# Legal directions in Joseph Alleine?



## Reformed Covenanter (Oct 21, 2018)

On reading John Brown of Haddington's dying advice to his younger children, he recommends (among other books) reading Joseph Alleine's _Alarm to the Unconverted_ and Richard Baxter's _Call to the Unconverted_. However, he warns them to "beware of some legal directions in the last two." I am aware of Baxter's Neonomianism, but did Alleine subscribe to the same error?


----------



## Pergamum (Oct 21, 2018)

Joseph Alliene tells us to do things. So does the Apostle Paul. Seeking God. Praying. Repenting. Jesus tells us to cut off the offending member. Jesus tells us to do things. The Bible throughout tells us to DO THINGS for our spiritual good. 

These are all necessary steps in our spiritual journey, but do not mean that we are saved through our works. Alliene is very practical and I am reminded of Jonathan Edwards where Edwards also tells us to seek God. This all only appears "legal" if you are a neonomian, I think.


----------



## py3ak (Oct 22, 2018)

The difficulty is not with the fact of _directions_. Clearly, John Brown (a man of excellent temper and orthodoxy himself) thought it a profitable book.

But you can see if you look at the directions given, that there is an emphasis on inducing in yourself a certain state of feeling, and this is preparatory to resting in Christ. E.g., "Labor to Get a Sight and Sense of Your Sins" ... "Strive to Affect Your Heart with a Sense of Your Misery" ... "Renounce Your Sins" ... "Choose God for Your Portion" and only then "Accept the Lord Jesus as Yours in All His Offices."

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## jw (Oct 22, 2018)

Pergamum said:


> Joseph Alliene tells us to do things. So does the Apostle Paul. Seeking God. Praying. Repenting. Jesus tells us to cut off the offending member. Jesus tells us to do things. The Bible throughout tells us to DO THINGS for our spiritual good.
> 
> These are all necessary steps in our spiritual journey, but do not mean that we are saved through our works. Alliene is very practical and I am reminded of Jonathan Edwards where Edwards also tells us to seek God. This all only appears "legal" if you are a neonomian, I think.


But these things must be done _by_ faith having believed on Christ and His promises in the Gospel, not _in order to_ faith (which may have been Brown's concern wrt to Alleine). Christ then furnishes the believer with these gifts.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Oct 22, 2018)

py3ak said:


> But you can see if you look at the directions given, that there is an emphasis on inducing in yourself a certain state of feeling, and this is preparatory to resting in Christ. E.g., "Labor to Get a Sight and Sense of Your Sins" ... "Strive to Affect Your Heart with a Sense of Your Misery" ... "Renounce Your Sins" ... "Choose God for Your Portion" and only then "Accept the Lord Jesus as Yours in All His Offices."



Ahh, right, I can see why that would not sit well with a follower of the Marrow Men.


----------



## Pergamum (Oct 22, 2018)

We don't have the strength of our own to do these things, and yet these things are demanded of us and we are to do them or else we won't be saved.

As Augustine said, "Command what You will, and grant what You command."

Here is a link explaining how to seek God:http://www.intoutreach.org/seeking.html

We find in Edwards and other Puritans lists of stuff to do for their spiritual good. None of these Puritans were saying we gain salvation by these efforts, however.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Oct 23, 2018)

I think that the probable issue that John Brown of Haddington had with Joseph Alleine's directions was not with the directions as such, but with the order in which Alleine presented them, which (if the above presentation of them is correct) seem to imply that repentance comes before faith. Given the background of the Marrow Controversy and Brown's status as a minister of the Scottish Seceders, this approach would not have been congenial to him.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## deleteduser99 (Oct 25, 2018)

Pergamum said:


> Joseph Alliene tells us to do things. So does the Apostle Paul. Seeking God. Praying. Repenting. Jesus tells us to cut off the offending member. Jesus tells us to do things. The Bible throughout tells us to DO THINGS for our spiritual good.
> 
> These are all necessary steps in our spiritual journey, but do not mean that we are saved through our works. Alliene is very practical and I am reminded of Jonathan Edwards where Edwards also tells us to seek God. This all only appears "legal" if you are a neonomian, I think.



There was universal concern about Richard Baxter's doctrine of salvation even in his own time and not just our's, which doctrine was that the New Covenant is essentially another covenant like the old one with easier terms of obedience for acceptance with God (I leave it to other experts on Baxter to elaborate). He's appreciated and highly respected for many things in his own time and our's (I've profited wonderfully from Christian Directory and his directions on melancholy), but not his doctrine of salvation in either his time or our's, and godly men in his own day such as John Owen and Walter Marshall--and later on, Thomas Boston--were not silent about these concerns. Certainly none of these three were neonomians.

Indeed without holiness no one will see the Lord, that's as good as written in stone. There is still a danger in presenting repentance in such a way that the hearer mistakes it as his merit to believe on Christ and be saved. Repentance is as necessary to true salvation as justification, but you could communicate repentance in such a way as to say you have no right to believe on Christ to be saved until you've repented sufficiently. So, Christ's benefits end up being presented as prerequisite to actually receiving Christ and His benefits--and that's the essential Gospel distortion of hyper-Calvinism. A sinner is commanded to believe on Jesus alone and be saved, whether or not he sees evidences of salvation.

This is coming from someone guilty of falling off both sides of this horse at one time or another.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Oct 25, 2018)

Someone has drawn my attention to the fact that there was an autobiographical reason why John Brown of Haddington was critical of Joseph Alleine's work (see the reference in A sketch of his life).

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## jw (Oct 25, 2018)

Reformed Covenanter said:


> Someone has drawn my attention to the fact that there was an autobiographical reason why John Brown of Haddington was critical of Joseph Alleine's work (see the reference in A sketch of his life).


Particular page number?


----------



## deleteduser99 (Oct 25, 2018)

Joshua said:


> Particular page number?



First page of the Sketch of the Life of the Author. PDF page 10 of 787.

Of the book "Alarm to the Unconverted":

"In the thirteenth and fourteenth years of my life, the Lord by his word, read and heard, did often strive with my soul for its good. The perusal of Alleine's 'Alarm to the Unconverted' contributed, in some measure, to awaken my conscience, and to move my affections. However, some of his hints, made worse by my corrupt mind, occasioned my _legal_ covenanting with God."

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## jw (Oct 25, 2018)

Harley said:


> First page of the Sketch of the Life of the Author. PDF page 10 of 787.
> 
> Of the book "Alarm to the Unconverted":
> 
> "In the thirteenth and fourteenth years of my life, the Lord by his word, read and heard, did often strive with my soul for its good. The perusal of Alleine's 'Alarm to the Unconverted' contributed, in some measure, to awaken my conscience, and to move my affections. However, some of his hints, made worse by my corrupt mind, occasioned my _legal_ covenanting with God."


Thanks, Jake.  I suppose I could have read the first page.


----------



## deleteduser99 (Oct 25, 2018)

Joshua said:


> Thanks, Jake.  I suppose I could have read the first page.



We're Reformed. That's too easy.

Reactions: Funny 2


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Oct 25, 2018)

Joshua said:


> Particular page number?



All that you needed to do was click on the link and it should have brought you to the exact page.


----------



## jw (Oct 25, 2018)

Reformed Covenanter said:


> All that you needed to do was click on the link and it should have brought you to the exact page.


Yep. Thanks!


----------



## Pergamum (Oct 25, 2018)

Some more high Calvinists have written articles against "preparationism" and have railed against such practices among many of the Puritans and have listed such men as follows as being "preparationists":

William Perkins
William Ames
Richard Sibbes
John Owen
Thomas Manton
Joseph Alleine
William Guthrie
Thomas Shepard
Wilhelmus a Brakel
Herman Witsius

John Bunyan in Pilgrim's Progress, then, is also guilty of preparationism.

But if they are guilty, then I can hardly believe in any danger in "preparationism" and I don't understand the charges against it. Of all the dangerous errors to write against, I can hardly get alarmed over this one.


One article states the following:
"Dutch Reformed divine, Wilhelmus à Brakel (1635-1711) reveals a belief in preparationism. He speaks of "preparatory convictions"56 and urges the unconverted to entertain hope because God "grants [them] conviction and a desire for repentance and salvation."57 His advice is to attend diligently on the means. "You have reason to hope … Wait, therefore, for the least movement of the Spirit, respond to it, and be careful you do not resist it."58 However, such a desire, granted to some of the unconverted who use the means of grace, does not guarantee salvation. It is not a sign of regeneration, but _may _lead to it."
(http://www.cprf.co.uk/articles/preparationism.htm#.W9JW0WgzZPY).


So, what is so bad about that? There does seem to be a doctrine of seeking God in Scripture. We need not do anything prior to believing in Christ or in coming to Him, but often there is a struggle and conviction prior to being born again.

This old hymn is true:

"Come, ye weary, heavy laden,
Bruised and broken by the fall;
If you tarry till you’re better,
You will never come at all;
Not the righteous, not the righteous,
Sinners Jesus came to call."

But none of these men listed above tell the sinner to wait until they are better. They merely outline how the Spirit might lead the sinner to salvation and how the sinner can make the best use of the means available to him.

The preacher Charles Spurgeon and many others speak of a preparatory use of the law in convicting sinners, and while every sinner need not suffer under intense conviction, there is enough expectation in the normal course in how a sinner is saved that Spurgeon can say:

*"I do not believe that any man can preach the gospel who does not preach the law.* The book of Leviticus and all the other typical books are valuable as gospel-teaching to us, because there is always in them most clearly the law of God. *The law is the needle, and you cannot draw the silken thread of the gospel through a man’s heart, unless you first send the needle of the law through the center thereof, to make way for it. If men do not understand the law, they will not feel that they are sinners; and if they are not consciously sinners, they will never value the sin offering. *If the Ten Commandments are never read in their hearing, they will not know wherein they are guilty, and how shall they make confession? If they are not assured that the law is holy, and just, and good, and that God has never demanded of any man more than He has a right to demand, how shall they feel the filthiness of sin, or see the need of flying to Christ for cleansing? *There is no healing a man till the law has wounded him, no making him alive till the law has slain him."*


Jesus did say that He didn't come for the well but for the sick, He did not come for the righteous, but for sinners. And thus, becoming a sinner and feeling the weight of one's guilt is often a prior step before God grants true conversion.

Thomas Goodwin tells the sinner, "If you can't go to God WITH a right heart, then go to God FOR one." So there is a sense in which, while no unregenerate man can truly seek the Lord, sinners often seek to flee the wrath to come or sake salvation from their fates, and God then grants faith and repentance when this occurs.

Many preachers who urge the sinner to struggle forwards despite struggles or to push ahead towards salvation runs the risk of being charged with preparationism. This year I heard someone (a high calvinist) charge Paul Washer with being a preparationist.

I would recommend the following book as a remedy:
Joel Beeke and Paul Smalley, _Prepared by Grace, For Grace: The Puritans on God’s Ordinary Way of Leading Sinners to Christ._ Reformation Heritage Books, 2013. 297 pages.

https://www.amazon.com/Prepared-Gra...540513327&sr=8-1-fkmrnull&ref=sr_1_fkmrnull_1

"In _Prepared by Grace, for Grace_, Joel Beeke and Paul Smalley make careful analysis of the Puritan understanding of preparatory grace, demonstrate its fundamental continuity with the Reformed tradition, and identify matters where even the Puritans disagreed among themselves. Clearing away the many misconceptions and associated accusations of preparationism, this study is sure to be the standard work on how the Puritans understood the ordinary way God leads sinners to Christ."


And also, from this article: http://www.reformation21.org/blog/2013/06/leading-sinners-to-Christ.php:

"Regeneration is a simple and instantaneous act of God giving faith to the sinner for justification and eternal life in Christ. So the gospel call is simply, "Repent ye, and believe" (Mark 1:15). But the sinner's experience that precedes regeneration ordinarily involves thought, feeling, and activity. Thus the simple gospel call is accompanied by many subordinate and related duties such as: "hearken to my words" (Acts 2:14), "incline your ear" (Isa. 55:3), "let us reason together" (Isa. 1:19), "we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device" (Acts 17:29), "examine yourselves" (2 Cor. 13:5), and "be afflicted, and mourn, and weep" (James 4:9). When the Puritans preached such duties, they did not present an alternative to trusting in Christ without delay, anymore than Paul did when he "reasoned of righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come" with Felix (Acts 24:27). Preparatory duties are the servants of faith.

Shepard said that King Jesus commands all people to come to Him for grace, offering Himself in a great exchange.[4] But sin makes it a "wonderfully hard thing to be saved."[5] So the Westminster divines taught that the first work by which God "doth persuade and enable us to embrace Jesus Christ, freely offered to us in the gospel," is "convincing us of our sin and misery" (WSC, Q. 31). Christ is portrayed in the prophecy of Isaiah 55:1as a merchant of salvation in the market place, crying, "Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price." As Guthrie said, preparation stirs our first thirst and hunger for salvation.[6]"


I have found Joseph Alleine very helpful and I do not feel the need for any cautions when reading him, regardless of what Richard Baxter might say.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Oct 25, 2018)

Pergamum said:


> I have found Joseph Alleine very helpful and I do not feel the need for any cautions when reading him, regardless of what Richard Baxter might say.



I think you mean John Brown of Haddington. Also, you seem to be taking this matter far too personally. The OP is simply raising a disinterested question about why Brown had concerns regarding Alleine's book. No one was asking you to agree with his assessment. And, for what it is worth, I agree with you that some people spend too much time looking for preparationism around every corner.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Pergamum (Oct 26, 2018)

Reformed Covenanter said:


> I think you mean John Brown of Haddington. Also, you seem to be taking this matter far too personally. The OP is simply raising a disinterested question about why Brown had concerns regarding Alleine's book. No one was asking you to agree with his assessment. And, for what it is worth, I agree with you that some people spend too much time looking for preparationism around every corner.


Just answering thoroughly. Nothing personal.


----------



## deleteduser99 (Oct 26, 2018)

Pergamum said:


> Some more high Calvinists have written articles against "preparationism" and have railed against such practices among many of the Puritans and have listed such men as follows as being "preparationists":
> 
> William Perkins
> William Ames
> ...



Not sure I disagree with anything here (I assume you're replying to me?). For that matter it's been a while since I read Joseph Alleine.

You asked why such a thing causes alarm. I believe Dr. Strange has a paper on this, but in New England it was a problem that hardly anyone could have assurance because a thorough and detailed narrative of grace was required before it would be believed you had been soundly converted, which may have played into Edwards' resolution that he would constantly examine himself to be sure that there would be no lack of it at the end of his life. The result is that hardly anyone was a member of a church, and the Halfway Covenant became necessary just to keep society moving. I had read Solomon Stoddard's "A Guide to Christ" when I was unconverted(?). It helped in some ways, but I walked away despairing just because I couldn't meet his qualifications for who was sincerely repentant and sufficiently resigned to the justice of God. Of course, it might just be on myself that he was directing me to Christ and to trust Him alone and I just didn't see it. I'd have to re-read it.

My wife did attend a church in the eight years prior to our marriage where a sort of Damascus Road experience indeed _is_ requisite to salvation. It won't be said, but it is. If you did not have such an experience, your salvation was suspect. People are exhorted to keep seeking--not believing--and were told in one sermon that "he who began a good work in you will complete it unto the day of Christ Jesus", ie. will complete the awakening and seeking work until you are converted (I kid you not... that's how the text was preached). The result is a dying church with people never attaining assurance, always believing that they haven't wept enough, mourned enough, been resigned enough to the justice of God, not had a good enough sight of their own sins so that they may safely trust in Christ. And of course, when one of the men had the ideal conversion/Damascus road experience it was paraded as the model conversion story. But of course, if I understand right he continued to struggle all the same.

On the other side, I've been given resources by a good friend of mine about sinners seeking salvation during the revivals. They had the same complaints as I did--I'm not sorry enough, I haven't repented enough, I haven't believed enough. To which the ministers frequently told them they come to Christ as they are, and they do not seek qualifications before coming to Him.

I certainly don't want to sound like I am against any preparatory work. A man won't be saved unless he truly is sorry for his sin, and sees his sin as sin and not only as inconvenient. If we are in a good frame sin will break our hearts, or our hearts will break that our sins don't break our hearts; and true conversion will bring a repentance not to be repented of, and it will be thorough, precise, diligent, sincere, honest, though imperfect. The question is, are these qualifications before you may come to Christ, or do you come whether you are qualified or not and believe Him to give salvation, repentance, and godly sorrow not to be repented of? I was converted possibly 2011, but I myself never did really find the burden begin rolling off my back until I discovered the Marrow Men--or I should say, discovered Sinclair Ferguson who discovered the Marrow Men to me.

It might all sound nit-picky, none of it is simple, but it was a debilitating problem for me, and not far from my home is a church of people who cannot find any release from the burden on their back because they haven't yet drowned in the slough of despond (they could have been within the wicket gate decades ago). It may just also be because I'm in an area where hyper-Calvinism is more prominent--Grand Rapids, MI. For these reasons I have a special interest in it.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Pergamum (Oct 26, 2018)

Harley said:


> Not sure I disagree with anything here (I assume you're replying to me?). For that matter it's been a while since I read Joseph Alleine.
> 
> You asked why such a thing causes alarm. I believe Dr. Strange has a paper on this, but in New England it was a problem that hardly anyone could have assurance because a thorough and detailed narrative of grace was required before it would be believed you had been soundly converted, which may have played into Edwards' resolution that he would constantly examine himself to be sure that there would be no lack of it at the end of his life. The result is that hardly anyone was a member of a church, and the Halfway Covenant became necessary just to keep society moving. I had read Solomon Stoddard's "A Guide to Christ" when I was unconverted(?). It helped in some ways, but I walked away despairing just because I couldn't meet his qualifications for who was sincerely repentant and sufficiently resigned to the justice of God. Of course, it might just be on myself that he was directing me to Christ and to trust Him alone and I just didn't see it. I'd have to re-read it.
> 
> ...


Ah, thanks for the context. I can certainly understand the broader picture now and what it is people are reacting to.

What did you think of Joel Beeke's book about preparatory graces?

Linked here: https://www.amazon.com/Prepared-Gra...joel+beeke&qid=1540595880&sr=8-71&ref=sr_1_71

It seems God leads a sinner towards salvation even prior to a person being regenerate at times. Justification is a moment in time, yes, but God leads most people through a process and some cannot even pin-point exactly when they were saved because of the process through which God often leads them (awakening, and conviction, and hope, and intellectual assent, and perhaps struggles and rejections, before finally the heart being given over to Christ). 

The journey towards salvation happens with many features common to most cases, such that many preachers try to fix sign-posts along the way to guide the sinner along the way on his path and to give steps and instructions.

For example, strong conviction often happens to people prior to conversion, so preachers often preach and try to encourage this strong feeling of conviction. Many people do have a "salvation experience" and so many preachers expect that of people or even encourage it in some cases. We forget that not all cases are the same. But giving helpful hints along the way is not a case of "dangerous preparationism" but merely outlining to people the normal way in which God works in people.

But yes, I agree with your point: I have also met people agonizing over their election or not. It is like they are naval-gazing trying to ascertain their election or reprobation. We had a young lady who did this last year and she claims we helped her. But all my wife and I did for her was to give a consistent reply every time she started in on this tedious sort of self-searching of, "Am I elect, or not...how do I know..." or "Have I repented good enough..." We'd simply tell her, "No...your repentance is sinful and insufficient, why are you agonizing over something you are ALWAYS going to fail at. You are never good enough." And we'd simply ask if she loved the Jesus as portrayed in the Bible or not. Did she love Jesus. Yes? Then don't worry. Of course her repentance and faith were insufficient without Jesus. But with a true love towards Jesus, He covers even these things. And that seemed to break her cycle of paralyzing introspection and she claimed that our counsel gave her peace and freed her to look outward to God and the world instead of always inward to her heart and her thoughts, etc.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Oct 26, 2018)

Pergamum said:


> What did you think of Joel Beeke's book about preparatory graces?
> 
> Linked here: https://www.amazon.com/Prepared-Gra...joel+beeke&qid=1540595880&sr=8-71&ref=sr_1_71
> 
> It seems God leads a sinner towards salvation even prior to a person being regenerate at times. Justification is a moment in time, yes, but God leads most people through a process and some cannot even pin-point exactly when they were saved because of the process through which God often leads them (awakening, and conviction, and hope, and intellectual assent, and perhaps struggles and rejections, before finally the heart being given over to Christ).



Thanks to your recommendation, I plan to read it. I may just go for the Kindle version.


----------



## De Jager (Oct 26, 2018)

Harley said:


> Not sure I disagree with anything here (I assume you're replying to me?). For that matter it's been a while since I read Joseph Alleine.
> 
> You asked why such a thing causes alarm. I believe Dr. Strange has a paper on this, but in New England it was a problem that hardly anyone could have assurance because a thorough and detailed narrative of grace was required before it would be believed you had been soundly converted, which may have played into Edwards' resolution that he would constantly examine himself to be sure that there would be no lack of it at the end of his life. The result is that hardly anyone was a member of a church, and the Halfway Covenant became necessary just to keep society moving. I had read Solomon Stoddard's "A Guide to Christ" when I was unconverted(?). It helped in some ways, but I walked away despairing just because I couldn't meet his qualifications for who was sincerely repentant and sufficiently resigned to the justice of God. Of course, it might just be on myself that he was directing me to Christ and to trust Him alone and I just didn't see it. I'd have to re-read it.
> 
> ...



It sounds like your wife was attending an NRC.


----------



## deleteduser99 (Oct 27, 2018)

Pergamum said:


> Ah, thanks for the context. I can certainly understand the broader picture now and what it is people are reacting to.
> 
> What did you think of Joel Beeke's book about preparatory graces?





Pergamum said:


> Linked here: https://www.amazon.com/Prepared-Grace-Puritans-Leading-Sinners-ebook/dp/B00DUK9CTM?keywords=joel+beeke&qid=1540595880&sr=8-71&ref=sr_1_71





Pergamum said:


> It seems God leads a sinner towards salvation even prior to a person being regenerate at times. Justification is a moment in time, yes, but God leads most people through a process and some cannot even pin-point exactly when they were saved because of the process through which God often leads them (awakening, and conviction, and hope, and intellectual assent, and perhaps struggles and rejections, before finally the heart being given over to Christ).
> 
> The journey towards salvation happens with many features common to most cases, such that many preachers try to fix sign-posts along the way to guide the sinner along the way on his path and to give steps and instructions.
> 
> ...



I've never read the book by Beeke and Smalley. I do know Smalley personally, as he pastors my old church, Grace Immanuel RBC.

As for the preparatory process, that's how it was for me. Several years ago God--most righteously--inflicted me severely in my soul because at one point I willfully dropped the doctrine of justification by faith alone, which is why I may not have been converted until 2011. It was a true blasphemy against the work of Christ. I was left to try to find relief by anything I could, and I found no relief from this burden until I realized I was depending on my repentance, and I was brought to trust Christ alone. The seeking in no way qualified me--I was already wicked even before then, therefore already qualified, therefore I was to believe. It's only out of unbelief and rebellion that I did not. That's where many who are "seeking" go wrong, thinking that there's a pattern of steps to follow before they are fit to believe on Christ.

It's big for another reason I didn't think of, but in some circles, people _want _such an experience, and want a great story to tell, almost like people trying to one-up each other with their battle scars. The more hellish your experience, the longer it goes, the more stunning the revelation of Christ at the end, the more credible your conversion, the more assured you think you will be. Combine this with the inbred notion that simple faith and assurance is considered presumption. The New England error persists today.

Coming back around to Baxter and Alleine, sometimes a person in this seeking stage will read such books because they are alarmed, but they will mistake detailed directions as more steps they have to follow, and they might seek out these books because they are afraid of missing a step. Another one that gets greatly misapplied is Boston's illustration in the Fourfold State of God lopping off the branches on the tree, where I believe he outlines several steps God takes to break a man off from his self-righteousness, but even things like this get twisted around and are perceived as necessary steps in their narrative of grace. However, that doesn't make Boston wrong.

We brought up John Bunyan. Spurgeon brought up this interesting anecdote concerning the counsel of the evangelist. Pilgrm's Progress is narrative, so he may in certain instances be illustrating things as they are perceived and not as they really are, or should happen. Another example is Hopeful's conversion.



De Jager said:


> It sounds like your wife was attending an NRC.



It's a Baptist church, but the NRC does have presence in our area.

This pastor had also made an ugly use of John Bunyan's story about Hopeful coming to Christ. In Pilgrim's Progress, Hopeful attempts to believe again and again, as he said "a hundred times over", but it was only after several attempts that he got a sense of acceptance--and my wife's former pastor would emphasize that Hopeful had to go over and over and over again. In John Bunyan's defense, it's possible that he is illustrating what is perceived, and not how it is expected to happen. Also, Hopeful is not as strong in doctrine and practice and understanding as Christian, so a more mature believer would see and describe things quite a different way. At such a stage you’re better at illustrating what happened rather than explaining why they happened.


----------



## The Narrator (Oct 28, 2018)

I was asked to weigh in on this discussion. I believe Pergamum has stated things clearly and agree with his conclusions. If there is anything I would say about Beeke and Smallie's book is that it is a small part of the history. It didn't deal with later treatments of the subject. It is certainly something Lloyd-Jones speaks about in his exposition of Romans 8:15 and Romans 7:14-25, though it is unfortunate Lloyd-Jones expounded the verses in Romans 7 incorrectly. One of the best treatments of this subject, and there are so many, is the section on regeneration in Shedd's Dogmatic Theology on the antecedents of regeneration. Also, if you have the book "The Old Evangelicalism" by Iain Murray, the footnote by John Brown of Haddington on Preparationism what it is, and what it is not, is very cautious and helpful. I will link to the paper I wrote on this. It may be objected that this is not something the Marrow Men taught. I answer, then you haven't read Human Nature in its Fourfold State, Thomas Boston, "Let us try, next, what the sinner can do to recover himself, in the way of the GOSPEL." I anticipate a lot of objections. I will answer them as they are posted here. Here is a paper I wrote, now it is dated, but most of it still, I trust, helpfully defines the terms. http://puritanaudiobooks.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Preparationism.htm

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Oct 28, 2018)

Please fix your signature per the board rules so folks can interact who don't know who you are. https://www.puritanboard.com/help/signature/


The Narrator said:


> I was asked to weigh in on this discussion.


----------



## De Jager (Oct 29, 2018)

Dead people cannot begin to help themselves. Dead people don't help themselves. Spiritually dead people do not truly hear and understand God's word. If someone senses something of their sins and need for a saviour, and looks to Christ for salvation, they should be considered as saved, until proven otherwise by either a lack of fruit or a falling away.

When you preach the gospel, you _do not_ tell people what they need to do in order to convince God to regenerate them.

You simply need to keep preaching the gospel, and the Holy Spirit will work faith in the hearts of the elect SOVEREIGNLY. Those people then, must continue to look to Christ, but never trust that their salvation is based in their "looking" or in their "grasping" or in their "clinging" to Christ. If someone is saved it is because they have been united to Christ by the soverign, unaided work of the Holy Spirit. The very fact that one looks to Christ for salvation is evidence that they are in fact, united to Christ savingly.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## A.Joseph (Oct 29, 2018)

Is prepretory grace even biblical? What portion of scriptures can we point to? How explicit is this doctrine? I stumbled upon this when looking up the term.... Sounds like a form of common grace with as great a potential for prepretory reprobation. I think we can get too technical with these things to the point that it seems to become a doctrine of conditions.
http://www.cprf.co.uk/articles/preparationism.htm#.W9edM58pA0M



> Preparatory grace is a notion which crept into the theology of many of the Puritans. Although the Puritans insisted that man is totally depraved and unable to contribute anything to his salvation, "as early as 1570" some English theologians began to teach that the sinner "might somehow dispose himself for saving grace."1 By this they meant, generally (with some variation), that an unregenerate sinner could prepare himself for the grace of regeneration by a serious consideration of his sins in the light of God’s law. By careful self-examination, the sinner could and ought to stir himself up to loathe his own sinfulness and to desire mercy and, by a judicious use of means (especially attendance upon the preaching of the gospel), he could put himself in the position of being a likely candidate for the new birth. Most of the Puritans who advocated such views insisted that _God _prepares the sinner in this way. They were loath to suggest that man can do this _unaided_ by the Spirit. However, they also taught that this preparatory grace was often present in reprobates so that preparation for regeneration did not necessarily lead to salvation in the end


----------



## De Jager (Oct 29, 2018)

A.Joseph said:


> Is prepretory grace even biblical? What portion of scriptures can we point to? How explicit is this doctrine? I stumbled upon this when looking up the term.... Sounds like a form of common grace with as great a potential for prepretory reprobation. I think we can get too technical with these things to the point that it seems to become a doctrine of conditions.
> http://www.cprf.co.uk/articles/preparationism.htm#.W9edM58pA0M



It depends what you mean by preparatory grace. As presented in the article you quoted, no, that is not biblical. Of course God does actually prepare the hearts of the elect to hear the gospel - that's what regeneration is for. The natural man does not accept the things of God, they are foolishness to him.

The job of the preacher is to preach "come to Christ as you are and he will supply you with all that you need" - and the job of the sinner is to do just that - come to Christ. This of course, all under the sovereign election of God.


----------



## A.Joseph (Oct 29, 2018)

What you wrote seems a bit over complicated. We would need to simply point to scriptures that affirm a pre-regenerate preperation, or a slow reviving from death to life....sorry, I'm not seeing it


The Narrator said:


> I was asked to weigh in on this discussion. I believe Pergamum has stated things clearly and agree with his conclusions. If there is anything I would say about Beeke and Smallie's book is that it is a small part of the history. It didn't deal with later treatments of the subject. It is certainly something Lloyd-Jones speaks about in his exposition of Romans 8:15 and Romans 7:14-25, though it is unfortunate Lloyd-Jones expounded the verses in Romans 7 incorrectly. One of the best treatments of this subject, and there are so many, is the section on regeneration in Shedd's Dogmatic Theology on the antecedents of regeneration. Also, if you have the book "The Old Evangelicalism" by Iain Murray, the footnote by John Brown of Haddington on Preparationism what it is, and what it is not, is very cautious and helpful. I will link to the paper I wrote on this. It may be objected that this is not something the Marrow Men taught. I answer, then you haven't read Human Nature in its Fourfold State, Thomas Boston, "Let us try, next, what the sinner can do to recover himself, in the way of the GOSPEL." I anticipate a lot of objections. I will answer them as they are posted here. Here is a paper I wrote, now it is dated, but most of it still, I trust, helpfully defines the terms. http://puritanaudiobooks.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Preparationism.htm


----------



## A.Joseph (Oct 29, 2018)

Ok, that makes sense. Of course, how can we come to believe in something we have not heard and only God can grant the increase.

I read that book Alarm to the Unconverted. It's a compelling read, but causes one to do much reevaluation. And I don't mind these things, but if it was extreme for those times, it can really cause deep exploration in our day. I understand the Christian life turns things upside down for the former estranged sinner, but for others the affections are probably cultivated more subtly. For John Bunyan, his life was turned upside down and he seemed to suffer from a scrupulous mind. I have nothing but respect for the Puritans, they really did much contemplation of these matters. I guess I'm treading lightly here....


De Jager said:


> It depends what you mean by preparatory grace. As presented in the article you quoted, no, that is not biblical. Of course God does actually prepare the hearts of the elect to hear the gospel - that's what regeneration is for. The natural man does not accept the things of God, they are foolishness to him.
> 
> The job of the preacher is to preach "come to Christ as you are and he will supply you with all that you need" - and the job of the sinner is to do just that - come to Christ. This of course, all under the sovereign election of God.


----------



## De Jager (Oct 29, 2018)

A.Joseph said:


> Ok, that makes sense. Of course, how can we come to believe in something we have not heard and only God can grant the increase.
> 
> I read that book Alarm to the Unconverted. It's a compelling read, but causes one to do much reevaluation. And I don't mind these things, but if it was extreme for those times, it can really cause deep exploration in our day. I understand the Christian life turns things upside down for the former estranged sinner, but for others the affections are probably cultivated more subtly. For John Bunyan, his life was turned upside down and he seemed to suffer from a scrupulous mind. I have nothing but respect for the Puritans, they really did much contemplation of these matters. I guess I'm treading lightly here....



I certainly have a lot of respect for the puritans.

However, we need to call a spade a spade, even if a puritan lays the card.

The apostle Paul taught us as much when he publicly rebuked his fellow apostle Peter for withdrawing from the gentiles, as this conduct was not in step with the gospel. We cannot be afraid to do the same.

I actually have the book Alarm to the Unconverted but never have read it, and probably won't for a long time.

I have dealt with an extremely scrupulous mind and agonized over my spiritual state for many hours. My conclusion from all of it, is that it is all worthless compared to the merits of Christ. I will trade all of it to look to him with faith. He provides me with all that I need and covers all my deficiencies and sin, including my imperfect repentance, imperfect grieving over sin, etc. 

I qualify for salvation because Christ died for the ungodly, and I am definitely one of those.

Regards,

Izaak

Reactions: Amen 1


----------



## Pergamum (Oct 30, 2018)

Westminster Shorter Catechism:

Question 31 - What is effectual calling?

Answer 31.) Effectual calling is the work of God's Spirit, whereby, convincing us of our sin and misery, enlightening our minds in the knowledge of Christ and renewing our wills, he doth persuade and enable us to embrace Jesus Christ, freely offered to us in the gospel.

"So the Westminster divines taught that the first work by which God "doth persuade and enable us to embrace Jesus Christ, freely offered to us in the gospel," is "convincing us of our sin and misery" (WSC, Q. 31). 

Christ is portrayed in the prophecy of Isaiah 55:1as a merchant of salvation in the market place, crying, "Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price." As Guthrie said, preparation stirs our first thirst and hunger for salvation."

Sounds like preparatory grace to me!


----------



## De Jager (Oct 30, 2018)

Pergamum said:


> Westminster Shorter Catechism:
> 
> Question 31 - What is effectual calling?
> 
> ...



The key word is effectual. No one is denying that God works in people's hearts prior to them receiving the gospel. However, in the elect that work of God is not resisted. What is being denied is that men must be told to do this and that to improve their chances of being saved, i.e. to prepare one's own heart to receive grace, which makes grace contingent on our preparation, which is simply wrong.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## A.Joseph (Oct 30, 2018)

Yeah, I'm not sure any here would argue that point.


Pergamum said:


> Westminster Shorter Catechism:
> 
> Question 31 - What is effectual calling?
> 
> ...


----------



## De Jager (Oct 30, 2018)

Here we must make a careful distinction between what people affirm and what they actually do.

It is one thing to affirm free grace, it is another to actually preach it.

We know from scripture that our God justifies the _ungodly_. Therefore, each person has all the warrant they need right there to come to Christ.

And what if they don't really "feel" their sin? Go to Christ anyway. If a doctor told you that you had cancer and needed to go on Chemo, would you say "thanks, but I really don't feel that sick...I think I will wait a while until the cancer spreads and I notice more symptoms before I get the treatment" - that would be incredibly foolish. The warrant to come to Christ is that he bids you come.

"God commands all men everywhere to repent".


----------



## deleteduser99 (Oct 30, 2018)

De Jager said:


> The key word is effectual. No one is denying that God works in people's hearts prior to them receiving the gospel. However, in the elect that work of God is not resisted. What is being denied is that men must be told to do this and that to improve their chances of being saved, i.e. to prepare one's own heart to receive grace, which makes grace contingent on our preparation, which is simply wrong.



Well-said. God wounds before He heals, but the wounding doesn’t provide the merit for healing. Of course, a man is also foolish if he does not pursue conversion and if he doesn’t have and does not get into the means of grace. Yet neither the means of grace nor time spent under them are ever substitutes for believing right here, right now. In whatever case, the sinner will end up laying the charge at his own feet that he wasn’t saved sooner, and it was pure unwillingness on his own part rather than that God wasn’t satisfied with his seeking.


----------



## Pergamum (Oct 31, 2018)

De Jager wrote:

"However, in the elect that work of God is not resisted."

This is untrue. All men resist God prior to conversion.


----------



## De Jager (Oct 31, 2018)

Pergamum said:


> De Jager wrote:
> 
> "However, in the elect that work of God is not resisted."
> 
> This is untrue. All men resist God prior to conversion.



In the final analysis, it is irresistible.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Pergamum (Oct 31, 2018)

De Jager said:


> In the final analysis, it is irresistible.


Yes. Amen.


----------



## The Narrator (Nov 3, 2018)

From Tom Sullivan - to get back to the subject of Alleine's directions, let me ask a simple question for those who are implying this is preparationism. Should we ask the awakened to pray the sinner's prayer, or should pastors give an alter call? You will answer, don't insult my intelligence, of course not. But we would all agree it is the awakened sinner's immediate duty to repent and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. That is granted, that is the starting point. What if the sinner replies, I can't believe. I welcome the deliverance, but truth be known, I hate the Deliver. Any desire I have for salvation is mercenary, not out of a motive of faith and love. We would answer, correct, so is God under obligation to grant mercy to someone that is at war with Him, hates his Son, and his only real interest in salvation is to escape His wrath? At this point, if you are giving him counsel, and you have ruled out the use of the sinner's prayer, what are you going to tell him? If you know anything about reformed theology, you know that we can tell him he can employ means that God has appointed. He can read his Bible, he can attend sermons, he can read books on counsels to the awakened sinner, and he can break off from outward sin, though not out of evangelical motives, but knowing that it is less likely that God will grant him repentance while engaging in the transgressions that show he is unrepentant. Now, where you who charge the Puritans with preparationism have misunderstood them is that you suppose they are teaching the use of these means as a cause and effect. The awakened sinner does his part, and then he is in a prepared frame in which God does His part. And we object that this is not what the Puritans taught. They taught the use of means as a way to an end, or "means" to an end. God is often pleased, so that the sinner knows how great a mercy salvation is, but doesn't yet know how innately self-righteous the sinner is, to allow him to "struggle in the slough of despond" for a while that it may be made known experimentally how unable he is to prepare himself. LBC and Westminster Confession Chapter 9 verse 3. Further, it often pleases God to allow the sinner to struggle under these convictions so that he will learn the reality of Romans 8:7, the carnal mind is enmity against God. The awakened sinner begins to realize that if God does not mercifully interpose and grant faith and repentance, he - the awakened -will inevitably perish. Two qualifications. (1) these are the means God often employs, no sound theologian ever taught that all come to Christ only after a lengthy (law-work.) The real reason that the "law-work" of God's preparing the sinner, (not the sinner preparing himself) is so shunned or seldom taught in our day is so many "reformed" theologians really don't believe that the heart of the sinner is so desperately wicked. They will claim they believe in total depravity, but really don't believe in total inability. But God's ways are not our ways and He is pleased more often than not, to teach the sinner the truth of his innate enmity and self-righteousness so that he will prize another Righteousness the more. As Richard Sibbes says in the Bruised Reed, many become apostates afterwards because they were not bruised reeds before. If it be objected that this will cause weak doubting Christians to doubt the more, we have to do all we can to assist them with their doubts. That is why I have a Facebook site called Thoughts on Christian Experience and Assurance. But I believe in our day we have many self-deceived in our churches because they say they are trusting in Christ but secretly they have never closed with Him because they are trusting their own righteousness. That is why the Puritans were helpful.


----------



## A.Joseph (Nov 3, 2018)

I respect the realities of what you say, and the corncerns with easy believing and falling away, but the flip side is graying the line between justification and sanctification, and exchanging grace for law. How does scriptures directly speak to this?


The Narrator said:


> From Tom Sullivan - to get back to the subject of Alleine's directions, let me ask a simple question for those who are implying this is preparationism. Should we ask the awakened to pray the sinner's prayer, or should pastors give an alter call? You will answer, don't insult my intelligence, of course not. But we would all agree it is the awakened sinner's immediate duty to repent and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. That is granted, that is the starting point. What if the sinner replies, I can't believe. I welcome the deliverance, but truth be known, I hate the Deliver. Any desire I have for salvation is mercenary, not out of a motive of faith and love. We would answer, correct, so is God under obligation to grant mercy to someone that is at war with Him, hates his Son, and his only real interest in salvation is to escape His wrath? At this point, if you are giving him counsel, and you have ruled out the use of the sinner's prayer, what are you going to tell him? If you know anything about reformed theology, you know that we can tell him he can employ means that God has appointed. He can read his Bible, he can attend sermons, he can read books on counsels to the awakened sinner, and he can break off from outward sin, though not out of evangelical motives, but knowing that it is less likely that God will grant him repentance while engaging in the transgressions that show he is unrepentant. Now, where you who charge the Puritans with preparationism have misunderstood them is that you suppose they are teaching the use of these means as a cause and effect. The awakened sinner does his part, and then he is in a prepared frame in which God does His part. And we object that this is not what the Puritans taught. They taught the use of means as a way to an end, or "means" to an end. God is often pleased, so that the sinner knows how great a mercy salvation is, but doesn't yet know how innately self-righteous the sinner is, to allow him to "struggle in the slough of despond" for a while that it may be made known experimentally how unable he is to prepare himself. LBC and Westminster Confession Chapter 9 verse 3. Further, it often pleases God to allow the sinner to struggle under these convictions so that he will learn the reality of Romans 8:7, the carnal mind is enmity against God. The awakened sinner begins to realize that if God does not mercifully interpose and grant faith and repentance, he - the awakened -will inevitably perish. Two qualifications. (1) these are the means God often employs, no sound theologian ever taught that all come to Christ only after a lengthy (law-work.) The real reason that the "law-work" of God's preparing the sinner, (not the sinner preparing himself) is so shunned or seldom taught in our day is so many "reformed" theologians really don't believe that the heart of the sinner is so desperately wicked. They will claim they believe in total depravity, but really don't believe in total inability. But God's ways are not our ways and He is pleased more often than not, to teach the sinner the truth of his innate enmity and self-righteousness so that he will prize another Righteousness the more. As Richard Sibbes says in the Bruised Reed, many become apostates afterwards because they were not bruised reeds before. If it be objected that this will cause weak doubting Christians to doubt the more, we have to do all we can to assist them with their doubts. That is why I have a Facebook site called Thoughts on Christian Experience and Assurance. But I believe in our day we have many self-deceived in our churches because they say they are trusting in Christ but secretly they have never closed with Him because they are trusting their own righteousness. That is why the Puritans were helpful.


----------



## A.Joseph (Nov 3, 2018)

> Now, where you who charge the Puritans with preparationism have misunderstood them is that you suppose they are teaching the use of these means as a cause and effect. The awakened sinner does his part, and then he is in a prepared frame in which God does His part. And we object that this is not what the Puritans taught. They taught the use of means as a way to an end, or "means" to an end. God is often pleased, so that the sinner knows how great a mercy salvation is, but doesn't yet know how innately self-righteous the sinner is, to allow him to "struggle in the slough of despond" for a while that it may be made known experimentally how unable he is to prepare himself. LBC and Westminster Confession Chapter 9 verse 3. Further, it often pleases God to allow the sinner to struggle under these convictions so that he will learn the reality of Romans 8:7, the carnal mind is enmity against God. The awakened sinner begins to realize that if God does not mercifully interpose and grant faith and repentance, he - the awakened -will inevitably perish. Two qualifications. (1) these are the means God often employs, no sound theologian ever taught that all come to Christ only after a lengthy (law-work.) The real reason that the "law-work" of God's preparing the sinner, (not the sinner preparing himself) is so shunned or seldom taught in our day is so many "reformed" theologians really don't believe that the heart of the sinner is so desperately wicked. They will claim they believe in total depravity, but really don't believe in total inability. But God's ways are not our ways and He is pleased more often than not, to teach the sinner the truth of his innate enmity and self-righteousness so that he will prize another Righteousness the more. As Richard Sibbes says in the Bruised Reed, many become apostates afterwards because they were not bruised reeds before. If it be objected that this will cause weak doubting Christians to doubt the more, we have to do all we can to assist them with their doubts. That is why I have a Facebook site called Thoughts on Christian Experience and Assurance. But I believe in our day we have many self-deceived in our churches because they say they are trusting in Christ but secretly they have never closed with Him because they are trusting their own righteousness. That is why the Puritans were helpful.


In all do respect, this is where I think you go off the deep end, and contradict yourself. I believe I am very desperately wicked... But this is sanctification, not justification. I think this is where things get mixed up....

....anyway, can we charge or apply anything resembling altar calls and easy believing to denominations that teach sound theology? The bible says repent and believe, not seek further means...of course we need to be taught and preached to know of what we are repenting and whom we are believing, but Alleine possibly goes much further to analysis via paralysis. If we are not truly concerned, his words will have no impact, but possibly to discourage the already bruised and insecure and maybe leaving them dejected and rejected. If we are not pricked we won't seek further means. It seems a moot point. We can encourage bible study attendance and clarification of hard questions, but shouldn't be surprised when the hardened sinner finds excuses and takes a pass.


A.Joseph said:


> I respect the realities of what you say, and the corncerns with easy believing and falling away, but the flip side is graying the line between justification and sanctification, and exchanging grace for law. How does scriptures directly speak to this?


----------



## A.Joseph (Nov 3, 2018)

> Two qualifications. (1) these are the means God often employs, no sound theologian ever taught that all come to Christ only after a lengthy (law-work.) The real reason that the "law-work" of God's preparing the sinner, (not the sinner preparing himself)...


 very interesting, would love to flesh that out a bit....


----------



## Andrew P.C. (Nov 4, 2018)

The Narrator said:


> "Let us try, next, what the sinner can do to recover himself, in the way of the GOSPEL."




You should probably give the fuller context of this heading. One can find this quote in volume 8, page 130 of Thomas Boston's works. 

Boston continues on in saying stuff like this: 
"Man cannot work a saving change on himself: but so changed he must be, else he can neither believe nor repent, nor ever see heaven. No action can be without a suitable principle. Believing, repenting, and the like, are the product of the new nature; and can never be produced by the old corrupt nature. Now, what can the natural man do in this matter? He must be regenerate; begotten again unto a lively hope; but as the child cannot be active in his own generation, so a man cannot be active but passive only, in his own regeneration. The heart is shut against Christ: man cannot open it, only God can do it by his grace, Acts 16:14. He is dead in sin; he must be quickened, raised out of his grave; who can do this but God himself? Eph. 2:1–5. Nay, he must be “created in Christ Jesus, unto good works,” Eph. 2:10. These are works of omnipotence, and can be done by no less a power."


One cannot "prepare" themselves for anything because "the heart is shut against Christ".

Reactions: Amen 1


----------

