Grace in the Triad Refuted by Jesse Morrell: jesse morrell josef urban grace triad

Showing posts with label jesse morrell josef urban grace triad. Show all posts

Friday, November 20, 2009

Grace in the Triad Refuted by Jesse Morrell Part 2

“The doctrine of Original Sin: This core Christian belief states that all men enter this world with an inherently sinful nature and all men possess an inherent moral corruptness in their own flesh.” Quote

Josef, I know for a fact, teaches Gnosticism which says that our flesh is sinful. Some of his friends have confronted him on this but he has not repented. In Gnosticism, sin is not a choice of the will but a substance of the body. That is why Josef believes that we are sinners because of the type of body we inherit, and why he believes we cannot be morally perfect until we get a glorified body.

But the Bible does not teach that it is a sin to have flesh, or that our flesh is sin. It is sinful to live after the flesh (Rom. 8:13), or to live selfishly (Rom. 8:7). But it is not sinful to have flesh, since Jesus Christ had flesh (John 1:14; Luke 24:39; 1 Tim. 3:16). Nor do you need a glorified body to be morally perfect, because Jesus Christ was morally perfect (2 Cor. 5:21) before He had a glorified body (Luke 13:32).

The Gnostics denied that Jesus Christ came in the flesh because they believed that the flesh was sinful:

“And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist…” 1 John 4:3

“For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.” 2 John 1:7

Sinfulness is not a substance of matter. Our flesh is not a sin in and of itself. We could use our body for sinfulness or we could use our body for righteousness:

“Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God.” Rom. 6:13

“I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh, for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness.” Rom. 6:19

“I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.” Romans 12:1

“And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly, and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.” 1 Thes. 5:23

Sin is when we choose to gratify our flesh in an unnatural and forbidden way. Jesus Christ was tempted in the wilderness, not because he had a sinful nature or because his flesh was a sin, but because he had a natural desire for food (Matt. 4:3). Eve was tempted because of her natural God given desires (Gen. 3:6). Eve choose to gratify her God given flesh in a forbidden way. She had a natural desire for food and wisdom, but it was forbidden for her to gratify that desire by eating of the fruit.

God is the one who forms us in the womb (Gen. 4:1; Ex. 4:11; Isa. 27:11; 43:7; 49:5; 64:8; Jer. 1:5; Ps. 95:6; 139:13-14, 16; Ecc. 7:29; Job 10:9-11; 31:15; 35:10; Jn. 1:3) and that is why God is responsible for the condition of our flesh when we are born (Exodus 4:11). Men are not sinful because God has created us with a flesh. Men are sinful because they have chosen to violate God’s law. Sin is not a substance of matter, sin is the choice to transgress God’s law (1 Jn. 3:4).

“Now temptation is not sin. Temptation is the proposition presented to the mind that you can satisfy a good appetite in a forbidden way. Temptation leads to sin…. Sin is the decision of the will…. sin is the decision to gratify a good appetite in a bad way." Paris Reidhead (Finding the Reality of God, pg 141-142)

“Don’t mistake temptation for sin. Temptation is a suggestion to gratify a desire in an illegal way or amount. Temptation is not sin. Jesus was tempted.” Winkie Pratney (Youth Aflame, Bethany House, pg. 83).

“God created us to exist in a constant state of desire and appetite… The infant cannot think of terms of duty, responsibility, or moral choice…. The self-centeredness of infants has all the appearances of a vice. But they are acting on natural, God-given impulses to survive and seek their own pleasure…. They do not have the intellectual and moral capacity to say “No” to appetites and impulses. They cannot yet be held responsible. They begin life in innocent self-centeredness…. But the growing child or adult who doesn’t rise above self-indulging desires has fallen from God’s intention and design. The root of all sin is founded in runaway indulgence of God-given desires… Drives which are not in themselves evil, nonetheless, form the seedbed on which sin will assuredly grow… When does this innocent, natural selfishness of a child become sin? In other words, when is a child to blame? Keep in mind that a child will not come under condemnation until his moral faculties are fully operative… When a child goes against his conscience, however limited and incomplete his understanding may be, he is then guilty. The degree to which his understanding has developed is the degree to which his actions can be called sin…. As the body of flesh was the medium of Eve’s sin and of Christ’s temptation, so it is the implement of your child’s development into selfishness – which, at maturity, will constitute sinfulness.” Michael & Debi Pearl (To Train Up A Child, No Greater Joy, pg. 15-20)

“The bodily appetites and tendencies of body and mind, when strongly excited, become the occasions of sin. So it was with Adam. No one will say that Adam had a sinful nature. But he had, by his constitution, an appetite for food and a desire for knowledge. These were not sinful but were as God made them. They were necessary to fit him to live in this world as a subject of God’s moral government. But being strongly excited led to indulgence, and thus became the occasions of his sinning against God. These tendencies were innocent in themselves, but he yielded to them in a sinful manner, and that was his sin.” Charles Finney (You Can Be Holy, published by Whitaker House, p. 215).

"We have a nature that is capable of being perverted from legitimate to illegitimate, from the natural to the unnatural, from the pure to the polluted." Sin is to "pervert... natural, legitimate, human desires." F. Lagard Smith (Troubling Questions for Calvinists, page 134-135).

The Bible does not teach that men are born sinners. The Bible teaches that men are sinners by choice (Gen. 6:12, Ex. 32:7, Deut. 9:12, Deut. 32:5, Jdg. 2:19, Hos. 9:9, Ps. 14:2-3, Isa. 53:6, Ecc. 7:29, Rom. 3:23.) It is their own fault because it is their own choice, and therefore they deserve punishment and therefore they need Christ’s atonement and God’s mercy.

Infant children are morally innocent (2 Kng. 21:16; 24:4; Jer. 13:26-27; Ps. 106:37-38; Matt. 18:3) and have not yet “done anything” morally “good or evil” (Rom. 9:11) until the age of accountability, which is the age of reason, when they know right from wrong (Deut. 1:39; Isa. 7:15-16), and choose to do wrong (Jas. 4:17). Jesus said that if you were blind, you would have no sin. Since infants are morally blind, they have no sin.

Children do not inherit the guilt or sin of the parent: Deut. 24:16,2 Kng. 14:6, 2 Chron. 25:4, Jer. 31:29-30, Eze. 18:2-4, Eze. 18:19-20.

Sinners are separated from God for their own sin: Isa. 59:2; Lk. 15:24; Rom. 5:12; Rom. 7:9, Col. 2:13.

"If a man were created evil, he would not deserve punishment, since he was not evil of himself, being unable to do anything else than what he was made for.” Justin Martyr (First Apology Chap. 43)

“Those who do not do it [good] will receive the just judgment of God, because they had not work good when they had it in their power to do so. But if some had been made by nature bad, and others good, these latter would not be deserving of praise for being good, for they were created that way. Nor would the former be reprehensible, for that is how they were made. However, all men are of the same nature. They are all able to hold fast and to go what is good. On the other hand, they have the power to cast good from them and not to do it.” Irenaeus (A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs by David Bercot, p. 287, published by Hendrickson Publishers)

“If man is in fault for his [supposed] sinful nature, why not condemn man for having blue or black eyes? The fact is, sin never can consist in having a nature, nor in what nature is, but only and alone in the bad use which we make of our nature. This is all. Our Maker will never find fault with us for what He has Himself done or made; certainly not. He will not condemn us, if we will only make a right use of our powers – of our intellect, our sensibilities, and our will. He never holds us responsible for our original nature… since there is no law against nature, nature cannot be a transgression… man’s nature is not a proper subject for legislation, precept, and penalty, inasmuch as it lies entirely without the pale of voluntary action, or of any action of man at all.” Charles Finney (Sermons on Gospel Themes, p. 78-79, published by Truth in Heart)

“And lest, on the other hand, it should be thought to be nature's fault that some have been unrighteous, I shall use the evidence of the scripture, which everywhere lay upon sinners the heavy weight of the charge of having used their own will and do not excuse them for having acted only under constraint of nature.” Pelagius (The Letters of Pelagius and his Followers by B. R. Rees, p. 43, published by The Boydell Press).

"If anyone is truly religious, he is a man of God; but if he is irreligious, he is a man of the devil, made such, not by nature, but by his own choice." Ignatius (Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume One, p. 61)

“The Scriptures…emphasize the freedom of the will. They condemn those who sin, and approve those who do right… We are responsible for being bad and worthy of being cast outside. For it is not the nature in us that is the cause of the evil; rather, it is the voluntary choice that works evil.” Origen (A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs by David Bercot, p. 289, published by Hendrickson Publishers)

“All men are therefore sinners by nature” quote

Ephesians 2:2-3 says that we are by nature children of wrath, but in context this is talking a lifestyle of living for the flesh. Those who are selfish, those who live for the gratification of their flesh, are children of wrath. “By nature” simply means that they are choosing to live for their flesh, instead of living for God, instead of subjected their flesh to its proper place and presenting it to God for His service. The “natural man” is someone who lives for his flesh, instead of for God.

Charles Finney said, “To represent the constitution as sinful, is to present God, who is the author of the constitution, as the author of sin.” (Finney’s Systematic Theology, Bethany House, p. 261).

An unknown writer in the Early Church said, “… it is impious to say that sin is inherent in nature, because in this way the author of nature is being judged at fault.” (The Letters of Pelagius and his Followers by B. R. Rees, p. 168, published by The Boydell Press).

“To equate humanity with sinfulness is to make God the Author of His own worst enemy; to make God responsible for the thing that has brought Him unhappiness.” Winkie Pratney (Youth Aflame, Bethany House, pg. 78).

“The next dogma deserving attention is the position, that mankind derived from our first progenitor a corrupt nature, which renders obedience to the commands of God impossible, and disobedience necessary, and that for the mere existence of this nature, men ‘deserve God’s wrath and curse, ot only in this world, but in that which is to come.’ If the above dogma is true, it is demonstrably evident, that this corrupt nature comes into existence without knowledge, choice, or agency of the creature, who for its existence is pronounced deserving of, and ‘bound over to the wrath of God.’ Equally evident is it, that this corrupt nature exists as the result of the direct agency of God. He proclaims himself the maker of ‘every soul of man.’ As its Maker, He must have imparted to that soul the constitution or nature which it actually possesses. It does not help the matter at all, to say, that this nature is derived from our progenitor: for the laws of generation, by which this corrupt nature is derived from that progenitor, are sustained and continued by God himself… If, then, the above dogma is true, man in the first place, is held as deserving of eternal punishment for that which exists wholly independent of his knowledge, choice or agency, in any sense, direct or indirect, He is also held responsible for the result, not of his own agency, but for that which results from the agency of God.” Asa Mahan (Doctrine of the Will, published by Truth in Heart, p. 115).

Men are sinners because they choose to sin, not because of the flesh that they inherit from their parents. Sinners are criminals because of their choices, they are not victims of their circumstances.

It should also be noted that sin is contrary to our design, and our conscience demands obedience to God, and in this way sin is contrary to human nature. Our body naturally coughs when it first smokes a cigarette. Our body throws up and suffers a hang over when consuming alcohol. These sins are contrary to our design and are therefore against our nature. Men also naturally feel guilt and shame when they sin, which shows that our nature is against sin. The Bible says that homosexuals do that which is against nature (Rom. 1:26-27) and our conscience, which demands obedience to God, is part of our nature (Rom. 2:14-15).

“Homosexuals often cover and excuse their evil acts of perversion by saying that they were born homosexual. And if the teaching is true that men are born with a sinful nature, homosexuals are right to say they were born homosexuals. For they were born homosexuals if they were born sinners. Also they are right to excuse their evil actions of perversion. For is they were born sinners, they were born homosexuals; and if they were born homosexuals they can no more be blamed for their evil acts of perversion than the brute beasts can be blamed for being born brute beasts. Likewise the alcoholic cannot be blamed for his drinking if it true that he was born with the ‘disease of alcoholism’. In fact the murderer, the rapist, and all other sinners have a perfect and legitimate excuse for all their sins if they were born with a sinful nature. But God never excuses the murderer or the drunkard or the rapist or the homosexual or any other sinner for his sins. For God created al men with a good nature. All sin is a corruption of man’s nature, it is a perversion of man’s nature. It is rebellion against our nature – it is rebellion against the ‘law of God written in our hearts’ and against the God who has written his law in our hearts. No man is born a sinner. No man is born with the ‘disease of alcoholism’. No man is born a homosexual.” Alfred T. Overstreet (Over One Hundred Texts From The Bible That Show That Babies Are Not Born Sinners, pg. 8).

“Sin is never natural. It is horribly un-natural. Sin is never ‘human’. It is horribly in-human. Sin creates remorse, guilt, and shame; every time a man feels these three witnesses in his soul, they tell him sin is not natural. Even the simple lie-detector can tell us this. The whole body reacts adversely when a man sins… God never planned sin for man. It is the most un-natural thing in the moral Universe… Do not dare say sin is ‘natural’! God hates sin with perfect hatred; He loves humanity.” Winkie Pratney (Youth Aflame, Bethany House, pg. 78).

“The nature we are born with teaches us to reject evil and choose good…. Men must go against their nature to sin.” Alfred T. Overstreet (Over One Hundred Texts From The Bible That Show That Babies Are Not Born Sinners, pg. 6-7).

“and apart from redemption through the grace of Christ, are under the curse of the Law” quote

Agreed. But the law commands us to make certain choices, therefore those who choose contrary to the law are under the curse of the law. Men are not under the curse of the law because of the body or flesh that they have, since the law does not demand us to have a certain type of flesh neither does it forbid us from having a certain type of flesh.

“abide under the wrath of God” quote

Agreed. Those who are sinning are under the wrath of God, notwithstanding the atonement of Christ. While the atonement of Christ made it possible for God to turn away from His wrath without dishonoring or weakening His law, no man is actually saved from God’s wrath until they are converted. Men, after the atonement, are still under the wrath of God while they are sinning.

“are by nature children of wrath” quote

Agreed. Those who are choosing to live after their flesh, who are living for their own selfish gratification, are children of wrath. Anyone who chooses to be a sinner, who chooses to live for their flesh, is under God’s wrath.

“are dead in trespasses and sins” quote

Agreed. Sinners do not have a relationship with God, but are separated from Him, because they have personally chosen to sin. To be dead in sin means that you do not have a relationship with God (Luke 15:24). Sinners are separated from God for their own sin: Isa. 59:2; Lk. 15:24; Rom. 5:12; Rom. 7:9, Col. 2:13.

“do nothing that pleases God” quote

Agreed, because sinners are entirely selfish, they are living supremely for themselves, and God is not pleased with this. Sinners are carnally minded, which means that their purpose is to gratify their flesh, and this is violation of God’s law and does not please Him (Romans 8:6).

“and sin continually against God as a manifestation of the wicked sinful nature in their own hearts.” Quote

Sinners sin continually because of their own sinful character, not because of the nature, flesh, or body that they inherit. Sinners sin because of their own sinful hearts. The term “heart” in the Bible is a symbolic word used to describe man’s will. All sin comes out of the heart Jesus said (Matt. 15:19). The root of man, which brings forth fruit, is his own heart or will (Luke 6:43-45). God commands sinners to make unto themselves a new heart (Eze. 18:31), which means that He wants them to change the state of their will. God command men to change from having a disobedient will to an obedient will.

“The Bible teaches that we (commit acts of) sin because we’re sinners (by nature), not that we are sinners only because we (commit acts of) sin” quote

Disagree. Men are sinners because they sin. The definition of a sinner is someone who sins. Until you sin, you are not a sinner. Adam was not a sinner until he sinned. Eve was not a sinner until she sinned. Lucifer was not a sinner until he sinned.

Likewise, the Bible does not teach that men sin because they are servants of sin. The Bible teaches that men are servants of sin because they sin (John 8:34, Romans 6:16). Nobody serves sin until they choose to sin.

“that outward acts of sin are manifestations of the moral depravity of our own hearts.” Quote

Sin is not merely an action, sin is a state of the will. Men are sinners when they choose to have disobedient hearts, when they choose to have rebellious wills.

Outward actions of sin are the manifestations of the disobedient will or rebellious hearts of men. This is what Jesus taught in Luke 6:43-45. If our will (heart) is good, our life (fruit) will be good. But if our will (heart) is sinful, our life (fruit) will be sinful. Actions are the fruit of the will. The will is the cause, the actions are the effects. Good trees have good fruit, bad trees have bad fruit. Sinful actions are manifestations of sinful hearts. A sinful life is proof that a person is choosing to be selfish, that they have a selfish heart.

“Moral Government Theology and Jesse Morrell deny that this is true, and believe that all come into this world in a morally neutral state” quote

We inherit physical depravity from Adam (1 Cor 15:22), that is, we all physically die as a consequence of Adam’s sin because he was removed from the tree of life (Gen. 3:22).

But while physical depravity is hereditary, moral depravity is not, because moral depravity has to do with the will.

“and deny that all of Adam’s posterity died spiritually in Adam’s original sin in the beginning.”

Men are not born dead in sins, they become morally depraved and relationally separated from God when they voluntarily choose to sin: Isa. 59:2, Lk. 15:24; Rom. 5:12, Rom. 5:14, Rom. 7:9, Rom. 7:11, Col. 2:13.

“Further, they declare that all sin is a choice and only a choice, and therefore all must make the choice to “stop sinning” and become morally perfect in order to be accepted by God.”

Repentance is the choice to stop sinning, it is a change of mind about breaking God’s law. Until a sinner repents, until they make this choice, they are not accepted by God. True repentance is not forsaking some sin, it is forsaking all sin. If a person does not forsake all sin, they do not forsake sin at all.

“If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from Heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land” (2 Chronicles 7:14).

“Repent, and turn yourselves from all your transgressions, so iniquity shall not be your ruin… Cast away from you all of your transgressions, whereby ye have transgressed; and make you a new heart and a new spirit: for why will ye die… For I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, saith the Lord God: wherefore turn yourselves and live ye” (Ezekiel 18:30-32).

“wash thine heart from wickedness, that thou mayest be saved” (Jeremiah 4:14).

“Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the Lord, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon” (Isaiah 55:7).

“He that covereth his sins shall not prosper: but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them shall have mercy” (Proverbs 28:13).

“Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee” (Acts 8:22).

“Then Peter said unto them, Repent…. For the remission of sins…” (Acts 2:38).

“Repent, ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out…” (Acts 3:19).

“Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life” (Acts 11:18).

The Bible talks about “repentance to salvation…” (2 Corinthians 7:10).

“he believes that when a man chooses to stop sinning” quote

The Bible says that it is a choice to sin or not sin (Deut. 30:19; Isaiah 1:16; Rom. 6:13; Rom. 6:19; 1 Cor. 10:13; 1 Cor. 15:34; Eph. 4:26) Repentance is a change of mind about sinning. This change of mind results in a change of life. That is called the fruit of repentance (Matt. 3:8; Acts 26:20). If a person changes their mind about sinning, they will stop sinning. But they are later free to change their mind again and begin to sin again (Matthew 21:28-30; Ezekiel 3:20; 18:26-27; 33:18-19).

“that man can enter a state of sinless and moral perfection” quote

We cannot have physical perfection in this life (Php. 3:12) but we can have moral perfection in this life, or have a perfect heart (1 Kings 8:61; 1 Kings 11:4; 1 Kings 15:4). Since sin is not having a certain type of body, we do not need a new body to be free from sin. But sin is the intention of the heart, and therefore to be free from sin we simply need a new heart. Moral perfection is not getting a glorified body, moral perfection is having a pure heart of love (Matt. 5:48, Rom. 13:8). Since sin is transgression of the law (1 Jn. 3:4), but love is the fulfillment of the law (Gal. 5:14; James 2:8), the person who has a loving heart does not have any sin in their life, they are morally perfect. We cannot have glorification in this life, but we can be sanctified in this life (Acts 20:32; Acts 26:18; 1 Cor. 1:2; Hebrews 2:11; Heb. 10:10; Heb. 10:14; Jude 1:1).

“and must keep his right-standing with God based on his own works by maintaining such a state of sinless perfection.”

God only forgives those who turn away from their sin, and therefore we remain forgiven as long as we stay away from sin. If we return to our sin, we are returning to the broad road the leads to destruction. If anyone is sinning, they are on the broad road to destruction.

The Bible says that if a believer sins, they are not covered by the cross and are under the wrath of God (Heb. 10:26-31), but they can be restored through repentance. If backsliders repent (Lk. 13:3; Jas. 5:19-20) and seek forgiveness (Matt. 6:12; 1 Jn. 1:9), they can be restored (Ps. 51:9; Jer. 3:22; 4:1; Lk. 15:20; 22:32; Rom. 11:23; Jas. 5:19-20) unless they are apostates (Heb. 6:4-6; 2 Cor. 13:5; 2 Tim. 3:8; Titus 1:14-16), having grieved away the Spirit (Matt. 12:31-32; Eph. 4:30), having resisted (Acts 7:51) all possible influence (Heb. 6:4-6; 2 Tim. 3:8).

The Bible tells believers to pray for forgiveness if they sin (Matt. 6:12). Charles Finney said, “if Christians are not condemned when they sin, they cannot be forgiven, for forgiveness is nothing else than setting aside the penalty. And therefore, if they are not condemned, they cannot properly pray for forgiveness. In fact, it is unbelief in them to do so.” (Oberlin Evangelist, Justification, July 19, 1843)

The wrath of God is impartial (Ex. 32:33; Deut. 10:17; Rom. 2:9; 2 Cor. 10:6; Col. 3:25; 2 Pet. 1:17; 1 Jn. 3:15; Rev. 21:8; 22:15), so anyone who consciously or knowingly sins or rebels is under condemnation (Jn. 3:19; Rom. 1:18, 2:6-11; Heb. 10:26-31; 1 Jn. 3:8, 3:15, 3:20; 2 Jn. 1:9).

The notion of being positionally righteous but still practicing unrighteous is absolutely contrary to scripture (1 Jn. 3:7; 3:10). Such a concept is false doctrine and damnable heresy (2 Pet. 2:1; Jude 1:4-5). Jesus is the author of salvation to all them that obey Him (Heb. 5:9),

The Bible says that those who are going to Heaven are sanctified (Acts 20:32, 26:18; 1 Cor. 6:9-11).

The Bible says that those who are breaking God’s law not enter the Kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9-10; Gal. 5:19-21) but only those who keep God’s commandments will enter into Heaven (Matt. 7:21; Matt. 19:17; Rev. 22:14).

There is no salvation or forgiveness apart from repentance. If a believer sins, they must repent or perish (Luke 13:3, 5).

“if Christians are not condemned for one sin, they would not be for ten thousand, and that the greatest apostates could be saved without repentance. But what kind of a gospel is that? It would overthrow the entire government of God.” Charles Finney (Oberlin Evangelist, Justification, July 19, 1843)

“Now when any individual sins, he must be condemned till he repents, or forsake his sin…. Repentance is a hearty and entire forsaking of sin, and entrance upon obedience to God…. when one has truly repented, he is justified, and remains so just as long as he remains obedient, and no longer; and that when he falls into sin, he is as much condemned as any other sinner, because he is a sinner.” Charles Finney (Oberlin Evangelist, Justification, July 19, 1843)

The entire Bible repeatedly and abundantly teaches the doctrine of probation or conditional security for believers, or that salvation could be lost or forfeited by sin (Eze. 3:20-21; 18:18-31; 33:12-20; Matt. 6:14-15; 10:22; 24:13; 24:48-51; 25:1-13; Mk. 4:16-19; 13:13; Jn. 6:66; 8:31; 15:6; Acts 1:25; 11:23; 13:43; 14:22; Rom. 8:13; 11:20-23; 1 Cor. 3:16-17; 6:9-10; 9:27; 10:5-13; 15:1-2; Gal. 5:4-9; 5:19-21; 6:7-9; Col. 1:21-23; 1 Thes. 3:5; 3:8; 2 Thes. 2:3; 1 Tim. 1:5-6; 1:18-20; 3:6; 4:1; 4:16; 5:15; 2 Tim. 2:12; 4:9-10; Heb. 2:1; 2:3; 3:6; 3:8-15; 3:18-19; 4:1; 4:11; 4:14; 6:1; 6:8; 6:11-12; 6:15; 10:23; 10:26-31; 10:35-39; 12:14-15; 12:25; Jas. 1:13-16; 5:19-20; 2 Pet. 1:9; 2:20-22; 3:17; Rev. 2:4-7; 2:10-11; 2:17; 2:25-26; 3:2-5; 3:10-12; 3:16; 3:19; 3:20; 21:8; 22:15).

The Bible speaks of Christians who have departed from the faith (Matt. 18:21-34; 24:10; Mk. 4:17; Lk. 8:13; Jn. 6:66; Acts 1:25 w. Matt. 19:28; 2 Thes. 2:3; 1 Tim. 1:19; 4:1; 2 Tim. 3:8; 4:10; Heb. 3:12-15; 4:1-11; 6:6; 10:29; 2 Pet. 2:20-22; Jud. 1:5).

We have the example of the unforgiving servant who was forgiven of his unpaid debt, but then later had his debt reinstated because of his immoral conduct (Matt. 18:23-35). This parable clearly shows how the Lord can graciously pardon an individual and then later execute the punishment that they deserve.

We also see the example of the Apostle Judas who lost his salvation. Judas was a disciple of the Lord and therefore he left all to follow Jesus (Lk. 14:33). He picked up his cross (Lk. 14:27) and even loved Jesus more then his own family (Lk. 14:26). Judas was picked by Jesus specifically to cast out devils, heal, and preach (Matt 10:1-27). Judas was a friend Jesus trusted (Ps. 41:9; Jn 13:18), so Judas kept the money (Jn. 12:6; 13:29). Jesus told Judas that He was shedding His blood for him (Lk. 22:14-20), and previously said that His name was written in the Lambs book of life (Lk. 10:20). Jesus even said that Judas was one of His sheep (Matt. 10:1-4, 16), who received His truth (Matt 10:1-4, 8), who’s Father was God (Matt 10:1-4, 20), who even had a throne in Heaven upon which he would judge Israel (Matt. 19:28; Lk. 22:30). But then later we see that Judas became a devil (Jn. 6:70) and therefore it would have been better for him to have never been born (Mk. 14:21). He even began to steal money from the group (Jn. 12:6). Judas fell from his apostleship by his transgression (Acts 1:25) because He failed to do what Jesus picked him for. His name was blotted out of the book of life (Ex. 23:33; Rev. 3:5).

"Judas was sincere, when Christ chose him to the apostleship." John Fletcher

"Judas was at first a child of the kingdom and heard it said to him with th disciples, 'You shall sit upon twelve thrones' but at last he became a child of hell" St. Chrysostom

"For both Saul and Judas were once good...Sometimes they are at first good, who afterward become and continue evil; and for this respect they are said to be written in the book of life, and blotted out of it." St. Ambrose

Genesis 6:5 – “And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” (See also Gen. 8:21) quote

This is talking about the unconverted. This is not talking about those who have been changed and transformed by Jesus Christ. This verse is not saying that sanctification is not attainable in this life, or that moral perfect or purity of heart is not possible on earth.

Likewise Romans 3:10-18 is taking about the unconverted. Many apply these passages to everyone, but they are specifically talking about those who are not saved because it says they do not have the fear of God and they do not know the way of peace.

It is interesting that right after Genesis 6:5, in verse 6, it says that God repented of making mankind because he saw their wickedness. This implies that God did not know mankind was going to sin and that mankind was not created for the purpose of sinning. God created mankind to obey Him, not to disobey Him, which is why he sent the flood. This is a great text used for open theism.

Psalms 51:5 –“Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.”quote

A. This scripture is talking about David and his mother. It is not referencing all of humanity. It says nothing about Adam.

B. The event spoke of is the conception of David, not the birth of David. He is not saying that he was born a sinner, he is saying that his mother was in sin when she conceived him.

C. A strong case can be made that Ps. 51:5 is talking about the defilement of David’s mother, because of a previous marriage to another man – a heathen.

1.) David had two half-sisters named Zeruiah and Abigail (1 Chron. 2:13-16).

2.) The father of David’s half sisters was not Jesse but Nahash (2 Sam. 17:25).

3.) Nahash was an Ammonite king (1 Sam. 11:1; 1 Sam. 12:12).

(4.) David’s father was Jesse, not Nahash. But the Father of David’s half sisters were daughts of Nahash. This could explain why Nahash showed kindness towards David (2 Sam. 10:2).

(5.) David’s mother was most likely the second wife of Jesse. The first wife of Jesse would have been considered superior to his second wife which had been either the concubine or wife of a heathen king.

(6.) This would explain why David’s half brothers viewed themselves as superior to David, and why David was considered prideful for thinking he was as good as them (1 Sam. 17:28-30).

(7.) This may explain why David was not called before Samuel the prophet amongst the other sons (1 Sam. 16:11).

(8.) David’s mother apparently had a good relationship with the Lord (Ps. 86:16; 116:16). But she would have been, in the eyes of Jewish law, considered defiled by her previous relationship with an Ammonite (Num. 25:1,2; Deut. 7:3,4; 1 Kings 11:2-4, Ezra 9:2; Neh. 13:23,25; 2 Cor. 6:14-17).

D. The context of David’s prayer of repentance is not consistent with David making an excuse for his adultery, “I was born this way”. In true repentance, an individual takes full responsible for their sin, offering no excuses for justification. David was not blaming his sin on his birth. David was simply stating that even the circumstances of his birth were surrounded by sexual sin.

E. David said that he was “wonderfully” and “marvelously” made by God in the womb (Ps. 139:13-14). Therefore, he could not have been sinfully made by his mother in the womb. It is not wonderful to be born sinful or marvelous to be created evil.

Ecclesiastes 7:20 – “For there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not.” Quote

This might have been true in the days of Solomon, but it was not true of all generations. And this might be true of the unsaved, but it is not true of the saved. The Bible says that Joseph was a “just man” (Matt. 1:19), that those who are born of God “doeth good” (3 John 1:11), and the Bible says that whosoever abides in Christ “sinneth not” (1 John 3:6; 5:8). So in the New Testament “There are men that are just upon the earth, that doeth good, and that sinneth not”.

Romans 5:12-19 – “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many. And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification. For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.) Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.” Quote

“For as by one mans disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.” Romans 5:19:

A. If we are going to apply the first section of the passage unconditionally and universally, we must also apply the second section of the passage unconditionally and universally, since the language for both is the same. If the first section means mankind is universally and unconditionally condemned in Adam, then the second section would mean that mankind is universally and unconditionally justified through Jesus.

B. By Adam’s disobedience of eating from the tree, Adam provided all mankind with the opportunity of choosing to be sinners, since moral knowledge has been granted to all men. A sinner is an individual who voluntarily chooses contrary to their moral knowledge. The result of one man’s disobedience (eating from the tree of knowledge) was that many were made sinners (men have chosen to be sinners).

C. By Christ’s obedience of hanging on the tree, Christ has provided all mankind with the opportunity of choosing to be saved, since remission of sin has been offered to all men upon condition of their repentance and faith.

D. The word “made” used in these passages is not referring to a constitutional change, but referring to a conditional position which requires the consent of the will. Being a sinner is conditional upon choosing to sin. Likewise, being justified is conditional upon choosing to repent and believe.

You can read my entire commentary on Romans 5 at LibraryofTheology.com in the writing section, in the original sin section, called “The Fall of Mankind”.

Ephesians 2:1-3 – “And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.” Quote

A. The word nature can describe a man’s God given constitution: (Rom 1:26; 1:31; 2:14; 2:27; 2 Tim 3:3). But this is just dirt and it is created by God. Therefore it cannot be sinful in and of itself.

B. The word nature can describe a man’s self chosen character, custom, habit, or manner of life: (Jer. 13:23; Acts 26:4; 1 Cor 2:14; Eph 2:2-3; Gal 2:14-15; 2 Tim 3:10; 2 Pet 1:4). This is voluntary and has to do with the heart. Therefore moral character, or sinfulness, can belong to this type of nature.

C. The context of this particular passage is talking about a former manner of life, addressing a previous lifestyle. "Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world... among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of the flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind..." Eph. 2:2-3

D. To say that they are “children of disobedience” (Eph. 2:2, 5:6) and “by nature children of wrath” is to say the same thing.

E. That which brings the “wrath” of God is voluntary moral character, not involuntary constitutions.

F. A sinful nature is moral not physical, it is a person’s self chosen character and not his God given constitution. A man’s heart (will) can be sinful, but a man’s body can only be an occasion of temptation. Though continual choices of self-gratification, man has developed a habit of sin.

Grace in the Triad Refuted by Jesse Morrell Part 1

The False Charges of Grace in the Triad Against Jesse Morrell

JESSE MORRELL (MORAL GOVERNMENT THEOLOGY)

REFUTES JOSEF URBAN (CALVINISM)

The words of Josef are in bold, my response to what he said comes after each quote.

Josef Urban is a man who believes that Charles Finney and John Wesley are in hell right now because they were “false teachers”. He also believes that Leonard Ravenhill, Albert Barnes, and Paris Reidhead were heretics. I do not take it too personally that he calls me a heretic, since it seems I am in good company. Josef himself is a five point Calvinist. He greatly misunderstands and misrepresents my theology. I have tried to correct this in the past but he has ignored my corrections. I have tried to reasonably dialog with him in the past, but he has refused to answer my questions and also results to harsh name calling. The impression that I have gotten from him over the years is that he is overly critical and harsh, and comes off as very mean spirited and even cruel, as lest towards me.

You will notice that in his accusations against me, and in his attacks against my theology, he NOT EVEN ONCE provides a single quote of something I have said.

“Yet, despite the outward appearance of zeal in evangelism and devotion to theological subjects, there is reason to have grave concern about this man and the ministry he leads. Not only has he employed unscriptural and cruel tactics of “shock and awe” preaching where crude statements are shouted in the open air in the hopes of offending people so that a heckler will rise up and yell and then a crowd will gather,” quote

What are my “cruel tactics” or what are the “crude statements” that I have made?? He gives absolutely no quotes whatsoever. I have nearly 200 videos on YouTube people can watch to see what it is that I say and do. Anyone can judge my open air preaching by watching the videos.

While I do say, “The unrighteousness will not inherit the Kingdom of God. If you are sleeping with your girl friend you are on your way to hell”. I do not see this as crude or cruel. It is truth spoken in love.

Jesus Christ often said shocking statements like “unless you repent, you will perish”, “I am the way the truth and the life”, “unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood”, etc. The truth is often shocking. For me to say, “God is going to judge your life” or “God is angry with the wicked every day” might be considered “shock and awe” but it is completely biblical.

There is no doubt that I aim at dialoging with those who disagree with me. I go to a campus, not to talk to those who already agree, but with those who disagree. And so I will bring up controversial issues that I know others will get an opposing opinion about. Examples would be abortion, homosexuality, etc. I am not bringing up these topics in the “hopes of offending people” but in the hopes that those who disagree would vocalize their disagreement, so that we could discuss it. Crowds do gather when there is a public debate, I use this for the advantage of the Gospel.

“and not only does he align himself with false evangelists who are known for their shockingly offensive and anti-biblical methods of ministry,” quote

He is talking about Ruben Israel, Kevin Farrer, JK, Jed Smock, Micah Armstrong, Dick Christenson, etc. These men are my friends and I believe they preach the truth. They are not “False evangelists”.

“I have already communicated with Jesse on numerous occasions pleading with him from God’s Word to recognize his error and to renounce the false doctrines he believes, and have communicated with him numerous times and even rebuked him sharply, all to no avail.” Quote

I once had to ban Josef from my message board because he was making false accusations and was not open to a discussion. He refused to answer any of my questions but just continued to rail on in his false accusations. I told Josef that he would be allowed back on if he would be willing to engage in reasonable dialog.

But I am not going to “repent” of what I believe is taught in the Bible. I am not going to “repent” and become a Calvinist.

“The doctrine of God’s Omniscience: Simply stated and summarized, Jesse does not believe that God immutably knows the future” quote

I believe that God is omniscient. Omniscient means “all knowledge”. God has all the knowledge that exists. God knows everything that there is to know. The parts of the future that are predetermined, God knows as predetermined, and the parts of the future that are undetermined, God knows as undeteremined.

The future is partly settled, because God had made predeterminations. And the future is partly open, because God allows men to choose.

* God speaks of the future in terms of what may or may not be: Ex. 3:18, 4:9, 13:17; Eze. 12:3

* God changes His plans in response to changing circumstances: Ex. 32:10-14, Jer. 18:1-10

* God's willingness to change His plans is considered one of His glorious attributes: Jonah 4:2; Joel 2:12-13

* God tests people to see what types of decisions they will make: Gen. 22:12; Ex. 16:4; Deut. 8:2, 13:1-3; 2 Chron. 32:31

* God has had disappointments and has regretted how things turned out: Gen. 6:6; 1 Sam. 15:10, 15:35

* God has expected things to happen that didn't come to pass: Isa. 5:1-5; Jer. 3:6-7, 3:19-20

* God gets frustrated and grieved when he attempts to bring individuals into alignment with his will and they resist: Eze. 22:29-31; Isa. 63:10; Eph. 4:30; cf. Heb. 3:8, 3:15, 4:7; Acts 7:51

* The prayers of men have changed the plans of God: Ex. 32:10-14; Num. 11:1-2, 14:12-20, 16:16:20-35; Deut. 9:13-14, 9:18-20, 9:25; 2 Sam. 24:17-25; 1 Kin. 21:27-29; 2 Chron. 12:5-8; Jer. 26:19

* God is said to have repented (changed His mind) multiple times in the Bible: Gen. 6:6-7; Ex. 32:12-14; Num. 23:19; Deut. 32:36; Judges 2:18; 1 Sam. 15:11, 15:29, 15:35; 2 Sam. 24:16; Ps. 90:13, 106:45, 110:4, 135:14; Jer. 4:28, 15:6, 18:8, 18:10, 20:16, 26:3, 26:13, 26:19, 42:10, Eze. 24:14, Hos. 11:8, 13:14; Joel 1:13-14; Amos 7:3, 7:6; Jonah 3:9-10, 4:2; Zach. 8:14

* Prophecies are often God foretelling what He Himself will later bring to pass. So they have to do more with God's omnipotence then His omniscience: Gen. 3:15; 1 Kin. 8:15, 8:20, 8:24, 13:32 (with 2 Kin. 23:1-3, 15-18); 2 Kings 19:25; 2 Chron. 1:9 (1 Chron. 6:4; 10, 15); 2 Chron 36:21-22; Ezra 1:1; Isa. 5:19, 25:1-2, 37:26, 42:9 (with vs. 16); Jer. 29:10, 32:24, 32:28, 33:14-15, Lam. 3:37; Eze. 12:25, 17:24, 33:29, 33:33; Dan. 4:33, 4:37; Acts 3:18, 27:32-35; Rev. 17:17

* Scriptures that say God has a past, present, and a future: Rev. 1:4, 1:8, 4:8

* Scriptures that say God’s eternity is endless time, that is, time without beginning or end: Isa. 9:6-7; Isa. 43:10; Isa. 57:15; Job 36:26; Dan. 4:34; Hab. 1:12 Ps. 23:2; Ps. 90:2; Ps. 102:24; Ps. 102:27; Lk. 1:33; Heb 1:12; Rev 1:4; Rev. 1:8; Rev. 4:8; Rev. 5:14;

* Scriptures that say man's eternity is endless time: Isa. 45:17; Eph. 3:21; Rev. 14:11;

* Scriptures that say eternity is endless time for Heavenly creatures: Rev. 4:8

* Scriptures that say there will be time in Heaven, or a distinction between the past and the present: Rev. 5:12

* Eternity is time without end (endless time instead of timelessness): Isa. 9:6-7; Isa. 43:10; Isa. 57:15; Job 36:26; Dan. 4:34; Hab. 1:12 Ps. 23:2; Ps. 90:2; Ps. 102:24; Ps. 102:27; Lk. 1:33; Heb 1:12; Rev 1:4; Rev. 1:8; Rev. 4:8; Rev. 5:14; Isa. 45:17; Eph. 3:21; Rev. 14:11

The future is not some eternal fixity. The future is flexible. The future is not entirely certain, the future is changeable. Examples of how the future can be changed is how God was going to destroy Israel but did not (Numbers 14:11-20), how Hezekiah was going to die but God added years to his life (2 Kings 20:1-6), how Nineveh was going to be destroyed but was not (Jonah 3:10) and how Jesus Christ could have escaped the cross by being rescued by angels (Matt. 26:53). The future multiple possibilities which God and man can choose between. The future can be changed.

“but that God just makes really good guesses.” Quote

Prophecy is not God making “really good guesses”. There are four different types of prophecies:

1. ABSOLUTE PROPHECIES

These are prophecies of events that will inevitably come to pass. This relates to the omnipotence of God to bring about events predetermined by Himself. The matter is completely settled and certain.

Two example would be:

- God will crush the head of Satan:

"And I WILL put enmity between thee and the women, and between thy seed and her seed, and it shall bruise thy head." Gen 3:15

- The end of of the world:

"Declaring THE END from the beginning, and from ancient times, the things that are not yet done, saying MY COUNSEL shall stand, and I WILL do all MY PLEASURE... I have spoken it, I WILL also bring it to pass, I have purposed it, I WILL also do it." Isaiah 46:10-11

2. CONDITIONAL PROPHECIES

These are prophecies of contingent events. They relate to the freewill of men. The matter is completely open and contingent.

Two examples of this would be:

- The repentance of Judah:

"Perhaps they will hear and turn every man from his evil way, that I may repent of the evil which I purposed to do unto them because of the evil of their doings." Jer 26:3

- Blessings and wrath contingent upon obedience and disobedience:

"At what instance I shall speak concering a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up and to pull down, and to destroy it; if that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them. And at what instance I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it; if it do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them." Jer 18:7-10

3.EXTRAPOLATIVE PROPHECIES

These are prophecies that are predicted, based upon God's exhaustive knowledge of the past and the present. Looking at the pattern of the past and the circumstances of the present, our Infinite God is able to make accurate and detailed predictions of the future behind our own finite comprehension:

Examples of this type would be:

- The future disobedience of Israel

"For when I shall have brought them into the land which I swore unto their fathers, that flows with milk and honey; an they shall have eaten and filled themselves, and waxen fat; then will they turn unto other gods, and serve them, and provoke me, and break my covenant. And it shall come to pass, when many evils and troubles are befallen them, that this song shall testify against them as a witness; for it shall not be forgotten out of the mouth, of their seed: I KNOW THEIR IMAGINATION which they go about, EVEN NOW, before I have brought them into the land which I swore." Deut 31:20-21

- Peters denial:

Mark 8:31-34, Peters heart was revealed that he greatly feared the cross. He rebuked Jesus for talking about crucifixion and the Lord rebuked Peter for His cowardice.

Mat 26:34, Jesus knew Peter’s heart had not changed. And Jesus new all the circumstances Peter would face that night, since Jesus knew the devil was orchestrating Peter’s circumstances (Lk. 22:31), and predicted Peters denial based upon his past pattern, present character, and present/future circumstances.

4. PARALLEL OR ANALOGOUS SCRIPTURE FULFILLMENTS

These are events found in the New Testament, which correlate with events found in the Old Testament. The scriptures used had an original meaning in the Old, yet are applicable to a situation in the New.

Examples would be:

- My Son called out of Egypt:

Hos 11:1 speaking of Israel in the Old Testament.

This is also applied to Jesus in the New Testament, Mat 2:15.

- The betrayal of a trusted friend:

Psa 41:9, David speaking of his trusted friend and counselor Ahithephel.

John 13:18, this is also applied to Jesus and his trusted friend and disciple Judas.

- The replacement of Judas, Acts 1:16:

Acts 1:20, Peter applies two Scriptures to the situation of Judas.

Ps. 69:25, talks about “their habituation” being desolate, but Peter modifies it so say “his habituation”, and “let none dwell in their tents”

Ps. 109:8, David curses his enemies, who treated him wickedly.

WHAT PROPHECIES DO NOT PROVE:

- That the future has already happened

- That God already lives in the future

- That God lives outside of time

- That God has determined everything

- That all events are foreknown as certain

WHAT PROPHECIES DO REVEAL:

- That the future is partly settled by God (absolute prophecies)

- That the future is partly open and contingent (conditional prophecies)

- That the future is partly predictable to the Divine Mind (extrapolative prophecies)

- That the future is repetitive and similar to the past (parallel or analogous prophecies)

“This is the result of exalting the free will of all “moral agents” to a Deified position, exalting free will even above God Himself.” Quote

Again, a false accusation. When have I ever exalted moral agents to a deified position, or exalted free will above God? Give me a quote.

God, man, and angels, have a free will. But God is above man. God not only has a free will, God is omnipotent. While we are free to will whatever we want, only God is free to do whatever He wills. Free will does not mean that we have the ability to do anything. Free will is the ability to will, not to do. Omnipotence is the ability to do anything, and only God is omnipotent.

Because God is above man’s free will, God can take away man’s free will whenever He chooses, and God also holds men accountable for the way that he uses his free will.

All of the Early Church taught that mankind has a free will. The only people who denied that man had a free will were the Gnostics.

“Therefore, Jesse thinks that even God has to submit to the free will of man” quote

God does not submit to the free will of man. God has graciously granted man a free will:

“Behold I set before you this day a blessing and a curse; a blessing if ye obey the commandments of the Lord your God…. And a curse if ye will not obey the commandments of the Lord your God” (Deut. 11:26-28).

Man is free to choose between obedience and disobedience. But God has freely determined to punish those who disobey.

“and doesn’t know what any man will choose to do before that man actually makes the choice and does it.” Quote

See the above about prophecy and omniscience. If God predetermines what a man will do (like King Cyprus or John the Baptist) then God can know it because there is no free will involved. And if God knows a person’s heart and character (like Israel and Peter) he can know what they will do in the immediate future. Again, see the above on prophecy.

“Because of this, Jesse believes that God doesn’t know the future, but kind of just makes the best choices He can as He finds out what free moral agents decide. This is in direct contradiction to the teaching of the whole Bible! In Jesse’s theology, God Almighty has been stripped of His Omniscience!” quote

See the above about prophecy and omniscience. I believe that God does know the future as it is, and God is omniscient.

“Yet the fact that God knows the future and declares it immutably is one of the glorious attributes of His character that distinguishes Him from false pagan gods and from every other being in creation:

Isaiah 42:9 – “Behold, the former things are come to pass, and new things do I declare: before they spring forth I tell you of them.” Quote

This is talking about things that God has predetermined to do. Prophecies are often God fortelling what He will do. This does not mean that the far in the future free will choices of man are foreknown a head of time.

Remember:

Isaiah 46:5-10 – “To whom will ye liken me, and make me equal, and compare me, that we may be like? They lavish gold out of the bag, and weigh silver in the balance, and hire a goldsmith; and he maketh it a god: they fall down, yea, they worship. They bear him upon the shoulder, they carry him, and set him in his place, and he standeth; from his place shall he not remove: yea, one shall cry unto him, yet can he not answer, nor save him out of his trouble. Remember this, and shew yourselves men: bring it again to mind, O ye transgressors. Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me, Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure.”

The difference between the pagan idols and the God of the Bible is that God can say He will do something in the future, and then He will actually do it! This verse is not contrary to the open view of God, but is actually teaching it. In the open view, prophecies are often God foretelling a head of time what He plans on doing in the future.

Acts 15:18 – “Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.” Quote

The context of this was the salvation of the Gentiles.

“That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things. Known unto God are all his works, from the beginning of the world. Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God.” Acts 15:17-19

The Gentiles were not a “plan B” for God. God always planned on blessing all nations through the seed of Abraham. All of God’s purposes have been determined from the very beginning, and now He is finding ways to carry them out.

Romans 8:29-30 – ”For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.” Quote

Who did He foreknow? He knew the Israelites in the Old Testament. “Foreknew” does not mean to know in the future, it means to have known in the past. An example of this is when Paul uses the same Greek word to say how the Israelites knew him when he was a Pharisee (Acts 26:5). That is what it means when it says that the Lord has not cast off his people whom he foreknew (Rom. 11:2). God, who knew the Israelites in the past, has not cast them off. The Greek word “foreknew” does not teach exhaustive foreknowledge, or that God foreknows the outcome of a contingency before it occurs.

“The doctrine of Substitutionary Atonement” quote

This is not true. I believe that the atonement of Christ substitutes our eternal punishment of hell. The six hours of Jesus’ suffering, and his death, is a substitute for our eternal torment in hell. Because an atonement has been provided, which substitutes our eternal penalty, God can remit our penalty by His grace and mercy.

“The real doctrine of the Atonement as taught in the Bible teaches us that Christ died as a literal Substitute for sinners; that Christ took our sin and was punished on behalf of our sin as our Substitute under the wrath of God so that the righteous demands of God’s holy Law could be satisfied and we could receive the forgiveness of sins and His righteousness and eternal life as a free gift of grace.” Quote

1. Christ suffered and died for our sins (Isa. 53:5; 1 Peter 3:18). Punishment implies sin and guilt. Sacrifice implies the sin and guilt of another. Jesus Christ was sacrificed for our sins.

2. The law demanded the eternal death of the guilty (Eze. 18:20; Prov. 17:15, 26; 2 Thes. 1:9) and therefore the atonement could not have satisfied the demands of the law. The atonement rather satisfied the purpose of penalty, it honored the law as equally as the penalty would have.

3. The penalty for our sins is eternal hell (2 Thes. 1:9)

4. Jesus did not suffer eternal hell, He suffered six hours on a cross.

5. Therefore Jesus suffered a substitute for our penalty, not the penalty itself.

6. Jesus said that the disciples would drink the same cup that he drank (Mark 10:38-39), therefore Jesus did not drink the cup of God’s wrath. The cup of God’s wrath is still full after the atonement (Rev. 16:19).

7. God still has wrath after the atonement (Acts 12:23; Rom. 1:18; Rom. 2:5; Rom. 2:8-9; Col. 3:6; Rev. 6:17; Rev. 14:10, Rev. 14:19, Rev. 15:7; Rev. 16:1) and therefore the atonement did not satisfy God’s wrath.

8. Nobody is saved from God’s wrath until they forsake their sins (Isaiah 55:7; Jer. 26:13; Prov. 28:13; Acts 3:19; Acts 8:22).

9. The atonement is a substitute for our penalty (Heb. 9:22), so that God could remit our penalty (Matt. 26:28; Rom. 3:25) without dishonoring or weakening His law.

10. Forgiveness is the remission of penalty (Matt. 26:28; Rom. 3:25; Heb. 9:22). Forgiveness is when God turns away from His wrath (Ps. 85:2-3; Micah 7:18). But if Jesus took our penalty and satisfied God’s wrath, there could be no real forgiveness. The atonement makes it possible for our penalty to be remitted, it makes it possible for God to turn away from His wrath when sinners repent.

We can see that the atonement does not automatically or unconditionally save anyone. Many of those for whom Christ died will ultimately perish for their sin (1 Cor. 8:11) because they choose to continue in their sin (Heb. 10:26-31). Though Christ died for all (Isa. 45:22; 53:6; 55:1; Eze. 18:30-32; Matt. 23:37; Mk. 16:15-16; Lk. 2:10-11; Jn. 1:29; 3:16; Rom. 2:11; 5:15; Heb. 2:9; 2 Cor. 5:14-15; 1 Tim. 2:11; 4:10; Tit. 2:11; Heb. 2:9; 2 Pet. 2:1; 1 Jn. 2:22; Rev. 3:20), many are on the broad road (Matt. 7:13). It’s possible to deny the Lord that bought us and thereby fall into condemnation (2 Pet. 2:1).

“Simply put, He bore our sins and our punishment so we could receive His righteousness and reward. Any denial of this truth is a denial of the essential truth of the biblical Gospel. To deny that Christ literally suffered in our place on the Cross in order to bear the wrath of God which we deserve, as our Substitute, in order to avert God’s wrath and condemnation from us and to purchase our redemption, is to deny the Gospel.” Quote

Jesus did not suffer our punishment (eternal hell) but Jesus provided a replacement for our punishment (his own blood shed on the cross) so that God could forgive us our sins by remitting our penalty and turn away from His wrath.

See the above 10 points.

“Jesse Morrell believes that Christ did not actually bear our sin on the Cross, that our sin could have never been imputed to Christ, and therefore Christ could have never been punished for our sin.” Quote

I do believe that Christ bore our sins on the cross, that He suffered and died for our sins, suffering the replacement for the penalty of the law, so that the eternal punishment for our sins could be withheld.

“This is heresy, and if this is true, we are all yet dead in our sins and there is no forgiveness in Christ since there can only be forgiveness if He actually bore our sin and took it away.” Quote

It is not heresy to say that our punishment is eternal hell and that God still has wrath after the atonement. It is not heresy to say that our penalty could be remitted and God could turn away from His wrath because of the atonement of Christ. If the atonement is not a substitute for our penalty, but was actually our penalty, then there can be no forgiveness of sins because forgiveness is when our penalty is remitted. Our penalty cannot be executed and remitted at the same time.

Many men have held to the view of the atonement that I am expounding, such as Leonard Ravenhill, Jonathon Edwards Jr, Albert Barnes, Gordon Olson, Harry Conn, Charles Finney, Catherine Booth, etc. Were they all heretics?

“The Christ of God offered Himself as a sacrifice for the sin of man. The Divine law had been broken; the interests of the universe demanded that its righteousness should be maintained, therefore its penalty must be endured by the transgressor, or, in lieu of this, such compensation must be rendered as would satisfy the claims of justice, and render it expedient for God to pardon the guilty… Christ made such a sacrifice as rendered it possible for God to be just, and yet to pardon the sinner. His sacrifice is never represented in the Bible as having purchased or begotten the love of the Father, but only as having opened up a channel through which the love could flow out to His rebellious and prodigal children. The doctrine of the New Testament on this point is not that ‘God so hated the world that His own Son was compelled to die in order to appease His vengeance,’ as we fear has been too often represented, but that ‘God so LOVED the world, that He gave His only begotten Son.” Catherine Booth (Popular Christianity, p. 30, Published by Convention Bookstore)

“The very idea of atonement is something done, which, to the purpose of supporting the authority of the law, the dignity and consistency of divine government and conduct, is fully equivalent to the curse of the law, and on the ground of which, the sinner may be saved from that curse…a less degree or duration of suffering endured by Christ the Son of God, may, on account of the infinite dignity and glory of his person, be an equivalent to the curse of the law endured by the sinner.” Jonathon Edwards Jr. (The Necessity of the Atonement, p. 7)

“His sufferings were in the place of the penalty, not the penalty itself. They were a substitution for the penalty, and were, therefore, strictly and properly vicarious, and were not the identical sufferings which the sinner would himself have endured. There are some things in the penalty of the Law, which the Lord Jesus did not endure, and which a substitute or a vicarious victim could not endure. Remorse of conscience is a part of the inflicted penalty of the Law, and will be a vital part of the sufferings of the sinner in hell - but the Lord Jesus did not endure that. Eternity of sufferings is an essential part of the penalty of the Law - but the Lord Jesus did not suffer forever. Thus, there are numerous sorrows connected with the consciousness of personal guilt, which the Lord Jesus did not and cannot endure.” Albert Barnes (Commentary on Galatians 3:13)

“He did not endure eternal death….eternal death was the penalty of the law...No man can possibly hold that the Redeemer endured eternal sorrow; and no man, therefore, who believes that the penalty of the law is eternal death, can consistently maintain that he endured the literal penalty of the law.” Albert Barnes (The Atonement, Published by Bethany Fellowship, p. 236-237)

“The atonement is something substituted in the place of the penalty of the law, which will answer the same ends as the punishment of the offender himself would. It is instead of punishment. It is something which will make it proper for the lawgiver to suspend or remit the literal execution of the penalty of the law, because the object or end of that penalty has been secured, or because something has been substituted for that which will answer the same purpose. In other words, there are certain ends proposed by the appointment of the penalty in case of violation of the law; and if these ends are secured, then the punishment may be remitted and the offender may be pardoned. That which will secure these ends is an atonement.” Albert Barnes (The Atonement, Published by Bethany Fellowship, p. 244-145.)

“The atonement is the substitute for the punishment threatened in the law; and was designed to answer the same ends of supporting the authority of the law, the dignity of the divine moral government, and the consistency of the divine conduct in legislation and execution. By the atonement it appears that God is determined that his law shall be supported; that it shall not be despised or transgressed with impunity; and that it is an evil and a bitter thing to sin against God. The very idea of an atonement or satisfaction for sin, is something which, to the purposes of supporting the authority of the divine law, and the dignity and consistency of the divine government, is equivalent to the punishment of the sinner, according to the literal threatening of the law. That which answers these purposes being done, whatever it be, atonement is made, and the way is prepared for the dispensation of pardon.” Jonathon Edwards Jr. (The Necessity of the Atonement, p. 5-6)

The death of Christ manifests God’s hatred of sin and love of holiness in the same sense as the damnation of the wicked manifests these, namely, on the supposition that the divine law is just and holy. If it be allowed the divine law is just and holy, then every thing done to support and execute that law, is a declaration in favor of holiness and against sin; or a declaration of God’s love of holiness and his hatred of iniquity…By atonement I mean that which, as a substitute for the punishment which is threatened in the law, supports the authority of that law, and the dignity of the divine government.” Jonathon Edwards Jr. (Inferences and Reflections on Atonement, p. 3)

"If free pardon is to be extended to penitent sinners, some great measure must be substituted for the punishment of sinners that will uphold the moral government of God at least equally as well as the pronounced consequences would have done." Gordon C. Olson (The Truth Shall Make You Free, Published by Bible Research Corp, p. 95)

"In his undertaking the work of redemption; in his manifested character on earth; in his teaching; in the spirit with which he bore his trials; in his readiness to meet death, and in the manner in which he actually met it; in the offers of salvation which he made to mankind on the ground of the sacrifice which he made for human guilt, no one who believes the Saviour at all can doubt that he was in all respects pleasing to God. Whatever were the sufferings which were brought upon him, they were not of the nature of punishment for his own offences; whatever was the reason why he was left in darkness and gloom on the cross, it was not because he had incurred for himself the wrath of God. In the very midst of those sufferings he was performing a work which, of all the works ever performed on the earth, was most acceptable to a pure and holy God." Albert Barnes (The Atonement, Published by Bethany Fellowship, p. 292-293)

“An atonement is, properly, an arrangement by which the literal infliction of the penalty due to sin may be avoided; it is something which may be substituted in the place of punishment; it is that which will answer the same end which would be secured by the literal infliction of the penalty of the law. It is not a commercial transaction, - a matter of debt and payment, of profit and loss. It pertains to law, to government, to holiness; not to literal debt and payment.” Albert Barnes (The Atonement, Published by Bethany Fellowship, p. 230)

“Retributive justice, therefore, is not at all satisfied by the death of Christ. But the general justice to the Deity and to the universe is satisfied. That is done by the death of Christ which supports the authority of the law, and renders it consistent with the glory of God, and the good of the whole system, to pardon the sinner.” Jonathon Edwards Jr. (Inferences and Reflections on Atonement, p. 8)

"The sufferings and especially the death of Christ were sacrificial, were not the punishment of the law but were equivalent to the meaning to it, were representative of it and substituted for it. The demands of the law were not satisfied, but the honor of the law was promoted by it as much as this honor would have been promoted by the infliction of the legal penalty upon all sinners." Gordon C. Olson (The Truth Shall Make You Free, Published by Bible Research Corp, p. 100)

"The death of Christ is not a substituted penalty, but a substitute for a penalty. The necessity of an atonement is not found in the fact that the justice of God requires an invariable execution of deserved penalty, but in the fact that the honor and glory of God, and the welfare of his creatures, require that his essential and rectoral righteousness be adequately declared. The death of Christ is exponential of divine justice, and is a satisfaction in that sense, and not in the sense that it is, as of a debt, the full and complete payment of all its demands." John Miley (The Governmental Theory of the Atonement, p. 9)

Atonement is, properly, an arrangement by which the literal infliction of the penalty due to sin may be avoided; it is something which may be substituted in the place of punishment. It is that which will answer the same end secured by the literal infliction of the penalty of the law… The atonement is the governmental provision for the forgiveness of sins, providing man meets the conditions of repentance and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ.” Harry Conn (Four Trojan Horses, Published by Mott Media, p. 80-81)

“It [the atonement] provides a substitute for the penalty of the law”. Winkie Pratney (Youth Aflame, The Nature of Sin, Published by Communication Foundation Publishers)

“Yet the Bible clearly refutes Jesse’s (and Moral Government Theology’s) heretical doctrine of the Atonement:” quote

He hasn’t even stated what my doctrine of the atonement is. He said, or tried to say, what I do not believe. But he hasn’t even said what I do believe. This is probably because he doesn’t even know what I believe, or at least could not properly articulate it.

“2 Corinthians 5:21 – “For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.” Quote

I agree with Adam Clarke on this passage that it means Jesus was made a sin offering for us. A sin offering is something which God will accept on behalf of someone’s sins, so that He does not need to execute the penalty of their sins upon them.

I disagree with Martin Luther on this passage. Jesus was not turned into a sinner on the cross. Jesus did not become guilty of any sin. Jesus was offered as a spotless lamb to God.

I agree with Albert Barnes that the moral character of Jesus never changed. He never became a sinner. He was always sinless.

“Though innocent, he was treated in his death as if he had been guilty; that is, he was put to death as if he had personally deserved it…He was suspended on a cross, as if he had been a malefactor. He was numbered with malefactors; he was crucified between them; he was given up by God and man to death as if he had himself been such a malefactor.” Albert Barnes (The Atonement, Published by Bethany Fellowship, p. 296)

“Standing for the sinner, he must, in an important sense, bear the curse of the law–not the literal penalty, but a vast amount of suffering, sufficient, in view of his relations to God and the universe, to make the needed demonstration of God’s displeasure against sin, and yet of his love for both the sinner and all his moral subjects. On the one hand, Jesus represents the race; on the other, he represented God.” Charles G. Finney (The Oberlin Evangelist; July 30, 1856; On the Atonement, p. 4)

“The Savior identifies Himself with sinners so intimately that He is treated as if their sins were His, if the seemingly insurmountable problems of reconciliation were to be solved. He must be the great High Priest who voluntarily places the sin of mankind, not upon the head of an innocent animal, but upon Himself, with dreadful heart-broken solemnness, until it crushes out His holy and spotless life.” Gordon C. Olson (The Truth Shall Make You Free, Published by Bible Research Corp, p. 33)

“Christ was treated as though he had been a sinner – and as his sufferings answered the purpose of the sinner’s punishment, and are the ground of his pardon, it may be said with respect to all believers, that their sins were imputed or reckoned to Christ, and his righteousness imputed or reckoned to them. That is, Christ was treated as sinners deserve, and sinners are treated as Christ deserves.” Nathan Beman (Four Sermons on the Doctrine of the Atonement, p. 39)

“Jesus was not sinful, or a sinner, in any sense. He did not so take human guilt upon him, that the words sinful and sinner could with any propriety be applied to him. They are not applied to him any way in the Bible; but there the language is undeviating. It is that in all senses he was holy and undefiled. And yet language is often used on this subject which is horrible and only a little short of blasphemy, as if he was guilty, and as if he was even the greatest sinner in the universe. I have heard language used which sent a chill of horror to my heart; and language may be found in the writings of those who hold the doctrine of imputation in the strictest sense, which is only a little short of blasphemy. I have hesitated whether I should copy expressions here on this subject from one of the greatest and best of men (I mean Luther) to show the nature of the views which people sometimes entertain on the subject of the imputation of sin to Christ. But as Luther deliberately published them to the world… and since similar views are sometimes entertained now; and as it is important that such views should be held up to universal abhorrence, no matter how respectable the source from which they emanate, I will copy a few of his expressions on this subject…“If thou wilt deny him to be a sinner and accursed, deny, also, that he was crucified and dead.” “But if it is not absurd to confess and believe that Christ was crucified between two thieves, then it is not absurd to say that he was accursed, and of all sinners, the greatest.” “God, our most merciful Father, sent His only Son into the world, and laid upon him all the sins of all people, saying, be thou Peter, that denier; Paul, that persecutor, blasphemer, and cruel oppressor; David, that adulterer; that sinner which did eat the fruit in Paradise; that thief who hung upon the cross; and, briefly, be thou the person who has committed the sins of all people; see, therefore, that thou pay and satisfy for them” – Luther on the Galatians, Gal_3:13. (pp. 213-215. London edition, 1838).

“Luther was a great and holy man. He held, as firmly as anyone can, to the personal holiness of the Redeemer. But this language shows how imperfect and erroneous views may warp the language of holy people; and how those sentiments led him to use language which is little less than blasphemy.” Albert Barnes (Commentary on Galatians 3:13)

1 Peter 3:18 – “For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit.”quote

I completely believe in the substitution of “the just for the unjust”. The death of the innocent (Jesus Christ) substitutes the eternal death of the guilty (sinners). This verse is teaching substitution, and the moral government view of the atonement teaches substitution.

“the atonement is the governmental substitution of the sufferings of Christ for the punishment of sinners.” Charles Finney (Lectures on Systematic Theology, p. 281)

Romans 3:23-26 – “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.” Quote

The atonement is a declaration of God’s righteousness so that He could remit our penalty. Now that the atonement has been made, God can remit our penalty and still be just to Himself, just to His law, and just to His universe. He is just to Himself because He has made a public declaration of His righteousness and His regard for His law. He is just to His law because the value of the law is declared through the atonement of Christ as equally as it would have been through the penalty being executed. And God is just to His universe because the atonement of Christ maintains the authority and influence of God’s law, just as equally as the penalty would have, and therefore the rights and well-being of the universe are protected even though God withholds our punishment or remits our penalty.

Galatians 3:13-14 – “Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.” Quote

The curse of Jesus Christ hanging on the tree saves us from the eternal curse of the law (hell fire). Because Jesus Christ suffered and died on the cross, we can be saved from eternal hell if we repent and believe.

Isaiah 53:4-6 – “Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.” Quote

Because all men have been sinners by choice, “all we like sheep have gone astray” we need the atonement of Christ “the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all”.

The wounding and bruising and whipping of Jesus Christ was done on behalf of our sins, so that the penalty for our sins, or the eternal punishment of hell, could be remitted. God does not need to send sinners to eternal hell, in order to maintain his law, because Jesus Christ has suffered for the sins of the whole world.

Isaiah 53:10 – “Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.” Quote

God sacrificed His son, by giving him into the hands of wicked men, and it pleased the Lord to make such a sacrifice, because through the sacrifice of the atonement God will be able to pardon mankind without dishonoring or weakening His law, without encouraging sin, without endangering His universe.

Grace in the Triad Refuted by Jesse Morrell

Friday, November 20, 2009

Grace in the Triad Refuted by Jesse Morrell Part 2

Grace in the Triad Refuted by Jesse Morrell Part 1

Followers

Blog Archive

About Me