Book Review: The Marrow of Modern Divinity, by Edward Fisher
Throughout Church history, there has been a constant tendency, new with every generation, to fall into one or the other of the twin errors of legalism and antinomianism. I know of perhaps no other text that better addresses both of these dangers from a wise, biblical, and evangelical perspective than Edward Fisher's Marrow of Modern Divinity. Anyone who reads this classic volume will come away much richer in the knowledge of the gospel; with a deeper understanding of the unity of the biblical message as a whole; and vastly better able to pursue a genuinely Christian life in a manner solidly rooted in the true gospel. This new and well done publication of the Marrow is a considerable boon to the modern Church, which I hope will be taken full advantage of.
Fisher's Marrow is an unusual book, structured in the form of two dialogues. The first is between Evangelista, a gospel minister, Neophytus, a recent convert, and two false Christians, Nomista (a legalist) and Antinomista (an antinomian). The second dialogue is between Evangelista, Neophytus, and Nomologista, a “Prattler of the Law”. In the first dialogue, the gospel minister, Evangelista, in order to address the confusion caused by the false perspectives of Nomista and Antinomista, describes the threefold perspective of the Law as revealed in the Bible: the Law of Works, which says, “Do this, and live”; the Law of Faith, which promises free pardon in the gospel; and the Law of Christ, which says, “Live, and do this”. The first two portions lay out the redemptive-historical, covenantal understanding of the gospel in as clear and helpful a fashion as is likely to be found anywhere; and the last of the three gives immensely practical guidance for living the Christian life in a manner that does not deny the gospel either by despising the Law and living in sin or by coming back under the Law as a Covenant of Works.
The second dialogue, which gives a very thorough explanation of the Decalogue, and indicates the proper way of putting it to use when dealing either with an unbeliever or with a genuine Christian, is also quite helpful. The vast extent to which the ten commandments reach is very helpfully described – much to the discomfiture of the legalist – on the basis of six principles: first, “where any evil is forbidden, the contrary good is commanded; and where any good is commanded, the contrary evil is forbidden”. Second, in every specific commandment “all of the same kind or nature [of action] is comprehended”. Third, the law is “spiritual, reaching to the very heart and soul”. Fourth, the law “must not only be the rule of our obedience, but it must also be the reason of it”. Fifth, obedience to the law must be directed to the end “that God alone may be glorified by us”. And finally, “we must be careful to do all our actions after a right manner”. After giving these premises, Evangelista describes in order the full import of each of the ten commandments, with great insight, showing how vast and all-inclusive is their extent; and with them, he adeptly breaks down Nomologista's self-sufficiency, but comforts Neophytus with the free grace of the Gospel.
One of the elements of Fisher's treatment of the gospel that I found particularly encouraging was the thoroughly Christ-centered treatment he made of the Old Testament. Without a true and genuine knowledge of Christ, interwoven throughout every page of the Hebrew scriptures, there is no profit to be had, either for us or for the Old Testament saints before us. “There is no question,” he says, “but every spiritual believing Jew, when he brought his sacrifice to be offered, and, according to the Lord's command, laid his hands upon it whilst it was yet alive (Lev. 1:4), did, from his heart, acknowledge that he himself had deserved to die, but by the mercy of God he was saved, and his desert laid upon the beast [typically]; and as that beast was to die, and to be offered in sacrifice for him, so did he believe that the Messiah should come and die for him, upon whom he put his hands, that is, laid all his iniquities by the hand of faith” (emphasis mine). Much more of the same could be adduced, but the sum of it is this, that the whole bible, when Fisher is speaking of the Law of Faith, or in other words, the gospel, is treated in a truly evangelical manner, which is very refreshing to see.
Fisher is also very gospel-centered in his teaching on sanctification, or in other words, how the believer is still subject to the Law, not as a law of works, but as the law of Christ. Although there is a sense in which the believer is under the law, it is never divorced from his gospel-freedom from the law. This makes for some very powerful and practical teaching on the Christian life. “If a man will go about this great work, to change his life, to get victory over any sin, that it may not have dominion over him, to have his conscience purged from dead works and to be made partaker of the divine nature, let him not go about it as a moral man; that is, let him not consider what commandments there are, what the rectitude is which the law requires, and how to bring his heart to it; but let him go about it as a Christian, that is, let him believe the promise of pardon, in the blood of Christ; and the very believing the promise will be able to cleanse his heart from dead works” (emphasis mine).
When you read Fisher's work, and in particular this edition of it, you will come away with much more than just Fisher's (significant!) wisdom; for Fisher himself mined the treasures of all the Reformers before him, and he quotes extensively from Luther, Calvin, and others; and in this edition, the very extensive commentary of Thomas Boston (one of the greatest Puritans) is included in an easy-to-follow format. Boston's comments alone would be worth purchasing, and contribute no small incentive to acquiring the Marrow. I hope may readers will put this treasure trove to good use.
Miracles Today? by Pastor John Samson
Do miracles happen today? If we believe in a God who still answers prayer, I am sure we as Bible believing Christians would say "yes." I try to refrain from using the word "miracle" too often though because as I understand its definition, it refers to something that totally defies natural law - something that cannot be explained by natural process alone.
I can testify to seeing the Lord do some amazing things in the region of Kerala, India. I remember taking a small team there and praying for two young girls aged 7 and 9, one deaf and mute since birth, the other deaf since birth, and they were totally healed by God's power, which resulted in their mother, a Hindu (before all this happened), making a profession of faith in Christ. It was something I will never forget and still brings tears to my eyes when I think of it. The image of a young child hearing sound and speaking for the first time is forever etched on my mind.
In a village in Mongolia, I saw the pastor's mother healed of a lame leg which she had suffered with for more than 60 years. Apparently, she had injured her leg when she had fallen off a horse as a teenager, and now at age 76 brought her home village a tremendous visible testimony to the power of God and the authenticity of the gospel!
I mention these two incidents (though I could speak of others) because I am still in contact with people who were present at the time and who can verify these things.
Though I am sure every Christian can testify to seeing answers to prayer even in the realm of physical healing, why do we not see the same level of miracles today as in the time of the early church? Here (below) is a short video (less than 4 minutes) by Dr. John Piper which I think is quite helpful in this regard:
Continue reading "Miracles Today? by Pastor John Samson" »
Doctrine is Practical
"The word doctrine simply means "teaching." And it's ludicrous to say that Christ is anti-teaching. The central imperative of His Great Commission is the command to teach (Matthew 28:18-20). Yet there's no shortage of church-growth experts, professional pollsters, and even seminary professors nowadays who are cautioning young pastors that doctrine is too divisive, too threatening, too heady and theoretical—and therefore simply impractical. Impractical? I agree that practical application is vital. I don't want to minimize its importance. But if there is a deficiency in preaching today, it is that there's too much relational, pseudo-psychological, and thinly life-related content, and not enough emphasis on sound doctrine. Moreover, the distinction between doctrinal and practical truth is completely artificial; doctrine is practical. In fact, nothing is more practical than sound doctrine, because there's ultimately no basis for godly behavior apart from the truth of God's Word. Practical insights, gimmicks, and illustrations mean little if they are divorced from divine principle. Before the preacher asks anyone to perform a certain duty, he must first deal with doctrine. He must develop his message around theological themes and draw out the principles of the texts. Then the truth can be applied. The New Testament church was founded on a solid base of doctrine. Without that, no practical application matters. True doctrine transforms behavior as it is woven into the fabric of everyday life. But it must be understood if it is to have its impact. The real challenge of the ministry is to dispense the truth clearly and accurately. Practical application comes easily by comparison." - Dr. John MacArthur
Jesus "the Christ"- Pastor C. R. Biggs
The angel told Joseph (and earlier Mary):
"[Mary] will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins."
The angel declared to the shepherds:
"For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord."
Jesus "the Christ" is the righteousness of God that God requires- -and amazingly provides - - for sinners to receive by faith.
Jesus simply means "YHWH is Salvation"; his name is JESUS because he will save his people from their sins.
"Christ" is not Jesus' last name (it would have likely been "Ben Joseph"). "Christ" is Greek for the Hebrew "Messiah". "Christ" means "Anointed One"; which means that Jesus Christ is our Savior from sins and our Anointed One.
Continue reading "Jesus "the Christ"- Pastor C. R. Biggs" »
Caution: Make haste slowly...
The Manhattan Declaration - I do not feel I can sign it, sharing the sentiments of written statements of men like Dr. R. C. Sproul on the matter here and Dr. John MacArthur here. On the other hand, esteemed men like Dr. Al Mohler and Dr. Ligon Duncan are amongst the nearly 300,000 people who have signed it. The document, written to bring about a united purpose, can now possibly become a source of division, even within the ranks of those who have a firm grasp on the gospel. The question now is "how should we respond to precious brothers who take a different view on the matter (without throwing them under the bus)?" Dr. James White takes some time here to respond to this question. - JS
The Relationship Between Irresistible Grace and the Atonement
In a discussion relating to limited atonement I discussed how all redemptive blessings are found in Christ, including the blessing of irresistible grace.
A visitor responded:
John, Please help me understand your logic here. Irresistible grace is wrought through the atonement and not election? I am under the impression that God will have mercy on whom he wills. Whether the atonement is limited or not God has chosen his elect and they are atoned for. I am not seeing how by acknowledging that "irresistible grace is found only in Christ" we "acknowledge limited atonement by default". How are the two connected?
my response
Hello ______.
Election, by itself, has never saved anyone. It is God's blueprint, so to speak, of what he intends to do in time through the redemptive work of Jesus Christ and the regeneration of the Holy Spirit. God the Father elects, the Son redeems them, and the Spirit applies the work of Christ to the same. The Trinity, in other words, works in harmony, to bring about the redemption of the elect. God the Father does not do this alone, APART form the work of the other two Persons of the Trinity. All redemptive grace is found in Christ. Ephesians 1:3 explains it thus:
"Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing in Christ. For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will— to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves." (Eph 1:3-6)
Please note that all spiritual blessings are IN CHRIST, that the Father chose us IN CHRIST, that He predestined us to adoption as sons IN CHRIST. So yes, you are right, God elects according to his good pleasure but he gets the job done through Jesus Christ.
Limited Atonement is connected to irresistible grace in that, irresistible grace (all acknowledge) is given to the elect alone. It is not granted to the non-elect. And all spiritual blessing are in Christ... Therefore, Christ died in a way, a redemptive way to secure irresistible grace for the elect, that he did not for the non-elect. Irresistible grace was not purchased for the non-elect PERIOD. In other words, the redemptive blessing of irresistible grace is what Christ purchased on the cross to render certain the elect would respond positively to the outward gospel call. No redemptive grace is to be had outside of the work of Christ. All spiritual blessings are found in Christ and Christ alone. To claim otherwise is to deny Christ as our Savior and that his work is finished. At the very least, it denies that His work is sufficient to save completely. Those who deny limited atonement may well believe Christ's atonement was necessary, but it was not sufficient. Even Roman Catholics believe the grace of Christ was necessary, but it was not enough ... they must believe and persevere to the end and thus MAINTAIN their own just standing before God. We affirm that Christ work is complete ... it is totally sufficient to save. He is the author AND perfecter of our faith. There is nothing we can do to improve upon that. In 529 AD the Council of Orange worte the following;
if anyone affirms that we can form any right opinion or make any right choice which relates to the salvation of eternal life... that is, assent to the preaching of the gospel through our natural powers without the illumination and inspiration of the Holy Spirit ...he is led astray by a heretical spirit." The Council of Orange, CANON 7.(529 AD)
John Owen said, "To suppose that whatever God requireth of us that we have power of ourselves to do, is to make the cross and grace of Jesus Christ of none effect."
Consider: that whatever God requires of us also includes faith. We do not have the power to believe the gospel without the the Spirit uniting us to Jesus Christ.
In Ezekiel 36:25 God says, I will gather you from all the countries and bring you back into your own land. I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be clean; I will cleanse you from all your impurities and from all your idols. 26 I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws.
Notice that God first gives us a new heart so that we may keep his laws. Without the Holy Spirit, the word does not find a place in our heart. Jesus told his disciples that he must go to the Father so the the Spirit would come to the whole world. So again the Bible forces us to conclude that The Trinity works together to bring about his redemptive purposes.
Hope this helps
John
Monergism
The Doctrines of Grace (Video Seminar) - Dr. James White (Part 3)
The Doctrines of Grace (Video Seminar) by Dr. James White - Part 2
The concept of "Middle Knowledge" and the Divine Decree
Question Concerning Man's Inability
Question from Visitor
Concerning man's inability to come to God on his own, which statement is true:
1. Man cannot come because he will not come.
OR
2. Man will not come because he cannot come.
I was reading and came across those statements. What is at the heart of man's inability to come to Christ? Is it his depraved will? Is it his spiritual blindness/deadness/bondage?
Kinda confused at what lies at the heart of man's inability.
---
Response
Hi and thanks. That is a great question.
The natural man is unspiritual, that is, he is not regenerated or indwelt by the Holy Spirit, so he acts in accordance with his own nature. Left to himself he both cannot and will not come to Christ. But let's be clear. God does not stop him from coming, nor coerce him in any way. His innate corruption means that he rejects Christ of necessity. Water does not rise above its source and a thorn bush does not produce figs, as it were.
Another way to consider this: If someone borrowed $100 million to fund a company and then immediately went and spent it all in a week of wild living in Las Vegas, his inability to repay the debt does not alleviate him of the responsibility to do so. So there is no contradiction between his responsibility and his inability. He created his own inability so he is responsible. Likewise Adam, our federal head, who represents the entire human race, fell and plunged all of us into a condition of debt which we cannot repay. Take note: this does not alleviate us of the responsibility to do so. We owe a debt we cannot repay. We are spiritually bankrupt and our heart needs to be renewed in the Holy Spirit who unites us the Christ. Only then do we have the mind and heart of Christ. ( See 1 Cor 2 ) Without the Spirit we are dead (even hostile) to spiritual things. But when the Spirit comes with the grace of regeneration, renewing our heart after the image of God, we both can and will come to Christ.
Hope this helps. Peace be with you
John
Monergism
COLLISION Playing at BAGDAD THEATER & PUB
BAGDAD THEATER & PUB
Sunday, December 13
5 Points Media presents
COLLISION
Featuring leading atheist Christopher Hitchens and Christian apologist Douglas Wilson
Doors at 6 p.m.; event at 7 p.m. | $5 | Minor with parent
OVERVIEW
In May 2007, leading atheist Christopher Hitchens and Christian apologist Douglas Wilson began to argue the topic "Is Christianity Good for the World?" in a series of written exchanges published in Christianity Today. The rowdy literary bout piqued the interest of filmmaker Darren Doane, who sought out Hitchens and Wilson to pitch the idea of making a film around the debate.
In Fall 2008, Doane and crew accompanied Hitchens and Wilson on an east coast tour to promote the book compiled from their written debate titled creatively enough, Is Christianity Good for the World?. "I loved the idea of putting one of the beltway's most respected public intellectuals together with an ultra-conservative pastor from Idaho that looks like a lumberjack", says Doane. "You couldn't write two characters more contrary. What's more real than a fight between two guys who are on complete opposite sides of the fence on the most divisive issue in the world? We were ready to make a movie about two intellectual warriors at the top of their game going one-on-one. I knew it would make an amazing film."
In Christopher Hitchens, Doane found a celebrated prophet of atheism. Loud. Funny. Angry. Smart. Quick. An intimidating intellectual Goliath. Well-known for bullying and mocking believers into doubt and doubters into outright unbelief. In Douglas Wilson, Doane found the man who could provide a perfect intellectual, philosophical, and cinematic counterpoint to Hitchens' position and style. A trained philosopher and and deft debater. Big, bearded, and jolly. A pastor, a contrarian, a humorist--an unintimidated outsider, impossible to bully, capable of calling Hitchens a puritan (over a beer).
It was a collision of lives.
What Doane didn't expect was how much Hitchens and Wilson would have in common and the respectful bond the new friend/foes would build through the course of the book tour. "These guys ended up at the bar laughing, joking, drinking. There were so many things that they had in common", according to Doane. "Opinions on history and politics. Literature and poetry. They agreed on so many things. Except on the existence of God."
Visit collisionmovie.com for more information.
BIOS
CHRISTOPHER HITCHENS
Christopher Hitchens (b. April 13, 1949) is a popular political journalist and the author of several books, including "God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything". Hitchens is regarded as one of the most fundamental figures of modern atheism. A regular contributor to Vanity Fair, The Atlantic Monthly and Slate, Hitchens also appears regularly on The Daily Show, Charlie Rose, Washington Journal, and Real Time with Bill Maher. He was named one of the US's "25 Most Influential Liberals" by Forbes and one of the world's "Top 100 Public Intellectuals" by Foreign Policy. Hitchens lives in Washington, DC.
DOUGLAS WILSON
Douglas Wilson (b. June 18, 1953) is a pastor of Christ Church, editor of Credenda/Agenda magazine, and a Senior Fellow at New Saint Andrews College. A prolific writer, he is the author of many books, including The Case for Classical Christian Education, Letter from a Christian Citizen, Reforming Marriage and Heaven Misplaced: Christ's Kingdom on Earth. Wilson lives in Moscow, Idaho.
DARREN DOANE
Darren Doane is a Los Angeles-based independent filmmaker. Doane made his name as a music video director. His work for Blink-182, AFI, Jimmy Eat World and Pennywise is credited for helping bring punk rock into the mainstream in the 1990s. His previous documentary film, The Battle For LA, explored the underground battle rap scene in Los Angeles. Doane is currently in production on the documentary film To Be Born Again about legendary musician Van Morrison and has also written and directed several feature films, including Godmoney, 42K and Black Friday.
COLLISION: Is Christianity Good for the World? (DVD)