Tried With Fire

This is another quote from The Whole Christ on another negative side effect of separating the benefits of the gospel from the Benefactor. The separation of the benefits of the gospel from Christ, who is the gospel, is also the mother of the many varieties of "multiple stage" Christianity in which a person can enjoy some, but not necessarily all, of the discrete blessings. Thus one may experience an abstractable "second blessing"; or alternatively enjoy the blessings of salvation without obedience, having Christ as Savior but not (at least not yet) as Lord. But this, as Calvin noted, is to "rend asunder" the Savior. What Marrow theology grasped was the New Testament's stress on the fact that when we are "in him," we possess Christ himself; all spiritual blessings are ours immediately and simultaneously "in him." Yes, this is true eschatologically - in the sense that their full realization awaits glorification. But, nevertheless...

For the past 10 years, my church has been hosting a theology conference. We've had some great speakers over the years, and this year's topic and speaker were announced yesterday. The topic is The Marrow of Salvation: Assurance, Legalism, & Antinomianism with Dr. William VanDoodewaard from Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary. Our pastor just preached a series on assurance, and I read The Whole Christ by Sinclair Ferguson last year, which goes into the practical application of the Marrow Controversy. Thus I am looking forward to the conference. What was the Marrow Controversy? Dr. VanDoodewaard will be giving the historical background in one of his talks, but in a nutshell, the dispute centered on whether a group of Scottish Presbyterians (labeled the Marrow Men) were advocating antinomianism. Spoiler alert - They weren't. They were defending the gospel. The dispute also centered around a book, The Marrow of Modern Divinity by Edward Fisher. I refrained from orde...

From The Whole Christ : "The Confession of Faith states that rather than produce antinomianism and license, assurance produces gracious fruits. In essence, it involves what the Westminster Divines describe as an enlarged heart: In peace and joy; In love and thankfulness; In strength and cheerfulness in duties. (WCF18.3) This conforms well to the joyful confidence of the New Testament church. There, assurance of salvation produced boldness in witness; eagerness and intimacy in prayer; poise in character in the face of trial, danger, and opposition; and joy in worship. The lack of these is also evidence of a lack of assurance that produces them, for rather than breed presumption or antinomianism, assurance produces humility. Christian assurance is not self-assurance and self-confidence. It is the reverse; confidence in our Father, trust in Christ as our Savior, and joy in the Spirit as the Spirit of sonship, seal of grace, and earnest of our inheritance as sons and daughte...

I've been listening to The Whole Christ: Legalism, Antinomianism, & Gospel Assurance - Why the Marrow Controversy Still Matters by Sinclair Ferguson. It was a freebie from Christian Audio and is read by someone with a British accent. I know this is a minor point, but given the author, a North American accent would never do. I also got a copy of the book for the church library, which will be on the book nook on Sunday. I'm halfway through the audio, and it's so good.  Unfortunately, I can't mark an audio book or the church's copy, so alas and yet again, I will need to get my own. Ferguson points out that we veer into legalism because we doubt the character of God. We are skeptical that He is a loving Father. We distrust what He says because it seems too good to be true. So it is safer to take things into our own hands and do our bit in case He doesn't come through. The same lie from the garden still deceives us today. "Has God said?..." So our u...

I got B.B. Warfield's book on the deeper life movement, Perfectionism , several years ago to try to make sense of my former theological beliefs. I never thought I would be referring to it regarding the current discussion on sola fide . This debate is more than academic hair-splitting over theological terms. It is critical to how we answer the question, "What must I do to be saved?" Consequently, I am very concerned that a prominent theologian in the loosely reformed-ish camp is answering that question in this way. John Piper  (ht:  Brad Mason ) - "Electing love is unconditional, regenerating love is unconditional, and all other loves are conditional. Everything after regeneration that you benefit from is conditional, including glorification, salvation, sanctification, and everything else. It’s conditional, one, on faith, and second, upon the evidences of faith in obedience. Anybody in my church can understand that. Electing love is unconditional. The act of sett...