Mistake #1. I stopped in at the BHT today and the latest post was by Michael Spencer. It went something like this.
I tried 'googling' the quote that he put up, but couldn't find the source. But I think I can defend the quote very easily just by saying that Spencer's abbreviated form of the quote: Faith alone = faith + evidential works, is not accurate. In fact, it takes the quote and turns it upside down, jumbles it up, then puts it in a blender, and finally strains all truth out of it and comes up with the equation, Faith alone = faith + evidential works, which does not exist in the original quote.
I am conducting a test on the minds of my critics. I am confessing it right now so if it comes up later, I can honestly say I admitted it. There. I did.
Definition of salvation that appeared today on a TR blog:"It is faith alone in the gospel truth, and we need to show our faith by our works. Fruit needs to be evident in the believers life."
If you keep repeating "Faith alone = faith + evidential works" long enough, I guess it starts to make sense. Did Bill Clinton ever say "I guess it all depends on what alone means?"
And by the way...I'm pomo.
No right minded TR would disagree with the imonk that that equation is erroneous. We are not saved by faith plus works. But to say that faith in Gospel truth will not result in evidential works is also erroneous. The writer of the quote (probably the same person who wrote Hebrews) avoids both errors and says faith in the gospel truth saves, and that the faith that saves also produces evidential works. Then adds an axiom of Christianity, Fruit needs to be evident in the believers life.
Mistake #2. I put myself as a guinea pig in imonk's experiment. I admit it. But, I just don't see the problem with the quote. And we here at TR Doxoblogy would also like a reference to look at. Just throwing up quotes out of context is about as profitable as actually reading the BHT.