Following up on a thread I started Saturday Re John Piper and Works being necessary for salvation.
First I’d like to thank @JulesDiner, @ErinMHarding, @SolaSisters, @RScottClark and @DarrenCollwell for pushing back and forcing me to think about this more deeply.

You all are among my favorite follows.
1st, let me say that I’m not necessarily a John Piper follower, though I have found much of his work to be helpful to me at times.

I’m not averse to dramatically changing opinions about someone I hold in high regard and have done it many times in the past, so I don’t THINK I am necessarily driven by a desire to defend JP other than I hate it when people are inaccurately represented

- even those I have strong disagreement with.
2nd, I don’t intend to get too deep into the theological weeds, others have already done that, but rather only to point out and highlight some things I’ve found compelling and interesting.

The 1st thing that troubles me about many of the responses in this thread, and ones I’ve seen elsewhere is there seems to be a reading into what JP has said, even after he clarifies his meaning. For example: there is the assertion that JP teaches

“final justification” (a term that I cannot find JP using) and a continual use of “salvation” and “Justification” interchangeably even though JP is very careful to explain how he is using these terms differently.

BTW, this isn’t a mistake that @RScottClark makes and is very careful to note in his article that salvation is correctly described as a process. R.C. Sproul also affirms this: “Salvation is the word that covers all of the process by which God fully brings us to total redemption.”

So, I can only assume the casual conflation of these two words indicates that those doing it are equating the two and possibly attributing that to JP. At a minimum, for the sake of honest representation, we should allow him to define how he’s using them and not force them to mean

the same.
The 2nd thing I find troubling is quotes, that in my estimation are pulled out of context from JP and reposted as though they were slam dunk evidence that JP teaches a 2 step salvation process.

I find it interesting that the same type of language that JP uses of good works is used by other Reformed Theologians. For example, from R.C. Sproul:
“There can be no salvation whatsoever without good works, and your good works are crucial to your salvation.”

“good works are absolutely crucial and are, indeed, necessary for salvation because God requires good works to save anybody.”
“Justification is that point in the process when God declares me a person who is in a state of redemption. The fact is that you are already justified,

and you are in a state of salvation to a degree, but there’s still more of your salvation yet to come.” https://www.ligonier.org/blog/what-role-do-good-works-play-salvation/