I searched my library for "no fruit, no assurance" and was unable to locate anything. Is this a simplified statement of what lordship salvation teaches, or is this a contrary statement? I was able to find similar statements by MacArthur and Sproul, but I dont know if i am miss interpreting what they are saying
[Take a look at what Sproul say's
"Second, we must examine the fruit of our faith. We do not need perfect fruit to have assurance, but there must be some evidence of the fruit of obedience for our profession of faith to be credible. If no fruit is present, then no faith is present. Where saving faith is found, fruit of that faith is also found."
R. C. Sproul, Essential Truths of the Christian Faith (Wheaton, Ill.: Tyndale House, 1996).
Also
"Full assurance is not an automatic fruit of conversion, nor is it necessarily an immediate fruit. The believer may be in a state of saving grace for a long time before attaining assurance. But attaining it is not a remote possibility; it is eminently attainable and surely desirable. The assurance of salvation is an enormous benefit to the Christian, yet it is also to be pursued as a duty. The confession alludes to the apostolic injunction to make our election and calling sure."
R.C. Sproul, Grace Unknown : The Heart of Reformed Theology, electronic ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2000). 203.
And,
""MacArthur writes, “The Bible teaches clearly that the evidence of God’s work in a life is the inevitable fruit of transformed behavior. Faith that does not result in righteous living is dead and cannot save. Professing Christians utterly lacking the fruit of true righteousness will find no biblical basis for assurance they are saved.” Again, “The fruit of one’s life reveals whether that person is a believer or an unbeliever. There is no middle ground.” "
Bibliotheca Sacra Volume 147, 585 (Dallas, TX: Dallas Theological Seminary, 1990). 59-60.]
