THE FEDERAL VISION HAS REPLACED HISTORIC BIBLICAL REFORMED THEOLOGY - Pastor Patrick Hines Podcast #shorts The RCUS report is short and outstanding: https://rcus.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/RCUS-Position-Federal-Vision-2006f.pdf John Otis’ book is outstanding and has all of the primary source material organized very well with an excellent TOC: https://www.amazon.com/Danger-Camp-Analysis-Refutation-Heresies-ebook/dp/B071V2LNJ5/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?crid=2883T9QF0JSY4&keywords=danger+in+the+camp+otis&qid=1705719813&sprefix=danger+in+the+camp+otis%2Caps%2C90&sr=8-1 Hopefully this will help people. https://www.ironsharpensironradio.com/podcast/january-26-2018-show-with-dr-douglas-wilson-on-why-i-discontinued-identifying-myself-with-the-federal-vision-plus-dr-dewey-roberts-on-historic-christianity-the-federal-vision/ From this interview (at the 16:06 timestamp): Chris Arnzen: Yes, but what about his own view… he seemed to be denying that works were only an evidence of true justification and salvation. He seemed to be implying that… he seemed to be muddling the differences between the temporal and earthly covenant that God has with Israel in the Old Covenant, and how obedience and disobedience affected you, … with how one is justified before God and being given and entrance into heaven for all eternity with him. There seems to be a muddling of that difference. I mean, do you see a difference between those two things? Doug Wilson: I would say it’s a muddling of categories. I do think I would probably agree with Steve that the fruit of belief is more than simply evidence. It’s more organically connected to saving faith than that. In the book, “Reformed is Not Enough,” Wilson wrote: "In the historic Protestant view, good works are inseparable from biblical salvation…Because this is the case, James can speak of justification by works. He is not speaking of rabbinical works-righteousness or Pelagian self-salvation or medieval merit theology." Further from "Reformed is Not Enough" Wilson wrote: Chori Seraiah notes the importance of this in questions of apostasy. “The means by which men apostatize from the covenant is unfaithfulness. The means by which men persevere in the covenant is faithfulness.” In other words, to assert that men fall away because their salvation was contingent upon continued faithfulness in the gospel is not to deny the sovereignty of God at all. … In an interview with Christian Renewal magazine [Douglas Wilson, The Monroe Four Speak Out, 5, 6.], DW was asked: Interviewer: Doug, when you cite ‘continuing in goodness’ in Rom. 11 in your 2002 lecture, is that the cause of our salvation or the fruit of it? Doug Wilson: Yes (laughter all around). Look, in Colossians Paul says as you received Christ so walk in him. So the way we become Christians is the way we stay Christians is the way we finish as Christians—by faith from first to last. So we continue in God’s goodness by trust. We stand by faith—they fell, but you stand—doing that to the end is how you come to your salvation. It’s the gift of God lest anyone boast. I believe we are saved by faith from first to last, which is why I have been accused of denying sola fide. Joint Federal Vision Statement //federal-vision.com/ecclesiology/joint-federal-vision-statement/ We deny that law and gospel should be considered as hermeneutics, or treated as such. We believe that any passage, whether indicative or imperative, can be heard by the faithful as good news, and that any passage, whether containing gospel promises or not, will be heard by the rebellious as intolerable demand. The fundamental division is not in the text, but rather in the human heart. The Monroe Four Speak Out, p5-7 Doug Wilson: Justification to them is something that happens and has to be tied up with a bow, and then we can move on to sanctification. But when God gives faith, that faith doesn't immediately croak. It is a saving faith, and that same faith is the lone instrument for sanctification also. One can't be apprehended without the other. They are distinct but not separable. You can't make an ontological distinction. It is an organic whole for us.