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
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
"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
Hos 11:1 speaking of
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
“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
“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:
* 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
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.
“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.
I also made a blog about this!
ReplyDeleteI posted about this on my new blog.
ReplyDelete