There seems to be confusion surrounding the matter of the use of the law. This is a critical issue and one worth some serious thought and study. You can see some of the to and fro around the web last week. Frank Turk wrote a letter to Michael Horton about a perceived imbalance. Horton responded, as did Scott Clark (to which Turk then replied). And quite apart from these interactions CT had an article about antinomianism.
There is not time or space to interact here with all that has been said, but in reading Matthew 11 this morning something stood out to me.
For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, ‘He has a demon.’ The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, ‘Look at him! A glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!’ Yet wisdom is justified by her deeds.” (Matthew 11:18-19 ESV)
So John was branded a legalist, and Jesus was branded an antinomian. My guess is that they both got things right and the response probably had more to do with those making it than with the accused. The fountainhead of both legalism and antinomianism is the same, void of the gospel of grace.
Now back to The Marrow of Modern Divinity.