I am not sure it is completely accurate to say that John had a "revelation" about the monergistic work of the spirit and thus began the debate between a NonLS position and a LS position. From what I understand from John in both his preaching and in private discussions around Grace Church, is that he was asked years ago, as a young minister, if he believed in "Lordship" salvation and his response was, "What other kind of salvation is there?" As his attention was drawn to the fact there was this insidious nonsense theology advocated by proponents of classic dispensationalism, John believed there needed to be a biblical response. Hence, the book, "The Gospel According to Jesus" arose out of that conviction. I have always understood that "Lordship Salvation" was coined by the opponents to the biblical doctrine. Similar in fashion to how the various points of Calvinism received negative titles, like "Limited Atonement." That is an Arminian gloss that places a negative spin upon the doctrine and does not correspond to what the Synod of Dort meant when highlighting the doctrine of Christ's atonement.

In some respects, it could be argued that John probably was not as clear as he could have been when he originally wrote against this false doctrine, and LS proponents, as well as NonLS proponents, accused him of promoting a works oriented salvation. However, any one even remotely familiar with John and his preaching and reading "The Gospel According to Jesus" in its entirety, realize that is not what he is advocating at all. Perhaps in his zeal to defend the truth he could have been clearer in his presentation (hence the reason for a revised and updated "TGATJ").

Fred

"Ah, sitting - the great leveler of men. From the mightest of pharaohs to the lowest of peasants, who doesn't enjoy a good sit?" M. Burns