Moral Government Theory...

If the Moral Government theory is heretical, what do we do with preachers like Leonard Ravenhill? there are oter preachers that are highly esteemed as men of God, yet they are Moral Government theroists. Are they not saved? Is the Moral Governement theory plausible? I am a calvinist myself, yet I am always open to other portions of theology.

As for me, I think "what has GOD done with preachers like Ravenhill?" would be more relevant... I do not really know much about MGT (just that it is somewhat opposed with the satisfactory theology) but roughly I would think they are BUT our interpretation of Divine and thus INFINITE truths, so I wouldn't dare to "heretize" (perhaps out of my own ignorance) anyone who does not buy into my "sandbox" theology, yet I reckon that there MUST be basic principles on which we have to agree before sharing fellowship with 'others'...

And also my fair "disgust" for -ism and -gy will surely spare me from digging into this (at least i hope so)

A quote of Bro Ravenhill

"You can have all of your doctrines right, yet still not have the presence of God."

Don't bother about having "right doctrines" AT ALL COST, rather seek God AT ALL COST, He said If you seek Me, you will find Me, IF YOU SEEK ME WITH ALL YOUR HEART and I will found by you -what a precious thought brother to "find" our maker- (jer 29:13)

Blessings,

Does anyone have snything else to say about this theory?

@ Sermonindex,

I am honored that you answered my question. May I throw something else at you?

I understand what you are saying about both extremes. I understand that Moral Government Theory is the extreme side of Arminianism, but how can someone who believes that men are born morally nuetral say they are saved? Isn't that heretical? Wasn't it deemed as such? Is it damning?

Thanks for you help on this matter. I do appreciate sharpening with you.

If reading church history has taught me anything, it is that all men are heretical within the faith to one degree or another. Ephesians itself even says that there will be a blowing about by winds of doctrine "until" we all come to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ, "That we henceforth be no more children tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive, but speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ." -Ephesians 4:13-15

This passage of scripture, in the larger context of the book of Ephesians, which is the epistle I like to call the eschatology of the ecclesia, shows us that there is a fullness to which the church is called to grow into. I do not believe we are their yet. We as a body throughout the millenia have yet to grow fully into that maturity. We are lacking glorification, and perfect unity to the mind of Christ. As teachers, apostles, prophets, evangelists, and pastors...we are called to stand and contend for the faith, which will mostly just consist of being loving and gentle Bereans. The problem we face is there are many paradoxical truths in scripture. Many opposing viewpoints will be correct in what they affirm about scripture but can be wrong in what they deny. The problem is that we are not content with the paradoxes.

I know absolutely nothing about moral government theory. But I do know that the pattern apostle Paul himself said, "For now we see through a glass darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known. And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity." Paul said this right after he said, "When I was a child, I spake as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things." - I Corinthians 13:11-13

This passage echoes Pauls sentiment before in Ephesians that I quoted. During this life, what we are to cling to are faith hope and love, These are derelict without biblical understanding, but also biblical understanding is "puffery" without them. I believe that Paul is indicating there are things we grow into with maturity as believers. Some of us hold to theological views that we later cast out in favor of better ones, more replete with a fuller knowledge of scripture. I have probably believed heretical things in my lifetime, but have received correction and grew up and became a man in place of being childish on any number of occasions.

If Ravenhill had appropriated what you consider to be a heretical teaching, well I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but nearly every "great" teacher in the history of the church has taught heresy at one point or another in their lives. The reason being that none of us know in full. We lack the fullness of the complete man, we as a church have not yet grown into Christ. There may have been a few spiritual savants who know scripture word for word, but the greatest defense we have is to follow Christ's leading and respond to the accuser with, "It is written!"

I am not making excuses for heresy, nor am I condoning it, but the fact of the matter is, we are all broken vessels, our treasure is Christ. We see even the great Apostle Peter falling into attitudinal heresy and Paul having to correct it. Paul and Barnabas themselves had "no little dissension," which I would probably call attitudinal heresy to a degree.

Within the Methodist church, you had two mighty evangelists who shook the foundations of the earth with their preaching, God used both mightily to convert countless souls into the Kingdom, and their theological views could not have been in starker contrast.

God does not use people because of their theology, he uses his church because of himself. We are his body, we are his hands, we are his feet, we are his reproductive system, we are his mouth, we are his Body. It is a mystical relationship that generates life as a result of Christ. There is not a hand in the universe that operates and functions according to the dictates of the mind because it "understands" how it works. A hand does not say, "I refuse to type this letter until I understand fully the biology and cellular/chemical makeup of how you direct me brain!" That would be silly. My hands type this letter because my mind wants them to.

All that said, as we grow in the knowledge of Christ, when we come to an awareness that there is something wrong in what we have believed, we ought to be teachable at all times. Always growing, always maturing. When we see errors in others, we ought to correct in love. If we are spiritual (Ye who are spiritual Galatians 6:1) we are to do so. Even Paul here draws a line suggesting there are some brothers who are and some who are not, only we know.

Sometimes I wrestle over these issues even here on SI. There are preachers on here that I personally don't enjoy listening to because of their brand of theology, but I have a great respect for what I perceive Greg Gordon's heart is. This website represents a catalog of men in the faith whom Greg has promoted, and in a great way...he is truly obeying the word when we are called to "Endeavor to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bonds of peace." I do not think in the history of the Church there has ever been something like this, not that I am daring to commend ourselves by comparing ourselves to ourselves, but I am greatly encouraged by this ministry, because rather than drawing such harsh silly and childish lines of demarcation in the sand, SI seems to represent an interesting cross-section of the body of Christ. And I hope it represents a drawing together of the body as we grow up into the head in these last days.

People throw the word "heretic" around a lot these days. I have found that it is used most often when peoples pet theological systems are discovered to have flaws in them right from the word of God.

One of my absolute favorite new passages of scripture from the last few weeks has been, "Therefore every scribe which is instructed into the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, which bringeth forth out of his treasure things new and old." -Matthew 13:52. Jesus did this in his teaching, as a result he had authority above all the other scribes and pharisee's who always sat around quoting other theologians all the time. Jesus does not condemn scribes but rather says...they need to be hospitable people, serving others by giving and drawing out of their own treasuries things both antiquated...and things refreshingly new. Like new wine!

On to the new wine brothers and sisters!!!

Brother Greg,

I find great blessing in reading your response to this thread. The theological debates are tiresome and cause me to shut down as others probably do as well. I have had to leave SI and stop listening to sermons and the forum at times. But I know that we are all made of clay and need the spirit of God too.

I like what you wrote about the importance of "walking in the Spirit with the Lord and all pleasing to Him". My favorite paragraph you wrote is:

I encourage you brother to allow your life to be thrown onto the cause of eternity. To die to yourself, ambitions, goals and desires and have your life magnify Christ in such a way that will leave a mark on this earth.

Honestly God has doing a work in my life to reconnect to the heart of God in his, do die to self and more.

I have heard about many theologians stop witnessing, serving God, praying, etc. and living for God and getting buried in books and theology and wasting much time on Facebook and debate. It's very sad. I am preaching to myself here.

I have done this and forgotten what the heart of God is about. Time on this earth is very short and my prayer is that my life magnifies Christ in such a way that it will leave a mark on this earth.

~ Doug

I encourage you brother to allow your life to be thrown onto the cause of eternity. To die to yourself, ambitions, goals and desires and have your life magnify Christ in such a way that will leave a mark on this earth. I feel at times and this is not necessarily speaking of you brother at all, but many who argue about these things and think about them much are those that are doing little or nothing for the kingdom of God.

So incredibly true. I have been so exhausted in my life by those who spend all their time in critique and do nothing. I am impoverished even by having fallen into this pitty pit myself on a number of occasions.

Making marks on eternity, that is a worthy cause!

If reading church history has taught me anything, it is that all men are heretical within the faith to one degree or another.

By this I do not mean they are "heretics" in the sense that they are schismatic. A true heretic as defined by Spiros Zhodiates interpretation of the greek word is someone of divergent opinion who breaks off a portion of the body to schism. So I guess I do not really fully believe my above statement. I do mean though that there are many amongst bodies who do see things differently but are not heretics in the schismatic sense. I hope that clears that up.

I encourage you brother to allow your life to be thrown onto the cause of eternity. To die to yourself, ambitions, goals and desires and have your life magnify Christ in such a way that will leave a mark on this earth. I feel at times and this is not necessarily speaking of you brother at all, but many who argue about these things and think about them much are those that are doing little or nothing for the kingdom of God.

Sorry to say this, but I am pretty frustrated now. I am not saying that you all accued me of this, but I can certainly tell you that this above quote is my goal. However, this above statement is doctrinal, am I wrong? For anyone to say anything on how we should live, think, and act according to Gods word, it means they are making theological statements and doctrinal proclaimations.

I most certianly am not looking for a fight, nor am I interested in online debates that drag on for too long (because I agree with you all that they are wearisome), but I am really disappointed. I am looking for help concerning the Moral Governement Theory in light of sound doctrine (without the quotations).

I don't think I am asking for too much, and I most certainly do not think that my questions were to hard to answer. Please, please, please, give me something that will help me understand whether or not Moral Government Theory is heretical, and if it is please explain why. If not, please explain why.

When I say heretical, I mean damning. Not just different.

Here is a succinct thumbnail sketch of the heresies contained in Moral Government Theology:

* God does not fulfill some of His own prophecies.
* God changes His mind and is not immutable.
* God does not have sovereign control over earthly events.
* God does not know His future actions.
* God does not know ahead of time the free decisions of humans.
* God's foreknowledge is limited in the area of man's free decisions.
* Many of the things God predicted never came true.
* The atonement shows a willingness on God's part to forgive, rather than a desire to punish sin.
* God forgives completely out of His grace rather than a need for personal vindictive satisfaction.
* God never needed His wrath abated because of sin.
* The atonement does not pay our debt for sin.
* The devil has deceived us into believing that Christ was a ransom for us, and that he redeemed us by paying for our sins.
* Jesus did not pay for our sins.
* To believe that our salvation was literally purchased with Christ's blood makes God to be vindictive and bloodthirsty.
* One is ultimately responsible for his/her own salvation because of free will.
* Imputed righteousness is a lie. God does not look on Christians through the garb of Christ's blood.
* True repentance means ceasing from all sin before we die.
* Salvation is not so dependent on whether we accept Christ - it's whether He will accept us. We need to do more so that He will want to accept us.
* Salvation is dependent upon our adherence to moral law.
* God is holy only because He chooses to use His attributes in a loving way.
* God has the ability to make wrong choices or to sin.
* Our moral character is shaped merely by our individual acts of sin.
* If an individual unknowingly commits a sin, it is not a sin to that person and they will not be held to account for it by God.
* The sin of Adam is not transmitted to us, and it would be unjust for God to pronounce us guilty because of his sin.
* If God condemns us all because of Adam's sin, God must also save everyone because of what Christ did (Rom. 19). This is universalism, and therefore both parts of the argument must be wrong.
* Our moral depravity is shaped solely by wrong and sinful choices we make.
* We as humans are able to fulfill the law.
* Humans are not bound to a sinful flesh that continually wants to sin. Through good choices and an iron will, mankind can turn away from sin in and of him/herself.
* One can achieve perfection if that individual sets his/her goals high enough.

I found this at: http://www.apologeticsindex.org/m05.html

My impression is that it is pure Pelagianism and salvation by works with emphasis on the Old Testament and the law and almost no grace whatsoever. These people believe that Jesus came only to be a good example for us to follow and his death by crucifixion did not pay for our sins but was only to show us how much God hates sin. Avoid this like the plague my friend.

Doctrine is very important. It undergirds any and everything one will ever have to say about God, Jesus, the Bible, the Christian walk, etc. Paul teaches the importance of it throughout his epistles, especially those to Timothy.

The issue comes in the setting in which one engages these things. Generally, internet forums are not most conducive to healthy debating (wrong word) certain theological issues, as people hold them very closely; people are very fervent about their position; tones can get misinterpreted; a certain view is given off towards visitors to the site (perhaps an argumentative vibe); and by and large at the end of the day, neither party switches views (or even wanted to switch views, rather, desired to articulate their view) and at best an "agree to disagree" is reached.

Ideally, the best place to hash out doctrines would be privately (not in a public place) with someone you have an established relationship with, perhaps even a spiritual authority (like a Paul to Timothy). The internet is open to too many eyes, openings for potshot posts, and doesn't accommodate a "let's pause right here and pray for the Holy Spirit to show us and then search the scriptures together" flow.

If reading church history has taught me anything, it is that all men are heretical within the faith to one degree or another. By this I do not mean they are "heretics" in the sense that they are schismatic. A true heretic as defined by Spiros Zhodiates interpretation of the greek word is someone of divergent opinion who breaks off a portion of the body to schism. So I guess I do not really fully believe my above statement. I do mean though that there are many amongst bodies who do see things differently but are not heretics in the schismatic sense. I hope that clears that up.

Nonetheless, I thoroughly enjoyed reading your previous post Areadymind. We are all imbalanced, and need one another for this reason. Though our underlying doctrinal beliefs may differ, Christ cannot be seen without the body. It is only Jesus Himself who has it all right. Every man of God is imbalanced, and the Lord has it be so, so we may learn to depend upon Him and not upon man.

Thank you again for that post.

Sorry to say this, but I am pretty frustrated now.

I most certainly am not looking for a fight, nor am I interested in online debates that drag on for too long (because I agree with you all that they are wearisome), but I am really disappointed. I am looking for help concerning the Moral Government Theory in light of sound doctrine (without the quotations).

Lets look back at your original question...

If the Moral Government theory is heretical, what do we do with preachers like Leonard Ravenhill? there are other preachers that are highly esteemed as men of God, yet they are Moral Government theorists. Are they not saved?

The way you phrased your original question was, without citing any sources, nor quoting anything Ravenhill actually said, you asked what we are to "do with him." If you go to the first page of this website, you will see that the moderator recommends that you listen to him since he is the primary inspiration for this website. I apologize for sounding a bit like a stickler but here is a good model for how to get further without receiving glancing answers about these kinds of questions.

1.) Start a thread in a proper place (which you did)
2.) Properly name it (which you also did)
3.) Play the ball, not the man, as the forum rules recommend. By that, the moderators imply that your thread should have started something like this.

"What is moral government theory? Is it sound doctrine or is it heretical? Can anyone explain it with authority?"

4.) Pray about it.
5.) If you have a peace about it...post.

In my possibly flawed opinion your original thread did not "Play the ball." You played the man. By doing so, you get glancing responses and end up frustrated. In my case, I responded with the intention to protect Ravenhill, protect his memory, and continue to cherish the wealth of Godly wisdom he left in his wake. There is no reason of value to bring Ravenhill under the scope. I am of the opinion that Systematic Theologies need to be discussed objectively and with a severity of acuteness that I have rarely seen afforded to any kind of internet forum.

Had you framed your original question as mentioned above, I personally may have not replied to this thread. The reason being is that my conscience would dictate a complete and full attention to the subject. A subject like what you mentioned (when one poster listed its main points) would take upwards of days to write a solid, biblical, and holistic response to.

Thank you Greg and all others. I did realize my mistake in my original question and in the future I will take that into consideration. Also, thank you all for giving me something to look at and study concerning this theory. I will struggle, for now, concerning those that hold this theory as to whether or not they were truly saved, but at least you guys (and maybe gals, I don't know) gave me information I was looking for. God Bless you and thank you for condescending to my questions.