Repentance For Forgiveness? | Theocast Clips

While we're here, historically, there is a controversy in the 18th century in the Church of Scotland known as the Marrow Controversy. And we don't have time to explain all of the context and everything that was going on there.

It was around a book written in the 17th century called the Marrow of Modern Divinity. And there were a number of men in the Church of Scotland in the 1720s or so who were referred to as the Marrow Brethren because of their appreciation for this book.

There was a rural presbytery, the Octorator Presbytery, in which there was a question for ministerial candidates that was worded effectively this way. Must one forsake sin in order to come to Christ? Now, I fear, John, that many of our contemporaries in the Lordship Camp and many of our contemporaries in the Calvinistic Evangelical Church would maybe answer that question, yes, a person must forsake sin in order to come to Christ in faith savingly.

Our answer to that and the Marrow Brethren, as they were known, their answer to that question is no. If we need to do anything, then we cannot come to Christ. But in fact, what we need to do, we don't need to do anything, we trust that Christ is able to save all those who draw near to God through him, period.

Right? And then from that, all this other stuff flows. So I'm gonna just read a quote. This has everything to do with preaching. This has everything to do with that emphasis thing that we were talking about.

Where is the emphasis in the church? What is the lifeblood of the church? So listen to Sinclair Ferguson's words from the whole Christ. He says, Is it obvious to me and of sermons I, excuse me, let me just start over.

It is obvious to me and of engrossing concern that the chief focus, the dominant note in the sermons I preach or hear is Jesus Christ and him crucified. Or is the dominant emphasis and perhaps the greatest energies of the preacher focused somewhere else?

Perhaps on how to overcome sin or how to live the Christian life or on the benefits to be received from the gospel. All are legitimate emphases in their place, but that place is never center stage. Very helpful.

He goes on to say, The warrant of faith in Christ is neither knowledge of election nor a conviction of universal redemption, nor is it a sense of our own sinfulness. It is that Jesus Christ is able to save all those who come to God through him since his is the only name given under heaven whereby we may be saved.

Christ himself is the gospel. And that's all we are saying. That's right. Is we need not qualify this thing. For people to come on the front end and we need not throw all these qualifications on the back end to say, well, you need to have done all these things and you need to do all these things in order to be in Christ because we have put the cart before the theological horse in doing so.

Well, we have history now on either side where you have this good word as a punctilliary time, right? There's a period of time where you get you are dead and now you're alive. And when we're looking at that, the debate is, well, did you do what was required to become alive?

And now are you doing what's required to prove you're alive? And neither of those are biblical concepts. Being dead is sure. If you want to do the law to live, do this and live. Sure, you can try and do that.

But no one is able to. This is why Christ was the only man to do that.