The PuritanBoard - View Single Post - The Federal Vision and the Doctrine of Assurance

toddpedlar · #55 (**permalink**) 05-28-2008, 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MOSES

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hippo

Quote:

Originally Posted by MOSES

How does this show up, or what does this matter, in each of their doctrines on ASSURANCE?

Because to the FV assurance of temporal salvation is what man is able to obtain and good works play a part in salvation (albeit good works that are the product of God's grace).

Ok..for the FV assurance of salvation is what man is able to obtain.
What is wrong with that? Does not the confession speak of that? There would be no such thing as assurance without man "obtaining" it.

Ok...And good works play a part in salvation.
I have never heard an FVer teach this...Do you have a particular person in mind when you say that the FV say this?

Note: if "play a part" means, the fruit of salvation,,,then I would agree...but if "play a part" means the means of salvation, then I would disagree.

Also...I am here to learn, not to defend...so lay it on me.

What works of the FV crowd have you read / are you reading? You can find this teaching in "The Federal Vision", edited by Wilkins, for starters, and Norman Shepherd's books as well. Another resource in which you can see this kind of thinking is the Federal Vision, Pro & Con, edited by Calvin Beisner. Rich Lusk is, in my opinion, the worst offender when it comes to teaching distinctly that works are regarded as part of our 'salvation qualification'. Mark Horne is just as committed to this position.