Why is heresy (J. Morrell) permitted on this message board?

Josef,

I get Jesse Morrell's emails and I have never detected that he taught this doctrine of Pelagianism. I checked its definition but I never noticed this in any of his articles, unless I did not read them all and that is where it is. Would you mind posting a link to a piece that he wrote exposing this doctrine?

ginnyrose

Can you explain what these heresies are?

You can read why Jesse Morrell is a heretic on the blog post below. It is factual.

http://graceinthetriad.blogspot.com/2009/08/heretical-theology-of-jesse-morrell.html

To be fair to the moderators, truefaithsav had previously kept a relatively low profile and only recently started posting his false doctrines prolifically. A few of those threads were locked, and the moderator has warned him to desist based on the content of those posts (Pelagianism), but I'm not sure if they are aware of his true identity.

How are you so sure that truefaithsav is Jesse Morrell?

Thank you true witness for the link.

Agree, that this teaching is heresy. There are many other "Campus Preachers" that have heretical views. Some of them have been discussed here.

Some accuse Calvinism also, of at least the odor of it.

Hello Brother Tom

I believe you meant to say Arminianism.

I don't know whether or not "truefaithsav" is truly Jesse Morrell. He used to go by a different name here.

I think that it would be wise to remember that the SermonIndex ministry, Greg and the moderators do not necessarily endorse ANY of the posts made by individuals on this website. The thoughts and views that are posted within the forum are just that -- [u]out[/u] thoughts and [u]our[/u] views. There are plenty of individuals here who do not see "eye to eye" on many different "doctrinal" issues. I haven't agreed with Jesse Morrell in the past on certain things, but I never thought that he embraced open-ended "Pelagianism." Then again, I have never asked him either.

Of course, I haven't read every post in every thread contained within these forums over the last six years. However, over this same time, I have seen plenty of doctrinal disagreement. I have also noticed that many people are very quick to point the finger of "heresy" at someone else without taking the steps necessary to seek clarity.

Someone once accused me of being a "Calvinist" here. Of course, they were using their own personal definition of what a "Calvinist" might be (which, after all, varies from person to person). After they spoke with me privately, they became exceedingly aware that I was definitely NOT a Calvinist (at least, by the extent of their own definition). Perhaps much of the heretical finger pointing might be squashed if we were able to sit with one another, share our testimonies, and explain the extent of our views a little more clearly.

Of course, I really don't know Jesse Morrell or the extent of his doctrinal views. I don't even know if "truefaithsav" is actually Jesse Morrell either. I also believe that we should stand for truth...and remain opposed to what we see as a true heresy. However, I can't help but wonder if we have made every attempt to verify or clarify the ultimate extent of those views.

Like the notion that "The Pilgrim" expressed, I've seen plenty of open air preachers who teach heresy. More often, however, I have noticed that their message is no longer simple because it teaches a "salvation" that appears contingent upon the hearers embracing the open air preacher's personal doctrinal views. In the "secular" college campus that I attended, there was a visiting "open air preacher" who presented a message that was so complicated and dogmatically specific that it almost made it seem impossible for a "normal" sinner to ever truly be saved. Consequently, no one accepted his "invitation" for prayer even after a week of "trying."

Regardless, I am not particularly "influenced" by ANYONE's doctrinal views as presented here on SermonIndex. I am fully aware that everyone here is just as "human" as I am...and just as confined to live on this side of Eternity (complete with the flaws) as we still "see through a glass, darkly" (I Corinthians 13:12).

*EDIT - My post is not meant to be seen as any endorsement of "Pelagianism," "moral government theology" or any other real (or imaginary) heresy either. I just think that we often exert too much energy into dissecting doctrines into complex ideas and then somehow miss the simplicity of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

The only benefit I see in him sticking around is that his heretical views make it easier to demonstrate from the Scriptures what Biblical Christianity is when compared to the dark teachings of these demonic doctrines. Personally, I'd rather see him go if I had a say in the matter. But God bless the moderators in whatever they do.

I think Joseph, Eli or someone should have an open debate (with the scriptures open) with Jesse. What do you all think?

I think there has been enough of that here on these forums. There is nothing to debate.

The only benefit I see in him sticking around is that his heretical views make it easier to demonstrate from the Scriptures what Biblical Christianity is when compared to the dark teachings of these demonic doctrines. Personally, I'd rather see him go if I had a say in the matter. But God bless the moderators in whatever they do.

I was going to write something and then I read KingJimmy's response and he said it better then I could - so amen brother - I agree.

Patrick
www.jonahproject.org

My dear brethren,

The fact that this person is Jesse Morrell or anyone else for that matter is irrelevant. Any person coming into these forums with a proselytizing agenda for one theological system or another is not allowed.

John Calvin himself would be shut down here if he tried to aggressively promote Calvinism; John Wesley would also be shut down if he tried to promote and strive for Arminianism - and the same for Charles Finney if he tried to promote Pelagianism. There is no respect of persons nor partiality for one doctrinal system or another on SermonIndex. All are free to share - and are encouraged to share the writings of Finney, Wesley, Spurgeon - but once the "sharing" becomes "promoting" (note, there is a fine line of discernment here), the person in question has failed to comply with the SermonIndex guidelines.

As many know, I have already shut down numerous moral government theology threads. You have also seen me conclude several divisive cal/arm threads with equal tenacity. Brothers, the sad thing I find in common is that all these systems are at war with one another, and the devil triumphs when brethren are divided. The Arminians blame the Calvinists for being lawless and lukewarm; the Calvinists are at war with the Arminians and Pelagians, accusing them of heresy, etc. The Wesleyian camp fires another round back with the word "antinomianism" painted on the bullet. It's endless, mindless, profitless and accomplishes absolutely nothing but the furtherance of more war.

I say, leave "trufaithsav" alone and study instead to be quiet and do your own business. I personally do not adhere to the system these guys propagate, and I know many of you reading do not either, but they are free to share their interpretations of scripture just as the reformed and free will brethren are.

Once we feel someone has crossed the "fine line" of what was already mentioned, measures will be taken accordingly.

Brother Paul

Hey Paul,

It's endless, mindless, profitless and accomplishes absolutely nothing but the furtherance of more war.

I agree with you totally on the issues of Cal/Arm and the division it causes - most times it is a useless argument instead of an edifying discussion and I won't be a part of it. I don't believe either Cal/Arm believers are heretics, except in cases where extremes are pushed resulting in certain forms of sinless perfection and/or free grace as a license to sin.

But in my opinion when talking about Moral Government theology and Open Theism I think in most cases you have crossed the line into heresy or as KingJimmy put it "demonic doctrines". It's kind of like you don't hear Wilkerson railing against Calvinist, but you do hear him rail against the prosperity gospel - one is a difference in theological opinion the other is heresy or a different gospel all together.

What are your thoughts on this - this is just my opinion, please correct me if I am wrong as I have been many times in the past.

God bless,

Patrick
www.jonahproject.org

This discussion sounds alot like what Paul spoke of when he described a spiritual precept found in 1 Corinthians 11:

1Cr 11:18\t \tFor first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it.
1Cr 11:19\t \tFor there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.

In the above Scripture we find that "there must be also heresies among you" for the expressed purpose of God declaring "that they which are approved may be made manifest among you."

This precept is found throughout Scripture.

Example...................................................................................

Num 16:1\t¶\tNow Korah, the son of Izhar, the son of Kohath, the son of Levi, and Dathan and Abiram, the sons of Eliab, and On, the son of Peleth, sons of Reuben, took [men]:

Num 16:2\t \tAnd they rose up before Moses, with certain of the children of Israel, two hundred and fifty princes of the assembly, famous in the congregation, men of renown:

Num 16:3\t \tAnd they gathered themselves together against Moses and against Aaron, and said unto them, [Ye take] too much upon you, seeing all the congregation [are] holy, every one of them, and the LORD [is] among them: wherefore then lift ye up yourselves above the congregation of the LORD?

Num 16:4\t¶\tAnd when Moses heard [it], he fell upon his face:

Num 16:5\t \tAnd he spake unto Korah and unto all his company, saying, Even to morrow the LORD will shew who [are] his, and [who is] holy; and will cause [him] to come near unto him: even [him] whom he hath chosen will he cause to come near unto him.

Here is another example............................................................

1Ki 18:17\t¶\tAnd it came to pass, when Ahab saw Elijah, that Ahab said unto him, [Art] thou he that troubleth Israel?

1Ki 18:18\t \tAnd he answered, I have not troubled Israel; but thou, and thy father's house, in that ye have forsaken the commandments of the LORD, and thou hast followed Baalim.

1Ki 18:19\t \tNow therefore send, [and] gather to me all Israel unto mount Carmel, and the prophets of Baal four hundred and fifty, and the prophets of the groves four hundred, which eat at Jezebel's table.

1Ki 18:20\t¶\tSo Ahab sent unto all the children of Israel, and gathered the prophets together unto mount Carmel.

1Ki 18:21\t \tAnd Elijah came unto all the people, and said, How long halt ye between two opinions? if the LORD [be] God, follow him: but if Baal, [then] follow him. And the people answered him not a word.

In each of these situations God made it clear who was right and who was wrong.

Likewise we find this precept found in the book of Job. We have the 3 friends of Job against the testimony of Elihu. We again are given a clear decision on who speaks from his flesh and who speaks from the Spirit of God.

If one reads the testimony of Elihu found in Chapters 32 through 37 one will find that Elihu teaches us many things about how God works to restore to man His righteousness.

My question to you all...based on Elihu's testimony...how does your doctrine line up or diverge from the truth....

Does your doctrine declare you a heretic or are you approved?

In Christ
Jeff

I have only two cents to add:

1.) When you lose the imputation of Christ's righteousness by grace alone through faith alone, you've lost the Gospel.

2.) When you lose the penal substitutionary suffering of Christ in the place of all sinners that believe on Him, you've lost the Gospel.

Put wax in your ears if someone is telling you otherwise.

[b]Galatians 5:14-16 (KJV)[/b]

For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another. This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.

I read some things, and some accusation towards Jesse, some things are very hard and serious, and proof should be given, link or quotation to this accusation, i have read much what Jesse have written heard much of his preaching, some i dont agree with, some i do agree with. What gives me a bit of worrie tho is with what force some come against him?

I understand some think the gospel are at stake, but i think God is in control. we just be faithful in our ministry god called us to. and if God has called us to openly expose false teachings let us be the humblest of men and graceful about it.

What is common not just here is one side misrepresenting what the others are saying or believing. i sense it is so here a bit, and tomake statements like ravenhill and wesley and alike, tozer, t.a sparks or who ever you will from arminian side to be false teachers and in hell. That to me is just as needed of repentance as false doctrine. If such statements are true.

The verdict of who is in hell is gods alone scripture says, and we are commanded not to make such judgements. whatever theology you might hold just se to it we keep away from the pitfalls.

There are five point calvinist in hell right now, there are arminians in hell right now.....

Tim Conway, a calvinist shares much good thoughts here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UoQ860GEIp0

The challenge Jesse makes of Joseph Urban's article is a challenge that does not need to be met. The fact of the matter is that Jesse does not deny that he holds to any of the positions that Joseph Urban claims he does. Jesse only makes this challenge so that you might look him up on his web site, and read his writings, and be further infected with his false teachings. His challenge is merely rhetorical and self-serving. Perhaps Joseph could have been a bit more scholarly in his approach, and gave specific citations where Jesse espoused these doctrines.

But, I don't think such is necessary, as: 1) People would only look Jesse up on the internet because they have interacted with him via the internet or heard him preach on campus or 2) If you have any basic understanding of theology, and the different schools of thought, you will quickly recognize that all the things that Joseph said in his article are true after having interacted with Jesse. As one who has had about a dozen or so e-mail exchanges with Jesse, and as one who has received his newsletter (which I seem to still get in-spite of unsubscribing), and as one who has encountered him on this forum a hundred times, it doesn't take too much discernment to realize that the doctrines Jesse espouses clearly lay outside of evangelical orthodoxy, and are in total accordance with Joseph's article. Additionally, I have talked with other brothers who have in times past traveled with Jesse on his campus tours who will tell you the exact same things.

God bless our brothers and sisters who think the strong responses given to Jesse are simply a difference of opinion on theology. I will admit to you that I am deliberately heavy in my response to him, though I still walk gently and humbly in the fear of God when I do respond. I would not act this way if I thought Jesse were a born-again Christian, and a brother of a like and precious faith. But because he espouses doctrines that are clearly out of the realm of orthodoxy, and is a false brother and a false teacher, I feel it necessary to speak in a way that shows that there is a vast difference between the gospel he preaches and the gospel of Jesus Christ. I do this so as to make the gospel all the more clear.

I do not hate Jesse or wish him any ill will, I wish he would actually get saved. The pastoral spirit which resides in me from our Chief Shepherd constrains me to speak in such a manner for the sake of my brothers and sisters who do frequent this forum, and do not quite realize that much of what Jesse says might sound good on the surface, but is altogether rotten underneath. If you think Jesse's gospel is within the realm of evangelical orthodoxy, then either you have not understood and discerned what Jesse is saying, or you yourself do not truly understand the specifics of what the gospel really teaches. And if you do not understand what the gospel really teaches, you may be mislead by something that is another gospel altogether.

You might be impressed with his zeal and his boldness in his campus preaching, but all of this is simply smoke and mirrors that he uses in order to deceive you into believing he is a legitimate brother in Christ and minister of the gospel. And I can say that as one who has stood on street corners and gone on college campuses in order to preach the gospel in the open-air. I've been harassed by the police, have been threatened, and had beer bottles thrown at me in order to carry out the preaching of the word. I conducted Bible studies in a homeless shelter for a year, and sometimes wondered if I would leave safely due to fights, shootings, and drug activity that happened there. These things he has experienced as well, but these things are not what makes one legitimate. It is one's faithfulness to the preaching of the true gospel that makes one legitimate. And there is a vast difference between the man-centered moralism Jesse preaches, and the Christ-centered preaching of the gospel.

Beautiful post brother Jim.

The true gospel, and the true Christian life will ALWAYS glorify God and humble men.

A man centered gospel has no power, and will only attract proud, self centered men, who feel like God owes them salvation.

Every man, woman, and child could go to hell and God would still be God. But God is love, and chooses to save those who He shall. This is unmerited grace.

Does your gospel glorify God? Or does your gospel focus on men?

Brethren, the fulcrum of the issue at hand here is essentially one man's soteriology versus another. It is my opinion that a man can have a soteriological difference with me and still be considered a brother. I do not hold to the doctrines of pelegianism or semi-pelegianism, arminianism or any other "ism" exclusively. But I hold to the sovereignity of God in salvation to the extent that many of you reading this (including Calvinists) would probably be offended.

But I do not share my convictions here for the sake of unity, and I will not refute the convictions of others for the same reason. I can fellowship with Finney, Wesley, Spurgeon, the Puritans...and, yes, Jesse Morrell too. Because I believe they all genuinely love the Lord, they are all genuinely born-again and, like myself, they all know only in part. Soteriology is different from Christology. I cannot, for example, fellowship with Russellites (Jehovah Witnesses), because here we are dealing with a Christological error, which I deem as fatal.

Moral Government theology is something I strongly disagree with, but I recognize brothers like Keith Green, Ravenhill, Pratney, Finney and acknowledge they too, like the Puritans, were accepted by God and fulfilled a wonderful role in the Body of Christ while on earth. I refuse to reject what God has accepted, just because my "dark glass" understanding is a different shade from theirs.

My job here is to not ban someone from the forum just because of a soteriological difference, because if that were the case, we would have to remove a large quanitity of great sermons from preachers who now "fit the mold".

However, if we perceive someone is spamming the forum with Moral Government or Calvinism or Arminianism (or any other "ism") for the purpose of aggressively subverting others to their pet doctrinal affiliation, this is where I will step in. As it stands I don't think trufaithsave has done this yet - and furthermore, I think it is presumptuous and disrespectful to accuse this guy of being someone whom he consistently denies. The way I see it, if you have even a shred of doubt that he might not be who you think he is, is it not therefore prudent to remain inconclusive until his true identity is revealed?

Brother Paul

Brethren, the fulcrum of the issue at hand here is essentially one man's soteriology versus another. It is my opinion that a man can have a soteriological difference with me and still be considered a brother. I do not hold to the doctrines of pelegianism or semi-pelegianism, arminianism or any other "ism" exclusively. But I hold to the sovereignity of God in salvation to the extent that many of you reading this (including Calvinists) would probably be offended.

But I do not share my convictions here for the sake of unity, and I will not refute the convictions of others for the same reason. I can fellowship with Finney, Wesley, Spurgeon, the Puritans...and, yes, Jesse Morrell too. Because I believe they all genuinely love the Lord, they are all genuinely born-again and, like myself, they all know only in part. Soteriology is different from Christology. I cannot, for example, fellowship with Russellites (Jehovah Witnesses), because here we are dealing with a Christological error, which I deem as fatal.

Moral Government theology is something I strongly disagree with, but I recognize brothers like Keith Green, Ravenhill, Pratney, Finney and acknowledge they too, like the Puritans, were accepted by God and fulfilled a wonderful role in the Body of Christ while on earth. I refuse to reject what God has accepted, just because my "dark glass" understanding is a different shade from theirs.

My job here is to not ban someone from the forum just because of a soteriological difference, because if that were the case, we would have to remove a large quanitity of great sermons from preachers who now "fit the mold".

However, if we perceive someone is spamming the forum with Moral Government or Calvinism or Arminianism (or any other "ism") for the purpose of aggressively subverting others to their pet doctrinal affiliation, this is where I will step in. As it stands I don't think trufaithsave has done this yet - and furthermore, I think it is presumptuous and disrespectful to accuse this guy of being someone whom he consistently denies. The way I see it, if you have even a shred of doubt that he might not be who you think he is, is it not therefore prudent to remain inconclusive until his true identity is revealed?

Brother Paul

My dear brother, with all due respect I cannot agree with you, and I am grieved by this kind of attitude that permeates so many hearts today. I also want to say that I believe it is this very attitude that is Sermonindex's greatest weakness and danger. If soteriology, the doctrine of salvation, is not a point of division, then I don't know what is. We maintain fellowship with others who don't agree with us concerning polity, tongues and end times, because we do not deem these as essential to salvation- but do we dare say that soteriology also is not essential, and that we may maintain fellowship with someone who does not believe the truth about salvation? If someone does not hold to the truth about salvation, how then can they be saved? And if they are not saved, how can we have fellowship with them, and pretend it is a non-essential?

The book of Galatians ought to sound a clear warning in our ears. "If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed." (Gal. 1:8-9) Could it be more serious? Shouldn't we pay close attention to that which follows in this inspired letter? The apostle does not point out any problem in the Galatians Christology - it is entirely a matter of their soteriology. "Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified." (Gal. 2:16) This matter is the whole matter. And whatever one might believe this means - whatever the interpretation - it must involve the warning of 1:8-9, that whoever does not preach this gospel is to be accursed. Therefore we must discover what Paul was preaching, and we must preach it with the same exclusivity and urgency as he, demolishing anything other that sets itself up against the knowledge of God. "Which is not another gospel, but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ." (Gal. 1:7)

My dear brother, and all who are reading this, the attitude that we must have is the attitude of the apostle when it concerns the doctrine of salvation. If we lose this, we lose everything. If we accept Jesse as a brother in Christ we are foolishly entertaining a false and dangerous wolf in sheep's clothing. If we frustrate the grace of God, then Christ died for nothing. If we ignore the fact that Finney taught a false gospel, then we fail to do what the holy Spirit in Paul burned to do: confront Peter to his face. How many beloved sheep are being deceived by Satan's ministers of righteousness while we fail to sound the alarm? How long will it take before we realize the gospel is non-negotiable? Like Josef said, this is not about Calvinism/Arminianism. This is not about Romans 9, 10 and 11... this is about Romans 1, 2 and 3, and if we as Christians drop the ball here, we don't have the right to be called Christians.

"It is fine to be zealous, provided the purpose is good." (Gal. 4:18 NIV)

"Brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for Israel is that they may be saved. For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and seeking to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted to the righteousness of God." (Rom. 10:1-3)

For the cross of Christ,
-Eli

Wow. Solid post Eli_Barnabas.

Well said brother Eli.

It would seem to me that if so many godly men have a problem with what Jesse believes - if they are truly concerned about his salvation and what he is preaching - that they would get down on their faces before the Lord and pray for his salvation rather than murmuring and complaining about whether or not they should fellowship with him.

There really is something wrong with all of this settling into camps, as if being right is more important than the person of Jesus Christ. . . as if the cross of Christ were of none effect.

In all due respect for my brothers and sisters, and for the moderators of this forum, but would we allow those who ascribed to the error of the Galtian church to continue on unchallenged, and counted as brethren in our midst? Did Paul not draw a line in the sand when it came to them? Did he count them as blessed brethren, or did he count them as accursed and severed from Christ? There are some finer points of theology that we can no doubt be gracious towards one another in regard to. But there are some views that we must be dogmatically intolerant towards, though of course, still with a spirit of humility and love.

Some such issues are not merely a division over mere opinion, but it is a division over the very cross of Jesus Christ. Moral Government Theology as taught by Jesse shares nothing in common with either Arminian or Reformed schools of thought. It is a dangerous doctrine that obliterates the necessity of the death of Jesus Christ on the cross for our sins, and makes the resurrection, and consequently, the new birth as irrelevant. This is not only an affront to basic evangelical soteriology, but is an attack on Christology as well.

Like I've previously said, I have no personal problem with folks like Jesse having continued access to th forums. But in all due respect brother Paul, these forums have becoming a dumping ground for truefaithsav and his moral government theology. Many threads have been created in recent weeks, and many profitable threads have been greatly hijacked by heavy and almost militant like posting. And whether or not truefaithsav is actually Jesse or not is besides the point. He frequently takes direct material from Jesse's web site and dumps it on here in thread after thread. Perhaps he is a follower of Jesse, I don't know. But if it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck, it probably is a duck. He's certainly never denied being Jesse in public to my knowledge, and frequently let's people address him as such. But again, that's besides the point, as I previously have said.

Anyway, God bless you guys in whatever you decide. I still love this ministry and the precious saints I have encountered through this ministry. Some have definitely made an everlasting impact on my life for years to come, if not through all eternity.

For what it's worth, I heartily agree with the posts of brother Eli_Barnabas and KingJimmy.

We must also bear in mind that we always have about 40 to 60 guests reading the threads in this forum at any time. All of us who post here are actually teaching to an audience of 40 or more, 24/7. It is an enormous responsibility that should not be taken lightly. We should all be mindful of the scriptural soundness of all posts in this forum, particularly those that we post ourselves, so that no one will be misled by what they read here.

Let us hold true to the teachings of Scripture. Although we are instructed to avoid divisions with respect to disputable (non-essential) matters, and to be patient with others of varying degrees of faith, we should never tolerate the teaching of any other gospel other than that of Christ Jesus.

[i]2Co 11:2-4 "I am jealous for you with a godly jealousy. I promised you to one husband, to Christ, so that I might present you as a pure virgin to him. But I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent’s cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ. For if someone comes to you and preaches a Jesus other than the Jesus we preached, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it easily enough."

2Co 11:13-15 "For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. It is not surprising, then, if his servants masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve."

Eph 5:11 "Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them."[/i]

truefaithsav said:

You cannot confuse Judiazers with repentance preachers. Eli this has been your fatal mistake.

The heresy or error is those who say that you can have the forgiveness and mercy of God, while you continue in your sins.

Eli is a wolf in sheep's clothing because he says you do not need to repent of your sins to be saved, since repenting of your sins would be justification by works of the law. He says you must only repent of unbelief.

I challenge anyone to search this thread or even other threads to confirm if what truefaithsav said here is true. You will find nothing because it is not true, and at best an intentionally deceptive half-truth. He conveniently ignores the part where others have said that genuine faith (repenting of unbelief) and love for Christ always leads one to forsake sin. He lies boldly, knowing that very few would bother to check his false claims.

Because of the nature of this forum, many readers, particularly guests, will assume that he speaks the truth. It is unwise to allow someone into this forum who thinks nothing of posting lies and half-truths, and of putting words in the mouths of others to serve his own purpose.

The Book of Psalms has an apt description for someone like this:

[i]Ps 52:2-3 Your tongue plots destruction; it is like a sharpened razor, you who practice deceit. You love evil rather than good, falsehood rather than speaking the truth.[/i]

Note: This is my last post in this thread. I pray that the Moderators will seriously consider the honest concerns expressed here.

I agree with Eli and KingJimmy. Moral Government and Open Theism go far beyond mere doctrinal or theological differences - it touches the very heart of salvation and preaches a different gospel and preaches a different God and different Jesus much like Jehovah Witnesses or Mormons.

I am a STRONG proponent for unity among denominational, doctrinal and theological lines as long as the basics fundamentals of Christianity is agreed upon. One of my common sayings is:

"we have eternity to argue about our doctrinal and theological differences, but right now precious souls are dieing and going to hell - let's put our differences behind us, lift up the blood stained banner of Jesus Christ to a lost and dieing world and bring men out of darkness and into the marvelous light of new life and freedom in the gospel of Jesus Christ!"

I work with many denominations and just in the past couple of weeks have labored along side, Lutheran, AofG, Vineyard, Southern Baptist, Calvary Chapel, 4 Square and Nazarene. But at the same time we must draw the line and not fall into this modern thinking that counts all men brother - to start to accept those who hold to moral government, open theism, Jehovah witnesses, Mormons, Catholics, Muslims, and other false religions is a dangerous and slippery path.

I like what HeartSong said -

It would seem to me that if so many godly men have a problem with what Jesse believes - if they are truly concerned about his salvation and what he is preaching - that they would get down on their faces before the Lord and pray for his salvation rather than murmuring and complaining about whether or not they should fellowship with him.

I know myself, Josef, KingJimmy, Greg Gordon, and others have strived with Jesse to help him see the false teachings he preaches to no avail. At this point HeartSong is right we should be praying for him and others who hold to these false teaching. I also think it wise not to attack the man but rather focus on exposing the error of teachings. I think it much more wise to speak of this or that teaching as heretical and prove it with scripture instead of point our fingers and say this or that man is a heretic - but that is just my opinion.

The whole Eli is a heretic he said this, Josef is a heretic he said that, Jesse is a heretic he said this and that - VERY VERY DANGEROUS - in my opinion!!! I would be very careful if I were you - again judge and point fingers at the teaching all you want and then let the mans teachings speak for themselves. I find the following quotes to be VERY useful in situations like these.

Discernment is God's call to intercession, never to faultfinding. ~Corrie ten Boom

"When you begin to argue, you are on slippery ground. I would advise you to argue with no one, not even the devil."W.B. Dunkum

"Your spirituality is not seen by your ability to see the faults and flaws of others, but by lifting them to a higher plane of victory, usefulness, and Christian living. By all means be uncompromising, but don't be Pharisaical." W.B. Dunkum

"I would rather play with forked lightning, or take in hand living wires with their fiery current, than speak a reckless word against any servant of Christ, or idly repeat the slanderous darts which thousands of Christians are hurling on others, to the hurt of their own souls and bodies."
-A.B. Simpson

The devil is a better theologian than any of us and is a devil still. ~A.W. Tozer

“It is a sickening thought that, while Christians frequently quarrel, we never hear of the devils doing so. The Church of God is divided, but the kingdom of darkness appears to be one. Whatever intestine strife there may be between evil spirits, we have no hint of it here; they all seem to act in complete unison. Whether hate is a more compacting principle than love, I will not venture to say; but certainly these haters of God and of his truth appear to be knit together as though they were one devil rather than a multitude of evil spirits, yet the lovers of the Lord Jesus Christ are not knit together as one man under his blessed rule.”- Charles Spurgeon

Patrick
www.jonahproject.org

Hi eveyone,

Frank, I think this is important that you mentioned,

"What was the spirit that led men to burn other men? Was it a Godly Spirit, was that the work of the Holy Spirit or the work of the spirit of men? I find it so refreshing to read how Paul delt with the gnostics of his day. He spoke of who Jesus truly was."

I think that Paul's manner truely was to bring light from God!

His skill in handeling the scriptures, along with his gifting and calling from God(Rom 1:1), [b]and[/b] his experience of Christ! (2Ti 4:17) enabled him to stand against false teaching and teachers, and to do so with a SHINE and with the light of God.

And so he could not only refute what was in error, but brought out such amazing diamonds from the mine of the scriptures...

of Abraham being justified while in uncircumcision

or that the Gospel was preached in Abraham.

A wise masterbuilder knows how to cut straight and accurate lines. And to expose what is unsound and unworthy to build upon.

And not only him, but all of the Apostles, and others, as scribes instructed unto the Kingdom, bringing forth things out of their treasure, both new and old(Mat 13:52).

One of the things that comes to memory time to time is how the Lord Jesus told his disciples that He would give them a mouth, that none of their adversaries would be able to gainsay or resist.

Wish you all well.

Brother Eli wrote:

My dear brother, with all due respect I cannot agree with you, and I am grieved by this kind of attitude that permeates so many hearts today. I also want to say that I believe it is this very attitude that is Sermonindex's greatest weakness and danger.

Many of these types of statements put forward in this quote and others in this thread remind me of the ways of this world. Today's politicians and spin doctors use these types of words to sway the masses into beliefs that they promote. Words like danger, heresy, heretic, weakness, slippery slope, fear, are all used by the world to co-opt those whose beliefs call into question the current belief systems.

I have been here since 2003 and have been strengthened and not weakened by this ministry. I have been challenged by fellow brothers and sisters to search the Scriptures to see if what is said aligns with Scripture. I have been sharpened rather than been made feeble and weak kneed by this open dialogue that takes place in this forum. I have witnessed the growing strength of Christ in the men who moderate this forum. The types of Sermons that are highlighted like the current one, "The Power of Travailing Prayer" demonstrates the continued work of our Savior bringing messages from men who would otherwise be unknown by many of us.

Fear is stamped out and strength abounds for those who search the Scriptures and truly use the word of God to discern between good and evil. It is the use of Scripture which casts down men's arguments. This ministry provides us believer's the opportunity
to test our own opinions about Scripture. God has given us this forum as a means to discern if our "opinions" are of Him or of this world.

In Christ
Jeff

My dear brother, with all due respect I cannot agree with you, and I am grieved by this kind of attitude that permeates so many hearts today. I also want to say that I believe it is this very attitude that is Sermonindex's greatest weakness and danger

There are plenty of people that don't like your theology either, Eli. I have been asked to deal with you, but I explain that you haven't broken any rules here, and you are free to share your convictions with impunity.

You may all stand in opposition to my decision in not banning "trufaithsav" or whoever he is. He doesn't deserve to be banned - simply because he hasn't broken any forum guidlelines. There is not guideline stating he cannot "discuss" Moral Government; just like there is not a ban on Finney sermons here either.

If you cannot tolerate this liberality, we would suggest you find a forum that soley promotes and tolerates to be what you deem as the non-negotiable gospel. There will be no animosity, and my conscience will remain clear.

Thank you for this discussion. My intent is not to argue soteriology; we will know at the judgment who was right and who was wrong when we see if Charles Finney is there with any of his converts :)

As far as I am concerned, this discussion is over for me. Please consult Greg Gordon if you have any further grievances.

With love and respect,

Paul

By the way, Jesse is preaching his open theism in the Bible prophecy thread. I surely don't hope we think open theism is a matter that any saved person can hold to and still be counted as a brother.

"It is my opinion that a man can have a soteriological difference with me and still be considered a brother."..Paul West

Why don't we allow Muslims and Hindus and Jews to propagate their beliefs on this forum then?

If it's just a matter of salvation, then there's no big deal.

I mean, we all worship the same God don't we? If we call it Atman, Allah, or whatever.

:-o

The moderators have a very immense responsibility being in charge of this forum.

I fear that they may be held accountable to an extent as to what beliefs are allowed to be propagated on these forums in the guise of truth.

As men of God, we are called to protect the Bride of Christ, at all costs.

As Paul Washer stated, if his wife was attacked by 10 men in a parking lot late at Wal-Mart; and you walked by as a man, with your head down, in the name of self-preservation... Paul Washer would not only go after those 10 men, he would come looking for you.

We must present the Church of Christ as a beautiful virgin, for the glory of God.

If you cannot tolerate this liberality, we would suggest you find a forum that soley promotes and tolerates to be what you deem as the non-negotiable gospel. There will be no animosity, and my conscience will remain clear.

Thank you for this discussion. My intent is not to argue soteriology; we will know at the judgment who was right and who was wrong when we see if Charles Finney is there with any of his converts :)

By Jews I did not mean those the remnant of believers within Judaism that recognizes Christ as the messiah.

Rather, as when the writer of the gospel of John refers to the "Jews," he refers to the religious, proud legalists of the day, who denied Christ as their king. I assumed that this would be understood, my apologies.

As for the statement of being called to present the Bride of Christ as a spotless virgin before Him, this is an inference from personal study and devotion to the Word of God.

If you do not share the same convictions, once again my apologies. I assume that all believers share this passion to keep the Church beautiful.

Many statements here are very concerning to me, if truefaithsaves really is Jesse Morell or not i dont know, if they hold the same doctrines i dont know, many of the doctrines here may very well be heretical and so on, but somehow i am very grieved when we "limit" the eternal gospel to a set of doctrines, may it me moral government or reformed theology, yes both can not be right at the same time, but both can be wrong....

I dont agree that any other view then the reformed is the gospel, the gospel is greater then reformed theology only. What worries me even more, if we where to line up the scriptures given in this thread against the accusations , the accusations way outnumber what the Lord jesus has said in the scriptures.

There are so much words from mere men in this thread, and so little from our Lord Jesus

Many say God is like this, and his gospel is like this, there is no other way, myself hold men like Luther and Calvin on not a very high pedistal, actually i am convinced they done more harm to christianity then good, but on the other hand i recognice still gods hand was upon them in their time, god used them, God used Finney as well.

God even used a donkey once to speak his word...

Why could not Finney even tho he held a wrong view of the atonement or mans inheritance from Adam, could he still not be used of God?

I remember a Chinese brother that said he had no bible, he remembered only a few things his mother told him as a child, he confused the holy spirit with a holy dragon, so he preached the holy dragon would come, he later saw his mistake, but still God used him in his time of error.

I was thinking many are so convinced they are right, on both sides, both sides uses the bible as proof for their doctrines, both sides have "support" from "godly men" throughout christian history.

Myself se both sides in the bible, any doctrine on Gods sovereignty that free man from his responsibility in his words thoughts and deeds are heresy, and doctrine on free will that lower or makes Gods sovereignty any lesser then what is plainly in scripture is heresy.

any doctrine that says man has absolute no role what so ever in any thing is not true to the whole of scripture, any doctrine that says man can do any thing without God first working is not true to scripture....

Its all about Christ! from first to last Christ Christ Christ.

I wish i could shake you people and scream CHRIST!

He is risen and mighty and lives for all eternity

lastly even if you all who have confronted these heresies are right or wrong, i feel lead to post a word for meditation to all.
[i]
Evangelical Christianity has very largely become resolved into a crystallised and set system of doctrines. Those doctrines are the Deity of Christ; His Atoning Death; His Bodily Resurrection; His Ascension and Exaltation; and - with some variations as to time and manner - His Personal Return; The Person of the Holy Spirit; The Inspiration and Absolute Authority of the Bible; etc.

Let us hasten to say, lest anyone should jump to conclusions, read no further, and go away to misrepresent us, that we are not implying or calling for a necessary reform in the essential doctrines of the Church as above. These things are rightly and truly basic and governing, and must be maintained in purity and fulness. But when we have said all that could and should be said for them, we are far from having solved the problem of the Church's spiritual life and power. Orthodoxy and "soundness" never was the sign of spiritual life. Indeed "Fundamentalism" as such can be as cold, hard, cruel, bitter, dead, and ugly as the Inquisition, and it often is so. Its weapons are often completely carnal, and it does not hesitate to resort to physical force. This may be its extreme form, but even where these truths are held without these particular features, there is more often than otherwise a rigid legalism resulting in hardness, suspicion, prejudice, and exclusiveness of spirit. Many divisions have followed - not the faithful stand for the truth - but some enforcing of some aspect of a particular truth - hair-splitting. When we say this, we are far from forgetting the costly battles for truth in the Church's history, and how often the situation has been saved by faithful men in this respect. Our point here is another one. The Doctrines of Christianity have become something in themselves, and because this is so a host of unhappy, unholy, and unnecessary elements have gained a strong place in Christianity. It is so easy to gain your point and lose the real spiritual value. We are fully alive to the Devil's age-long work to destroy the Truth and to sow false doctrine, and we are wholly with faithful witness to the essentials of the Faith. Reform in doctrine is not our point at present, but reform in the place or relationship of doctrine. Be patient and follow through. We have a great and vital object in view. Christianity is not necessarily or inevitably established when the sum of its doctrines or tenets is enunciated and assented to. Here 'the letter may kill' rather than make alive. There is that which is not apart from the truths, but much more than they. Without that other and more, the very truths themselves may lack their right meaning. To that other we shall come presently.

We have said that Evangelical Christianity has become a system of Denominations, Sects, and Sectional Organisations. In fairness and righteousness, we must remember that many of these had an honourable beginning. As to Denominations, in not a few cases it was a conscientious start and for some particular doctrine, doctrines, or form of expression, costing very heavily, that brought these into being. And so with many other institutions, movements, missions, and organisations; some divergence from the truth, or some failure in the responsibility, obligation, and purpose to which Christianity is committed resulted in the rising up of these specific and varied activities. It is no small history of devotion, heroism, sacrifice and service. The story can fill a library. We take nothing from it. That is not our object. What we are saying is that many of these things have now become so largely something in themselves, and are often ends in themselves. It is the thing with which so many are bound up; and here again all the unhappy elements, rivalries, jealousies, competitions, suspicions, etc. have their occasion. The effect of much of this is to make organised Christianity the enemy of Christianity, and a menace to the real work of the Spirit of God. [/i]

Thread closed.

Please do not create anymore "heretic" threads, and please refrain from naming and accusing other believers publically. If you have issues, contact the offender, myself or Greg Gordon privately.

Thank you.

Could someone on this thread help me. I think in reading the link that began this thread (page 1, "Grace in the triad blogspot") I read a report, probably with links that [u]"Rich Warren had joined the board of directors of an international faith organization seeking the unity of ALL RELIGIONS".[/u]

I have tried to re-trace my steps but can not find it on that site. There were other references to his emergent bent, but it is the one to this ONE RELIGION, that I need. As I recall, the head of that movement is in Europe (northern Europe?), and the name is short like Faith United (?).

Thanks for any help on this. My fellowship is still recovering from the purpose driven church and fighting off emergent ideas that sound so good but are built on sand and not rock. I thought the readers of this thread, familiar with Warren my know where the reference is.