There’s a thread on the Book Nook about Pilgrim’s Progress and I was interested in this comment:
Those who are burdened and labor under the guilt of sin are called to come AS THEY ARE and Christ promises to relieve them of their guilt and find rest. No one can make themselves worthy in order to go to Christ. It is sinners who Christ came for and calls and not the righteous.
So, I’m wondering if there is a more thorough distinction that needs to be made here regarding “burdened and labor under the guilt of sin.” How is this wrought in the first place? How does one even come to a place of being burdened and laboring under the guilt of sin? That has to come from Word & Spirit, no? Is this the issue at hand with the Marrow Men? Or was there something else that I may be missing?
More specifically from that thread,
Sinclair Ferguson at the Banner of Truth Pastor's Conference held at Wheaton College in 1978 made mention of John Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress when dealing with the theological and practical issues of another book. That book was The Marrow of Modern Divinity by Edward Fisher. The uproar that arose at its publication was in regard to the examination of prospective ministers and was (paraphrased) "is it necessary for a man to repent of his sins before he is able [warranted] to go to the cross and believe upon Christ unto justification/salvation?" Sinclair said that if one agreed with this statement, then justification is not all of grace but of works and in essence a denial of biblical Calvinism. He said that Bunyan erred on this issue in his book. For Christian was in need to remove his "burden" before he went to the cross.
So is Ferguson wrong? Or is it Fisher who is wrong? Or both?
Wikipedia, summarizes the Marrow Controversy thus…
The Marrow Brethren, though rejecting universal atonement, held to common grace and that in some way God desires the salvation of all.[8] They attacked "High Calvinism", and sought to clear the gospel out of any other conditions other than faith. The Marrow Brethren denied that actions such as repentance, with either inward or outward reformation, are necessary to receive salvation, but saw them as naturally flowing from receiving Christ.[9][10]
The Marrow Brethren taught a form of the republication of the covenant of works.[11] while maintaining the Mosaic Covenant was an administration of the Covenant of Grace. The Marrow had a high emphasis on the possibility of assurance,[12] seeing the work of Christ as the foundation of the believer's assurance, while the general Assembly emphasized the human element in having assurance.[13] The Marrow Men maintained a belief in the Scottish covenants even renewing them after the Secession.
