Jesse Morrell Debates Sye Ten Bruggencate on Calvinism, Sovereignty, Abortion, Open Theism

FREE BOOK

I am giving away a free copy of the classic book, “Objections to Calvinism As It Is” by Randolph Foster! I pray that this blesses your life.

You’ll also receive in the same email two other theological books that I won’t name, just to spark your curiosity some more.

And lastly, you’ll also be subscribed to our free email newsletter and will receive biblical articles and great content from time to time.

Name(required)

Email(required)

Submit

Δ

JESSE MORRELL DEBATES SYE TEN BURGGENCATE
On Calvinism, Sovereignty, Abortion, Open Theism, etc.

It seems that I continue to rattle the devil’s nest as the attacks from Calvinists continue to come against me. (For those of you who don’t know, Calvinism is a teaching that says Jesus did not die for everyone, God does not want everyone to repent and be saved, etc. It claims to be ‘the Gospel’ but is really an utter denial of the Gospel. It is a counterfeit gospel or “another gospel”). 

If only I had a dollar for every time that a Calvinist called me a heretic! I truly take this as a compliment given how horrible their theological system truly is. I consider it a high honor to contradict Calvinism. I know I don’t win many Calvinist friends and they certainly do not act very friendly towards me but I praise God that many have told me that they have come out of Calvinism as a result of my efforts.

Now, it all started when one of My Facebook friends posted on his facebook my documentary “Beyond Augustine” about how Augustine brought Gnostic doctrine into the church by denying  free will.

He wrote:

All my Christian friends should definitely watch this video.

And he posted this link:

The first comment that he received was from Sye Ten Bruggencate. Now, Sye is a Reformed Apologist that I have recently become familiar with. He is becoming popular in Calvinist street preaching circles for his “Presuppositional Apologetics.” He is relatively new to the scene as far as I can tell and has a lot of Calvinists promoting him and puffing him up as a great debater.

Presuppositional Apologetics is actually something I have been using and teaching for nearly ten years now. It stems back to Calvinists like Greg Bahnsen and Cornelius Van Til. But I have known many non-Calvinist open air preachers over the years who are also Presuppositional in their approach. It is not a substitute for the gospel but it is a very helpful tool to use in the open air to always be ready to give a reason for the faith.

After Sye started launching his public attack against me, his other Calvinist Facebook friends decided to jump in to throw mud at me too.

My friend who posted the video said:

What’s funny is most of the responded to my page, are not my friends. They must be his. Hopefully some of them learned a bit from your video.

After reading all of their accusations against me I decided to jump into the mix and engage Sye in a theological debate. I choose the issue of abortion because of a Calvinist film right now about abortion that Sye To be honest, with all of the hype Calvinists have had about Sye I expected a bit more from him. He is good with regurgitating Greg Bahnsen when debating with Atheists, but he did not do very well at all in a theological debate in my opinion. I was very disappointed with his reasoning abilities, comprehension of scripture  and debating skills.

In our discussion he contradicted himself, posts a slanderous article against me, built and attacked straw-men, had unfounded presuppositions and made personal attacks. He also had a habit of ignoring my points and trying to completely change topics whenever he was unable to respond to my rebuttals.

However, as Sye is getting a lot of attention in street preaching circles nowadays I thought it would be good to post our public Facebook debate here on my blog for the edification of the body of Christ. Believers have already told me that they were blessed by my interaction with Sye.

One man wrote me and said:

I just read your debate with Sye and I really like your responses, It helped me a lot and I appreciate it! I really like how you break everything down so simply and it just makes sense

Another man wrote:

You did great. Some people are rethinking Calvinism today. I am certain.

So without any further ado, here is the debate I had with Sye Ten Bruggencate on Facebook and the entire discussion starting with Sye’s first comment and all of the comments from his Calvinist pals. Their comments are quoted with italics and indentation whereas my remarks are normal.

Sye Ten Bruggencate: Do you support the theology of Jesse Morrell?

Sye Ten Bruggencate: (The Heretical Theology of Jesse Morrell of Open Air Outreach) http://www.puregospeltruth.com/the-heretical-theology-of-jesse-morrell-of-open-air-outreach.html

Ryan James: You know it’s funny I was gonna ask Sye if he had heard of this guy. Many street preachers post his stuff because there are some helpful hints but seems to b full pelagian.

Wayne DeVito: There ain’t no seems, he’s a full on pelagian.

Tyree Griffie: I believe Fr. Andrew Damick makes similar claims about Augustine.

Sye Ten Bruggencate: I just want to know if I need to purge my friend’s list a tad.

Adam D. Robles: I remember listening to some of his street preaching tips…and thinking that they were great. then i heard him talking about the great ministry of Kerrigan Skelly….and well…lets just say i instantly knew where he was coming from.

Isaiah Rivera Sye: thanks for the share, very good article.

Tom Brewer: Morrell says God doesn’t know the future because free will hasn’t created it yet.

Ernest Es Timea Talmaci: He is a heretic !

Hugh McBryde; Had a hard time proving it without going to early church History. Do we now see Ignatius as Scripture?

Hugh McBryde: He’s preaching to the “Low Information” Christian. Don’t say this stuff to a Calvinist while they’re eating, they’ll inhale a meat ball because they’ll laugh so hard.

Robert Parker: Jesse is a straight up heretic. He doesn’t even believe God knows the future. Psalms 139:14, 16 NKJV

I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Marvelous are Your works, And that my soul knows very well. Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed. And in Your book they all were written, The days fashioned for me, When as yet there were none of them.

Garrett Dunlap Well: Sye, you may purge me of your friend list. I for one am sick of your arrogance, and your foolish ignorance that follows such a hypocritcal belief as calvinism. I don’t follow goats, I follow The Shepherd.

Robert Parker: Sorry Garret you are following yourself.

Robert Parker: Anyone can sit there and say I choose God. Is a self serving arrogant individual. And thinks he is better then most people because he choose God and they didn’t. So garret in his mind he gets the Glory because he choose God.. Sorry the God of the Bible gets the glory not you.Repent Garry.

David Virgil Wadhams: Why is Nick Kroll commenting on the bible?

Sye Ten Bruggencate: //”Well, Sye, you may purge me of your friend list.”//

Um, you are not on my friend’s list.

Moroni Lopez Jessop: I’ve don’t know anything about this guy, but he makes sense. Obviously, I am neither a fan of Augustine nor Calvin.

Travis Lee Sye: why would you purge people who disagree with you? I’m a Calvinist, I agree with you, but why unfriend someone based on their theology? A Facebook friends list is not the same as fellowshipping with someone..

Sye Ten Bruggencate: //”Sye, why would you purge people who disagree with you?”//

I don’t. I purge heretics and those who promote them.

Isaiah Rivera: Open theism is just so contradictory to scripture. I need to watch a couple of debates to see how on earth open theists “justify” there position.

Andy Fordham: They really don’t justify their position.They take certain Scriptures out of balance with the rest of what Scripture has to say

Victor Burgos: All I could think of while hearing this man was “did he get rid of the book of Romans on his Bible”?

Hugh McBryde: I find it fascinating that in the Old Testament, “Free Will” is only used once to refer to the choices of men & it’s by a Pagan King.

Jesse Morrell: (“The Heretical Theology Of Jesse Morrell” Addressed & Refuted – The Attacks of Josef Urban) http://openairoutreach.wordpress.com/2011/04/12/the-heretical-theology-of-jesse-morrell-addressed-refuted/

Jesse Morrell: See  also Why I Am Not A Calvinist:

https://biblicaltruthresources.wordpress.com/2013/07/30/why-i-am-not-a-calvinist-jesse-morrell/

Jesse Morrell: And since it was brought up: Is Open Theism Biblical:

https://biblicaltruthresources.wordpress.com/2013/08/06/is-open-theism-biblical-what-is-foreknowledge-can-god-change-the-future-jesse-morrell/

Jesse Morrell: I plan on making many theological teaching videos on these issues for YouTube, on things like Calvinism, open theism, atonement, original sin, perfection, etc.

I actually used to be a Calvinist but came out of it 10 years ago. It makes God the author of sin. And really makes Him unjust, unloving, and unmerciful by biblical standards.

Hugh McBryde: “I am the LORD, I do ALL these things’

Sye Ten Bruggencate Robert: I ask you again: Do you support the theology of Jesse Morrell?

Jesse Morrell: If he does, it is because God predestined him to and he cannot help it…

Sye Ten Bruggencate: If he does, I’m going to delete him.

Jesse Morrell: That’s because God predestined you to.

Sye Ten Bruggencate: I have no problem with that.

Jesse Morrell: Sye, if you were on my friend list, I would have deleted you first.

Jesse Morrell: Right, because God predestined you to have no problem with that. But I have been predestined to reject Calvinism. I have no free will in the matter, so don’t be upset with me about it.

Sye Ten Bruggencate: Well, you didn’t have the chance, cause you friend requested me and I did not accept.

Jesse Morrell: Don’t recall that.

Sye Ten Bruggencate: Who is upset Jesse?

Sye Ten Bruggencate: I do.

Jesse Morrell: You seem upset that one of your friends might support my theology.

Hugh McBryde: Like he Predestined you to ignore Isaiah Jesse Morrell?

Sye Ten Bruggencate: Nope, not in the least. I just simply will not have friends who do.

Jesse Morrell: Hey on this topic, I wonder why Calvinists are so upset that Babies are Murdered at abortion clinics? Did not God eternally decree that they would be aborted and none can resist His eternal decrees? In that case, to oppose abortion would be to oppose the sovereign will of God. And to pray for God’s will to be done on earth is to pray for babies to be aborted. (That’s called an internal critique)

Seems like an internal contradiction within the system of Calvinism for Calvinists to be so upset and mourn over abortion…

Sye Ten Bruggencate: It would seem that way, if you did not know what you were talking about.

Jesse Morrell: If you don’t think Calvinism teaches that abortion is God’s will, you don’t know what you are talking about.

Jesse Morrell: Hear it from the horses mouth:

John Calvin said, “The first man fell because the Lord deemed it meet that he should.”

John Calvin said, “Creatures are so governed by the secret counsel of God, that nothing happens but what he has knowingly and willingly decreed.”

John Calvin said, “Whatever things are done wrongly and unjustly by man, these very things are the right and just works of God.”

Now, lets apply these quotes to abortion.

John Calvin said, “Abortion happens because the Lord deemed it meet that they should.”

John Calvin said, “Abortionists are so governed by the secret counsel of God, that no abortion happens but what he has knowingly and willingly decreed.”

John Calvin said, “Whatever abortions are done wrongly and unjustly by man, these very abortions are the right and just works of God.”

That is the Calvinist doctrine of Sovereignty.

Sye Ten Bruggencate: If you think that things can happen outside of God’s plan then you believe in a different “god.”

Jesse Morrell: If you believe that abortion was God’s eternal will, then one of us certainly does worship a false god!

Jesse Morrell: Jer_19:5 They have built also the high places of Baal, to burn their sons with fire for burnt offerings unto Baal, which I commanded not, nor spake it, neither came it into my mind:

Jer_32:35 And they built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire unto Molech; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin.

Sye Ten Bruggencate: Did God plan that Judas betray Jesus Jesse?

Jesse Morrell: We are on the topic of abortion. Don’t change topics. We can discuss Judas another time and how there were no Old Testament prophecies that he needed to fulfill, but Jesus used Scriptures in the ecbatic sense to apply them to Judas and not the telic sense.

Sye Ten Bruggencate: (You really should watch the film by the way, that verse is quoted in it)

Sye Ten Bruggencate: //”We can discuss Judas another time”//

How convenient. Cheers!

Jesse Morrell: Given these verses, was it God’s irresistible and eternal plan for Israel to sacrifice their babies to false gods?

Jer_19:5 They have built also the high places of Baal, to burn their sons with fire for burnt offerings unto Baal, which I commanded not, nor spake it, neither came it into my mind:

Jer_32:35 And they built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire unto Molech; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin.

Sye Ten Bruggencate: Nothing happens outside of God’s plan Jesse, nothing.

Jesse Morrell: Oh here’s my article about how Judas was saved and there were no Old Testament prophecies about his betrayal: https://biblicaltruthresources.wordpress.com/2013/06/01/judas-was-saved-and-lost-his-salvation-nor-was-judas-eternally-doomed-to-destruction-to-fulfill-prophecy-as-there-was-no-old-testament-prophecy-judas-needed-to-fulfill/

How convenient!

Jesse Morrell: ” Nothing happens outside of God’s plan Jesse, nothing.”

Well wait a minute. When I said that Calvinism teaches that abortion is God’s plan and that Calvinists mourning abortion and opposing abortion is them opposing God’s plan, you said that I did not know what I was talking about.

Now you say abortion is God’s plan. So apparently I did know what I was talking about!

You are either dishonest or confused or both. At the least your worldview is internally inconsistent.

Sye Ten Bruggencate You are a snake Jesse. You said: “Seems like an internal contradiction within the system of Calvinism for Calvinists to be so upset and mourn over abortion…”

Then I said: “It would seem that way, if you did not know what you were talking about..”

Sye Ten Bruggencate: The record is clear. You must twist words to support your position. Repent while you still can.

Jesse Morrell: You are a snake Sye as you just taught that every aborted baby was aborted because of the plan of God. And yes, by saying it would seem that way if I don’t know what I am talking about, you are implying that I did not know what I was talking about by saying Calvinists are opposing the will of God by opposing abortion. Then you said abortion is God’s plan, so you admit I did know what I was talking about.

Hugh McBryde: Yes. Abortion is God’s plan Jesse Morrell. If the book of our days is written, that is also.

Jesse Morrell: Sye, nothing was twisted. You contradicted yourself.

Jesse Morrell: Here is a logical syllogism for you:

Major Premise: Abortion is the plan of God

Minor Premise: Calvinists oppose and mourn abortion

Corollary: Therefore, Calvinists oppose and mourn the plan of God

Jesse Morrell: You keep asserting this presupposition that nothing can happen that is not God’s plan and therefore abortion is God’s plan. But this question has been conveniently overlooked:

Given these verses, was it God’s irresistible and eternal plan for Israel to sacrifice their babies to false gods?

Jer_19:5 They have built also the high places of Baal, to burn their sons with fire for burnt offerings unto Baal, which I commanded not, nor spake it, neither came it into my mind:

Jer_32:35 And they built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire unto Molech; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin.

Hugh McBryde: Here’s a question for you Jesse Morrell: Do you subscribe to Infant Innocence?

Jesse Morrell: People like to change the topic when they are losing the debate. Let’s debate infant innocence elsewhere like my theology discussion group (Calvinism, Arminianism, Pelagianism, Wesleyanism, Finneyism, Lutheranism…): https://www.facebook.com/groups/603735202991980/

Hugh McBryde LOL. Or cut to the chase. Bwahaha..

Jesse Morrell: Sye, that’s just it. My initial critique showing an internal contradiction within the system of Calvinism remains. Calvinists rejoice over the atonement as that was God’s plan. But they don’t rejoice over abortion though they say that too is God’s plan. That is a clear cut contradiction. We should rejoice whenever God’s will is done. Therefore, if  abortion is God’s will, we should rejoice and not mourn.

Now, it is one thing for God to incorporate into His plans the free will choices of His subjects and to get good even out of their sinful choices and quite another thing all together to say that God eternally and irresistibly decreed all their sins. It is also fallacious to take an example of God incorporating into His plans the sinful choices of men in the atonement and therefore conclude that all sin is His eternal and irresistible will.

Dale Stenberg: He apparently doesn’t understand what happened with Pharaoh either. All things are for the glory of God. Sad so many try to cram Gods character into their emotional boxes. Also, God didn’t create evil. Evil is the turning away from God. These things have been explained in detail, but I suppose that in order serve God we must understand and agree with everything He does. Does God not have the right to do whatever He wants with His creatures?

Jesse Morrell: Allow me to continue in syllogistic fashion.

Major Premise: Abortion is God’s plan.

Minor Premise: God hates abortion.

Corollary: Therefore, God hates His own plan.

Again,

Major Premise: Abortion is God’s plan.

Minor Premise: Calvinists pray for God’s will to be done.

Corollary: Therefore, Calvinists pray for babies to be aborted.

This is no straw-man of Calvinism. These are the logical conclusions granted your presupposition. To say that I am presenting a straw-man of Calvinism is itself straw-man.

These syllogisms are what you call “reductio ad absurdum.”

Jesse Morrell: Dale, apparently you do not understand what happened with Pharaoh (Does God Blind The Eyes and Harden the Hearts of Unbelievers? Is this Predestination?): https://biblicaltruthresources.wordpress.com/2013/07/31/does-god-blind-the-eyes-and-harden-the-hearts-of-unbelievers-is-this-predestination/

Jesse Morrell: And you said, “All things are for the glory of God.” Now, it is one thing to say that God can use all things for His glory and another thing all together to say that God irresistibly and eternally decreed all murder, abortion, child molestation, rape, etc.

So do you pray for God’s will to be done that He might be glorified? Well then, in your view if you are consistent, you pray for babies to be aborted, children to be molested, and women to be raped.

And they say that I am the heretic!

Sascha André Arndt: How can evil be defined as “turning away from God”, when according to calvinism it is the the consequence of God’s eternal decree? Plus Prior to God hardening the heart of Pharao, we see that Pharao hardened his heart multiple times himself. Just as we see in Romans, at some point God “gives them over to their vile desires”

Sye Ten Bruggencate: //”Sye, that’s just it. My initial critique showing an internal contradiction within the system of Calvinism remains. Calvinists rejoice over the atonement as that was God’s plan. But they don’t rejoice over abortion though they say that too is God’s plan.”//

Again, craftily twisting words. We do not rejoice over the crucifixion of Jesus although that went EXACTLY according to God’s plan (Acts 2:23).

//” That is a clear cut contradiction. We should rejoice whenever God’s will is done.”//

Please quote the verse Jesse. Do you rejoice at the crucifixion of Jesus Jesse?

//” Therefore, if the abortion is God’s will, we should rejoice and not mourn. “//

You must have missed the distinction between decretive and prescriptive will.

//”Now, it is one thing for God to incorporate into His plans the free will choices of His subjects and to get good even out of their sinful choices and quite another thing all together to say that God eternally and irresistibly decreed all their sins.”//

Indeed it is.

//” It is also fallacious to take an example of God incorporating into His plans the sinful choices of men in the atonement and therefore conclude that all sin is His eternal and irresistible will.”//

Was it God’s will that Judas betray Jesus Jesse (acts 2:23), and do you rejoice over that?

Sye Ten Bruggencate: //”How can evil be defined as “turning away from God”, when according to calvinism it is the the consequence of God’s eternal decree?”//

Was it evil for Judas to betray Jesus Sascha, and was that part of God’s eternal decree? (Acts 2:23)

Jesse Morrell: Sye,

I certainly do rejoice in the atonement of Jesus Christ. There is no reason why we should not rejoice in the will of God being done. It even pleased the Lord to bruise Him. Why should we not rejoice in the means of our salvation?

I do not believe that you do not rejoice in the atonement of Jesus Christ. I suspect that you have taken the position that you do not rejoice in the atonement only because if you did, there would be no reason in your system why you should not rejoice in abortion or any of God’s will being done. If everything in God’s will is going to result in His glory and sin is part of His plan, we should rejoice in sin because God will be glorified in it. You can call this a crafty twisting a words but it is really just a logical internal critique.

And I have not failed to understand the distinction between God’s revealed will and God’s secret will, as Piper likes to distinguish them. That is the doctrine that says God says one thing but secretly wills another – making God disingenuous in His commandments. He command obedience but secretly decrees disobedience and then punishes the disobedience! And this passes for justice in Geneva!

So your answer to the scriptures of God saying neither did He command it nor came it into His mind, is that this was only His prescriptive will or what He commanded and not what He actually decreed. In other words, God said that it did not come into His mind that they would do such a thing but REALLY (if you have your Calvinist glasses on) it was in the eternal mind of God that these actions were decreed! So God says one thing publicly about His will while He secretly wills another.

Regarding Judas, it was not part of His eternal decree though God did manage to use it and bring good out of it. There is nothing in scripture that says God decreed the betrayal “from eternity.” That is an example of Calvinists reading their own presupposition into a text like Acts 2:23.

But yes, I do rejoice that God was able to get good out of an evil betrayal like that of Judas. Why should I not rejoice?

Sye Ten Bruggencate: //”I certainly do rejoice in the atonement of Jesus Christ.”//

Of course, that was not my question.

Jesse Morrell: But getting back to my point, Calvinists believe that millions of babies are aborted and that this cannot be otherwise because God has eternally and irresistibly decreed it. Yet they mourn over abortion, thus mourning over the will of God. Yet you said that it only seems that way because I do not really understand what I am talking about. Then you changed your position and admitted that abortion is God’s will and that you mourn over it. So I have misunderstood and misrepresented nothing in my internal critique.

Sye Ten Bruggencate The record is clear.

Hugh McBryde: Buh Bye

Sye Ten Bruggencate: You have exposed yourself once again Jesse.

Sascha André Arndt: Of course it was evil for Judas to betray Jesus: “The Son of man goeth, even as it is written of him: but WOE unto that man through whom the Son of man is betrayed! good were it for that man if he had not been born.” (Matthews 26, 24) Why is Jesus making here a personal rebuke towards the betrayer, when, just as everything else, it’s part of God’s eternal decree in the act of saving the world from sin? And What does Acts 2:23 speak of in first place? About God’s PLAN to redeem the world from sin through the death and resurrection of the messiah, just as we see prophecied in Genesis. It is not talking about the sinful act of Judas betraying as God’s will.

Jesse Morrell: If we come to the Bible with child like faith and see that God says that they killed their babies contrary to His commandments and that it never even came into His mind that they would do such a thing, we would never come to the conclusion that God really did secretly will or plan for it to happen. That is a view you have to be taught according to the tradition of men, not something you learned from the Holy Spirit or personal Bible study. That is you interpreting a Bible passage with your Calvinist glasses on.

Jesse Morrell: What is evident is that you are not coherent in your worldview and the logical conclusions of your doctrine is heretical and abhorrent. You have exposed yourself Sye for believing that it is God’s irresistible and eternal will for millions of babies to be aborted. And you have exposed yourself for believing that every rape, molestation, murder, genocide, holocaust, etc, is the “plan of God” since you said nothing can happen but His plan.

      Sye Ten Bruggencate: //” It is not talking about the sinful act of Judas betraying as God’s will.”//

Ya might wanna read that again. “this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men.”

Then go to Acts 4:27,28: “for truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place.”

Sye Ten Bruggencate: Well Jesse, of the two of us, you believe in a “god” that is not sovereign, and does not know the future.

Jesse Morrell: You read too much into the word “predestined.” No where does it say eternally predestined or unconditional predestined or irresistibly predestined. A student predestines to be taught by a teacher at college, but that does not negate the free will of the teacher in teacher. It is a fallacy to interject your doctrine of eternal and irresistible decrees into these verses.

Sye Ten Bruggencate: You don’t subscribe to predestination Jesse, you subscribe to postdestination.

Jonathan Bradford: Wow. I had heard a bit about this Jesse Morrell guy before, but to see him in action is mind boggling. The mental gymnastics and intellectual knots are painful to follow. Just wow!

Sye Ten Bruggencate; Normally I would not engage him, but it is good for him to be exposed once in a while for those who might be reading along.

Jesse Morrell: You said that I do not believe in the Sovereignty of God and that God does not know the future. That is a straw-man. It would seem that way if you do not know what you are talking about.

I believe in the sovereignty of God even though the word isn’t there. God could take away free will whenever He wants. God permits or allows evil things to happen. God can get good out of evil events. And God will hold all men accountable and responsible. This is the Sovereignty of God. But this is not the Calvinist doctrine. Calvinism teaches that the Sovereignty of God means that He is the ultimate cause of all evil. True Sovereignty when properly understood does not make God the author or cause of evil.

And certainly God does know the future, God knows that the future has open possibilities and that is why He speaks of the future often in terms of what might happen or expresses surprise over how things turned out. If God did not know that the future has open possibilities, God would not be omniscient.

And saying that you either believe in ETERNAL and IRRESISTIBLE predestination or else you believe in POSTpredestination is what you call a false dilemma or a fallacious antithesis. I certainly believe that God can PREdestine an event before it happened without it being an eternal and irresistible decree. Even man can determine events before they happen.

I am very disappointed with your reasoning skills. If you develop your powers of thought you might come out of Calvinism.

Sye Ten Bruggencate: Does God know the future exhaustively Jesse?

Jesse Morrell: The theological gymnastics has been on Sye’s part. For example, taking a verse that says neither came it into my mind and twisting that to really mean that it was in His eternal mind that those murders were planned.

Jesse Morrell: Sye, you are again changing the topic. This is a habit of yours when you apparently don’t know how to respond to the comments and rebuttals at hand.

However, yes God exhaustively knows the future as it is. His omniscient mind perfectly corresponds to the nature of reality. Since contingency is an element of reality, the omniscient mind of God perfectly perceives it. God exhaustively knows all of the possibilities of the future and exhaustively foreknows all of the certainties of the future. What is open He knows as open and what is already determined He knows as determined, otherwise He would not be omniscient.

Jesse Morrell: I need to get working on my Atonement book but this discussion has been very enlightening. I admit that I’ve been very disappointed with your debating and reasoning skills. But I pray that God will help you and change your future and that you will come out of Calvinism.

Sye Ten Bruggencate //”God exhaustively knows all of the possibilities of the future and exhaustively foreknows all of the certainties of the future.”//

Does God know which choice you will freely make tomorrow?

Jesse Morrell: Yes, even I can tell you what my wife is going to do tomorrow. She is going to homeschool, cook, clean, etc. And if presented with chocolate ice cream or vanilla, she will pick chocolate every time. I can make absolute predictions about her because I know her character and circumstances and habits. How much more can God who knows all things make such predictions.

It is a straw-man to say that open theism denies that God knows the future – the debate is over what is the nature of the future that God knows? And it is a straw-man to say that open theism denies His foreknowledge, as the real debate is over how does He have this foreknowledge? It is an internal intuition or extrapolation?

The article you posted about me was slanderous as it said that I believe God just makes really good “guesses.” What a strawman!

Guess is not the right word! Extrapolation is.

Guess: “To conjecture; to form an opinion without certain principles or means of knowledge; to judge at random, either of a present unknown fact, or of a future fact.”

Extrapolation: “to predict by projecting past experience or known data”

You really ought to study someone’s theology better before you start attacking it. Here is a short and simple article to start with: (Is Open Theism Biblical? What is Foreknowledge? Can God Change the Future? Jesse Morrell) https://biblicaltruthresources.wordpress.com/2013/08/06/is-open-theism-biblical-what-is-foreknowledge-can-god-change-the-future-jesse-morrell/

Sye Ten Bruggencate: //”Yes, even I can tell you what my wife is going to do tomorrow”//

With certainty Jesse? Would it be impossible for her to die today?

Stephen Baker: Jesse, how would you twist this into your rationalistic system? 1 Samuel 2:22-25 “Now Eli was very old; and he heard all that his sons were doing to all Israel, and how they lay with the women who served at the doorway of the tent of meeting. He said to them, ‘Why do you do such things, the evil things that I hear from all these people? No, my sons; for the report is not good which I hear the LORD’S people circulating. If one man sins against another, God will mediate for him; but if a man sins against the LORD, who can intercede for him?’ But they would not listen to the voice of their father, for the LORD desired to put them to death.”

Jesse Morrell: I can make extrapolations based upon my finite understanding, how much more could God with His infinite. That question is irreverent because such a limitation would not apply to God. He can add fifteen years to Hezekiah’s life if He wants and He can cut off sinners before their time the Bible says.

Now, if you want something to think about: Can God change the future?

To be consistent, the position that limits God and denies His Sovereignty is the position that says God cannot change the future because everything must occur how He has eternally intuitively foreknown it to be.

But again, this discussion has been fun and enlightening but also disappointing. I expected more from you. But I really must get working on my Atonement book. If you want to debate again later, that would be nice.

Sye Ten Bruggencate: //”That question is irreverent”//

Hardly, it exposes the problem with your view, THAT is why you will not answer it.

Sye Ten Bruggencate: Are you free to do other than what God knows you will do tomorrow Jesse?

Sye Ten Bruggencate: //”I really must get working on my Atonement book”//

How convenient.

Jesse Morrell: Sye, I answered the question because the analogy was meant to communicate how God can extrapolate what I am going to do tomorrow and your question implied a limitation on my mind which does not apply to God’s. Therefore the question was irrelevant the question as it only pertained to me in the analogy and not to God who was being discussed.

But yes I am free to do contrary to the foreknowledge of God but if the circumstances that tended in a certain direction change, upon which God’s foreknoweldge the based, the foreknowledge of God would change accordingly. For example, God foreknew that He was going to destroy Nineveh in forty days because he planned it. He did not lie to them. But when He changed His plans and thus changed the future He evidently changed what He foreknew about the future.

What is convenient is how you changed the topic to open theism when you were losing the debate on abortion. I understand that you wanted to get off the defensive and unto the offensive, but it was nevertheless convenient but I generously allowed you to pursue a new topic even while you did not satisfy the previous.

Klw Wallace: Jesse Morrell:

“Corollary: Therefore, God hates His own plan.”

“Corollary: Therefore, Calvinists pray for babies to be aborted.”

“These syllogisms are what you call “reductio ad absurdum.””

Yes, they are. Your conclusions are absurd.

Jesse Morrell: And Stephen, your point on 2 Sam. 2:22-25 is fully adressed by Adam Clarke:

“Because the Lord would slay them – The particle כי ki, which we translate because, and thus make their continuance in sin the effect of God’s determination to destroy them, should be translated therefore, as it means in many parts of the sacred writings. See Noldius’s Particles, where the very text in question is introduced: Sed non auscultarunt, etc., Ideo voluit Jehova eos interficere; “But they would not hearken, etc.; Therefore God purposed to destroy them.” It was their not hearkening that induced the Lord to will their destruction.”

Jesse Morrell: Klw, the conclusions are absurd. That was the design and intention. But they were logical given the premise of Calvinism. None can show a break down in the logic of the Syllogism. Simply saying that they were absurd, implying that they were illogical, is an accusation but not an argument.

Klw Wallace: Ah! Jessee. I see you employ the “preemptive like” tactic!

Klw Wallace: No. They are not “logical”. They are non sequiturs. You cann jump from your premise and land on your conclusions

Jesse Morrell Well, I agree. The logical conclusions of the Calvinist premise is absurd. You just consented to my point in your post.

Klw Wallace: No. Again. These are YOUR conclusions.

Jesse Morrell: Actually, it is a strawman to say that they are a non sequitur. All I did was merge the major premise with the minor premise to come to the conclusion – aka a proper syllogism.

Klw Wallace: Every time someone answers you – even if by direct statement, you just claim “it’s a straw man”?

Jesse Morrell: Well Klw, if those are not your conclusions I am glad that you are not a Calvinist. Other Calvinists on this thread have already admitted that all abortion is God’s plan and that God planned it for His glory.

Jesse Morrell: Just got an encouraging message: “Hey thanks for the friend request. I just read your debate with Sye and I really like your responses, It helped me a lot and I appreciate it! I really like how you break everything down so simply and it just makes sense haha”

I agree with Sye that this debate was worth it, not because I expected Sye to change His mind but for the benefit and edification of those reading it…

Sye Ten Bruggencate //”But yes I am free to do contrary to the foreknowledge of God but if the circumstances that tended in a certain direction change, upon which God’s foreknoweldge the based, the foreknowledge of God would change accordingly.”//

I think that speaks for itself folks QED.

Jesse Morrell: QED… It is actually self-evident that when God said Nineveh would be overthrown in forty days, that He foreknew this because He had planned it. To say He did not foreknow this would mean that He did not know His own plan. And to say it wasn’t His plan is to say that He lied to Nineveh when He said it would happen. It would mean that when Nineveh “believed God” that they believed a lie. And it is also evident that once God changed His mind or repented about destroying them, as it explicitly states, that He consequently foreknew that He wouldn’t destroy them. Thus His foreknowledge changed based upon His change of mind as His foreknowledge in this instance was contingent upon His plans. If God’s foreknowledge, in many cases, arises from His knowledge of His own plans, it stands to reason that when His mind is changed or when He repents that His foreknowledge changes in correspondence with the reality that He knows.

To say that God cannot change the future, change His plans and consequently change His foreknowledge is to limit the infinite and to contradict what is clearly seen in the Bible.

————

At this point, Sye stopped engaging me in debate all together. He than eventually posted:

Jesse is a heretic and I will not be friends with people who promote him. Cheers

To this I said: “Jesse is a heretic” says the guy who says God planned every murder, genocide, rape, and molestation in history… In other words, God is the author of sin as it originated in His eternal mind and will… Beware of Sye and anyone who claims to be a Calvinist.

Sye then decided to just spam the discussion with copy and paste verses and no longer engage in direct dialog. He posted:

Isaiah 45:7 I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the LORD, do all these things.

Lamentations 3:38 Is it not from the mouth of the Most High that both calamities and good things come?

Amos 3:6 When a trumpet sounds in a city, do not the people tremble? When disaster comes to a city, has not the LORD caused it?

I responded:

Sye,

Using verses like ” Isaiah 45:7 I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the LORD, do all these things.” and the other ones that you posted, you failed to make a very important distinction between moral wickedness and physical evil or calamity. These verses are talking about calamity aka physical evil. When God says things like He thought to bring evil against a sin, the evil spoken of is destruction. So your verses do not prove your point. It is a fallacious argument – a non sequitur.

This is from my book:

“Calvinists will even try to use the Bible to teach that God is the Creator of sin. They misuse Isaiah 45:7 which says, “I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.” The Hebrew word used for evil means “calamity.”57 Calamity is physical evil. It does not mean that God created moral evil. God talks about bringing “evil” or calamity to a city to punish their sins (Neh. 13:18; Jer. 21:10; 25:29; Amos 3:6). God did not say, “I make righteousness and create evil.” Evil is not contrasted with righteousness but is contrasted with peace, because the evil referred to is calamity. God gives peace to the righteous but God destroys the wicked. That is because God never wanted sin to occur but wants men to be righteous. God told His people to “put away evil” from among them (Deut. 13:5; 17:7, 12; 19:19; 21:21; 22:21; 22:22, 24; 24:7; Jdg. 20:13; Ecc. 11:10; Isa. 1:16). This command shows that evil was not God’s will for them. God wants us to be holy all of the time. God wants us to be sinful none of the time.”

Here is yet another set of syllogisms, showing the logical absurdities of Calvinism, which I foreknow or predict that Sye won’t be able to refute (just like he failed to refute the other syllogisms showing that in Calvinism Calvinists are upset with God’s plan, God hates His own plan, and Calvinists pray for babies to be aborted):

Major Premise: Sin is God’s plan.
Minor Premise: God’s plans are based on His wisdom.
Corollary: Sin is God’s wisdom.

Major Premise: Sin is God’s plan.
Minor Premise: God’s plans cannot be better.
Corollary: Nothing is better than sin when it occurs.

Let’s suppose for the sake of argument that in the beginning God decreed all things, including sin. And that in all of His decrees He is guided by His infinite wisdom so that He chooses the best possible plan. Any change in His plan would be for the better or the worse and since God is infinite this cannot happen. So the plan God decreed in the beginning is the absolute best plan that there is.

Now suppose what Sye says is true and that the holocaust of millions of babies in abortion is God’s plan. That means that there is nothing better than the holocaust of millions of babies in abortion whenever abortion occurs. It means that God prefers the slaughter of innocent babies over saving their lives as that is what God decreed when He easily could have decreed the opposite! It means that sin is better than righteousness in every instance of its occurrence!

So given Sye’s premise that all abortions, rapes, murders, molestations, genocides, etc, are God’s plan:

1. Calvinists are upset with God’s plan.
2. Calvinists are upset with God’s plan because God decreed that they would be.
3. God hates His own plan.
4. Calvinists pray for the abortion of babies when they pray “thy will be done.”
5. Sin is better than righteousness in all instances of its occurrence.
6. God prefers sin over holiness in every instance that it occurs.
7. God prefers the slaughter of millions of babies in abortion over saving their lives.
8. Nothing is better than the slaughter of millions of babies in abortion whenever it occurs.

It doesn’t take a genius to see that Calvinism is reduced to absurdity, blasphemy on God’s character, and worthy of all mockery, ridicule and scorn. And according to Calvinism, I was predestined to say all of this and I could not do otherwise.

____________________________________________

The Natural Ability of Man: A Study On Free Will & Human Nature by Jesse Morrell is an exhaustive theological volume that defends the Christian doctrine of man’s free will against the false Gnostic/Calvinist doctrine of man’s natural inability.

This volume explains the truth of man’s freedom of choice in light of Church history and other doctrines like total depravity, regeneration, atonement, the baptism of the Holy Spirit, predestination, repentance, faith, the believers security, original sin, etc. One Bible teacher called this book “the most comprehensive exposition on man’s natural ability in print.”

690 pages

$20.00

To Order: Click Here

WHAT OTHERS HAVE SAID ABOUT THIS BOOK:

“Jesse Morrell has provided much needed evidence that man is capable to meet his obligations to God. He has compiled evidence from historical Christian leaders, Biblical declarations, and the compelling demands of man’s conscience and reason. An honest mind will see the truth with clear conviction.”

Dennis Carroll,

President, Gospel Truth Ministries

 “By appealing to Scripture, logic, common sense, examples from civil government, and some of the greatest minds from Church history, Jesse Morrell has annihilated every excuse the careless sinner has to sin.  He also has torn down the last refuge for religious sinners, which is the Augustinian/Calvinistic doctrine of inability.”

Brother Jed Smock,

President, The Campus Ministry USA  

“Jesse Morrell has written a complete apologetic for natural ability. His research rivals and exceeds most doctoral thesis. The primacy of Scripture and logic in proving his points, makes this work a must read for those interested in defending God’s justice in eternal punishment.”

Dave Coke, M.A.

“It is Biblical truths like the ones found in The Natural Ability of Man that vindicate the character of God and put full responsibility for sin upon man, where it belongs.  To deny free will is to blame God for sin, which is blasphemy in the highest regard.  Christians everywhere would do well to consider the truths found in this book with a willing heart and an open Bible.”

Evangelist Kerrigan Skelly,

President of PinPoint Evangelism

“The Natural Ability of Man is a well-researched, powerful, and readable book that clears away confusion and makes this vital Biblical truth crystal clear. The author effectively demolishes dangerous errors that have grown up around this doctrine. It will be a very valuable tool for Biblical evangelism and discipleship.”

Pastor Mike Wiley,

Hope Church, Oregon

“Jesse Morrell’s new book ‘The Natural Ability of Man’ is one of his finest works next to his “Vicarious Atonement” booklet!  The language is simple and understandable by even the new believer.  I’ve been using nearly all of Jesse’s works i.e.: videos, DVD’s and booklets (especially his Atonement Series) in my YWAM School of Evangelism (SOE) here in the Philippines in preparing my missionaries-in-training in their theology as preachers and evangelists.  I so appreciate Jesse taking the time to put all of these important doctrines in print during this generation.”

Mitch Metzger,

Missionary with YWAM Philippines

“The Natural Ability of Man by Jesse Morrell is so comprehensive that it may be the standard in theology for many years to come. It is the most comprehensive exposition of man’s natural ability in print. It could be the primary “go to” text on the subject for many years to come.”

Dean Harvey,

Pastor, Author, & Itinerate Bible Teacher

“In a day when it is common to hear statements like, “God only gave us the law to show us that we cannot keep it” or “We all have to sin every day” or “Even repentance and faith are not our choices but God’s work in our lives,” Man’s Natural Ability provides a necessary and refreshing rebuttal to these common misconceptions. Jesse Morrell’s Man’s Natural Ability is thorough and well documented, giving abundant Biblical and historical references to support the truth of the natural ability of man to repent, keep God’s commandments, and persevere in a relationship with God. I recommend Man’s Natural Ability as a welcome refutation to the false doctrine of the natural inability of man.’

Michael R. Saia, author of

“Does God Know the Future?”

and “Understanding the Cross.”

Advertisement