Hypocrisy of the Highest Order: The “Christ Made Sin” (Without Imputation) Fallacy and Its Foremost Frontmen

Initially published via Facebook on June 12, 2025

Around 2005, a controversy emerged within some professing sovereign grace assemblies. It all started with a preacher named Mark Daniel. Like all false teachers, after misrepresenting his tenets of faith, he crept into a church and promoted the 'Christ-made sin' heresy. To be specific, the late Mr. Daniel, now deceased, once believed Christ became sin apart from imputation and referred to "sin" as "a reality in His [Christ’s] very being."  

Daniel's view was not what the apostle had in mind in 2 Corinthians 5:21: "For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him" (bold emphasis added). Paul's use of "sin" refers to an alien transgression, inherently belonging to sinners [God's elect], not inherent in  the Savior. God imputes the sins of the elect to the Son. In parallel fashion, "righteousness" points to the alien righteousness, inherently belonging to the Master, not naturally to men. God reckons or imputes righteousness to the sheep. Therefore, treating 2 Corinthians 5:21 as a proof text to say: ‘Jesus became sin apart from imputation’ is heresy. It unquestionably impugns the One Divine Essence and the sinless human nature of the impeccable person of Christ. It is blasphemous.

During the time of the controversy, news quickly spread about Daniel's 'Christ made sin' heresy. Some denounced his abysmal position while others defended it.

Defenders, not surprisingly, included a notable sovereign grace pastor in Kentucky named Don Fortner. This preacher supported Mr. Daniel as a preacher and also agreed with his 'Christ made sin' heresy. Regardless of one's popularity, a so-called preacher who defends a wolf is a sure sign he is one also. To this day, some preachers, listed on freegraceradio.com, remain silent about Fortner's defense of the 'Christ made sin' heresy. Most will not make it officially known as to what they truly know about the controversy. Often, they play both sides to keep peace among the supporters of Fortner and his critics. This is to be expected from hirelings. False teachers will always utilize deceptive practices to defend their own.

Rightful harsh criticism followed Daniel and Fortner's defense of the 'Christ made sin' aberration. A few men, once close friends with Fortner, rightly anathematized this heresy, referring to it as a "gospel issue" and excoriated the defenders of Daniel's view as "unbelievers." Almost twenty years later, some of the same adversaries of Daniel's heresy from the past are still boldly labeling it a "false gospel" from their pulpits and continue to label men holding to it as "unbelievers." In addition, it is not uncommon for some of these opponents of Daniel's view to encourage others to stay clear of ministries or churches affiliated with freegraceradio.com.

However, while it is patently clear that Daniel and Fornter's stance was damnable heresy, some of their staunch rivals are deceivers and hypocrites. For example, some of the men staunchly opposed to Daniel and Fornter's heresy are also fanboys of a popular preacher named Henry Mahan. Yet, during the time of the controversy, Mahan emphatically defended the supporters of the 'Christ made sin' heresy. Moreover, Mahan opposed the critics. Some of Daniel's most vociferous antagonists from 2005 to the present are well aware of Mahan's gross compromise but intentionally remain silent, are vague, or play dumb on the matter.

In summary, this is what the loudest critics of Daniel and Fornter's 'Christ made sin' falsehood will do: they will call this doctrine a "false gospel" but still call Mahan a "gospel preacher." They privately tell others to stay away from preachers listed on freegraceradio.com for tolerating or defending Daniel and Fortner's view, but have no problem recommending Mahan's sermons to the public. Here is hypocrisy at its finest!

To make matters worse, in almost every sermon, some of the loudest critics of Daniel and Fortner will incessantly mention and condemn their past lives in "false religion" when they formerly held to either legalism, universal atonement, free will, God's love for all, conditionalism, etc. Yet, they remain silent on letting the public know how Mahan defended as a Christian one of the leading figures of "false religion" in the twentieth century.

That's right, Mahan informed one of Daniel and Fortner's antagonists in the past that he believed Billy Graham was a Christian. This is well known today among the most vocal critics of Daniel and Fortner. Rather than letting the public know how Mahan defended a leading heretic as a Christian, even though Billy Graham affirmed all kinds of "false religion" (e.g., libertarian freedom, conditionalism, universal atonement, a love of God for all, and even abortion, etc.), the hypocrites will ignore it, remain silent, or play dumb, as all hirelings do. To add insult to injury, the most strident critics of Daniel and Fortner — who are well aware today of Mahan's defense of Billy Graham as a Christian — will still eulogize him in conferences, refer to him as a "brother" in sermons, or recommend his messages to others, without any disclaimers. These practices do not exemplify repentance from “dead works.” It is the epitome of deceit and wickedness.

As a result, while I want nothing to do with the 'Christ made sin' [apart from imputation] heretics, I will have no association with the compromising hypocrites either.

Matters discussed in this post do not even come close to the compromises I have learned about over the past five months concerning some men that I know. There is so much more.

Nonetheless, to the hireling, whom I had messaged recently, you are welcome to respond, either privately or publicly (on your own page, of course). Have no doubt, I will reply.

𝘍𝘰𝘳 𝘤𝘭𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘺, 𝘢𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘥 𝘍𝘦𝘣𝘳𝘶𝘢𝘳𝘺 2025, 𝘐 𝘩𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘥 𝘮𝘺 𝘧𝘪𝘳𝘴𝘵 𝘮𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘢𝘨𝘦 𝘣𝘺 𝘔𝘢𝘩𝘢𝘯 𝘢𝘧𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘢 𝘧𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘥 𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘮𝘦 𝘢 𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘬 𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘯 𝘢𝘶𝘥𝘪𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘰𝘧 𝘢 𝘴𝘦𝘳𝘮𝘰𝘯. 𝘐 𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘩𝘪𝘮 𝘮𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘢𝘤𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘥𝘰𝘤𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘥𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘦𝘵𝘤., 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘤𝘬𝘭𝘺 𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘢 𝘉𝘪𝘣𝘭𝘦-𝘵𝘸𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘤, 𝘦𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘢𝘧𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘭 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘤𝘭𝘶𝘮𝘴𝘺 𝘮𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘢𝘨𝘦𝘴. 𝘐𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘐 𝘱𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘸𝘰 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘸𝘰 𝘵𝘰𝘨𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘔𝘢𝘩𝘢𝘯, 𝘸𝘩𝘰𝘮 𝘐 𝘩𝘢𝘥 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘤𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘥 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘢 𝘧𝘦𝘸 𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘩𝘴 𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘳, 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘩𝘰𝘳𝘴𝘦'𝘴 𝘮𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘩, 𝘴𝘰 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘢𝘬, 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘥𝘦𝘧𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 '𝘊𝘩𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘵-𝘮𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘴𝘪𝘯' 𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘴. 𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘥 𝘔𝘢𝘳𝘤𝘩 2025 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘢 𝘧𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘯𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘦𝘥 𝘮𝘦 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘔𝘢𝘩𝘢𝘯'𝘴 𝘥𝘦𝘧𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘤 𝘉𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘎𝘳𝘢𝘩𝘢𝘮. 𝘚𝘰, 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘩𝘪𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘴 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘶𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘦𝘶𝘭𝘰𝘨𝘪𝘻𝘦 𝘔𝘢𝘩𝘢𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘢𝘪𝘯 𝘴𝘪𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘱𝘶𝘭𝘱𝘪𝘵𝘴 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘪𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘦𝘴, 𝘐 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘸𝘢𝘳𝘯 𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘸𝘰𝘭𝘧.