An Initial Response to Schreiner, Seifrid, Vickers, and Burk Responses' to Wright’s Response to Piper

This is going to be a short one because I am just trying to use this posting to hold down a thought which I think is important. One of the criticism raised by the panelists is that Wright is promoting some sort of justification by works which are generated by the Holy Spirit. They believe that this will lead to a problematic question of how much of our faithfulness is considered enough to be justified. To them this is similar to Luther's problem. The panelists want nothing more than the concept that we are justified by faith and faith alone. Schreiner qualifies it even more by saying that it is not enough just to say that by faith alone, but to whom this faith is directed to.
It started me thinking about "What is this faith which is so important to the panelist?" In fact, there is a question later on by one in the audience asking about which type of faith that leads to justification. So what is this faith that 'ensures' justification?

When a person believes in the Lord Jesus Christ, what is he actually believing? What is his faith actually about? Is he believing in what is said about Jesus Christ in the gospels? Is he believing in a set of propositional truths about Jesus Christ? Is he believing that Jesus Christ is real and alive and he needs to react to Him? How does this faith work out? One of the panelists says that this faith is believing the truth that we will be saved in the day of judgement because of what Jesus Christ has done for us. Rightly, Wright has criticized those who holds this view, saying that this is like believing that we will be justified not because we believe in Jesus Christ, but because we believe in the doctrinal truth about justification by faith.
So to the panelists, this is faith that leads to justification and this is against what Wright is saying. The next question is "what happens next?" Can the new believer decide to stop believing in this? And then, can he turn around and believe again after he has lost faith? So how does this work actually? There still exists the problem that the panelists have criticized Wright about, how much of faith is sufficient? When will his faith count? The first time, the second time, the time before he dies on his death bed? What is the nature of this faith? Propositional truths, making declarative statements of these propositions or speech acts? So justification by faith and faith alone as proposed by the panelists is not without its problems too.
On how the moderator and the panelists conducted themselves, I will have to leave it until the next posting. Anyone wanting to listen to the faculty podcast can follow this link.