I have noticed several references to the Trinity Foundation on the Highway.
The inquisitive person that I am I thought I would follow the link.
I happened to notice that John Robbins says some rather unflattering thing to say about a number of people such as the late John Gerstner and RC Sproul.
For instance in the following
link we read the following concerning Sproul`s book `Now That’s A Good Question``.
"SPROUL: The great issue of the Protestant Reformation in the sixteenth century was, How is a person justified? Luther's controversial position was that we are justified by faith alone. When he said that, many of the godly leaders in the Roman Catholic Church were very upset.
"Godly Roman Catholic Leaders"
ROBBINS: Oddly, without warning or explanation, Sproul suddenly changes topics, from faith to justification. Please note well the adjectives Sproul uses: Luther's position on justification, which is in fact the Biblical doctrine, is "controversial," but leaders of the Roman Catholic Church are "godly." Sproul does not describe Luther or his doctrine as "godly," nor does he describe Roman Catholic leaders or doctrine as "controversial." He says "godly leaders in the Roman Catholic Church" were "very upset" at Luther's "controversial position." This is not history; this is propaganda for Rome.
SPROUL: They [that is, "godly leaders in the Roman Catholic Church"] said, Does that mean that a person can just believe in Jesus and then live any way they want to live? In other words, the Roman Catholic Church reacted fiercely because they were afraid that Luther's view would be understood as an easy-believism in which a person only had to believe and never had to be concerned about bringing forth the fruits of righteousness.
ROBBINS: Rather than defending, or even explaining, the Biblical and Reformational doctrine of justification by faith alone - Sproul does not describe it as "Biblical," or "correct," but merely as "Luther's position" and "Luther's view," as though the idea of justification by faith alone had originated with Luther - rather than defending justification by faith alone from the charge of antinomianism, as Paul does in Romans, Sproul denigrates justification by the pejorative label "easy-believism." In so doing he tries to make Rome's murderous opposition to the Reformation understandable. This is inexcusable in any theologian, especially one who claims to be Reformed."
Now admittedly RC Sproul does not do a great job at explaining himself (perhaps because the whole context isn`t provided).However Robbins makes it seem like Sproul is a Roman Catholic sympathizer, rather than Reformed. Something that for anyone who has read or heard RC Sproul is laughable. It is one thing to say that Sproul could have done a better job in explaining his position; but it is another to misrepresent someone, whether or not that person is Reformed, RC, Muslim, etc.
This is just one among a few of the spin doctoring I read concerning John Robbin`s teaching and was enough for me not to want to read any more.
I thought rather than say anything else; I would open it up to others for discussion.
Tom
