The preperationists were apparently dominant in the presbyterian church that condemned the Marrow, and thought you had to forsake sin before you exercise saving faith (!).
It seems to me the preperationists got too enamored of the law-like character of the gospel call (which includes repentance, and a command to believe) but in opposing them the Marrow throws out some of the baby with the bathwater in terms of dividing law-gospel in a Lutheran fashion.
In principle I don’t have on objection to saying we go back to the same Christ who saves in justification as for sanctification. And even the ‘gospel’. but if someone narrowly defines gospel as necessarily excluding any commands or conditions, then the problem enters. But making Gospel ALL about conditions is also a distortion.
Patrick Ramsey is an opponent of the Lutheranizing of the presbyterian presentation of law and gospel that happens by men like Horton and Scott Clark of WTS West.
The preperationists were apparently dominant in the presbyterian church that condemned the Marrow, and thought you had to forsake sin before you exercise saving faith (!).
It seems to me the preperationists got too enamored of the law-like character of the gospel call (which includes repentance, and a command to believe) but in opposing them the Marrow throws out some of the baby with the bathwater in terms of dividing law-gospel in a Lutheran fashion.
In principle I don’t have on objection to saying we go back to the same Christ who saves in justification as for sanctification. And even the ‘gospel’. but if someone narrowly defines gospel as necessarily excluding any commands or conditions, then the problem enters. But making Gospel ALL about conditions is also a distortion.
Patrick Ramsey is an opponent of the Lutheranizing of the presbyterian presentation of law and gospel that happens by men like Horton and Scott Clark of WTS West.
Thanks for this. It’s apparent that the quoting of the Puritans by the GS crowd is selective. I think they forgot the quotes where Puritans say the gospel is law.
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
There was a dispute among Puritans (of course! how could it be otherwise!). The Marrow controversy is also a part of where we are with GS today.
http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/MarrowControversy.html
The preperationists were apparently dominant in the presbyterian church that condemned the Marrow, and thought you had to forsake sin before you exercise saving faith (!).
It seems to me the preperationists got too enamored of the law-like character of the gospel call (which includes repentance, and a command to believe) but in opposing them the Marrow throws out some of the baby with the bathwater in terms of dividing law-gospel in a Lutheran fashion.
In principle I don’t have on objection to saying we go back to the same Christ who saves in justification as for sanctification. And even the ‘gospel’. but if someone narrowly defines gospel as necessarily excluding any commands or conditions, then the problem enters. But making Gospel ALL about conditions is also a distortion.
Patrick Ramsey is an opponent of the Lutheranizing of the presbyterian presentation of law and gospel that happens by men like Horton and Scott Clark of WTS West.
http://patrickspensees.wordpress.com/category/neonomian-antinomian-controversy/
The book he refers to by David Como sounded very interesting because it took the Marrow itself to task for being antinomian-leaning book.
FWIW
LikeLike
Hi
The best book on preparationism is published by the U. of Chicago Press, called “The Heart Prepared” (forget the author’s name). Blessings,
Jay
LikeLike
Thanks.
LikeLike
“The Heart Prepared: Grace and Conversion in Puritan Spiritual Life” by Norman Pettit ???
LikeLike
for some reason this was waiting for moderation. perhaps because of links. I’ve removed links
There was a dispute among Puritans (of course! how could it be otherwise!). The Marrow controversy is also a part of where we are with GS today.
http://www.monergism. com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/MarrowControversy.html
The preperationists were apparently dominant in the presbyterian church that condemned the Marrow, and thought you had to forsake sin before you exercise saving faith (!).
It seems to me the preperationists got too enamored of the law-like character of the gospel call (which includes repentance, and a command to believe) but in opposing them the Marrow throws out some of the baby with the bathwater in terms of dividing law-gospel in a Lutheran fashion.
In principle I don’t have on objection to saying we go back to the same Christ who saves in justification as for sanctification. And even the ‘gospel’. but if someone narrowly defines gospel as necessarily excluding any commands or conditions, then the problem enters. But making Gospel ALL about conditions is also a distortion.
Patrick Ramsey is an opponent of the Lutheranizing of the presbyterian presentation of law and gospel that happens by men like Horton and Scott Clark of WTS West.
patrickspensees.wordpress. com/category/neonomian-antinomian-controversy/
The book he refers to by David Como sounded very interesting because it took the Marrow itself to task for being antinomian-leaning book.
FWIW
LikeLike
Thanks for this. It’s apparent that the quoting of the Puritans by the GS crowd is selective. I think they forgot the quotes where Puritans say the gospel is law.
> —–Original Message—– >
LikeLike