Comments on William W. Birch: Total Depravity and Total Inability: A Biblical Ca...

Bob, Then one can die twice. The Calvinist carica...

2012-01-24T11:14:48.274-05:00

Bob,
Then one can die twice.

The Calvinist caricature is of a corpse, unable to do anything. The Arminian conception is of one unwilling and unable to truly reach out to, understand, or believe in God apart from Divine enablement. The Calvinist perspective requires regeneration (akin to Frankenstein) before a spiritually dead person can be reconciled to God, the Arminian approach requires prevenient grace.

Not all that hold to TD believe in original guilt....

2012-01-24T09:29:39.657-05:00

Not all that hold to TD believe in original guilt. I am one. Russ

SLW... The second death is the "final separa...

2012-01-24T06:42:56.304-05:00

SLW...

The second death is the "final separation" that comes from leaving this life separated from God. I am not sure what you mean in TD "taken in the Calvinistic sense"... I am NOT aware of any other way it can be taken. Both Arminians and Calvinists see it virtually the same as I see it.

WF1

I am NOT at all saying that our sin is insignificant. I am saying that when one begins with TD... man is born "dead"; he is condemned in Adam's sin and IF THAT is true... THEN there is no further punishment for sin. This implication of TD is one of the arguments AGAINST TD... at least in MY mind.

Thanks for all the input! I really do appreciate the dialogue that is really CIVIL!

><>"

Bob, You said..... “If I am condemned because of ...

2012-01-24T00:02:32.461-05:00

Bob,

You said..... “If I am condemned because of Adam's sin in the garden and the wages of that sin condition is death, then my personal sin is of no consequence because I am already condemned to death.”

Ezekiel 18:20 (NIV)....
The soul who sins is the one who will die.

TD says Nope...you were born dead to begin with.

Romans 5:12 (NKJV).....
“Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned.”

TD says Nope, because that verse should read.....

“Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because Adam sinned.”

Isaiah 59:2 (NKJV) reads....
“But your iniquities have separated you from your God.....”

TD says Nope. You were born separated from God. Your personal iniquities are irrelevant.

God bless.

wingedfooted1

I cannot die twice. There is a second deat...

2012-01-23T23:08:44.023-05:00

I cannot die twice.
There is a second death.

I do not see why, given what you've described, that you find the term "total depravity" such an issue. It doesn't have to be taken in the Calvinistic caricature (which I take issue with as well), and you seem to be circling it unnecessarily trying to avoid calling your understanding by the name.

WF - I need not display my non-Calvinistcredential...

2012-01-23T22:46:50.674-05:00

WF - I need not display my non-Calvinistcredentials! :)

William, I did not say there no "fallen stat...

2012-01-23T22:29:52.670-05:00

William,

I did not say there no "fallen state" as you see it. My position is we inherited this separated state from Adam and that separated state from the perpetual presence of God is what gives us this sinful nature to sin. Basically, one could argue that there is very little difference in what I am calling a separated state and depravity. I would not have a problem with that myself, at least right now.

Your reference to Romans 3 simply talks about man in his sinful state... the passage has nothing to do with total depravity... which is what I disagree with.

I 100% disagree that I do not take what happened in the garden seriously. Adam sinned. His sin cost him a life in the garden which I relate to being in God's perpetual presence. ( I love that phrase.) Now... I suggest that is what Adam passed on to every individual born. I suppose I do believe in an original sin; I do not believe I or anyone is condemned by Adam's one sin in the garden. Here is why...

If I am condemned because of Adam's sin in the garden and the wages of that sin condition is death, then my personal sin is of no consequence because I am already condemned to death. I cannot die twice. Also as you stated in your original post, TD leads to TI and I am adamantly opposed to that.

Now, separated from God I cannot do anything on my own to correct that problem. There is the similarity perhaps to TD. It is God who has provided the remedy to correct the separation problem and it is the Holy Spirit that convincts me of my sin and seeks to draw me to Him and through repentance and saving faith, I trust Christ and God forgives me of my sin and the Holy Spirit takes up residence in my heart and I now belong to the Father; I become an heir to God and a joint heir with Jesus.

So the Pelagian argument goes out the window... I do not have men earning righteousness on their own.

All I am saying is that this state of separation is an explanation of the sin nature that we are born with. I am seeing it a little differently from most. I do not like the foundation of TD... and certainly not TI...

My position, which is evolving as we speak stands well against the backdrop of TD without the issue of TI... so I will continue to work on it.

I do appreciate your input as well as others...

><>"

Rick, I agree completely that man is incapable of...

2012-01-23T22:29:33.113-05:00

Rick,

I agree completely that man is incapable of saving himself. That is just scriptural. But Calvinism’s total depravity is much more than this. TD means the man in the ditch hates the One lowering the rope. TD means that man doesn’t even want the rope. In fact, TD teaches that man wouldn’t even understand what the rope is for.

You said “But it seems to me, there is a residue of the image of God which can communicate to us the existence of a deity, the existence of an afterlife, and a desire to seek both. But only the Spirit can reveal Christ to our fallen natures”

I believe the scriptures support this. And the Spirit does reveal Christ to us thru the written word of God.

God bless.

wingedfooted1

A man has fallen into a deep ditch. It is 100'...

2012-01-23T22:05:43.026-05:00

A man has fallen into a deep ditch. It is 100' feet deep and 50' wide. The walls are so steep it is impossible for him to get out without someone lowering a rope. But he is capable of attempting to scale the walls, or get a running start and jump up on the wall, but in the end he cannot escape or even get close.

That, to me, is total depravity. A complete and utter inability to save oneself but not that sinners don't try. And the man in the ditch, when he realizes his impossible situation, can yell up for someone to lower a rope, but only a Person 100' above can lower that rope.

And is it not possible that millions of sinners realize to some extent their predicament and they create their own religions. Total depravity reveals that there is nothing redemptive within us, and we are enemies of God, and that we cannot even help save ourselves.

But it seems to me, there is a residue of the image of God which can communicate to us the existence of a deity, the existence of an afterlife, and a desire to seek both. But only the Spirit can reveal Christ to our fallen natures - miraculously and in a mystery.

Dr. W, Yes, I would put the Ethiopian eunuch is th...

2012-01-23T20:43:03.565-05:00

Dr. W,
Yes, I would put the Ethiopian eunuch is the same general pattern. The HS was convicting him before he knew what is was that was stirring him.

Bob, Thank you for engaging the scriptures from w...

2012-01-23T20:36:45.304-05:00

Bob,

Thank you for engaging the scriptures from which I quoted; but I think I wish you hadn't, now that I see how you interpret them. I'm beginning to think we have much less in common on this issue than I previously imagined.

Let me show you why you often get the "semi-Pelagian" charge from others. You write, I see no evidence of an "fallen state" in the scriptures.

Now, some people will be ready to yell, Heresy! Pelagius himself would be proud.

How can there be "no fallen state" though we have fallen? Does that make sense to you? Do Christians everywhere (most everywhere), from the last two thousand years, not refer to The Fall, when Adam and Eve "fell" from their original righteousness? Or are you saying that there was no fall, that Adam and Eve did not fall from their righteousness into rebellion?

If Adam and Eve did, in fact, fall, and this fall rendered them "dead" (Gen. 2:17), then how you claim that they (or we for that matter) are not "in a fallen state"? I'm baffled, seriously baffled.

You also write, I agree with your statements dealing with separation ... I believe this condition of being separated from God IS our sinful nature that brings about our sin.

So, "separation" was the cause of sin? Did Adam and Eve separate themselves from God and then sin? Can you not see from Scripture how they sinned first, by eating from the forbidden fruit, and then they "fell," "died," and were then "separated" from God, and not vice versa?

How would you even articulate them separating first and then sinning? And where in Scripture do you get such an idea? And who in history as ever articulated any of this in any such way? Where in Scripture is it stated that separation IS our sinful nature?

You claim to be "developing" this new doctrine of yours, but then you ever so boldly and dogmatically declare what you know to be true. But when we look at what you're actually saying, it appears that you don't take sin or the fall seriously whatsoever -- not whatsoever. That's extremely problematic.

How can you read Romans 3:10-18 and then conclude that you don't see a fallen state in the scriptures? Seriously, I am beside myself.

I hope that you completely abandon this new teaching you're aiming to develop. I fear it is nothing more than a repelling of Calvinism in general, when such does not have to be the case. I doubt seriously any believer disdains some of the core distinctives of Calvinism (meticulous sovereignty, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace) more than the Arminians who frequent this site -- Arminians, by the way, who by and large actually do hold to Total Depravity and Total Inability, at least the Arminians who are members of the Society of Evangelical Arminians.

Finally, I'd like to see your scriptural evidences that separation "is the basis for our sin nature" and not vice versa. I look forward to engaging the scriptures with you.

'Til then.

WWB You wrote... Sin created a separation betwe...

2012-01-23T20:11:26.803-05:00

WWB

You wrote...

Sin created a separation between God and the creatures whom He created in His image -- a separation which could never be spanned by man's efforts, because he lost his original righteousness and has been rendered helpless in mending the separation. "For while we were still helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly" (Rom. 5:6, emphasis added). "But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us" (Rom. 5:8, emphasis added).

I agree with your statements dealing with separation... I believe this condition of being separated from God IS our sinful nature that brings about our sin.

Not only are we, in a fallen state, Stop! You went from establishing that sin is in the world... then you went to separation and here you insert "fallen state"; I see no evidence of an "fallen state" in the scriptures. helpless in doing anything positive about it, but we are rightly judged as sinners. If we are take sin and the fact that we are sinners -- those who commit sin -- seriously, then we are, in my opinion, obligated to believe and to teach the biblical doctrine of Total Depravity. "For sin is that condition and activity of human beings that is offensive to God, their Creator."7 Ok look again at what you just said... we are obligated to believe and teach Biblical Doctrine of TD... "for sin is that condition and activity of human beings that is offensive to God." I have no problem with the last statement but it has nothing to do with being obligated to teach TD. All unregenerate sinners are in a state of sin and unbelief and thus exist as unholy offenders in an environment of condemnation under the wrath of God (cf. John 3:18, 36). I do not even have a problem with this last statement either... but it does not demand TD... it simply sees the reality of sin in the lives of men... but does not say anything about his condition prior to his personal sin.

The state of sin in which the unregenerate sinner exists renders him unable to subject himself to the law of God (Rom. 8:7). "For this reason," explains Arminius, "the human heart itself is very often called deceitful and perverse, uncircumcised, hard and stony (Jer. 13:10; 17:9; Ezekiel 36:26): again... this is ok.Its . . . imagination is said to be 'only evil from his very youth' (Gen. 6:5; 8:21); and 'out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries,' &c. (Matt. 15:19)."8 Let us focus on two passages from which Arminius quotes.

Look... my point is that separation certainly lends itself to much of what TD contends... man is no doubt depraved. My problem is with the total and then inability. The scriptures simply do not bear that out.

Let me ask you something... after Adam... show me one instance where TD is demonstrated... sin is everywhere BUT NOT depravity or inability to respond to God apart from any prevenient grace. It is not there... there is NO hint of TD...

Now... with my proposition of separation and that is the basis for our sin nature that we inherit from Adam... then everything I do is sin until my separation is corrected in Christ... now... since there is no TD... TI is not demanded and man has the opportunity to come near to the God who has come near to him. This is the basis for relationship and the basis for covenant in the OT and New.

><>"

I agree on one level, however showa that one who d...

2012-01-23T17:55:13.922-05:00

I agree on one level, however showa that one who does not have the birthright can seek it.

On one level.

SLW - Thanks for helping me to pull this together ...

2012-01-23T17:17:32.947-05:00

SLW - Thanks for helping me to pull this together better. With WWB and your comments, I'm coming to a clearer picture of Cornelius.

Would you say the same for the Ethiopian eunuch? He was reading Isaiah and didn't understand what he was reading until Philip explained to him. We can assume that the HS was convicting him but he didn't know it until Philip explained?

Since you're a nice guy I don't mind talki...

2012-01-23T17:13:31.628-05:00

Since you're a nice guy I don't mind talking to you Dr. W, even if I didn't know I wanted to! ;-)

I do not think there is much of an enigma. Cornelius had been exposed to Judaism, which is obvious from the description of him as devout, a fearer of God and a benefactor of the Jews. There was a synagogue in Caesarea, Phillip had preached in the region, so there is ample reason to believe that Cornelius had been exposed to the Word of God prior to the event of Chapter 10. There is no reason to suppose he sought God without the influence of God's word and/or God's people, and plenty of reasons to posit that he did. He still he lacked the Gospel in that "seeking" state and was not born again until he heard it and believed. I do not see in Peter's remarks (v.34-35) any reason to suppose that Peter was suggesting anything other than a Rahab-like, or Ruth-like embrace of people exposed to God's word and God's people (the means of prevenient grace) who turned to follow God.

As for the paragraph: On his own, natural man, separated from God has no ability to span the gap and know God (TI). He really does not truly want to, even if he could (TD). When God "shows up" (some kind of Spirit visitation regardless of means) the person is stirred to capacities and spiritual awareness that would be otherwise non-functioning. Under that influence, a sinner can begin, if they choose, to seek and call out to God with some effectiveness. When the Gospel is heard and believed, the Spirit is no longer "with" that seeker, but "in" him. Now the seeker has not just the capacitated ability to be aware of God, but the ability to know him and walk by his Spirit (in agreement with God).

Whereas I do not believe that hearing the Gospel per se is the only means of the Spirit convicting, I do believe hearing the Gospel is the only means of getting saved.

However, it was specifically for the 'inherite...

2012-01-23T17:04:12.095-05:00

However, it was specifically for the 'inherited blessing' that he was seeking repentance for, and in comparing this to the Genesis account, we see Esau tearfully begging ISAAC for a blessing (Gen 27:38).

DT

I think he was seeking repentance for himself sinc...

2012-01-23T16:11:27.176-05:00

I think he was seeking repentance for himself since it was he who sold his own birthright.

Rick, A "God-given" ability to seek Him...

2012-01-23T15:56:56.036-05:00

Rick,

A "God-given" ability to seek Him, yes! An "inherent ability" to seek Him, no. I think we're on the same page.

Patience, smatience, I love interacting with you!

2012-01-23T15:55:52.344-05:00

Patience, smatience, I love interacting with you!

Was Esaus seeking GOD'S forgiveness, or that I...

2012-01-23T15:55:29.653-05:00

Was Esaus seeking GOD'S forgiveness, or that ISAAC would change his mind (ie "repent") regarding his blessing which he bestowed upon Jacob?

DT

WWB - True, not every story is replete with detail...

2012-01-23T15:40:40.857-05:00

WWB - True, not every story is replete with details and I think you are correct. The point of the Cornelius story was about you don't have to do things the Jewish way. I was going to bring up the Ethiopian eunuch and Philip as another possible case study but I think that merits the same response as you gave for Cornelius.

Thanks for your patience with me :-)

Thanks, DT :-)

2012-01-23T15:37:32.027-05:00

Thanks, DT :-)

BTW - If a fallen sinner does not have a God given...

2012-01-23T15:15:43.499-05:00

BTW - If a fallen sinner does not have a God given ability to seek Him, then what does the Spirit appeal to when He draws that sinner? Unless you embrace irresistable grace, you must believe in some residual ability to seek.

Heb.12:17 - For ye know how that afterward, when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected: for he found no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears.

How did Esau seek God's forgiveness without the Spirit? He was fallen I presume.

Here's the quote (it's actually the last s...

2012-01-23T15:11:40.273-05:00

Here's the quote (it's actually the last sentence in the Conclusion to the canons of Orange):

"We must therefore most evidently believe that the praiseworthy faith of the thief whom the Lord called to his home in paradise, and of Cornelius the centurion, to whom the angel of the Lord was sent, and of Zacchaeus, who was worthy to receive the Lord himself, was not a natural endowment but a gift of God's kindness."

I'd encourage folks to read all 25 Canons and the remainder of the Conclusion for the context of this statement.

DT

Dr. W., Great story! I've heard similar stori...

2012-01-23T15:08:23.391-05:00

Dr. W.,

Great story! I've heard similar stories from missionaries as well. I think Luke's lack of detail with regard to Cornelius is due to it being beside the point. What do you think?

He's recording some history, and this particular history was of a Gentile (of all people!) being saved by grace through faith. I think the fact that this Gentile following a Jewish Messiah (and that God actually wanted to save the Gentiles too) was more astounding to them then his pre-conversion state.

I think the overall message to everyone was two-fold: 1) Gentiles are included in God's redemptive plan; and 2) the Gentiles do not have to follow Jewish (or Messianic Jewish) ways. This was quite radical.

I also suppose that with every convert in the NT, we don't need to be told over and over that men are depraved, that they need prevenient grace, etc., etc. There are some circumstances we are allowed to assume (that everyone has sinned, we all need a Savior, we need the work of the Spirit, etc.).