For clarity's sake given the controversy caused by this, let's go into some basics:

1. This controversy stems from the fact that often times when Protestants speak on soteriology there is a tendency to conflate justification with salvation. This is not without warrant and the apostle Paul himself even appears to use this sort of language in Ephesians 2:8-10. The problem appears when one exclusively uses "salvation" to refer to justification.

2. As Protestants, we believe that justification is by faith alone. Faith alone is the only condition necessary for receiving justification from God. With WCF 11.2 we affirm, "Faith, thus receiving and resting on Christ and His righteousness, is the alone instrument of justification."

3. The Christian life is not confined to justification, but includes regeneration, sanctification, and glorification. All of these aspects of the Christian life can be grouped under the category of "salvation" and without one of these someone cannot be saved. Something important to understand about sanctification is that it is not equal in all (we are each given differing gifts and capacities as men), yet God still graciously labors with us to drive us towards holiness. WLC question 77 says of sanctification that it "is neither equal in all, nor in this life perfect in any, but growing up to perfection."

4. Given the Reformed understanding of perseverance of the saints, those who are united to Christ receive all the gracious benefits of Christ, one of those being the grace of perseverance. This means that if one is justified he will necessarily be sanctified and perform good works through the aid and assistance of the Spirit of God working in us. WCF 11.2 states, "yet is it [faith] not alone in the person justified, but is ever accompanied with all other saving graces, and is no dead faith, but worketh by love."

5. Given that sanctification requires one to perform good works for growth in holiness and that without this no one will see the Lord (Heb. 12:14, Rom. 2:5-11, Matthew 7:16-20), it can be said that this falls under the category of salvation. Thus, when one says "good works are necessary for salvation," they are not claiming good works to be necessary for justification or that good works merit salvation, but that they are a necessary means, condition, and antecedent to the attainment of salvation.

6. Search the scriptures in all things, but if you are Reformed be careful pointing and screeching heresy for those who affirm the necessity of good works for salvation. Here are four of our forefathers on the necessity of good works for attaining salvation (emphasis added):

John Calvin:
"He [God] announces, therefore, that the rewards for virtues are stored up with him, and that the man who obeys his commandments does not do so in vain... he promises both blessings in the present life and everlasting blessedness to those who obediently keep his commandments."
-Institutes bk. 2 ch. 8.4

Peter Martyr Vermigli:
“God has ordained to the elect not only glory but also good works, that is, the means by which he will have his elect come to glory. By this we may see how terribly deceived they are who live wickedly and yet boast that they are predestined, for the Scriptures teach that according to God's predestination, men are not brought to glory by wicked acts and evil deeds, but by a virtuous living and manners. Nor are they to be listened to who cry out, ‘No matter how I live, the predestination of God will have its effect.’ This is to be utterly ignorant of what predestination is, and to abuse it horribly.”
-Locus on Predestination, Art. 1.12

Thomas Watson:
“What must we do to obtain this
kingdom?
(1) In general, take pains for it. We cannot have the world without labor, and do we think to have grace? ‘If you Seek her as silver.’ Proverbs 2:4. A man may as well expect a crop without sowing, as grace without labor. We must not think to have grace as Israel had manna; who did not plough nor sow-but it was rained down from heaven upon them. No, we must operam dare, take pains for grace. Our salvation cost Christ blood, and will cost us sweat.”
-The Lord's Prayer, pg. 106-107 ( pdf edition)

Francis Turretin:
"[E]veryone sees that there is the highest and an indispensible necessity of good works for obtaining glory. It is so great that it cannot be reached without them (Heb. 12:14; Rev. 21:27)."
-Institutes vol. 2 topic 17 third question XII

"Works can be considered in three ways: either with reference to justification or sanctification or glorification. They are related to justification not antecedently, efficiently and meritoriously, but consequently and declaratively. They are related to sanctification constitutively because they constitute and promote it. They are related to glorification antecedently and ordinatively because they are related to it as the means to the end; yea, as the beginning to the complement because grace is glory begun, as glory is grace consummated."
-Institutes vol. 2 topic 17 third question XIVmongergism.com


Had to edit this post because of typos, formatting, and certain bits of wonky phrasing.

I should have an editor for my tweets.

I will attempt to explain this in a distinctly Reformed manner but also in such a way that others who affirm real presence (RC’s, EO’s, Lutherans, etc) may sympathize with certain points. Here’s a thread:

https://twitter.com/snemes12/status/1726583434712379805

Traditional Christian theology begins by assuming that human beings are composed of both body and soul (Gen 2:7; Eccl 12:7; Luke 23:43; Matt 10:28). Just as our bodies hunger and thirst for food, so too do our souls thirst after God for nourishment (Psalm 42:1-2).

“Millions have begun to feel like strangers in their own land. They recoil from a popular culture that is saturated with raw sex and trumpets hedonistic values. They see old holidays disappear and old heroes degraded. They see the art and artifacts of a glorious past removed from their museums and replaced by the depressing, the ugly, the abstract, the anti-American. They watch as books they cherished disappear from the schools they attended, to be replaced by authors and titles they never heard of. The moral code that they were raised to live by has

1. Sam Francis has many interesting political insights and quoting him does not imply a full endorsement of all his ideas, especially those regarding race.
2. Why don’t you publicize my thread where I explicitly state I am not a white nationalist?

https://twitter.com/_matthewpearson/status/1658538919867080710?s=46&t=ACCVE628ay-2CJnqhb6dng3

.

https://twitter.com/blakecallens/status/1665557170795028482

3. Historically speaking, the Jews (both the leaders and the crowd demanding he be crucified) killed Christ in giving him to the Romans. This is a historical fact that has real theological implications regarding the covenants and we shouldn’t ditch it because of post-WW2 values.

Watching people outside of RW circles try and decode RW language and then triumphantly proclaim someone a racist when they think they've cracked it and supposedly spot it somewhere has got to be some of the funniest stuff the Lord has graced me to witness. We're not as clever as they think. Most of the dog whistles I learn about I learn not from RW circles but from these watch dogs trying to figure out the online right.

🧵
Johannes Althusius on the character and customs of various peoples: “The character, customs, nature, attitude, and viewpoint of the people are to be sought and learned from the nature and location of a region, and from the age, condition, circumstances, and education of the people therein. One learns about the nature of men from the location of

Sometimes saying or doing the little things matter. Say mankind instead of humankind. Write BC and AD instead of BCE and CE. Especially in a college environment attempting to normalize these little things can mean a lot. Normalize normalcy and condition others to get used to it. Yea you’ll get funny looks and maybe even a correction, but if you do just look at the person like their insane. It’s what I do lol

“For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. Where is the wise? where is the scribe?

https://twitter.com/the_hellenist/status/1635445639176912900

where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. For the Jews require a sign,

I’ve been wanting to re-read the Space trilogy but tbh I may start The Lord of the Rings after I’m finished reading Dante’s Inferno… Or maybe I should read the next two books in the Dante trilogy and then Lord of the Rings…

Overwhelmed by God’s grace rn

Thomas Watson on the insufficiency of viewing the Lord’s Supper as only a symbol:

“This [orthodox] doctrine of the sacrament confutes such as look upon the Lord’s Supper only as an empty figure or shadow, resembling Christ’s death, but having no intrinsic efficacy in it. Surely this glorious ordinance is more than an effigy or representation of Christ. Why is the Lord’s Supper called ‘the communion of the body of Christ’ (1 Cor. 10:16), but because, in the right celebration of it, we have sweet communion with Christ? In this gospel ordinance,

🧵
A post-read thread on Stephen Wolfe's Case for Christian Nationalism book. I won't spend too much time giving background information on this work. Chances are that if you are on Twitter you've already heard plenty about it. Instead what I seek to do is give an assessment of the book from a perspective you may not have heard much from.

“I feel pleased with the well-known saying which has been borrowed from the writings of Augustine, that man’s natural gifts were corrupted by sin, and his supernatural gifts withdrawn; meaning by supernatural gifts the light of faith and righteousness, which would have been sufficient for the attainment of heavenly life and everlasting felicity. Man, when he withdrew his allegiance to God, was deprived of the spiritual gifts by which he had been raised to the hope of eternal salvation. Hence it follows, that he is now an exile from the

If you think Wolfe's book has Roman Catholic tendencies, I got some bad news for you about Calvin, Vermigli, Zanchi, Beza, Bucer, á Brakel, Perkins, Turretin, Owen, Watson, and oh so many more Was Calvin a papist 🤔

https://twitter.com/_matthewpearson/status/1592968527711211520?s=20&t=FVP2Sz0Dhp9PXq-1pu_pzg

I’m over halfway through this and so far am thoroughly unimpressed. Not only does he misinterpret Lex Rex, but he also seems to cast doubt on the degree of influence Thomas had on the Reformed and Wolfe’s account of total depravity. brianmattson.substack.com/p/a-childrens-… Mattson also accuses Wolfe of holding to the Roman Catholic view of the donum superadditum and then quotes Bavinck against Wolfe who states that the Reformers unanimously rejected the teaching that supernatural qualities were lost at the fall while the natural ones remained.

“The second kind of spiritual actions or things, concern the kingdom of God; as repentance, faith, the conversion of a sinner, new obedience, and such like: in which we likewise in part join with the Church of Rome and say, that in the first conversion of a sinner, man's freewill concurs with God's grace, as a fellow or coworker in some sort. For in the conversion of a sinner three things are required: the word, God's spirit, and man's will: for man's will is not passive in all and every respect, but hath an action in the first conversion and change of

“Here we may refer the outward actions of civil virtues; as namely, justice, temperance, gentleness, liberality. And in these also we join with the Church of Rome, and say (as experience teaches) that men have a natural freedom of will, to put them or not to put them in execution. Paul says Rom. 2. 14. The Gentiles that have not the law do the things of the law BY NATURE, that is, by natural strength: and he says of himself, that before his conversion touching the righteousness of the law, he was blameless, Phil. 3. 6.

Martin Luther explaining why he often uses such harsh language:

“I have, to be sure, sharply attacked ungodly doctrines in general, and I have snapped at my opponents, not because of their bad morals, but because of their ungodliness. Rather than repent this in the least, I have determined to persist in that fervent zeal and to despise the judg­ment of men, following the example of Christ who in his zeal called his opponents ‘a brood of vipers,’ ‘blind fools,’ ‘hypocrites,’ ‘children of the devil’ (Matt. 23:13, 17, 33; John 8:44). Paul branded

“How beautiful was Christ’s body upon earth! In it there was the rose and the lily; it was a mirror of beauty! For all deformities of the body issue immediately from sin; but Christ being conceived by the Holy Spirit, and so without sin, he must necessarily have a beautiful body, and in this sense he was fairer than the children of men (Psalm 45:2). There was graceful majesty in his looks. Christ’s body, as some writers aver, was so fair by reason of the beauty and grace which shined in it, that no artist could ever draw it exactly. And if it was so

Matthew Henry’s prayer in preparation for the Lord’s Supper:

“Now we are invited to come eat of wisdom’s bread and drink of the wine that she has mingled(Proverbs 9:5), give us to hunger and thirst after righteousness (Matthew 5:6); and being called to the marriage supper of the Lamb (Revelation 19:9), give us the wedding garment (Matthew 22:11). Awake, O north wind, and come, thou south, and blow upon our garden, that the spices thereof may flow forth; and then let our beloved come into his garden and eat his pleasant fruits (Song of Solomon 4:16).

“They [baptized infants] may therefore be called faithful, or believers, as they may be said to be reasonable creatures. For, although infants cannot rationally discourse, yet they have a soul, whereby, when they come to some years, they may be able to discourse. So that, they are called reasonable creatures, not because they have present use of their reasonable faculty, but by reason of the principle of reason in them; in other words, the reasonable soul, which is capable of all arts and sciences. Therefore, (we say) express faith is required in all