Originally Posted by Pilgrim
Originally Posted by Cranmer
The whole time salvation thing is an innovation. The old line Primitive Baptists rejected that view. In fact, it is really something in line with the Paul Washer, John MacArthur, John Piper thing about Lordship salvation and "final vindication" by good works.
Can you supply some direct links to information which would show that any or all of the above 3 mentioned men reject a "once for all declaration that the sinner is not guilty; justified at the moment faith is expressed in Christ"? Or, coming from the other side, that they hold to a progressive justification which is determined by faith + works and declared at the final judgment?

This view is predominantly held by those adhering to NPP, Federal Vision, Shepherdism, and others e.g., Richard Gaffin, John O. Kinnaird, &co. But I have never heard, until now, that John MacArthur or Paul Washer embraced or taught this view. John Piper is suspect due to what he wrote in his book Future Grace. So, any references you are able to supply would be much appreciated. grin

John Piper is the easiest to demonstrate a reliance on the NPP. First of all, Piper was a student at Fuller Theological Seminary, CA. His favorite professor there was Daniel Fuller, a well known advocate of the New Perspective on Paul. Daniel Fuller taught the doctrine of "future justification." Piper has simply retooled the doctrine and calls it "future vindication":

Quote
Salvation Demonstrated by Deeds

That leads us to the second purpose of the judgment. The first, was that the judgment makes a public demonstration of the varying degrees of reward that Christians receive for the exercise of their faith in obedience. The second purpose of the judgment is to declare openly the reality of the faith and the salvation of God's people by the evidence of their deeds. Salvation is owned by faith. Salvation is shown by deeds. So when Paul says (in v. 10) we "will be recompensed . . . according to what we have done," he not only means that our rewards will accord with our deeds, but also our salvation will accord with our deeds.

Why do I think this?

Romans 2:5–7

There are numerous texts that point in this direction. One is in Paul's letter to the Romans (2:5–7) where he refers to "The revelation of the righteous judgment of God," and then says (in vv. 6–8), "[God] will render to every man according to his deeds: to those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality [he will render] eternal life; but to those who . . . do not obey the truth . . . [he will render] wrath and indignation." In other words, just as our text says, the judgment is "according to what a person has done." But here the issue is eternal life versus wrath. What Happens When You Die?

The key point here in Piper's version of the judgment is that salvation is ultimately dependent on works to "vindicate" the believer's salvation. The emphasis here is not on the finished work of Christ but on something your "faith" and your "obedience" contributes to "salvation". This is really nothing more than the NPP view of "future justification" dressed up in dissimulating language. The problem is that Piper places this "evidence" for salvation in the final judgment, not in the visible church where church discipline and a credible profession of faith is necessary for communicant membership. God already knows who is saved. If a believe is not justified by faith alone on earth, then good works will certainly add nothing to salvation in the judgment. You will either stand in the righteousness of Christ alone or you will stand in your own works. If the latter, you're lost. (Romans 10:1-5).

John MacArthur is likewise compromised: The Gospel According to John MacArthur

Paul Washer likewise teaches a form of works righteousness since he, like Piper and MacArthur, confuses justification with sanctification:

Paul Washer and Gospel Sanctification

For "who has known the mind of the LORD that he may instruct Him?" But we have the mind of Christ. (1 Corinthians 2:16 NKJ)