Moral Government Theology and Ravenhill, Reidhead

I believe the biblical view is "both" victim and willful criminal.

Amen.

Ravenhill's soteriology so far as I have understood him was Wesleyan-Arminian in view, which would have stood clearly at odds with MGT. Ravenhill can be hard to pinpoint sometimes though, especially since he wasn't ever prone to do do any real in depth teaching on any given subject matter save, perhaps, revival.

I am interested in this concept of the descendants of Adam being "victims" of original sin. Where does this come from and what does it mean? It seems to be really important in our view of the condition of mankind and to me reveals a great deal about our personal opinions of man position in Adam. Any further thoughts or understanding. I can pose a question in this regard. Is the bad fruit of a bad tree a victim? If we are victims, then has God been unjust or unfair in making us subject to the curse against Adam and giving us inarguably at least a strong predisposition to sin? ( I am not arguing He has been unfair in this, but rather following the natural conclusion of our conclusion that we are victims of original sin )

I haven't spent too much time with Reidhead, aside from loving "Ten Shekels & a Shirt", but, as far as I know, he was involved in the Christian & Missionary Alliance, right? If so, their doctrinal standards clearly teach "original sin" and a "sinful nature", so it would be odd for a man to be in that fellowship and not hold to their standards, especially if there was any sort of inquiry into his understanding of doctrine.

Regarding Ravenhill, from what I can gather, he was all over the map for better or worse. I am not saying he wasn't smart, but he seemed content with contradictions and incoherence in his doctrine. I remember listening to him once and he said something like, "Young men would do well to lock themselves away for the winter and spend their time with Gurnall and Charnock." And these men were Calvinists.

When I was younger, I would read a lot of Finney, but not really piece things together, so I could be stirred by reading some of stuff on the atonement, but not fully grasp what he was saying. It wasn't until I read some other dialectical material that I saw the errors of Charles Finney.

I would put Keith Green in a similar camp as Ravenhill. Orthodox at the end of the day, but arriving there via different routes. Kind of like Lloyd-Jones telling Tozer, "We arrived at the same place. You through the mystics and me through the Puritans." Ravenhill seemed to love the Lord and was "like a moth to a flame whenever he heard his name", even if he did a poor job at "systematic theology'.

Excellent post dear brother, I am in full agreement.

I believe Finney has his purpose in the body of Christ, just the same as Gurnall and Spurgeon. Wesley and Whitefield were not teamed together in the same era of history by blind chance; I do believe that the Holy Spirit would teach us that what is impossible and irreconcilable to man is possible and reconciled through the eyes of God. Categorize as we may, I believe (and I speak for myself) the Lord would bring us as individuals to a level of maturity where these concepts would be reconciled in our hearts, even if we are unable to verbalize the mystery.

Brother Paul

at the end of the day it does not really matter if you hold to finney or calvin, what matters is not how much correct doctrine we have, but how much of Christ is produced in us. That is what we where predestined unto, so that is what matters, many have right doctrine and go to hell. Some have "faulty" views on some doctrines but have the living Christ in them and will be conformed into his image more and more. Not saying doctrine is unimportant, but it fades away in the shining light of the Life of Christ in us, we can stuff our heads with theology , systematic or not, but our hearts can be as hard as the sinner next door.

I been very encuraged by the fact, anyone who says someone elses doctrine is not right or wrong better se to it his life way higher quality then the one he is claiming to be wrong, in love, in holiness, in fervency in prayer, in intamacy with the Lord, then you can start saying this and that is wrong.

Yea i know apostle Paul did it alot pointing out error in doctrine and practices, but i dare to belive he was more holy then all of them, and he also said the only thing that really counts is a new creation, Christ in us, this is vital, doctrine is good, when accompanied by life. So let us focus rightly, maybe Calvin had a faulty doctrine? maybe right, but in the light of his life what does it tell us? Ravenhill may have had faulty doctrine, but in the light of his life what does it say?

Many said Jesus had a wrong doctrine to, and he did according to those who had a right one in his day, the most knowledgeable and accurate theologians of the day dident even see the life itself when it was infront of them, often times i think we miss the life in finney due to we have our doctrine so thigh and so fool proof we miss Jesus in finney because we focus on the speck in the brothers eye, or his error in a doctrine. And the other way around, so many armnians can not pick up spurgeon and be blessed because he was had a faulty understanding about some things in doctrine.

So my burden is so many miss Christ because they focus on the doctrine, he came to his own and his own received him not.... how many times do we not receive christ in people because they disagree on a small matter of doctrine....?

at the end of the day it does not really matter if you hold to finney or calvin, what matters is not how much correct doctrine we have, but how much of Christ is produced in us.

The church can't afford this kind of doctrine, seriously. It does matter if you hold to what Finney believed or what Calvin believed. What Finney believed was sub-Christian, period. His teachings have been rejected countless times as very dangerous heresy. Yes, it matters if you believe that the imputation of Christ righteousness to sinful men is a false doctrine, believing that kind of thing will damn you even if you witness to 50 people a day and pray 23 hours a day.

Frankly, the kind of jelly-fish, "it really matter what you believe, what matters is how you live" theology is worldly. That's what the pagan world believes. And, it's what the church has been drifting towards for over a century and look at where we are. Many believers are blessed if there is a sound church in the same state as them, much less the same city.

We need to drive for precise orthodoxy and precise orthopraxy. It doesn't matter how much of a "godly" life you live (pray 8 hours a day, pray 23 hours a day), if you reject the Gospel as taught by the Apostles.

This is somewhat of a firm post, but, I think it is needed. When people started attaching their works into the gospel (or confusing law and gospel), as Finney did, Paul told them to go ahead and castrate themselves if they liked their performance so much.

With care in Christ,
Taylor

Hi openairboy...

This is very interesting. When I met Brother Ravenhill in his home shortly before he died, he told me that he was going to tell me the most important thing that he thought that I needed to know as a young Christian. He told me to "test everything." He said that the reason that the Church is in the condition that it is in is because the Church continues to operate, teach and propogate as it has many centuries. He urged me to test everything (including what might be widely "accepted") and hold [u]only[/u] onto what is clearly "good."

Since my meeting with Brother Ravenhill, I've thought long and hard about the various things that he told me during that time. Since I was a young shy teenager, I spent most of that time simply listening. However, I have often thought about the things that he did NOT tell me. He didn't cover issues like this (moral government). He didn't mention other divisive doctrines. It was as if those things just didn't matter to him...that they just weren't very important.

I'm more of the "neither" position myself. Since there is just so much interpretation behind each of these type of doctrinal views, I find that it is better to NOT form an ultimate, concrete view on the matter. Instead, I believe in a "bottom line" [i]approach[/i] to this issue by merely standing firm to what is undeniable. Dpn't die in sin. Don't walk ahead of Christ. Don't depart the faith. Don't get distracted by the lusts of the flesh, lust of the eyes and the pride of life. Whether you are "predestined" or "never truly saved in the first place" doesn't really matter if "whosoever calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved."

I find it disappointing that so many people are certain that they know the ultimate extent to what God thinks about such matters...so much so that they create binding doctrines (either way) about such issues. Can we pretend to know the mind of God on every issue like this? I fear that many will stand before God like Job (found in Job chapters 38 through 42). Maybe we shouldn't take positions on things (at least, enough to propogate them as a binding doctrinal truths) if we are forced to "interpret" the Scriptures in order to try and find the answer.

Perhaps it wasn't that Ravenhill was "all over the map" of "full of contradictions and incoherence," but just didn't think enough of either point to choose a binding position on the matter. Just a thought.

*EDIT: Both Finney and Calvin were flawed men. They may have loved the Lord every bit as much as I do, but they were still confined to "seeing through a glass, darkly" and to "know in part" -- just like the rest of us (I Corinthians 13:12).

i did say doctrine is important, when accompanied with life. I am sad for you if you can not read finney and be blessed by his writings, and i agree some of it is to my understanding "wrong", but so is much of calvins and Spurgeons and to me have been refuted by scripture and countless times, And the gospel is greater then calvinism or reformed theology. Yes it is important, but orthodox theology goes further then augustine and the reformation, what the apostles preached was not calvinism or arminianism, both doctrinal camps can find verses to support and refute the other view.

I just say what i say because i see people that claim they have right doctrine but still very unloving and very unchristlike in much conversation, i see many saying Ravenhill had a error in his understanding of scripture yet they can not weep for souls. I see many saying Spurgoen had a faulty understanding of the gospels yet they have not offered their life up for the Lord as he did when reading how he spent his time and life.

To me it is the very essence of Pharisaical spirit and of satan himself. Satan has a much greater understanding of the atonement and salvation and scripture then all of us, yet he is going to hell.

So you can understand the scripture perfectly, have all things right and yet go to hell, what good is that doctrine without life? without christ? in that sense, correct doctrine is rubbish, but when life is there, its not so important. I am not saying the doctrine of God, who he is, who Jesus is, doctrine on salvation on faith and other "cornerstones" of the christian faith is rubbish, they are vital, but other aspects are not so important.

And yes Paul told them to cut of their lims from their body, but he said in the same letter also For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature. (Gal 6:15 KJV)

That is what matters, he said that to those that had a salvation by works theology, it is false i agree brother, but many calvinist claim all arminians believe this, and that is a very subtle and untrue claim, just as it is untrue to say all calvinist are hyper calvinists....

anyway, i hope some misunderstand me rightly.

I just fear many of us including myself have our head so deep in our theological box we cant see christ in finney or spurgeon or who ever, If you cant see in some of finneys writings somethings that will make Christ more dear to you, provoke you to good works, more love for the Lord, i petty you, and i petty all who can draw gold from Spurgeon.... all such people are in a very sad state and need refreshment from above.

God help us all

I find it disappointing that so many people are certain that they know the ultimate extent to what God thinks about such matters...so much so that they create binding doctrines (either way) about such issues. Can we pretend to know the mind of God on every issue like this? I fear that many will stand before God like Job (found in Job chapters 38 through 42). Maybe we shouldn't take positions on things (at least, enough to propogate them as a binding doctrinal truths) if we are forced to "interpret" the Scriptures in order to try and find the answer.

I agree brother, many a times we should do as Job did.

Behold, I am vile; what shall I answer thee? I will lay mine hand upon my mouth. (Job 40:4 KJG)

another thing, we so often study to gain knowledge and have a correct understanding of scripture and truth, this is a very good reason to study, but it is not the reason God gave us the book, the reason is that we should grow up to salvation how we should live, how Christ life can flow through us. Shine as lights in a dark world ect.

When we come to the book with that intention we will discover new things, not only in knowledge but in life, i spent hours studying diverse matters and doctrines, its good and i gained a lot, but without christ in my conversation at home with my wife, how i treat my children, how i walk in my workplace, how i live and move and speak and think, what God is that knowledge? it is as much good as the tree of knowledge was to Adam, thats how good a correct knowledge is without life. So we can have that correct doctrine and yet be banished from Gods presence, and i have come to this for my self, the more i think i come closer to the Lord, the more my doctrines crumble to pieces, God constantly showing me errors in what i help for a perfect doctrine and put me in situations where i can see it. To claim we understand all things concerning Gods ways would make us like Him.

Hi Mahoney...

And by what are we to "test everything"?

.....just responding to what you wrote here...

So you believe in beholding yourself and the work you can do, instead of beholding Christ and the Work He has done. At the core of all doctrine is the interpretation of the Person and Work of Christ.

That is why it is so important. If we get that wrong, we have nothing. We have no Gospel, no hope, and we are still dead in our sins.

I don't know where Leonard Ravenhill stood on every issue...nor do I care to know. I do believe that he loved and knew God. Whether or not he believed in any form of "moral government" (or what his interpretation was for the fourth toe of the beast of Revelation) is irrelevant in my counting him as a "brother." This, I think, is extremely important for the Body of Christ to learn.

I realize this thread was not intended to be a Moral Government argument, but just to make sure we are understanding the OP's concern:

[b]Moral Government theology[/b] denies the imputation of Christ's righteousness, which Christ as the Second Adam attained through obedience to the Law, and legally bestows upon all who rest in His finished work. Rather, [b]Moral Government theology insists that our own personal, perfect obedience to the Law is necessary to our being finally and eternally saved.[/b]

While I have no certainty about Ravenhill or Reidhead holding to these ideas, it seems very sensible that whoever does believe such extreme errors should not be recognized as a Christian, let alone as a teacher. Was it not for this issue that Paul wrote to the Galatians, and said, "I would that they [who teach such things] should be cut off!"?

What a grief, when people strive for clear-cut distinctions about music, movies, head coverings, and beverages, but are willing to endorse the confessions and ministries of ones who replace the [b]gospel of imputed righteousness[/b] with the fatal cyanide of works-righteousness. Anathema marantha to such a false notion.

Lord bless you all in the love of Christ's gospel, and fill you with grateful obedience and fresh consecration for both the greater and lesser concerns of Christ-likeness. To be conformed to Christ is to do as He did, and believe as He does.

PS: Here are some of Finney's statements, taken from his Systematic:

"The doctrine of imputed righteousness, or that Christ’s obedience to the law was accounted as our obedience, is founded on a most false and nonsensical assumption." After all, Christ’s righteousness "could do no more than justify himself. It can never be imputed to us ... it was naturally impossible, then, for him to obey in our behalf " This "representing of the atonement as the ground of the sinner’s justification has been a sad occasion of stumbling to many" (pp.320-2).

"But for sinners to be forensically pronounced just, is impossible and absurd... As we shall see, there are many conditions, while there is but one ground, of the justification of sinners ... As has already been said, there can be no justification in a legal or forensic sense, but upon the ground of universal, perfect, and uninterrupted obedience to law. This is of course denied by those who hold that gospel justification, or the justification of penitent sinners, is of the nature of a forensic or judicial justification. They hold to the legal maxim that what a man does by another he does by himself, and therefore the law regards Christ’s obedience as ours, on the ground that he obeyed for us."

And finally, to quote Dr. Michael Horton, who has studied Finney on an academic level, "Thus, in Finney’s theology, God is not sovereign, man is not a sinner by nature, the atonement is not a true payment for sin, justification by imputation is insulting to reason and morality, the new birth is simply the effect of successful techniques, and revival is a natural result of clever campaigns. In his fresh introduction to the bicentennial edition of Finney’s Systematic Theology, Harry Conn commends Finney’s pragmatism: "Many servants of our Lord should be diligently searching for a gospel that ‘works’, and I am happy to state they can find it in this volume."

theopenlife wrote:

What a grief, when people strive for clear-cut distinctions about music, movies, head coverings, and beverages, but are willing to endorse the confessions and ministries of ones who replace the gospel of imputed righteousness with the fatal cyanide of works-righteousness. Anathema marantha to such a false notion.

the same is true also the other way around, what a grief when people hold and say the have a true doctrine but are into worldly music, movies and clothing. Yet the word says those who are a friend of the world are Gods enemies, no matter if they believe right in all aspects concerning faith, works , imputation ect. So people who endorse the "believe right" but still worldly in their practices are the same grief and guilty just as much as those who argue the other side.

Hi theopenlife...

I don't mean to get into a quarrel about the definition of "moral government" or an argument about whether or not people must live a holy life if they are a believer. However....

While I have no certainty about Ravenhill or Reidhead holding to these ideas, it seems very sensible that whoever does believe such extreme errors should not be recognized as a Christian, let alone as a teacher. Was it not for this issue that Paul wrote to the Galatians, and said, "I would that they [who teach such things] should be cut off!"?

You see, it seems that people have made a convoluted doctrine out of, well, a basic truth. Whether or not you believe you are imputed with "Christ's righteousness" and therefore have no requirement for personal sanctification is NOT a "condition" for salvation. It is just "knowledge" (right or wrong). Some might even call it a doctrinal view. Yet it isn't a requirement to know and walk with Christ. I know many people who believe that one must live a holy life but do not believe for a moment that you can "earn" salvation through good works. They just believe that "faith without works is dead." I guess this is a NEITHER position in the matter. In fact, I know many people who think this way.

It would be silly to dismiss those with whom we disagree as needing to be "cut off" if they are merely believing something with a clear conscience something that is not essential for salvation. That is why such debates are so harsh and unnecessary. Someone feels so adamently about something that they are willing to dismiss the faith of another...who merely disagrees. The important points are held...the extent of which there is slight disagreement. What I said about a "bottom line" is where I stand. A believer cannot earn salvation. A believer should not continue to walk in the sins of this world.

Yet I don't want to argue about who is right and who is wrong...because, ultimately, I think that we are all flawed. We each see through the glass darkly. We can point the finger at Charles Finney all day, but we don't know if this is something that he REALLY believed...ALWAYS believed...or merely a thought that he entertained for a season. Remember, Finney only authored one real book. The rest were taken from notes that others took from his lectures (if memory serves me). I have read his autobiography...and I have been encouraged by and provoked by much of what is in it. I don't know what specific positions that he taught in lecture halls, auditoriums, or when he was an old man near death. He, like the rest of us, might have matured quite a bit (and struggled too) throughout his life. His life might have been filled with periods of truth and periods of error and then periods where he rediscovered the truth. We don't know...because we don't know him. The man has been dead for over a century...and all that is left is found in history books, his autobiography, and books that were taken from notes.

I hope this makes a little more sense of what I am trying to say.

I think the ultimate test for all doctrines is if we are free from sin.

For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death. (Rom 8:2 NKJ)

and this verse read in its context show it is speaking of sin.

"And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." (Joh 8:32 NKJ)

so the test is not do i have orthodox theology according to this system or not? the truth is is the doctrine you hold made you free from sin in all its forms? if not you have a false doctrine.

If your doctrine makes you more and more free from sin and more holy, more free from the world and its lusts, you have Christ, he is the TRUTH the way and the life, you will be free from sin. Is our doctrine doing this every day? if not you are deceived.

If we cling to worldly music styles, worldly clothing, worldly conversations, worldly entertainment and yet have an orthodox reformed faith or finnian theology we are deceived, Christ is salvation, Christ is correct doctrine, having a relationship with him is what matters, i think mother theresa had one, she erred in some doctrines but she knew Jesus Christ much more then i would say Martin Luther. Many of the reformers that i know many hold to have had a "pure" and "true" faith and doctrine still held mass in church after the reformation, they still clinged to state and church union and still held much heresy's in belief and practice.

Why is not that as important to remember as the errors mother theresa might have held? because we have our pet doctrines as idols and not Christ first, yes we may arue as we do here it is important, but we need to recognize one can have an error in their doctrine and still know the living Christ, otherwise not martin luther, john calvin, mother theresa knew Christ. All had serious errors in their doctrine. Some even blasphemous and very heretical.

Hi everyone,

"...we need to recognize one can have an error in their doctrine and still know the living Christ,"

Something that has appeared to me for sometime now is that heresy has to do with contending for something to the disunity of beleivers, more so than having a wrong view.

This seems to be the sense of the word as I've looked at it in Galatians 5 where Strong's greek dictionary defines it as:

G139
αἵρεσις
hairesis
hah'ee-res-is
From G138; properly a choice, that is, (specifically) a party or (abstractly) disunion. (“heresy” is the Greek word itself.): - heresy [which is the Greekord itself], sect.

The sense of it to me is in contending for something that causes others to make [i]a choice[/i], to choose sides in a matter, causing factions and divisions.

This isn't to say that there are not valid and right things to contend for that people will divide over.

Also, about doctrine, I think that the Bible speaks about doctrine in terms of life and living and not only in the sense of true or false statements or beliefs. I think this is something of what Christian is trying to emphasise.

For instance, when Paul writes about [b]the doctrine of God[/b] in 1Timothy, it is in the context of servants submiting to masters, and that this is in reference to the life and example of Christ(Mat 20:25-28, Php 2:1-12). Compare also Titus 2:9-12.

At the beginning of the Chapter there is the exhortation to speak the things that become sound doctrine, and what follows are not things to believe, but how to behave.

Wish you all well and wish us all help and grace from God.

Ccchhhrrrriiisss said,

I believe you misunderstood what I wrote. Of course we all agree that personal sanctification is an aspect of true regeneration. What is at issue is whether one must be personally, [b]perfectly[/b] sanctified in order to be finally saved, which Moral Government theology teaches.

Thank you for your research, friend. It is a sad report, and it is also saddening that the seriousness of it will go unheeded by most.

For the purity of the gospel,
Taylor

I have an honest question. Galatians 1:6 I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, 7 which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed.

Does this verse apply at all today? We give all this room for Moral Govt., Open theism and whatever else someone wants to teach and we say " but they were such good preachers and taught so well in other areas, and they believe men are sinners and Jesus died on the cross etc....."

How can a man hold to these teachings and be named a brother? It doesn't matter if they preached open air, gave to the poor, or anything else if they preached a message that trampled the blood of Jesus under foot.

I agree, brother Alan.

This idea that accepting these people regardless of how badly they pervert the gospel is somehow spiritual or godly is mistaken, in my opinion. Actually, it is worldly. It is the world who claims it doesn't matter what you believe and views everything from a pragmatic basis.

Godliness is not solely based on actions, it is also based on belief. To determine if someone was "used of God", we must examine their teachings to see if they are in accordance with the things of God. If the Gospel was perverted and cloudy, we should not promote their teachings, because it promotes ungodliness and misrepresentation of our Lord.

May the Lord give us all light to see clearly in these matters.

With care in Christ,
Taylor

So where is the dividing line of truth and error? This is getting confusing, because there are several saints on this thread that seem to have differing points of view, both seemingly defending the orthodoxy and orthopraxy of the gospel. Where is the line drawn?
Joe

I'm sorry, but I just can't help myself here, I've got to speak up.

Bro. Taylor,

Please consider the fact that those in the Moral Government camp claim to preach the Gospel as do those in whatever camp that you name. And it is very likely that those in both camps could back up what they preached with Scripture. But who are you to say that they are wrong and you are right to such an extent that you say that they are perverting the Gospel?

Do you honestly believe that all God is concerned about with us is our doctrine? What about men like Ravenhill's, Reidhead's, Finney's, Pratney's, and Green"s love for God? Can you question their intentions? Whether or not you agree with their theology is not the real issue, the question is: do we all love God and is it our intention to honor Him?

What if you're the one that's wrong in your theology and they are right? Will you even consider the possibility of that?

While we will never all agree on every point of our theology, I know that these men who you slander all agreed upon certain essentials that are central to salvation and right relationship with God, such as the necessity of repentance of all known sin and the necessity of a living, active faith in a resurrected Jesus Christ. Now as I see it, anything beyond this is open to doctrinal discussion and it's obvious that we will not all see everything alike. But wouldn't it be better to just agree to disagree, than to set ourselves up as judge and label those with whom we disagree as false teachers?

Also, whether you agree with men like Ravenhill and Reidhead or not, you cannot question the fact that they were both greatly used of God. Apparently God doesn't have a problem using proponents of Moral Government theology. Go figure.

Brother Billy,

It was not my intention to slander anyone. Forgive me if I have done so. Sure, I have and am still willing to consider if my theology is wrong. I myself must remain committed to the Scriptures alone.

I think we need to be careful that we do not fall into the same error as the Pharisees are described as falling into in Romans 10:4 ... I don't question that those who hold to moral government theology have a sincere love for God, but I do think they view and teach about God incorrectly, which leads others into the same error. Of course, the warnings James gives to teachers should not be taken lightly.

I can simply say this: I would not recommend these teachers or teachings to a fellow Christian. I believe there are better, more Biblical teachers out there that are more in harmony with the Scripture.

I guess everyone is "used of God" in a sense. God uses all things for His own glory and purposes, even wicked men. The fact that any of these teachers have garnered a powerful response from some does not excuse their false teaching in other areas. We have a duty to guide others in the truths that are in accordance with Scripture. Personally, I think anything that starts distorting the Biblical teaching on the propitiation or work of Christ is dangerous ground and needs to be seriously rejected, regardless of how beloved the teacher may be.

With care in Christ,
Taylor

Taylor,

Do you believe God's Kingdom would be best served if Greg, the owner and moderator, were to remove all sermons, etc. by Ravenhill, Readhead, Green, Finney and others from Sermon Index entirely to purify it of error, false teaching?

Seems to be where you are leading.

Wayne

Of course DOCTRINE DOES MATTER, but.....

When we talk about the doctrine of God that covers a huge area (as huge as the imensity and omniscience of God himself!). So what do we mean when we say 'doctrine is important'. Obviously to become saved (redeemed, regenerated, born again) there are fundemental basics we need to understand and accept to enable us to become partakers of this new life. This would be recognising we are all sinners and unable to pay the sin debt; that Jesus Christ paid that sin debt for us, repentance (turning from my sin) and trusting Christ for my new life, living by His power in obedience and faith.

Now how we understand in detail and fullness the working and mechanics of even these basic doctrines will vary greatly depending upon our maturirty, experience and influence by others. I'm sure we could spend hours and days debating the right meaning of these points here on SI.

The point of the above is that we have to realise that our understanding is limited and not perfect and we are (or should be) growing in knowledege. It's not that doctrine is un-important, it is important. However our full understanding of these doctrines is only in part.

I will listen to Ravenhill, Washer, Wilkerson, Wesley, Tozer, Lloyd Jones, Spurgeon, etc and be challanged, encouraged and enlightened. Do I agree with all they say? No. Is that because they are wrong on some things? Possibly, or maybe they are right and I am wrong on an aspect that I think is the right interpretation.

The problem comes when we follow a particular teacher or 'circle' without allowing for differences and imperfection. The 'I'm a Calvanist' or I'm an Armenian' line is so clearly wrong according to scipture (see 1 Corinthians 3 v 4). In fact it says that when we do this we are CARNAL and acting as mere men!

Wayne,

If I had a sermon site, I would only post teachers that preach the gospel clearly and Biblically, my conscience wouldn't allow me to do otherwise.

This isn't my site, I'm just a guest here. Greg and the Mods put in the hard work, and they make the decisions regarding what is beneficial.

With care in Christ,
Taylor

It is outrageous brothers how you can be saying these things. Your love for the letter of law has taken you from the Spirit of the law.

If left to drive on a shoulder long enough, the drivers soon begin to have disdain for those on the "other" shoulder - and even for those who choose to remain in a lawful lane. They are no longer content to endanger their own lives and risk wrecking, but now they call out to distract others seeking to maintain a safe distance. All other drivers soon become heretics; those who fail to read and interpret the roadsigns exactly as they do are now an anathema and unfit for the roads...when, in reality, [i]they[/i] are the ones endangering the public with their own reckless and fanatic shoulder racing.

When I am here, on the forum highway, I will remain in a safe driving lane. I will be courteous [i]to all drivers[/i], regardless of what type of car they own, or the speed they choose to drive. When I leave the forum highway, I can go off-roading with my buddies. But even then, I refuse to malign other drivers who may not have a liking for that type of off-road driving; indeed, one of the benefits of staying out of the dirt and grass is that your windshield stays clean. It's bad enough visibility already without going off road.

Myself am grateful for scripture, we see apostle paul speaking of faith, and some in those days just as now did not understand and went with some things he said and we se the apostle james straighten things out, or clarify things, so i see some reformed teachings is misapplied and misunderstood and God sends a ravenhill and straighten out and clarify that those missed. And the other way around.

I just think before anyone says "he has a fulty" or heretical doctrine, better se to it they are closer to God then that man he is accusing is, many will se in the day calling maybe finney, mother theresa heretics will find they knew God better then they did, maybe they knew the bible better but that is second to knowing God. Many will find the "heretics" prayed more, worked more, loved God and men more then they with a correct doctrine, and they will be shamed before all creation and Christ.

God open our eyes

I am not saying to quit loving but I am saying that scripture must be held up. If we allow scripture to be blurred in any and all directions then we risk losing truth all together. Personaly I like R C Chapman and the way he handled things when it came to baptism. You can read about it, but basicaly he held to the truth of scripture w/o compromising it or the command to love others. We can certainly hold to the truth of scripture and love at the same time, the issue is when we quit loving.

For me it has nothing to do with Calvanism, or Arminianism it has only to do with scripture. If a man says you must believe the gospel but he believes that gospel includes as Finney, moral govt. then that mans gospel is tainted. We can and should still love the man but we must point out how he errors away from the truth of scripture.

the most important thing is to know one can have errors in doctrine and still know jesus, some must be right, who god is , who jesus is etc.scripture says if we know him, not know the doctrine concerning how christ saved us, i agree it is important to a degree, but some will set their faith carved in stone, some say i am cal, some say arm etc, both have serius errors, many forget many reformers baptized infants, to me a very faulty doctrine , and others did also, bit i still believe some of them knew god better then i. can we say that? can a cal say maybe finney knew god betyer then i? can the arminian say pherhaps luther knew god better then me despite all wrong he believed and did?

to say ravenhill was a heretic one need to be holier, be more earnest in his devotinal life, have a greater burden, walked longer, under greater trials, prayed more, then speak of s mans errors. or you would be a very sad man in that day.

1Ti 5:20
Those who are sinning rebuke in the presence of all, that the rest also may fear.

2Ti 4:2
Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching.

Tit 1:13
This testimony is true. Therefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith,

Tit 2:15
Speak these things, exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no one despise you

Certainly we need to read these scriptures in context, but the overarching theme is that rebuking is in and of itself defending the truth of scripture for the sake of God and the person being corrected, as well as others looking on. The question is do we do it with love and longsuffering?

Edit: As Paul says truth without love is just a loud noise. :cry:

May I ask a question? I am in no way as knowledgeable as those who have posted to this thread so please bare with me. My question is this, Why do we allow for baggage and the understanding that as humans we all fall short the glory of God and are sinners here and now. Even on the SI forum I have read many posts allowing for forgiveness and understanding when it came to someone seeing that they may have errored in understanding at one time or another. Why is it that we take the men and women of God who are no longer with us and hold them up as to be infallible? Isn't it possible that Finney knew and had God given understanding in many areas of the Christian walk but God had not opened his eyes in other areas? Is it not possible that the same could not be said of Reidhard, Ravenhill, and Keith Green. To all those who have posted to this thread, can you boast, can you say right now you have clear, complete understanding of all areas of the Christian walk today? Can you say that over your lifetime of being a Christian you have always held the same view that you do today in all areas of the Christian walk and with out a doubt have always been one hundred percent correct? Why is that we call men who are no longer here to speak for themselves heretics when they are just as we are, fellow servants seeking to follow and know Jesus as Lord and Savior?

As I said, I do not have the knowledge that many here have, but it seems to me that its easy enough to read someones word, seek the Lord in prayer, read the Bible and glean from it what the Lord would have for you. Perhaps some of Finney understandings were building blocks that God gave him for others to come along after and build upon for the body as a whole. Is this not possible, that he might see and understand what the Lord had for him at that point in his walk and life. Is it not possible that God did not have for Finney to know and understand all because another member of the body was to come later and share what the Lord was doing in that persons life and have for them to share that with others? Finally I wonder if in ten, or twenty years, if we are all still here, how many believers will read over our own written words and call one of us a heretic because of what we shared here on this forum?? Something perhaps to consider?

Ok thanks for letting me throw that out there.
with care in Him
rdg

TaylorOtwell wrote:
Wayne,

If I had a sermon site, I would only post teachers that preach the gospel clearly and Biblically, my conscience wouldn't allow me to do otherwise.

This isn't my site, I'm just a guest here. Greg and the Mods put in the hard work, and they make the decisions regarding what is beneficial.

With care in Christ,
Taylor

Taylor,

It is obvious that Greg has built Sermon Index as a forum for revival upon the shoulders of men such as Ravenhill, Reidhead and others. If these saints of the past are so heretical and full of false teaching, then why are you here? How can your conscience allow you to participate in something that you find so offensive?

Do you realize that you have indicted Greg and the moderators as purveyors of false teaching and heresy?

The very people you have called false teachers and heretics have been a true source of God's grace to me. Am I now to disregard the instruction of the Lord I have received from these dear saints?

Is your mission here just to convert us all to 'Calvinism'? God forbid!

One last question, Taylor. Have you received the Holy Ghost since you believed?

Wayne

As I said, I do not have the knowledge that many here have, but it seems to me that its easy enough to read someones word, seek the Lord in prayer, read the Bible and glean from it what the Lord would have for you. Perhaps some of Finney understandings were building blocks that God gave him for others to come along after and build upon for the body as a whole. Is this not possible, that he might see and understand what the Lord had for him at that point in his walk and life. Is it not possible that God did not have for Finney to know and understand all because another member of the body was to come later and share what the Lord was doing in that persons life and have for them to share that with others?

I think the knowledge you have and share here is worth its weight in gold, Finney wrote much all belivers can draw from, so did ravenhill, luther and all the rest, all of them probably had some error somewhere, but as you say, compare it with the word of God and draw out from the main source what God has for us.

What should scare us is if what we believe today, or what we have learned the first three or four years from our conversion should be the exact same beliefs we hold when we are 50 or 60, we may have the same doctrines somewhere, but much will be shaken by the lord to show us mainly our pride, and showing us, all of us who love to study, his word, commentaries and all the rest, all those will God humble because we all have the flesh that like to feed from the tree of good and evil. so God must bring us to the place where we start seeking the tree of life, and if God is successful we will no longer box our self in in a limited understanding, we will lift our hands and fall on our face and say the closer we come to God the less i know what is right and wrong for others, but i know for me and my walk, myself was and still is a lover of theology, i love reading, i can sit with six or seven books, commentaries, interlinar bibles three or four bibles, english , swedish and my desk is packed with books, my wife says i am crasy and have never seen someone read the bible like me, but i love it.... but sadly the most i have done is gaining and eating for my mind, most of my study was wrong, no matter what i found out was right it was based upon the wrong thing, God spoke to me and said that it is not how much and how rightly i know the word, it is how transformed i become into his image that will count on that day, if i am christlike or not in all areas of my life, whether i know theology and right doctrines will not matter as much as how much i loved god and people, how i used my tongue and how pure my thought life where. And when i first was converted, i was in a pentecostal charasmatic church that preached the love of god and easy belivism as is rampant today, zealous for the new life i started reading, listening to washer, ravenhill , and found si and started reading the old classic, i read bonar, ryle, matthew henry, i read luther, i read calvin, i read mostly reformed writings, and i held to reformed theology, i did read others to, tozer etc and wesley... but i knew it all, and i was so fed up with easy belivism i went to the other side, as a reaction to the absence of hellfire preaching, repentance, decipleship etc i saw this in the old writings, in the puritans and i said to myself and all others this is the truth! and much of it was, but my heart was not right, my words maybe where, my doctrine maybe was according to some. but my heart was drawing further from the lord every day, i started slowly gleaning less and less from scripture and directly from God, and more and more from other men, from times in prayer and devotion with tears of joy and grief to a just studing what other men written, the tenderness went away from my heart slowly but surely, for a while i thought i was the only one in my surrounding that understood the scriptures, i was blessed God rooted out this pride, i still suffer from this today, but God is good, he showed me when i put away all books, all commentaries, even the bible for a short while and just gave up all i believed as doctrine and etc, after some time i took out the bible and asked i would see what God wanted me to know, not what i wanted to learn, so that i could be like Christ, so that Gods will could be worked out in my life and that i would not have a single regret in that final day. The result was every single doctrine i was super sure of, i think i could have died for my faith and doctrines rather then deny them, but in all of them, i found i had wrong understanding, maybe not the whole doctrine, but some aspect of it, one example is repentance, i was super sure what it was and how it worked out, but when coming with a fresh eye and a humbles spirit i saw new things concerning repentance, that i did not see before, and so i did with all things, predestination, election, heaven, hell but most wonderfully i saw new things of Christ....

if i had contiuned to feed from the wrong tree i would have missed these views of christ, these lovley marvelous sights of the king of glory for a doctrine, even a right doctrine, just as the pharisees did, they had all doctrines 100% right, yet missed God, this is in scripture for our learning, and i hope, in 50 years if i live and the lord tarries, that i would see much more of him, so i can be transformed into his likeness.

Also i found out that when we have the right view of Jesus, the right view on salvation, on doctrines, when we have the truth...it will set us free from sin, outward and inward, we will be more and more free, if not so, we probably do not have the true doctrine of Christ.

this must be our private litmus test, this doctrine i believe is the truth and the only gospel, is it freeing me from sin daily? is it making me more and more like Christ? more loving, more humble in my speech, more thoughtful before saying something, less self centered and more giving etc etc....

whether you or i am a calvinist or an arminian or whatever, if you find your doctrine have this effect, please continue to hold it, if not, if you find no change, no victory over sin given by God, you find unclean thoughts, evil thoughts towards others, attitudes and mood swings, lusting after money etc... you are in error somewhere most likely.

anyway, allowing God to humble us is not always a feel good thing, but it is worth it.

Lift up your heads, O you gates! And be lifted up, you everlasting doors! And the King of glory shall come in. (Psa 24:7 NKJ)

God bless you all

...As far a Pastor Reidhead, he did a wonderful job expounding Galatians 3:13. He said that Christ took our curse, so we didnt have to be cursed any longer..I was under the impression that he meant Jesus stood in our place and took the curse and penality of God's wrath.. I hope thats what he meant. (sermon was called Reedemed from the curse of the Law)

look forget what camp you come from but every person who wants salvation needs to ask yourself this question

1. How do I obtain the righteousness of God? because if you dont have this, you are not going to see and worship Christ.

a. Does it come from my actions and works?

b. Does it come from Christ imputed to me?

if you choose (a) then you dont understand the full work of Christ on the cross. and your in a dangerous position.

If you choose (b) you still dont understand the full work of Christ, but you know that you have no righteousness of your own that can save you and you need it from someone else..you need a declarative righteousness and an imputed righteousness...

(a) is moral government view
(b) is the substitutionary atonement view

look I hold Pastor Ravinhill and Pastor Reidhead in the highest regards, and if they were here on earth i would hug them... but we need to hold scritpure higher than calvin, luther, Finney, Edwards, Washer Reidhead, Ravinhill and especially ourselves...
in all humbleness and humility

andy

What if your calvinism was wrong? then by your own "JUDGING" you are condemning yourself to believe in a another gospel and therefore go to hell.

What if your view is wrong?

You boldly state that you are correct and others are wrong just like they are doing.

It is so easy to write these things out and judge others.

Oh Lord have mercy.

I agree.

Brother Wayne,

I participate in these forums for the purpose of pointing others towards Christ as He is revealed in the Scriptures. If others disagree, I make an effort to respond graciously and kindly even though my response may be firm.

Yes, I realize that I believe and imply that false teaching is distributed in some of the sermons here. The moderators themselves probably don't agree with every word of every sermon, but I can't speak for them.

Whether God has used Leonard Ravenhill in your life or not isn't really the issue here. This is a discussion of what he and others taught concerning moral government theology, and the validity of that belief. I myself have read four of Ravenhill's books and I appreciate the zeal he had. However, I also watched his type of teaching lead several people I personally know into deep spiritual depression because it distorted their view of the gospel. Their whole life became an effort to save themselves. If we are all honest, I would expect to see many people on these forums going through such struggles.

I will say this: whoever does not rest in the imputed righteousness of Christ to save them will go to hell.

Yes, I have received the Holy Spirit since I believed.

With care in Christ,
Taylor

I agrre with you 100% Taylor. At least on this issue ;-)

whyme wrote:
I am interested in this concept of the descendants of Adam being "victims" of original sin. Where does this come from and what does it mean? It seems to be really important in our view of the condition of mankind and to me reveals a great deal about our personal opinions of man position in Adam. Any further thoughts or understanding. I can pose a question in this regard. Is the bad fruit of a bad tree a victim? If we are victims, then has God been unjust or unfair in making us subject to the curse against Adam and giving us inarguably at least a strong predisposition to sin? ( I am not arguing He has been unfair in this, but rather following the natural conclusion of our conclusion that we are victims of original sin )

God bless.
Adam

I will leave to armchair professional theologians debates about theories about the atonement. I for sure dont agree with all Edwards,Wesley,Finney,Spurgeon,Ravenhill have said or written. They all believed in the incarnation,and passion, suffering and death and resurrection of Christ the 3rd day. They believed that by Christ blood shead on the cross our sins are washed away.That he caried our sins on the cross and that we are justified and saved by believing on the finished work of Jesus Christ our Savior and Redeemer.

They all preached the true gosple with unction and power, in truth and in deed, with words and life.

hi, i spent lots of time with bro len and he never preached calvin or armenian doctrines but he did emphasize his beliefs on conversion. he preached that altars are were one goes to die... also repent... in sincere sorrow for sin and espec. rebellion.he also said often that if your salvation does not produce personal righteousness as the result of Christ being in you then you are probably not His.jimp

The Letter and the Spirit
By Ed Ross on June 7, 2009

Forasmuch as you are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.
2 Corinthians 3:3

…Who also hath made us able ministers of the New Testament; not of the letter, but of the Spirit: for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.
2 Corinthians 3:6

I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness comes by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
Galatians 2:21

I almost lost the wonder
Of Your love in the delusion
That stoning men with rocks of truth
Was really pleasing You.
I traded new-born innocence
For the pride of being right;
A warrior on the holy road
To wield the sword with might,
Though every word I spoke was true,
Your Spirit gave no life;
The letter kills completely,
Even when completely right.
We’ve captured Living Water
In a box all painted gold,
Convincing men that they might live
If our box they will behold.
The Altogether-Lovely-One’s
Been traded for a price-
A piece or two of silver
To make our box look nice.
We’ve traded wings of eagles
For a tombstone in the light;
The letter kills completely
Even when it’s purest white.
O Holy One, let it be done,
Destroy this box that’s dead,
And pour it’s costly ointment out
Upon Your own sweet head.
May You, alone, be all our joy,
Our wisdom and our strength;
Restore that innocence for which
You died and rose again.
O now may torn and broken ones
Find refuge in Your sight-
Your Spirit heals completely
In the presence of Your light…
And the letter breathed upon by You
Becomes… the Word of Life.
- Ed Ross

Now the God of peace, who brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, the great Shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant, Make you perfect in every good work to do His will, working in you that which is well pleasing in His sight, through Jesus Christ; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen. Hebrews 13:21-22

Brother Michael wrote:

Moral Government theology denies the imputation of Christ's righteousness, which Christ as the Second Adam attained through obedience to the Law, and legally bestows upon all who rest in His finished work.

Christ fulfilled the requirements of the Law of Moses through obediently following the Holy Spirit. The Law of Moses is spiritual. In the flesh no one can fulfill the Law of Moses. Only through the power of the working of the Holy Spirit is one enabled to fulfill the law of Moses. Christ the second Adam demonstrated to us the means by which we too are saved.

Heb. 9:14 how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

Luke 4:18 \t“The Spirit of the LORD is upon Me,
\t\tBecause He has anointed Me
\tTo preach the gospel to the poor;
\tHe has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted,
\tTo proclaim liberty to the captives
\tAnd recovery of sight to the blind,
\tTo set at liberty those who are oppressed;

John 5:19 Then Jesus answered and said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He sees the Father do; for whatever He does, the Son also does in like manner. 20 For the Father loves the Son, and shows Him all things that He Himself does; and He will show Him greater works than these, that you may marvel.

For those who follow the law of the Spirit, these will come to know the righteousness that is from God...

Gal: 5 For we through the Spirit eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness by faith.

Faith that saves comes by hearing and then doing what the Spirit says, it is the Light of Life who works in us to reveal the truth.

In Christ
Jeff

Restore that innocence for which You died and rose again.
O now may torn and broken ones Find refuge in Your sight-
Your Spirit heals completely In the presence of Your light…
And the letter breathed upon by You Becomes… the Word of Life."

Amen to the whole poem. It is so appropriate and it surely blesses me.

Thanks so much, 'AbideInHim' for showing a better way...

Oh, the beauty of the Lord.

Wayne

I also was greatly blessed by the poem that Mike posted.

mackaymarsh wrote: Oh, the beauty of the Lord.

[b]Questions:[/b]
Waht are the dangers of Moral Government Theology?
What is the logical conclusion to Moral Government Theology?

Or is this a whole diferent subject for a new thread?