Slick Morrell Debate aftershow

Technical Setup and Opening Banter

All right. See buddy comes in here. Think I'm gonna do is going to get a drink of water. I have this mic on so what I can do is walk and go get water and I'll do. I'm really thirsty. So I'm gonna get some water.

I know you guys can see me and you can hear me and things like that. So what I'm gonna do if I have this is portable. I'm gonna continue to talk a little bit people kind of come into this room be right back, you know I'm gonna go get some water.

Talk to my wife too. And Hold on. Do you guys just let you know? Oh, no. No the headset starting to go battery. I'll have to use a different setup here. Yep, that's what's happening. It's it has about a two hours straight.

There we go. All right change the setting. Okay, I'll be back in a second, okay, how you guys doing. I'm gonna quick get away from this thing. The battery's dying on it. So I'm gonna go to the webcam.

Here we go. All right, you guys hear me. Yes, bass down. Yeah, I got to use the webcam. So my voice might not be as pristine the battery is going up good timing to there's going on. Okay. Whoo. So 15 viewers.

Leave you guys in here. What do you guys think? You guys even there you can say something. Vincent give me a sec. All right. Yeah, I just felt like I'm on the Catholic.

Hey Calvin's client. How you doing? Hey, man, how's it going? It's going man.

Just let everybody know. Everybody's you know, people who like Jesse. Just click the link you can get in you can talk. I'm gonna kick you. You know, it's not a big deal.

So I thought it was a pretty strange it was much different everyone turned out. The comics like the comment section was going crazy. Yeah, Calvin is finds the blame. I Think well. Because I was even disagreeing with some of the Calvinists and there's some of the Protestants because I I just made the comment that I Some people will say that we pay our sin debt in hell and I'm like, I don't like that.

That language is a little strange to me. Yeah, because it's in a different sense. It's like it's it's the penalty the just just punishment for sin. It's not as if We're paying it off or something like that.

It's just it sounds a little a little weird. Right, I think I think what Jesse was doing was he was conflating as you said Matt he's conflating the cancellation of sin.

With the forgiveness of sin, right? He had to.

Sin Debt, Forgiveness, and Colossians 2:14

Yeah, and and that can that was that made the whole thing a straw. This entire Position was a straw man tonight.

Yeah, he what I think happened is he saw an opportunity In his mind to find an inconsistency. He hammered it. I kept answering him and trying to show it. I tried different ways. And he just refused to.

To concede. Well, he can't concede because of his position. You know, I mean, that's what this that's what it says either way in Colossians 2 14. You know when it talks about if it's a sin debt that's canceled.

That's a problem for him. If it's the law and then it's the dietary law.

I've actually heard that and that's. It is a diet. Later into.

They're going later into the context. And they're ignoring verse 13. Yeah, right, right. Thirteen's the killer part and that's what I tried to you know I was waiting for to see how far he's gonna hang himself.

And then when I showed him it's having given us all our Transgressions having canceled in a bet. Those are connected by the part of symbols that the ongoing action in the present tense, that's what's going on.

And. If that's the dietary laws, then how is that a sinful issue? Because it has to do an issue of the moral law, which is the New Testament now. So it is interpretation. It can't work according to tax.

Try to show it to him.

Right. I was a little disappointed When it came to the discussion of first Peter. That wasn't really touched upon much at all.

Is it to 24? Yeah. Oh, yeah. Well that that's a problem for him, you know. And every time I asked him the question he avoided it.

That's what I was actually thinking that's What he really needs to deal with. But I also is so.

Was the opening statements for five minutes? Yeah, roughly. Yeah, you know, he just gave his position. I just kind of responded. It wasn't a big a deal. But you know, I went to first Peter to 24 several times and showed him.

This is what it says. He bore our sin. What does that mean? And you know what he would do my opinion is take off in a different direction and then just talk fast for a long time. Come on get back to the issue and deal with the issue.

What does the text say? You know. Our sin in his body. What does that mean? He says he you know, I like he did with so many verses he would just Change the wording a little bit constantly. And at the end.

This guy's preaching a false gospel. Yeah, that was that was really confusing because he would say oh snow. It's the fruit. But if if you sin you lose your salvation, so I was like is keeping the law doing it or is is that a fruit?

Or was he just kept going back and forth? I thought on that.

That's where I went to the issue of coveting, you know, I got my feet here. I wish I could articulate it better but coveting is an issue of attitude because he said repentance is an attitude change coveting an attitude.

That's all about that. So you're keeping the law by not coveting. He right keeping a salvation by his works by his ability to keep the law.

Yeah, I wanted to see him show where? Justification isn't a one-time action. Judging from Romans 5 1. Right. What I want to see. Right. And in Rome and Romans 4 6 or 8, you know. We were going crazy in the comment section about this.

But when Paul says blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin. As you may their denial of the Possibility and potentiality. There's no there's no potential and I believe the faith in Romans 4 5 is.

Or the belief in Romans 4 5 is present tense as well. So it's like the the ongoing faith that says that justifies that were justified through.

Right. Oh, yeah, I mean it's there's so many ways to deal with this. I mean Sheesh. But boy, I'll tell you he's good at just at conflating begging the question confusing the issues.

Yeah, he didn't like there's so many things. He didn't like Isaiah 53. I wanted to see what he had to say about that. But I wasn't expecting much.

But at least at the end. Anybody's gonna watch that long. At least at the end. He's saying yeah. I mean come on think about it. You get a little buzz just a little buzz. You've lost your salvation.

What oh I was like, I don't know what I don't want to know how many times I've lost my salvation.

I mean a little buzz means you're a drunkard now. What I mean misappropriated that verse. Let's talk about those abiding at the unregenerate. But if you do this. And then the issue of man of Romans 7 that's not it's not Paul.

It's even the Paul saying me me me me. It's not Paul. Wow.

Yeah, especially in the last verse of that. Well, it was he saying it's not Paulards.

He says not a Christian either. Yeah, like there's any unregenerate state.

Okay, clearly Paul. But it's debated when the last verses is like a Destroyer of that because it's there's praise. There's praise given to God through Christ. And then he state he restates the purpose of that whole pericope.

Which is now what there's some people with them with the mind. They worship God they well, I forget the terminology he uses there. He serves God but with the flesh he serves sin but then in the next chapter, he says well, there's some people that their mind set on the things of the flesh and Their their flesh and their minor Working towards the same goal, which is according to the flesh, but that's not the Christian.

But well, it's just odd usually when people argue about that they're arguing about when Or Or you can go Martin Lloyd-Jones and come out with a really weird interpretation, but that's not even what it's about.

Right. I I have to I know Dan Wallace has a really good treatment of that That passage in his grammar is a really good treatment of that. I don't remember off the top of my head what he says, but He's like in order to be consistent He says you must hold this this this and this and it makes perfect sense when you look at it and it's yeah, I forgot what the conclusion was, but yeah, I got a post that or something his His handling of that passage is really he's really good because that's a can that is a confusing passage.

But yeah, that was that was that the Jesse was a little a little disappointing there. Yeah I Still don't fully comprehend government. I don't either actually. Yeah, I know that's historically like an Arminian Atonement the theory of the Atonement.

But I don't I don't really understand it. I think I think I know the government it's like Something government here. I don't know if it's exactly well. It's a race came to defend it. So now we'll understand.

I know whatever bonds and says I just have to do whatever. The opposite the opposite of that. So Government atonement theory.

Trying to get the link, right. So someone was sitting there having trouble with it and some of our letter links. I just modified it on the site. I.

Think another thing that popped up Was Okay was the Issue of if the atonement happened. Way way way back. Well, how how are you being forgiven. You know the doingness of time when things are applied when you believe so forth.

And I find that a pretty bad argument that's common. That's that's why I emphasize the the word by Oh, thank you whoever it was. Just like that's how horrible I sound it's just like God help me. You know, that's pretty much as bad as I just lost my salvation there.

Okay, get over that you lose your salvation if you get a little buzzed while you're drinking even if it's actually salvation.

Yeah, that's just so crazy I mean. And he's like I would just stay away from wine altogether. The people in the Bible never did. That they drink wine all the time.

I went to Proverbs 31 6th. It says give strong drink to the men is perishing. You know, he was like. So, okay, so you're keep it by this by that I just trying to work with him. But you know, I'd ask him a question.

He would just bolt off with no eight directions Jesse doubt. But man. The poor guy is keeping his salvation by his works. I.

Know it and you know, what's funny is that? Functionally speaking. I I live the kind of life He would in terms of like when it comes to drinking and smoking and doing drugs things like that I don't touch him not because I don't think that I could but I'm just doing it as a practical means because I just want.

To be healthy, you know sort, you know, that's that's one thing I do to be healthy is not doing drinking or smoking or something like that. I mean, I eat plenty of bad food, but in terms of drinking I've never had a single beer in my life.

So I'm technically living the life that he is but for him to turn around and say well. If you think that you can get a drink then your preacher you're teaching a license for immorality. I'm like, no if I wanted to be a moral I'd go ahead and start getting drunk.

Why wouldn't I? Because because I'm safe because I mean that's what he's saying. Well, you you you you he corrected himself a couple times and said, okay, Matt. You're not saying that it's okay to sin and still be saved.

But you're still teaching a license to immorality because you teach that you can so that you can be saved. We still want sin you can still sin and still be saved. It's like but then but that's not a license then because you're saying it's not okay.

Then that means you shouldn't be doing it. It's not that it's not possible. So and and and you know these. This reminds me of the debate with Dan corner that gene cook had back in 2006. And he and Dan corner and this guy argued very much the same way except this guy's a little bit more slightly more restrained.

Because he doesn't just go about accusing his opponents of immorality. Not necessarily anyway. But yeah, I just drove me crazy. I just I just tuned into the stream just a little bit ago like like in the last half an hour of the debate and I couldn't stop listening me and my brother here.

We're trying to go to sleep and then we're now we're wide awake. We can't we we heard that part of it. We're just you guys were going at it were like we can't we can't turn it off now. We want to see where this goes.

Oh. It was a great debate. It was it was an awesome. This is an awesome debate. I can't wait to listen to the rest of it. Well, you know.

Mm-hmm. But this idea, you know, I was I something I want to bring up. I said, you know, well, wait a minute. You get a little buzz. Then you've lost your salvation. Okay. You know once I had my gallbladder out and I was in the emergency room and they morphine me up and I had a bus.

Did I lose my salvation? I actually liked the buzz while I was on morphine. Am I my salvation because I liked it.

Well, I mean I get you should never go in for surgery altogether. I mean, I mean if you're if you're a repentant person. Then you just won't even told you won't even walk the line as he as he talked about.

But yeah I grew up in in a group of people very similar to these in Terms of sin and stuff like that talking about making sure you don't even come a little bit close to maybe Taking a risk that you might commit one particular sin, but these people.

They're not they're not holy. They're not any more pious or holy than anybody else. They're just as immoral and sinful. So when he thought when he says well, I don't think the christian life is a is a christian life where you sin every single day.

That means that he thinks he goes for A day, perhaps even multiple days and doesn't sin once he really actually thinks that. It's like oh my gosh, you you're so deluded. You go for 24 hour periods and you don't even sin one time not even once.

It's ridiculous and I confessed yeah, I got my problem. I said, oh you're not a real christian then. No, I don't you know, he said oh then you could. What was it how he said it. But then you could lose your salvation.

I said no I can't i'm i'm trusting in christ. I don't have to do what you do. You don't keep my law. It's so uh, it's so obvious. He's keeping the law to be safe. Oh.

And he ran like a scared little rabbit from romans chapter 7. Man I have heard so many people trying not even being sinless perfectionists. Talking about the condition of the secure the the security of the believer whether it's conditional or unconditional.

And whenever it comes to romans 7 they tend to say what this guy did and that is that? Well romans 7 is paul talking about himself before he was a believer. But everything he says in romans 7 is about the present tense.

It's all present tense. And what was his response? It was well, you know in certain, uh, greek translations that sometimes something that is said, uh in the present english, uh,. So I actually think he got it backwards.

Uh is is a past is a past thing and i'm like, okay. So so wait a minute. So romans 7 is a mistranslation then.

What what does that mean? It's a historical presence. It's a historical.

Right. Well, no, I I agree. He paul's talking about himself in the present tense. I I totally agree with that but then it's like he throws out that there may be a possible mistranslation. I don't know if he believes that he just threw out there that sometimes things are translated differently but either it's translated wrong or it's translated properly and you need to back up a little bit and figure out the context.

Is him talking about The past but he can't be talking about the past because he keeps talking about himself in the present, you know. Wretched man that I am who will deliver me from this body of death.

That's that's him right there.

But you know, he brought it out. It's young believer talking. Well, wait a minute. But the bible says young believers do not do any good.

That's what I'm saying. They can't it doesn't say if they can't. It just says they don't do it. They doesn't say if they can't. It's like well, they can't if all they can do is the bad thing.

And that's essentially the same thing too. Like it's it's not exactly the same thing, but it's just if if they don't do it then they don't do it like. You know, it's going to answer that that the question of ability later, but it says that they they don't do that.

I was telling them in the greek. It's a condition. A lot of people don't know this. The present tense is not exactly like our present tense. So if you were to say present tense is number one and in english a participle, you know I eat is present tense.

Number one. I am eating is number 10. You know this varying degree of of intensity of the formation of action in the country the continuation of action. The greek present is like a two or a three. There's an issue there of of continual continuation and so.

You know, this is I forget what content we're talking about. I am a little bit tired but this is what we're talking about in that thing about I forget what I'm talking about. Anyway, it's part of I totally forgot my brain's fried after all this time.

You've been debating for three hours continuous tense or present tense. Yes about what verse it was roman 7. Oh, oh. Three.

No, it was roman 7. Oh, was it roman 7? Oh, I thought you were referring to roman 3.

Yeah, well, you know, but it's the idea of continuation in something. You know, we struggle and but with him you're not allowed to struggle. You're you. You have to have victory. Victory is where it's at.

And I know but see that's where it becomes that's where it's it becomes more of a serious issue because Roman 7 is not teaching a license to immorality. It's meant as a as a chapter of comfort to believers Who are undergoing persecution who might be afraid that what if I do commit a sin and then and then I die.

It's it's meant as a comfort that listen. You're you're in pursuit of holiness. We know you don't want to sin, but don't worry because if you fail that's that was never the way you kept your salvation.

It's a matter of comfort for people that believe in jesse's theology in his soteriology. There's no comfort. No, and I can tell you but when I used to believe very close to what he did not quite but very close having nightmares.

That the end of the world was about to come in just a couple of seconds. And that I didn't have the chance to do what he did and pray a prayer to ask god to forgive me for that one. Sin, I committed a few seconds ago.

That's where his theology stops being something to that. We can sort of laugh at in our position right now to the point where people who actually believe in it their lives are just That they're they're sucked free of any kind of joy.

Uh, the this constant need this worry that will haunt your dreams even. Yeah, but you see for him though.

What has to happen to the heart where you say I don't sin anymore.

Well, that sounds easy. Just don't sin.

Just don't do it. Don't do it anymore. Wow.

He has a very. Why did I think of that just don't.

He he doesn't. Yeah I mean, I like I think he said something similar to that like well if I were you I would just stop sitting that way. He said something Very similar to that and I was like man if it was so simple Just don't sin.

Well, who's gonna have a problem with that? Just don't sin. I mean, it's as simple as that just don't sin. It's just like don't jump off a cliff. You know, you just you just don't do it. I thought roman 7 was saying that paul had two different laws in his body.

One is what's waging against the law of his mind and making him captive to the law of sin. Um, but I guess I can just Not be captive. Just don't be captive.

Yeah, it's like nike. Just don't do it. I'll be the same guy who said he never sins. Yes. Him and along with the rest of his followers they uh They all believe that they are sinless perfectionists. I think that's the right term, right?

Yep, right, you know when I was in montana, we had our debate and we had this uh, No cross-examination period which really needs to happen on this which wasn't a debate then. Yeah. But uh, I actually got to the place where I could still very clearly remember the uh, the group of people uh in the audience and how hostile they were to me and Side note.

That's the worst i've ever been treated by any group. Including atheists in the in the crowd that group treated me the very worst in their disrespect or condescension. Their mocking tones and these are the guys who said they don't sin anymore.

And at some point I forgot where I actually started preaching the gospel to them. I don't know if you guys Saw that but I did. I remember going. I'm going to preach the gospel to them. They need to know that we don't keep our salvation by our goodness.

This is the same thing with jesse which I had to say to him several times. You are preaching a false gospel. Because he is a gospel of salvation by keeping the law. And I have my notes, you know still.

And what he was saying that he was absolutely saying we you know, this part of uh, where was this? Uh, I got it someplace. You know, yeah, I got over here. But anyway, you know where he said, uh,. Oh, yeah.

So you lose your salvation every time you sin. Well, then logically you keep it by not sinning. Yeah, sin is breaking the law of god. Yeah, that was good when you did that. What's that?

That was good when you brought that up the the logical conclusion. Is you keep it? You you keep your salvation by not sinning that he lost the debate at that point he was done.

It was over it was over a long time ago, but yeah um, but you know, so you keep your salvation by you're keeping the moral law and uh,.

Very similar to rome in a lot of ways, you know, it's you know, it's just. It's belgianism. Oh, yeah.

There's so many things I wanted to say, but I didn't. But one of the things about the debate I thought it was, you know, unfortunate was he was just trying to dominate in my opinion throwing things out and constantly talking and saying so much.

And I wanted to stay on the issue of colossians 2 14. First peter 224, but he was the one who went around And started bringing up other stuff.

Well, I think he was doing that because he was on the run. Uh, you can say he was trying to dominate at the same time. But uh when as soon as you quote roman 7 he quoted one verse out of roman 6 as in response just like at the snap of a finger, it's very fast very very on top of it, but Um, he didn't interact with roman 7 in any substantive manner.

I would like to see you guys do a debate just on the chapter of romans chapter 7. See how long he survives that.

Well, you know what he's good at is just giving answers giving things and it's difficult on the fly. To listen to something. Set a certain way where a sentence this way or that way can mean something different or or not.

And then you have to adapt to it and. It's tough, you know, it's just what it's just nature of any conversation you have but. This idea that that i've heard this before, you know, paul. It wasn't really about paul about Unregenerate which i've examined before it doesn't make any sense.

The unregenerate don't worry about this stuff because the bible says They don't do any good. And I quoted that too. That's what it was the present tense in. Um, you know roman 3 10 11 12. Uh, none seeks for god.

None does any good. That's a continuing action and that's what he's talking about there. And you know, so therefore roman 7. Well, yeah, they are doing good by recognizing his own sin. Well, then he said well then what they're doing is with the grace of god.

He's enlightened. That's prevented grace, which is why I absolutely you believe in preventing grace, right? Well, he's a I really want to talk about free will with them because they're still he's a danger guy about that.

He's a plagiarist. Oh, yeah. Then well. How there's no reason for me, right? Right, right. That's how I was confused in the while watching because he started throwing out prevenient grace. And I was like, okay, so he's just he's left the plagian category, but then I was super confused about that.

No metal. He was in the youtube chat.

Yeah, he didn't say prevenient grace. Notice. I asked him. You know, are you affirming i'm assuming prevenient grace. I had to use the phrase the couplet prevenient grace. So what I want to do is have a debate with him on the nature of free will.

And salvation and god's grace.

Free Will, Prevenient Grace, and Pelagianism

Hey, man, your audio is breaking up. Your audio has that.

Sound well as you're speaking. His headset died. Oh.

Let me put it back on. It's been charging for a little bit. So maybe it'll work now.

Yeah, you do sound a little bit robotic without it.

Hey, man. Okay, that's way better. Yes, that's better. Yeah, this thing was dying. So i'll just put it on a little bit longer until I have to go.

Matt one of the things that I would uh, I was hoping you might have brought up with him is whenever he spoke about sin. He seemed to always focus on sins of commission not sins of. And and that's kind of where.

Uh, I think it's easier to show where we're falling short. I mean he covered loving our neighbor. Uh, you know, my neighbor needs a pickup truck. I have a pickup truck you know. I should maybe give it to him and and love him.

I mean, you know, it's I mean are any of us really doing that? Um, you know to to the per to the standard of perfection, um, you know, he just he's kind of Jesse's kind of pretty much deluded about his sin.

Yeah. Oh, I don't I about I. I literally Ruffled at the point where he said that the blood of christ doesn't cover intentional sins. I was I just started laughing and I was clapping my head. I was like that's.

The vast majority of our sins. They're all voluntary. So as long as we send by accident the blood of christ covers for them. Oh, by the way, if if the blood of christ covers to them. Does that mean we don't have to ask for forgiveness for them.

Because he was ridiculing that idea in the debate. He was saying well, I mean. The idea that you have to ask for forgiveness is something that's already covered from our perspective. But from his perspective if it's unintentional then the blood of christ covered it.

So do we have to ask for forgiveness for unintentional sins? I don't know. Maybe maybe not but even i'm looking at leviticus 4 and it's talking about the issue of unintentional sins. And this is leviticus in the old testament in the old testament israelite nation.

And talking about individuals groups leaders lay people and if they sin unintentionally literally in the esv. Then they have to offer a blood offering. It's an offering for the sin, which means. Well, it doesn't matter if it was unintentional.

It was still a sin, right?

But for sin accidental or on purpose I say to people there's only two kinds of sins. We commit those on purpose and those on accident and both of them need to be covered. But what he was saying what he said there which is why I focused on it and said is that what you're saying.

Because if he did say that. It's way over for him. We're gonna jump on that one real heavy, but he modified it. I forgot how he modified it, but he did in order to get out from underneath that. Yep.

Real real quick. Do do christians unintentionally sin every single day. Because he also mocked that idea christians don't sin every single day so. But does that include the unintentional sins so.

What if he said he don't know about it? Which is why I brought up the issue be praying back there on that couch and I realized I said something that was sinful. And it was but I didn't realize I had that in me.

What am I guilty? Because you know, he says he doesn't sin anymore. Was that actually a sin? Well, yes, it was but was it a sin before I expressed it? Yes, it was pride is sinful. So I was trying to show him What he's saying about he has to confess it and all this stuff intentional.

It doesn't work. It's the issue of the heart and the heart's wicked and that's just an example of how it came out. But he's always going to have some way now. It has to be intentional and then he said he said about the atonement I'm like what?

What i'm hoping is that a lot of his followers Pay attention to this and say oh my goodness. What's he saying? What's he saying? Did he say that he's saying these things? Yeah, he was sounding kind of nutty.

What about? What about um, what about an intentional sin that you commit? And then you forget about it after you've even been converted yet. What have you said? That's another Right, but it's all covered.

Well, uh, well, I mean. But what if you steal a cookie from the cookie jar and it was completely intentional obviously. And then you forget about it for the rest of your life. Yeah I guess you're unsaved because if you commit a sin you're unsaved.

You're going to go to hell. I mean the christ though the blood of christ was enough to cover all of your unintentional sins. But that one intentional sin of taking a cookie from a cookie jar.

That can send you down. Well, if you're driving the car.

You intentionally say something really evil to somebody and you get a car accident. And then you're in a coma for a month. You wake up. You don't remember anything. Yeah.

You never remember it you can never ask for it to be forgiven. So what do you do?

Do do these questions even make sense within the government theory of the atonement.

The government theory the atonement is difficult to understand to some degree um. And i've got it on my website an analysis of what it is. But let me give you some of the stuff when it says and we can ask the question again.

What it teaches is god is a moral governor. And is not an offended party. So he's not offended by our sin in a legal sense, which is not true. I asked him. You know, is it a legal debt at first? He said no then he said sin was a legal debt.

Then sin could be transferred. He bore our sin. How's that work? No, he didn't bear us. He's so inconsistent. But at any rate number two jesus suffered on the cross on behalf of humanity. He did not bear individual sins.

Now that is consistent with mo excuse me with open theism. Which he holds to because how could god impute sins specific sins to people if he doesn't know the future exhaustively. So it's consistent. Number three jesus did not pay the legal debt to god for the sins committed by anyone who has broken god's law.

Now clausus 2 14 says he did and that's the case, but even when he says it's the written ordinances, which. Seriously the dietary laws. Are you kidding me? But at any rate even if that's the case that the law is done away with and you can't have sin if there is no law romans 5 13.

He's stuck that way. You know before jesus suffering on in the on the cross was not propitiatory. And that's a whole other thing. I wanted to talk about the nature of propitiation. But at any rate was not propitiatory in that it actually removed god's wrath due to people's sin rather.

It's a demonstration of god's displeasure with sin. That's something I wanted to discuss was a propitiatory act the nature of the atoning work, but I think that he knew enough to try and derail it many directions, which you know, that's what happened in debate he says.