Try again. I don't understand. We'll give it a couple minutes just because of the tight time frame that we had. I think we'll start, well, just before 5 after, so just let a few more trickle in here yet. Okay. Well, let's begin together. Welcome to this seminar session. We're breaking out right now into three different sessions, and this one's going to be sort of a look at church history and historical theology, specifically focusing on the marrow of modern divinity, marrow theology, we'll get into that, and particularly how that focused on the doctrine of Christ, who Jesus is, what He has done. We'll look at some applications of that. Let's open together in a word of prayer as we begin. Lord our God, as we enter into your holy presence this afternoon, once again in prayer, we do pray for your rich blessing on our study of this period of church history, this rich theology that is come from the teaching of Your Word. We pray that as we study this, it wouldn't simply remain something of the past, but that through the writings of faithful men rooted in Your Word, that we would see You, O Lord Jesus, that we would delight to behold once again Your glory and Your beauty, particularly in Your saving work. So Lord, we pray that you would give us, through the study of the history of your church, a fresh vision of yourself once again, that you would instruct our hearts and souls, and that you would bless us and encourage us through this session as well. We do pray this in the name of your dear Son, our Savior Jesus Christ. Amen. As I mentioned, this session is Christology in Marrow Theology. And I'm going to begin with a bit of church history, and then we're going to move into looking at some historical theology and doctrine and the application of that. First of all, how many of you have heard of The Marrow of Modern Divinity? The book, The Marrow of Modern Divinity? A few of you. It's been recently republished by Christian Focus Publications. And The Marrow of Modern Divinity, as a book, was first published in England. And this here is an image of London, England, around the time of the Westminster Assembly, so 1640s. Well, in England, in terms of the background of this book, which would prove to be very influential among English Puritans, and then later among Scottish Presbyterians, and through that really into the Reformed world and beyond, the roots of it begin with a man who is somewhat mysteriously known, at least in his writings, giving his name to his books as E.F. EF was born somewhere around 1590-1600, and we know he died in the year 1650. And we know that his real full name was Edward Fisher. Edward Fisher was perhaps not the kind of man that you would think would write a significant work of theology. By vocation, he was a barber. And in those days, if you were a barber, you also often carried out the task of being a surgeon. Medical practice wasn't quite what it is today. And so Edward Fisher was a barber-surgeon. He belonged to the Guild in London of barber-surgeons. Not only that, we know that he was a bookseller. During the late 1620s, early 1630s, in fact, he ran afoul of Archbishop Laud under King Charles I, who was the king who began to persecute the Puritans. This Edward Fisher ran afoul of some local officials because of his book-selling activities. He was involved in selling Puritan works on the side. So we know that while his main vocation in life was being a barber-surgeon, he also was a bookseller, undoubtedly liked reading the works of theology that were available in his day, and sought to promote those. We also know he was a lay theologian, and he was a resident, at least for a good part of his life, of the city of London, England. During his life, he had contact with a wide range of Puritans. If we look at the Merrill of Modern Divinity, read his introductions to the various editions that were published, we see that in his early life as a believer, he came into contact with a Puritan named Thomas Hooker. Thomas Hooker was known among Puritans in England, and later he would emigrate to the United States. Not then the United States, but to the Puritan colonies. And he was known as having somewhat of a tendency towards legalism, spiritually. Thomas Hooker had somewhat of an emphasis or an idea of a strong sort of preparationism. The idea that one would really seek to preach the law, perhaps even prior to fully offering Christ. Really desiring a development of conviction of sin before freely and fully offering Christ. Well, Edward Fisher was converted under the influence of Thomas Hooker, and he speaks of that. Thomas Hooker really standing sort of on the one end of what we would call the English Puritans. And he also had acquaintance right to the other end, a man named John Eaton. John Eaton was a real critic of Puritan legalism and very strong on freely offering Christ immediately to his hearers in the pastorate. But he was such a critic of Puritan legalism that perhaps he had erred in the opposite direction. The opposite direction was perhaps giving sort of a cheap grace gospel. You're forgiven and it doesn't matter. It's okay, you're in Christ. How you live, all your sins are abolished in God's sight. There's no real need for further sorrow for sin or repentance at any point in a Christian walk. And so we know Edward Fisher was friends with both of these men at some points in his life, and with a wide range of Puritans in between. He wrote a number of works that were published during the 1640s in England, during the time when the English Civil War broke out. Why would he be publishing books at that specific point in time? Well, that's when many Puritan works start to be published, Because just prior to that, King Charles I is still very much in dominant authority. And the Archbishop of the Church of England, Laud, is somebody who is really seeking to suppress much of what we know of as Puritanism. So in the 1640s, publishing booms, especially in the city of London, which is under parliamentary control. King Charles is out in the countryside, and there's a civil war going on. And it's in this setting that this barber-surgeon pens a number of works, including the most popular or well-known work called The Marrow of Modern Divinity, published in two parts. First part, 1645. Second part, 1648. Well, his writings as a lay theologian, he's not a pastor. In fact, we know that he's not an elder during his lifetime. but he's a member of a Presbyterian church in the city of London. His writings show that he's concerned about tendencies in the church of his day to either err in one of two directions, either to go towards legalism or to go towards antinomianism, or what we'd call lawlessness. So either a wrong focus on the law of God, which would minimize the gospel of Jesus Christ and His sufficiency, or a focus on Christ that would distort and negate the law and say that it's no longer valuable or important for the Christian who is saved. Well, the Marrow of Modern Divinity, which he wrote, was written in the form of a dialogue between four characters, something like a Shakespearean work of literature. So he has these four people in his work who are having a conversation. One of them is a pastor named Evangelista. He's an evangelical pastor, and he's one who's concerned to shepherd people in a right understanding of the relationship of the law and the gospel, covenant of works, covenant of grace, right understanding of who Jesus Christ is, how a believer is to live a life of thankfulness and holiness to God, Well, this pastor is counseling three people. One's a new Christian named Neophytus. Another is Neo's legalistic friend, Nomista, which is a play on the Latin word for law. And then his other friend is Antinomista. So, Antinomian, the lawless one. All three of these friends believe that they are Christians, they're wrestling through various issues of how to understand the gospel, how to understand the law, and it's through a long discussion that Evangelista leads them through this, and answers various things, and deals with things. He really shepherds them through. beginning with the right understanding of what sin is, what the law is, the covenant of works, then understanding who Jesus is as a fulfillment of the covenant of works, the establishment of the covenant of grace and of salvation in Christ and a new life in Christ. And so he shepherds them through this, and as Edward Fisher wrote in his dedication, This shepherding, this discussion, the point of it was to lead people to a true knowledge of Jesus Christ and Him crucified. Many people commended this work when it came out in the 1640s. Well-known Puritan ministers, Joseph Carroll, Jeremiah Burroughs, William Strong, wrote little forewords and comments, just like we have today. Our book commenders, you look at the back, does Sinclair Ferguson commend it or whoever? You get your little list of commenders, they had the same thing then. And we see a number of well-known Puritans there, commending this book. And it really emphasizes a gospel-hearted, evangelical, reformed spirit. Well, after he published The Marrow, he published a couple other works. One on the Lord's Supper, and interestingly enough, that was also a dialogue. And it's a dialogue about who should attend the Lord's Supper, and in what spirit should they attend. And he had several characters there as well. One's a pastor. And two others, one who is a very upright, moral member of a congregation, and the other, somebody who's just sinned grievously, but repented. And he shepherds through that discussion and really showing, in some ways, that the man who thinks he's moral and upright doesn't really understand the heart of the gospel. And that the one who men might have been critical of for attending the Lord's table, but is really repentant and trusting in Christ, is in a right spirit and a right frame to attend the Lord's table. And so we see this real concern for the souls of people, and a real concern that the gospel of Jesus Christ would be understood. Well, we know the year 1650 he dies. There's an obituary for him. We don't know a whole lot else about his life. The book is published a number of times into Welsh and English within the coming decades. And then it sort of seems to fade into obscurity. In many ways, it probably wouldn't have the stature today that it even has if, in God's providence, it hadn't been picked up in Scotland. We'll look briefly at the Scottish church history tied to the Marrow now. In Scotland, there's something called the Marrow Controversy that breaks out between the years of 1718 and about 1722-1723. So this is a good 70, 80 years after Edward Fisher's death. How does it begin, the Merrill Controversy? Well, in the year 1690, 1688 actually, there's a substantial change taking place on the British political scene. The change is a new king and queen coming in from the Netherlands, William and Mary, the Glorious Revolution. A Protestant king and queen come to the throne. And because of that, the Presbyterian Church of Scotland is restored. Under Charles II, it had been persecuted. previous to this. So after 1690, you really have, once again, a freely operating, reformed Presbyterian Church of Scotland. But it seems in the early decades of that new freedom that the character of the Church of Scotland is increasingly dominated by a tendency towards adding conditions to the gospel. An increasing spirit of legalism, hyper-Calvinism, begins to dominate the Church of Scotland, and in various forms. Some, again, begin to preach a preparationism, Somebody is expected to manifest a certain degree of conviction of sin and sorrow over sin before you offer the Gospel to them. So preaching for a law work prior to preaching Christ. Others preaching Christ only to those who they deem to have marks of election. And so again, the Gospel is really narrowed down. It's not free. It's not freely preached as all-sufficient in every situation. In the midst of these growing problems in the Church of Scotland, there were those who were more evangelical-hearted, passionate for the Gospel of Jesus Christ, who were concerned about these developments. And it sparks a controversy. One presbytery, the presbytery of Akhterader, decides to unilaterally add a vow to their ordination requirements for new pastors. Why do they decide to add this vow to their requirements? They want to prevent legalistic preachers, preachers who are preaching moralism or hyper-Calvinism, from becoming pastors in their presbytery. And so they add this vow to their ordination requirements. The new candidates for ministry have to vow, I believe it is not sound and orthodox to teach that we must forsake sin in order to our coming to Christ, and in stating us in covenant to God. What they're trying to say there is that it's not sound to teach that first, A person needs to give up their sin, and only after they've done that can they come to Christ. They're saying, no, it needs to be hand-in-hand, it needs to be right together, coming to Christ in order to be delivered from our sin. That repentance includes a coming to Christ and should come hand-in-hand. Well, they did this, and perhaps their wording was not the wisest wording in its formulation. They did this to try to weed out potential legalists from church ministry. It was appealed by one of the students who said, I can't take this vow. It came to the floor of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland in 1717, and the tendencies in the Church of Scotland were such that the Assembly said, this statement is unsound and detestable. and overturned it and said, no one is to add extra vows in requirement for the ordination of pastors. Well, it's at these synod meetings as they're going on, there are a number of men sitting there in the assembly who are in the midst of all of this as pastors and elders and really wrestling with sometimes personally, or in the case of their congregation or denomination, well, how are we to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ? Men who are concerned about tendencies that they see as really choking out the Gospel. One of these is Thomas Boston. Thomas Boston was a Scottish minister who ministered in the southern part of Scotland, just north of England. And he himself, in his early ministry, had really struggled with aspects of hyper-Calvinism and legalism, really wrestled with assurance of salvation. He wasn't sure if he should preach Christ freely to everyone, or if Christ should only be offered to those who had clear marks of conviction of sin. Well, one of the things that really impacted Thomas Boston was a visit to an old member of his congregation who had fought in the English Civil War. This old soldier had on his shelf the book, The Marrow of Modern Divinity. Thomas Boston borrowed this book, and he read it. And he read through this English Puritan dialogue, and he said it was just liberating to him. Suddenly it made it crisp and clear, the understanding of the relationship of the Law and the Gospel. The work of Jesus Christ in fulfilling all of the requirements of the Law, as an all-sufficient, perfect Savior. And then the role of the Law as a rule of thankfulness, as a guide to holiness for the new believer. And so he was really transformed by this book. And as he's sitting at these meetings in 1717, he mentions to one of his friends, this is a good book, you really ought to read this. You know, all the stuff we're going through right here. This really answers this. Well, that man, Thomas Drummond, went to the bookshops in Edinburgh, looked around, found a copy. read it, passed it on to another friend, who read it, passed it on to another pastor, and that pastor's name was James Hogg. James Hogg was a firebrand pastor, very bold, very blunt, sort of like a Martin Luther in personality. And he read through it, and he said, this needs to be republished. This addresses our situation." And so he republished it himself with a fiery foreword declaring that this addressed the errors, the darkenings of the gospel in our day in the Church of Scotland by those who profess to be preachers of the gospel but are not. And really, very bluntly, addressed the situation in the church. It was not received well in the denomination. By 1719, formal complaints were brought against the book to the Church of Scotland General Assembly. As we'll see, we're going to get some of the wording in the book at points. It did perhaps, in its freeness, in some of its language, at a few points, it could perhaps have been construed, if taken out of context, to perhaps lean a bit towards antinomianism. But, as Thomas Boston would point out and others, they would say, if you read it in its context, it does not do that at all. But as controversy ensued, the result was a number of ministers band together in defense of the book, and they're known as the Merrow Men. Merrow theologians in Scotland, men like Thomas Boston, Ebenezer Erskine, and later his brother Ralph Erskine. James Hogg, of course, is already in there. A guy named Robert Rickleton. William Wilson, a whole list of men who were really evangelical Calvinists in the Church of Scotland who stand up to defend this book. Despite their defense of the book, which is articulate and careful, theologically the book was nonetheless condemned by the Church of Scotland. However, in order to avoid what they certainly thought would become a split in the Church of Scotland, the men who continued to teach the teachings of the book and commend it were not required to make any vow or public statement of repentance, the fear being that it would cause a division in the Church, though about 15 years later that division occurred nonetheless. Well, that's a bit of the historical background. Let's move now to looking at the actual content of Marrow theology as it's formulated in the Marrow of Modern Divinity and then in the writings of the Scottish theologians who stood to its defense. So what exactly did Edward Fisher And these later Scottish men believe or teach about the doctrine of Jesus Christ. There's a lot that could be said on this. And I highly commend this book again, The Marrow of Modern Divinity, published by Christian Focus. I highly commend you to get a copy. It's laid out beautifully. It's easy to read. It has great indexes. And it covers a wealth of theology, very practically, on the law and the gospel. However, for the remainder of our time, we're going to focus particularly on the atoning work of Jesus Christ and the implications that that had as these men came to understand it for their preaching, their pulpit ministry. First of all, looking at the formulation of the doctrine of Christ in the marrow of modern divinity, and among the Scottish theologians who defended it. We'll begin by looking at how they describe the nature of the atoning work, or what Jesus has done. Well, as they talk about the atoning work of our Lord Jesus Christ, If you read the Marrow of Modern Divinity, or the writings of Thomas Boston, Ebenezer Erskine, these other men, we see right away that it's framed in terms of a covenant or federal theology. What does that mean? Scripture is understood not only in its particulars, but also its grand overarching themes. The idea of the covenant of works, made with Adam, the requirements that God laid upon Adam and his posterity, in some ways which are exemplified in the law. That covenant of works was broken by Adam and led to the necessity of the work of the atonement. Because Jesus Christ, as the second Adam, is the one who fulfilled that broken covenant of works and established a new covenant, the covenant of grace. And that covenant of grace already, of course, promised and spoken of right from the very beginning, Genesis chapter 3. He would bruise the head of the serpent, the seed of the woman. So these grand themes of covenant theology are really what frame the thinking of these men as they talk about what has Jesus done. Let's look at a few quotes, or hear a few quotes, on the necessity of Jesus' atoning work. Edward Fisher says this, Because of the broken covenant of works, man has now become liable for the payment of a double debt. He owes a debt of satisfaction for his sin committed in time past, and he owes a debt of perfect and perpetual obedience for time to come. So man owes a double debt under the broken covenant of works, and he's utterly unable to pay for either of them. His sin was committed against an infinite and eternal God, and therefore it merits infinite and eternal satisfaction. James Hogg, that fiery, blunt Scottish minister who republished it, said this in one of his writings, The obligation of the covenant of works to both the obedience and the penal sanction remains unbroken. Thomas Boston, man in a state of sin under the covenant of works, is in a position of utter inability to recover himself. Ebenezer Erskine said, the man who has broken the law is utterly incapable to repair its honor or to satisfy divine justice. And so we see this theme right through, from the marrow of modern divinity through the Scottish writers who defend it, that man is in a desperate condition. He owes this great double debt. He can't pay it. But he remains under the force, the still-in-force covenant of works. It's unattainable. It's broken. And so, he's deserving of an eternity in hell, which must continue forever, because it still does not satisfy the sin against an infinitely holy God. How is this answered? The covenant of grace established in Jesus Christ. Thomas Boston said, Our Lord Jesus Christ became surety for the elect in the second covenant. He put himself in the room or in the place of the principal debtors under the covenant of works. And so in marrow theology, we see this strong emphasis that Jesus has fulfilled every aspect of the covenant of works in the place of his people. He's paid the penalty fully for the violation. How did He pay that penalty? By bearing the full weight of the just wrath of God against the sin of His people. Through His incarnate suffering, through His self-sacrifice to His death on the cross, we call penal substitutionary atonement. Again, let's listen to a few of these Merrill writers, beginning with the barber-surgeon. He said, "...Christ yielded in man's flesh the price of the satisfaction of the just judgment of God, and in the same flesh suffered the punishment that man had deserved, and thus justice was satisfied." Thomas Boston. Who can fully describe the wrath of an angry God? Consider how God dealt with His own Son, whom He spared not. The wrath of God seized on His soul and body both, and brought Him into the dust of death. That His sufferings were not eternal. flowed from the quality of the sufferer who was infinite, and therefore able to bear at once the whole load of wrath. And upon that account, his sufferings were of infinite value. Ralph Erskine says this, Christ met with that which sin deserves, the death and the curse, the hiding of his father's face, the wrath of God, the awakened sword of the justice of God smiting him, the eternal Son bearing the stroke of vengeance in the place of elect sinners. And so, throughout marrow theology, we see this strong focus. Christ has paid the debt of penalty. But the marrow theologians are really particularly known, and that would be common to Reformed theology, that understanding. The marrow theologians had this strong stress as well on Jesus Christ fulfilling all righteousness. Also, that aspect. You see, not only did Adam sin, and deserve judgment because of that. But also in sin, he failed to do what was righteous. And man in sin is incapable to perform that required righteousness, that obedience. And so, as the Merrill men speak of this, Christ fulfilled the demand of obedience under the covenant of works. And so he secured the imputation of his righteousness and obedience in this to his people through the covenant of grace. Listen to a few more quotes. Edward Fisher. God did, as it were, say to Christ, what they owe Me, I will require at Your hands. Then said Christ, Lo, I come to do Thy will, O my God. Yea, Thy law is in my heart." Psalm 40. This Christ assented and from everlasting struck hands with God, shook hands with God, sealed this agreement. to put upon him man's person, to take upon him his name, and to enter in his stead in obeying his Father, to do all for man that he should require." So Edward Fisher, the barber-surgeon, is saying, Jesus fulfilled the law. He was the one who was perfectly obedient. Thomas Boston said, Christ made the satisfaction of God's justice by payment of the double debt, namely the debt of punishment and the debt of perfect obedience. As man was unable to sanctify himself, just as he is unable to satisfy justice. And so, Boston would say, Jesus Christ is made to the believer, holiness, righteousness, and justification. He clothes us in all His merits and takes to Himself all our sin. So that, if any should now be condemned for sin, that is the sin of the one who trusts in Him, It must needs be Jesus Christ who has taken them upon Him. Ebenezer Erskine said, Christ did everything that the law required. He fulfilled all righteousness in His own person by an active and passive obedience in all His members by imputation. And so it's Jesus Christ who fulfills everything that that covenant of works required. And in Himself establishes and completes, fulfills the new covenant of grace in Himself. When we answer the question, what has Jesus done? We see, really expressed through Maratheology, and I believe an accurate reflection of Scripture, that Jesus Christ is the perfect, all-sufficient sacrifice. And He is, or His was and is, the perfect and all-sufficient obedience as well. Finally, it's worth considering as well, as we speak of this, to note that in terms of the work of Jesus Christ, the Merrill theologians and Thomas Boston were clear to delineate the connection of the covenant of grace with election. They believed atonement was limited in extent, in particular in application. And Louis Burckhoff says this, the Merrow men of Scotland were perfectly orthodox in maintaining that Christ died for the purpose of saving only the elect. They said that Christ did not die for all men, but that He is available for all. Well, how does all of this, what Jesus has done, reflect who He is? Again, if we look at marrow theology, we see them express Jesus is the mediator of the new covenant, the covenant of grace. As fully God, the only begotten Son of God, fully man, God incarnate, He is the second Adam. As such, He is the perfect, all-sufficient Savior and Redeemer. He's the perfect and eternal High Priest. prophet and king. We really see that theme and that language drawn out as the Merrow men in their sermons. In Scotland we have many of their sermons still today. And in the Merrow of modern divinity, Christ is prophet, priest and king. Perfectly fulfilling that work. And as prophet and king, extending the offer of Himself and what He's done. in the offer of complete salvation, fully sufficient for anyone, to all of mankind. And this is what the marrow theologians refer to as the deed of gift and grant. The idea that the gospel offer was like a sealed royal letter, a promise. proclaimed throughout the kingdoms that anyone who comes to Christ will receive free and complete pardon, all that is necessary for salvation. So they spoke of this language of the deed of gift and grant, which the King Jesus, who is the perfect High Priest, declares and extends through his ministers, ambassadors, to all the earth. and then drawing, by the work of His Spirit, His elect to Himself." Well, what was the impact of all of this theology, this doctrine, in their writings? I'd like to focus on just one aspect in their preaching, their gospel offer. We see that it's universal, it's free, And it's full. So universal, free, and full. And that this is rooted time and again in the person and work of Jesus Christ, and in His promises, rooted in who He is and His work. A few quotes from the marrow. in terms of this gospel offer, because Edward Fisher, the barber-theologian, barber-surgeon-theologian, as he's writing, he's thinking of all these people in the city of London and everywhere that are confused about the gospel or wrestling over really understanding it. And so even as he has this dialogue, it's like the barber is preaching through the dialogue, through this pastor, this character that he has created. And so we have Evangelista saying, I beseech you, consider that God the Father, as He is in His Son Jesus Christ, moved with nothing but His free love to mankind lost, made a deed of gift and grant unto them all, that whosoever of them all shall believe in this His Son shall not perish, but have eternal life. And so it was that Jesus Christ said to his disciples, go and preach the gospel to every creature under heaven. And here's Fisher's commentary on that. That is, go and tell every man without exception that here is good news for him. Christ is dead for him. And if he will take him and accept of his righteousness, he shall have him. Now that wording, Christ is dead for him, is one of the phrases that really got caught up in the Scottish controversy. Some said, wait a second, that sounds like universal atonement, like Christ died for everyone. But as Thomas Boston would point out, if we read the rest of Fisher's writings in context, what he says around that and before that, it's clear that he's speaking of the gospel offer here. that in this grant, this offer that's made, it's a guaranteed offer of Jesus' complete work, His full work. Another point, Nomista, the legalist, raises a question. He says to the pastor, but sir, suppose the person who comes hasn't truly repented for his many and great sins. Does he still have a warrant, a right to come to Christ by believing? Shouldn't he first repent of his sins before he comes to Christ? Listen to Evangelist's answer. I tell you truly that whatever a man is, or whatever he has done or not done, he has enough warrant to come to Christ by believing. Because Christ makes a general proclamation. Ho, everyone that thirsteth, come ye to the waters. Come buy and eat. Yes, come buy wine and milk without money and without price." You see, the condition is, buy wine and milk without money. That is, without any sufficiency of your own. And so Fisher would say to the person Might not. Might think, I don't have enough conviction of sin to come to Christ. Am I really repenting? Do I need that to come to Christ? Well, go to Christ and ask Him. Confess your sin and say, I'm cold-hearted. I'm spiritually dull. I'm lacking here. And so, Christ as the all-sufficient Savior. Well, we see this as well in the writings of the Marrow theologians in Scotland. This morning we heard that message from the Word of God, from the Song of Songs. It's interesting, Thomas Boston has a sermon called The Everlasting Espousals, which compares the covenant of grace offered in the Gospel to a marriage contract. drawn up, already signed by the bridegroom, bearing his consent to match with the captive daughter of Zion." This is what Thomas Boston exhorts his hearers, his congregation to. He says, the royal bridegroom has signed this. In other words, he offers you himself in the Gospel. He's making this marriage offer to you. And it is incumbent upon you to sign it likewise, consenting to take Christ as He's offered to you in the Gospel. It's endorsed and directed to you, every one of you. Therefore, you have sufficient warrant to sign it yourselves. What is your name?" And he goes through a whole listing of categories of different spiritual conditions of people. He says, are you a thirsty sinner? Then he turns to Isaiah 55. Oh, everyone that thirsts. Are you a willing sinner? Do you want to come to Christ? He directs them to Revelation 22. Whosoever will, let him take up the water of life freely. Are you called heavy laden sinner? Arise then, the Master calls you. Come to me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Is your name Horish Backslider? You have played the harlot with many lovers, yet return again unto me, says the Lord." Jeremiah 3.1. Are you a lost sinner? A Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was lost. Luke 19.10. Are you the chief of sinners? Even to you this word of salvation is sent. Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners of whom I am chief. But by whatever artifice you may use to try to disown these, or of any of these to be your name, Boston says, if you try to wiggle out of any of these categories and say they don't apply to you, listen to this. Surely you are men, sons of men. You cannot deny that that is your name. Therefore, this espousal is directed to you, every one of you. Unto you, O men, I call. My voice is to the sons of men." Proverbs 8, 4. Oh, the riches and freedom of grace! This offer is made unto all of you without exception. Christ is willing to be yours. Ralph Erskine says this, speaking again of this freeness of the Gospel offer, here speaking as well of its fullness, He says, oh happy are believers, all things are yours. For you are Christ's and Christ is God's. You have wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and redemption and all things in Christ. It is easy with Christ to supply all your needs and to give you all sufficiency in all things. There's an overflowing ocean of all good in Christ. Hence we see the duty of all poor and needy sinners, and where they ought to go for supply, and to share in all things they need, and what a broad foundation for faith there is. God in Christ is the fountain of living waters. God the Father has all things, but how shall we come at them? Why, says Christ, come to me, for they're all mine, mine to give out, mine to distribute. James Fisher, who was the son-in-law of one of the Erskines, says this, "...come to Christ with all your sins, that they may be pardoned, because He has paid the ransom. With all your wants, that they may be supplied. Come to Him with all your doubts, that they may be solved. Come to Him for all that you need." And so we see just the impact that having this understanding of Jesus Christ as the second Adam, the one who fulfilled all righteousness, the one who bore the complete penalty, the one who establishes the covenant of grace, fulfills the covenant of works, this understanding of law and gospel, the impact that it had in their preaching of the Word, One quote yet from a man named William Wilson. He says, Oh sirs, the market of grace is a rare market. The wares that are therein are all given freely. Oh, everyone that thirsts, come to the waters. He that has no money, let him come and buy wine and milk without money and without price. Whoever will, let him take of the waters of life freely. Oh, come and take freely. Oh, come and enjoy. Oh, come and share in the unsearchable riches of Jesus Christ, the worthy Lamb. So again and again we see their focus pointing to Jesus Christ. So what can we learn from this? Well, certainly I think we see in this historical case a picture here of people who are wrestling with the right understanding of the Gospel, wrestling how to live, how to preach, how to minister. Where did they find the answer? Well, they found it in turning to the Word and coming to know Christ, His rich grace more and more, His precious promises more and more. And as they knew Christ and His complete, perfect work, and knew His gracious, loving promises and covenant, and what they deserved, as those who had broken His law and covenant of works. They were filled with this overflowing delight in Jesus Christ, a passion to proclaim that same gospel freely to others without setting conditions or hurdles or expectations that would add law to the gospel. They proclaimed Jesus Christ universally, fully, and freely. That was their passion and impelled them. Why? Because they understood it themselves. This is the Lord Jesus Christ who saved them and set them free from their own darkness, from their own being under wrath and in bondage to sin. This is where they have come to found freedom and liberty. in Christ. We'll end it there. Let's close together in prayer. Lord our God, as we bow before you at the end of this session of just looking at some of the history of your church, we do marvel and wonder at the riches of your grace. We know that we are the ones who sinned, who have broken covenant with you. We are the ones who have sought to worship the creature rather than the Creator. We are the ones who so quickly ignore the riches of your Word and your grace. We do praise you. And thank You that You have provided in Your Son a perfect, full, and complete salvation. Lord, we thank You. You are so gracious to us, so good and kind. Lord, we pray that You would cause our hearts to overflow in wonder And in Thanksgiving, as we behold today and through the rest of this conference more of your work, more of who you are, more of your dear Son, we pray that you would cause our hearts to overflow, just as these Merrill men's hearts overflowed, that we would delight both in walking in a holy Thanksgiving, and in a great compassion for those around us who do not know You and who are lost in the darkness of sin. So Lord, we pray for Your gracious blessing. In Jesus' name, Amen. If anyone has any questions, I'll be glad to chat a bit afterwards here. When the work was condemned in the Church of Scotland, was it called non-conformity by Westminster standards? Was it a confessional? The condemnation? Yeah. There was argument that it taught, on the Church of Scotland side, some of the men like James Haddo, who taught at the University of St. Andrews, argued that it was teaching universal atonement by implication. And that really, I think, was rooted to that phrase where they said, Christ is dead for you, where Edward Fisher said that, which I don't think was a wise choice of words on his part, even though Thomas Watson did a good job of explaining he didn't really mean Christ died for everybody. But so there were just a few phrases and a few words that were characterized in a way that was not consistent with the confessional standards. Thank you. Yes. Okay. Yeah, absolutely. Everything is in Him. And that is such a wonder. And those that stumble over the fact that it's said of Israel in Acts 11-18, it's them that says that. And we've seen that when Peter Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah Yeah, yeah, it's Full of the word is full of his riches of his grace. Yeah. Yeah. No, you're welcome Yeah, looking forward to catching up yeah, we'll be in touch okay, all right Yes. Is it biblical to call sinners and say, repent and believe the gospel? It's almost like you're mixing the law and gospel together. Is it biblical? I think so. To say, repent and believe? Absolutely. But the Merriman would stress that it's only even as, you know, in coming to Christ that we truly repent. They would say it's evangelical repentance. when we understand that we've sinned against God, understand who He is, that we're only truly repenting, actually, when we're trusting in Christ. Yeah. Yeah. I think that's in two ways. If he doesn't give me love, he hasn't given me faith. If he doesn't give me love, he hasn't given me faith. Yeah, they certainly were. I mean, the Merrill men, they would preach the full counsel of God's Word and convictingly. It's not that they don't want people to be convicted of sin. They certainly do want them to understand their estate apart from Christ. It does very much. And so they're not throwing out the law of God in any way, but they're putting in right harmony with the gospel and pointing to Christ. He talks about the broken off from the old branch and the new. Many of the reprobates are slain here after they supposedly believed, but didn't believe in the Lord God's own God. Like I was saying when you were talking about that too, we have a warrant to preach the gospel to our teachers, but we don't have a warrant to tell them that they're saved. unless there's a proof. There's so many precious promises. I went out of the security man in jail once, and I believed the gospel, and had more shirts, and joy, and things were done. I believed. Things were done. I said, why are you in New York? I remember that all the time in jail. I believe in the gospel, I believe in the Lord Jesus Christ. I have to be careful not to make it legalistic, but it is still that. You know, I think that if you made that same Jesus, Lord, and Christ, it would have a prick in the heart of the Episcopalists. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Are there any names on the other side of the controversy I'd recognize? Haddo. James Haddo. He's probably the best. There were men on the other side of the controversy who were evangelical, like some. I'd say the majority was, at least at this point, tied up with some sort of legalism. But there are a group of men who don't go along with Boston and the other Maryland in the votes. who later, in hindsight, some of them say we probably should have. But we're concerned... John Willison. John Willison is a Scottish theologian. He's written quite a bit of really good stuff. He was, later on in his life, he became very good friends with Ebenezer Urska, though they'd been on separate sides on this debate. He was concerned particularly over the language like, Christ is dead for you. He just said that's just bad wording. It doesn't fit with the... That's what Boston was saying about the oath. Boston was saying, you know, I agree with you, it's just bad wording, you know, that both of them have... Now, another question. Fisher. I understand he has a couple of minor awards. Is there any place you can access those? Online early English books online if you can go to Calvin or cornerstone if you're in this area and access them on a computer They have not I don't think they've been reprinted since the 1700 Yeah, I really like the one on the Lord's Suffering I think it's fascinating it's And it really fits with the tenor of the Mero, too. Yeah, you can get them online if you go to a library that has what's called Early English Books Online. And Calvin's library does. I don't know who else in this area does. Are you from this area or not? Where are you from? Kansas. Any big university library will have it. So University of Kansas or if there's Kansas State campus, they should both have it. Yeah. No, you're welcome. Hi. Oh, you're welcome. It was just a word used at the time that just meant the heart of. So it's like, yeah, sort of the heart of and a little bit, it was sort of a term used at the time for sort of, you know, this is the heart of, this is cutting edge, this is the crucial. And so, yeah. Yeah, and it's a weird term today, you know, like marrow. Yeah. And in those days, you know, when they had feasts and stuff, sucking the marrow out of a bone, you know, that's supposed to be the best part of a bone. And if you're eating, they'd sort of like those kinds of things. So, yeah. Well, thank you very much. Yeah, it was good to be here with you. Are you a follower of Boston Quintet or just the Maricon? Well, the Maricon, first thing I like is I've appreciated numbers of the Fourfold State. It's a great work and I've read through a bunch of his sermons. I have some very personal application of the Fourfold State. Somebody gave it to me shortly after I was saved. Why they say I'm the only Baptist, you can't catch a convert at a Christian farm church. Then they gave me a 4-4 stay and I thought, there it is. She only read the first section No, her husband said, read the last part. She said, no heaven there for me. And then God convicted her, and saved her, and came again. She said, you know, I picked up the book, and the wrath's all gone. The same book. I saw the love of God after I was saved. She saw the wrath of God in person, just like Galatians 3. Shout out to the law, to the faith, for it's afternoon in the middle. Well, and if you do read it as an unbeliever, I mean, they spoke, Boston and these other men too, spoke very plainly, if you're an unbeliever, this is where you are. You're not going to be in the state of glory.