Does this say what I think it says?

I included a picture as proof that no one is making this up. But in the foreword to Faith Alone: The Doctrine of Justification by Faith by Thomas Schriener, John Piper writes these unsettling words:

The stunning Christian answer is: sola fide - faith alone. But be sure you hear this carefully and precisely: He says right with God by faith alone, not attain heaven by faith alone. There are other conditions for attaining heaven, but no others for entering a right relationship to God. In fact, one must already be in a right relationship with God by faith alone in order to meet the other conditions...

Such faith always "works by love" and produces the "obedience of faith." And that obedience - imperfect as it is till the day we die is not the "basis of justification by ... a necessary evidence and fruit of justification." In this sense, love and obedience - inherent righteousness is "required of believers, but not for justification" - that is, required for heaven, not for entering a right-standing with God. 

And from his own mouth:



Note what he has written above. Piper wants to make sure that the reader hears carefully and precisely that sola fide only applies to justification. If that is the case, there is something else required beyond Christ's justifying work for us to enter heaven - an "inherent righteousness" that is "required of believers." This is a huge problem IMO.

Some have  tried to defend Piper as saying this is a response to the hyper-grace teachings where all of ordo salutis is subsumed into justification. From what I have read from this movement, there seems to be an idea that any change on our part diminishes God justifying the ungodly. But in Piper's case, he appears to be making ordo salutis a series of higher levels that we climb to through our love and obedience until we attain the last rung -  "final justification." I have a hard time reading it any other way. Both of these views minimize God's redeeming power.

From election to glorification, it is all God's doing. We were dead. He made us alive. We had no faith. Faith is given as a gift. We thought we were doing just fine. The Holy Spirit convicts us of sin and grants repentance. We were formerly God-haters. Now we love Him because He first loved us. We had no desire to obey before, but now He changes our desires and wills. In the end, God deserves all the credit.

But what is the average person in the pew supposed to think? It should not be on us to read Piper's entire published corpus to understand what he means. One of the requirements of being a pastor is to be able to teach. Therefore, the burden is on him, not on his apologizers, to explain carefully and precisely whether salvation is a multi-tiered process whereby sola fide gets us in the door but then more is required of us to climb the ladder to heaven.

This also leaves an unanswered question - What happens to a believer if they are justified but do not have the "inherent righteousness" required for heaven? I can only come up with three possible answers:

1. You lose your salvation. 
2. A Protestant form of purgatory. The partial-rapture teaching advocates this. 
3. This is illogical. You cannot be A and not A. You cannot have right standing before God by faith alone through Christ alone and not enter heaven. Therefore, this is moot. 

If this is what Piper feels is necessary to highlight in the forward of Faith Alone, then the question becomes what is Dr. Schriener teaching? I am planning on reading to find out.

For more on the sola fide debate:
Salvation by Grace Alone Through Faith Alone in Christ Alone - Rachel Miller
What Precisely is the Disagreement with John Piper - Brad Mason (Brad has written a series of posts on the sola fide debate, which are worth reading. However, this one is a good summary.)
Believers Are Not Out On Bail - R. Scott Clark

Update:
Two posts by Christopher Gordon on the serious pastoral implications of Piper's teaching:
A PROPOSED OCTOBER, 2017 MEETING: DEAR MARK JONES, WILL YOU PLEASE MEET JOHN LEWIS?

It's Hardly Wrapped-Up: A Response From John Lewis