No one can fall from saving grace. You cannot simply say that apostates fall from real grace, without defining what that grace is from which they have fallen. This is the same kind of ambiguity that has plagued FV teaching from the start. What kind of grace is it? Is it common grace, special grace, or a tertium quid? I suspect they would call it covenantal grace. That’s a big help. What does it do? Does it save or not? Wilkins says yes in his article in the Federal Vision. It just doesn’t save permanently. This is still Arminian, and it doesn’t matter in the least that he affirms decretal election also. To say that anyone has temporary saving grace and then loses it is Arminian. Leave decretal election out of the picture for a moment. Let’s just talk about those who will fall away. If you define what they fall away from as real salvific benefits, then it is an Arminian scheme, however much it may be juxtaposed with a more Calvinistic scheme. Affirming Calvinism in one spot isn’t enough. It has to be thorough-going.

via Assurance and Apostasy « Green Baggins.

I’ve been out of this for months and come back to see that Lane is still chasing his tail.  It is sad to see.  It reminds me of the scene in The Last Battle when the dwarves refuse to acknowledge they are in Aslan’s country and insist they are prisoners in the stable.  (Sadly, unlike Lane’s targets, Lewis uses the scene to present Arminian teaching).

First of all, Lane is insisting on using the term “salvific” and “saving” and the like as univocal terms for final salvation.  Since God does not so restrict the use of these words, this is simply a pharisaical word rule that no one should allow to bind their conscience of speech.  God, after all, “is the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe” (First Timothy 4.10).  I could show more examples but one is all that is necessary to establish the point.  Nothing in the Westminster standards requires a Presbyterian ministers to use salvation univocally (and if it did then the Standards would simply be in error, binding God’s people with rules God not only does not impose, but which He himself does not follow).

Secondly, the only way this argument will work is to go full-bore into the hyper-calvinism of the Protestant Reformed variety.  It is not PCA.  It is not Reformed mainstream.  It is not Confessional to mandate this rather novel and minority (mis)understanding of the grace of God.

God pours out his grace on many, including non-elect within the Covenant and Church.  Making God look stingy with his blessings involves not knowing what Spirit one is following.  Using convoluted and nonsensical rationalizations to make Calvinist ministers into Arminians is simply not in keeping with Christian behavior nor all the more with duties toward fellow ministers of the Gospel.

But now we will just see more of the same.  Say it again and again to yourself:  We are locked in a dark stable.  There is no sunshine.  There is no pleasant breeze.  There is no lion with a feast for all.  The temple of the Lord.  The temple of the Lord.  The temple of the Lord.