Arminian - Total depravity - what is this

[GodsGrace]

Both do indeed believe in total depravity. Its very similar at the end of the day. To arminians the way people get saved from this total depravity and are able to respond is through "prevenient grace".

In the calvinist side of the fence its God just granting faith to the elect upon hearing the Gospel.

Hi Frosty,
I understand about Irresistible Grace,,,could you explain, in your own words, what prevenient grace is?

I understand it to be a grace that comes before one decides to be converted by his how choice, by the Holy Spirt, or with the Holy Spirit's help.

This grace comes after learning about God, or hearing the gospel. It's a grace that could be accepted or denied; if accepted conversion happens.

After conversion God's grace is always available so the person can experience Ssanctification (or progressive justification).
Some call this Actual Grace.

Would you agree?

 

[GodsGrace]

Indeed. as i said i DO love me some R.C. Sproul and Tim Conway and James White and all those guys. I got nothing against them PERSONALLY.

I just feel much less anxiety right now when im not constantly thinking "am I really saved, am I really elect?" because if you are familiar with the Perseverance of the saints doctrine, it provides less security of salvation than the arminian "you can fall away" view. Because of the fact that you can never really know FOR SURE that you are one of the elect, until you pass to the other side.

I am not going to lie and say I still dont hold to some reformed ideas subconsciously due to the way I read the scriptures with those "lenses" on.

Here are a few examples of how I read the scriptures when I was a calvinist:
- Every verse about chosen automatically means chosen from eternity to salvation (never service or anything like that)
- All the verses that say to continue, persevere, remain steadfast, abide etc. are just descriptive of the true elect that will then persevere. (Despite the fact that these are adressed to churches)
- The word "all" doesnt mean "all" in 1 Timothy 2:4 where it says God wants ALL to be saved, but it sure does mean "all" in Romans 3:10 where all have sinned and it sure does mean "all" in Ephesians 1:11 where God works all things according to the pleasure of His will.
- I would make massive leaps in logic, for example: In Exodus it says God made the mouth (of man) and God is teh one who makes dumb, deaf and blind. So because God makes some people deaf dumb and blind, THEREFORE, everything that happens is predestinated by God. You see that huge leap of logic? Dont know what I was thinking, lol. I mean, if im born handicapped in some way, I can still choose to not bear false witness, or to bear false witness, to sin or not sin. Thats simply the kind of free will I believe in.

I like to credit wondering for playing a part by showing me some scriptures challenging my ideas. The final straw was when I read someone make a rather mocking (yet accurate question) statement: If God is the one who saves people and grants them faith, why doesnt God make every saved person a calvinist? <- Thats a good question aint it? Why would God grant someone faith in the free will heresy if it aint so? And thats what most Christians believe. In fact, all except calvinists do believe in universal atonement.

Sorry to go on a rant, I will get back to topic now. SORRY!!

Frosty,
I agree that Piper, and Sproul, and all those guys have some very good sermons and commentaries. If I didn't know they were calvinist, I'd want to go to their church! But they're tricky and don't tell you the whole truth---they just talk about what sounds nice.

Some poor girl (about 30 or so) called John Piper on program---he had opened the program for questions. She was literally crying because she wasn't sure of her salvation. Piper had no comforting words for her...he replied that maybe she wasn't saved if that's how she felt!

Could you imagine....theology teaches us that we can be sure of God's love for us and the Holy Spirit's keeping force, if we just allow Him to keep us. Anyone on this thread could have reassured her of her salvation telling her that it was HER DECISION to accept God and that if she did, she was definitely saved.

Calvinism changes the very character of God....It changes Him from a loving, merciful, just God, into an unloving, cold, merciless and unjust God - basically since He would choose who is saved or not based on nothing at all ! How anyone could accept to serve such a God remains a mystery to me.

I thank God that you have a clear and loving way to see God and how He really is.

And, yes, all those ways you had of reading scripture were wrong....you took YOUR ideas to scripture...instead of just reading it and coming away with an idea.

 

[GodsGrace]

-sigh-

this is a difficult thread, because i really fell in semi-love with basic Calvinism 101. i never read Calvin, but sproul, old school ji packer, etc. etc. etc. and now...

im reading -Scripture- more frequently, and the whole issue of salvation seems a lot more nuanced that "GOD IS SOVEREIGN!!!!" (Calvinism) vs "MAKE A DECISION FOR CHRIST!" (the sort of arminian perspective I grew up with, in "The Bible Belt"), and then one reads the debate materials, and...wow. things get ugly, and its like Christian on Christian aggression. -not good-

So...I don't know what to make of it, personally. I have a cousin...he's in ministry now...whose advice I respect and try to apply. He goes to an essentially Pentecostal church ("non-denominational," but...c'mon...Baptism of The Holy Spirit, healing, etc....), but he holds on to the Calvinist fundamentals he grew up with, and I think...

personally, that's a good approach. where the rubber hits the road, you're gonna want a fervent, Pentecostal-style believer doing things for The Kingdom, but when it comes to theology, intellectual sorts of exercises...Calvinists seem to reign supreme.

and so it goes...

Hi CE,

The problem with calvinism is that if you just listen to the preachers, they sound really good and make calvinism sound good.

Have you really studied it?
You can agree to the fact that God chooses us and we do not choose God?

You can accept that we are so depraved as to have no good in us at all? Isn't the universe made up of good and bad? Even books and movies have themes based on this....nothing we can see or cannot see is all good....and nothing we can see or cannot see is all bad. The universe is made up of a combination of both.

As you know, even Romans says that all of creation is waiting for redemption,,,because it, having been made good by God in the beginning, is also affected by the bad that exists.
Genesis 1:10, 12, 18, 21, 25
Romans 8:19-22

 

[GodsGrace]

-sigh-

this is a difficult thread, because i really fell in semi-love with basic Calvinism 101. i never read Calvin, but sproul, old school ji packer, etc. etc. etc. and now...

im reading -Scripture- more frequently, and the whole issue of salvation seems a lot more nuanced that "GOD IS SOVEREIGN!!!!" (Calvinism) vs "MAKE A DECISION FOR CHRIST!" (the sort of arminian perspective I grew up with, in "The Bible Belt"), and then one reads the debate materials, and...wow. things get ugly, and its like Christian on Christian aggression. -not good-

So...I don't know what to make of it, personally. I have a cousin...he's in ministry now...whose advice I respect and try to apply. He goes to an essentially Pentecostal church ("non-denominational," but...c'mon...Baptism of The Holy Spirit, healing, etc....), but he holds on to the Calvinist fundamentals he grew up with, and I think...

personally, that's a good approach. where the rubber hits the road, you're gonna want a fervent, Pentecostal-style believer doing things for The Kingdom, but when it comes to theology, intellectual sorts of exercises...Calvinists seem to reign supreme.

and so it goes...

P.S.
It's not a choice between:
God Is Sovereing
and
Make A Choice For God

God IS sovereign. This is why God is not afraid of us robbing Him of any Glory. That's such a silly idea anyway, I don't even get into it. How does one rob the creator of the universe of glory?

And we DO make a choice for God. Choice is all over the O.T. and the N.T. I'm very happy that our God of love and mercy an justice gave ME the opportunity to be a saved person that is in HIS side of the camp and can have the opportunity to be with HIM after death. I'm very happy that, in keeping with calvinists beliefs, I am NOT one of the UNLUCKY ones that He did NOT choose.

God offers Himself to all of mankind.
It's up to us to respond with a YES.
John 3:16

 

[GodsGrace]

wondering,

You caught me out with TTYTT, but Dr Google helped.

Do Christians disagree because of the theological baggage they bring with them and they find it difficult to leave those beliefs behind? That was the case with me for the gifts of the Spirit. I was raised a cessationist and I clung to it for years.

I don't THINK I have theological baggage - but how to know for sure? I know catholic doctrine - I know which of it I can agree with and which of it I cannot agree with and I know why.

Ditto for Protestantism. I see the good and the bad in each camp. I'm told my works doctrine comes from catholicism but I don't believe this to be the case. It comes from many verses in the N.T. that speak about doing good works/deeds. It's obvious that once we are saved we are called upon to do good works for God.

You say, 'History is history'. Well, you and I think so, but that's not even the position of some historians. For example, the historical Jesus scholar, John Dominic Crossan, of the Jesus Seminar wrote of "Jesus' resurrectional apparition" (The Historical Jesus, Harper SanFrancisco, p. 396). An apparition is a ghostlike figure or a phantom.

Yet, another historian, Dr N T Wright, spent about 500 pages in his 817pp of The Resurrection of the Son of God (Fortress Press 2003), demonstrating Jesus' resurrection was a bodily resurrection.

In my understanding, there is no such thing as bare history as historians have to interpret the data and as long as there are human beings looking at the data, there will be divergent opinions. That's where peer-reviewed scholarship is a powerful tool. I would not have had the ability to examine Crossan's apparitional resurrection if it were not for the critiques of my 3 doctoral examiners and then 3 verbal examiners (that was a grilling).

There will always be those who disagree. But it seems to me that the vast majority of biblical scholars agree that Jesus' resurrection was, indeed, a physical one. And I also find that the resurrection is accepted as historical fact even by some agnostics. One of the first things I learned in the little bit of theology I've had was that our faith is based on reason, and the resurrection is based on reason. I'll never forget this.

Even though Augustine was an eminent church father, he also was like you and me; he was a maturing Christian who changed his views on a number of topics: (a) In the City of God he is both an old earth creationist and a young earth creationist; (b) See my articles, St. Augustine: The leading Church Father who dared to change his mind about divine healing, and Augustine's last illness: A divine healing encounter.

Ah! But the very reason I have a problem with Augustine is because of the changes he went through. I do believe he brought some manechaeism and his gnosticism along with him when he converted to Christianity. Also, he changed his mind about a few things (which don't even come to mind right now) that I'd have to ask which part of his life a commentator was speaking to.

And let's not forget Original Sin....It's thanks to HIM that infants are baptized -- because He taught that they are imputed with Adam's sin instead of being affected by his sin.

I don't believe God holds us personally responsible for Adams sin. If Augustine were right, every infant SHOULD be baptized asap. I know that you don't believe in infant baptism...so I'd have to say you also don't agree with Augustine's view of O.S.

I enjoy reading the ECF, but like all reading about and from the Scriptures, we are to be Bereans (Acts 17:11). Be careful reading Origen as he tended to allegorize Scripture. Of course, there were also false teachers like Marcion, Pelagius, and Arius.

There's a delightful modern translation of the ECF on the Roman Catholic website, New Advent.

I consider we have enough information to indicate the end of Sabbath worship and now worship on the first day of the week under the New Covenant. See my article, No Sabbath-worship for Christians

The path of Christian growth comes with its challenges, like you are experiencing.

Oz

Of course, some of the early Christians were heretical...also they had their own ideas. But I think we could "filter" as we read. As to Sunday worship,,,I agree; I just used it as an example.

I just see Christianity being watered down to something I don't recognize and it's beginning to bother me more than it used to.
Might be old age!

 

[Nathan12]

If Augustine were right, every infant SHOULD be baptized asap.

Augustine is responsible for more false doctrine than most of the ECF. And yet Protestants (who should know better) preferred to believe him over the Bible. Imagine!

 

[PeterJens]

Indeed. as i said i DO love me some R.C. Sproul and Tim Conway and James White and all those guys. I got nothing against them PERSONALLY.

I just feel much less anxiety right now when im not constantly thinking "am I really saved, am I really elect?" because if you are familiar with the Perseverance of the saints doctrine, it provides less security of salvation than the arminian "you can fall away" view. Because of the fact that you can never really know FOR SURE that you are one of the elect, until you pass to the other side.

I am not going to lie and say I still dont hold to some reformed ideas subconsciously due to the way I read the scriptures with those "lenses" on.

Here are a few examples of how I read the scriptures when I was a calvinist:
- Every verse about chosen automatically means chosen from eternity to salvation (never service or anything like that)
- All the verses that say to continue, persevere, remain steadfast, abide etc. are just descriptive of the true elect that will then persevere. (Despite the fact that these are adressed to churches)
- The word "all" doesnt mean "all" in 1 Timothy 2:4 where it says God wants ALL to be saved, but it sure does mean "all" in Romans 3:10 where all have sinned and it sure does mean "all" in Ephesians 1:11 where God works all things according to the pleasure of His will.
- I would make massive leaps in logic, for example: In Exodus it says God made the mouth (of man) and God is teh one who makes dumb, deaf and blind. So because God makes some people deaf dumb and blind, THEREFORE, everything that happens is predestinated by God. You see that huge leap of logic? Dont know what I was thinking, lol. I mean, if im born handicapped in some way, I can still choose to not bear false witness, or to bear false witness, to sin or not sin. Thats simply the kind of free will I believe in.

I like to credit wondering for playing a part by showing me some scriptures challenging my ideas. The final straw was when I read someone make a rather mocking (yet accurate question) statement: If God is the one who saves people and grants them faith, why doesnt God make every saved person a calvinist? <- Thats a good question aint it? Why would God grant someone faith in the free will heresy if it aint so? And thats what most Christians believe. In fact, all except calvinists do believe in universal atonement.

Sorry to go on a rant, I will get back to topic now. SORRY!!

Hi Frosty,

Thankyou brother. I mean that most sincerely. My security is in the cross and the love Jesus shows me, not my walk or my knowledge. It is the light of my day, because I know how great it was for Him to die. I do not think I am the "elect" though obviously I am because I love Jesus and desire to follow Him.
But the idea that being one of the elect as a focus could cause anxiety is news to me. Free grace seem to just assume they are elect because of some general conviction, but I wonder if their certainty is compensating for insecurity, which by there definition is of the enemy. They tell me often I am driven by fear and want to obey Jesus because I have to prove something, but I know emotionally I can prove nothing because I am a washed up has been.
I do not of those who punish themselves for sin, but not personally and go on pilgrammeges to earn favour, but I doubt equally they truly know the cross.

God bless you

 

[Walpole]

And let's not forget Original Sin....It's thanks to HIM that infants are baptized -- because He taught that they are imputed with Adam's sin instead of being affected by his sin.

Why do you continue to perpetuate this erroneous information?

---> https://christianforums.net/Fellowship/index.php?threads/born-again.78843/page-26#post-1512064

 

[GodsGrace]

Augustine is responsible for more false doctrine than most of the ECF. And yet Protestants (who should know better) preferred to believe him over the Bible. Imagine!

I agree.
However, I don't agree that the ECF were responsible for heresey...I DO believe that THEY are the ones that kept heresies out of the church.

If by ECFs you mean persons of the faith that allowed their ideas and concepts to creep into the Christian faith, then yes, but I wouldn't call them the ECFs since that denotes a specific type of person.
Maybe we could call them the early heretics? I'm not certain what title they held....

 

[GodsGrace]

Why do you continue to perpetuate this erroneous information?

---> https://christianforums.net/Fellowship/index.php?threads/born-again.78843/page-26#post-1512064

Because it's true!
I've posted links but apparently you don't care to believe facts.

OS has ALWAYS existed. It's the sin committed by Adam.
Augustine took this concept and changed it to mean that every person born is imputed with Adam's sin.

This caused every baby to have to be baptized AS SOON AS POSSIBLE because Augustine reasoned that if they were not baptized they could not enter into heaven.

You're mixing up the baptism of babies with Augustine's understanding of O.S.

Babies were baptized from the beginning...to bless them and to make them a part of the community and to allow them the benefits of the Holy Spirit...

NOT because they'd go to hell if they weren't.

This is common knowledge in the CC, I don't even know why links are necessary.

I'm sure you know that the CC has thought this over and is no longer stating as fact that babies that are not baptised to to hell.
This very idea was adopted by Augustine and, in turn, the church.
Why, I cannot fathom.

Please read the CCC 1229-1261.

And here's the last link I'll post,,,,the information is history and I don't know how one can argue with history...

https://decodedpast.com/concepts-original-sin-early-christianity-augustine-vs-pelagius-others/14520

 

[PeterJens]

Frosty,
I agree that Piper, and Sproul, and all those guys have some very good sermons and commentaries. If I didn't know they were calvinist, I'd want to go to their church! But they're tricky and don't tell you the whole truth---they just talk about what sounds nice.

Some poor girl (about 30 or so) called John Piper on program---he had opened the program for questions. She was literally crying because she wasn't sure of her salvation. Piper had no comforting words for her...he replied that maybe she wasn't saved if that's how she felt!

Could you imagine....theology teaches us that we can be sure of God's love for us and the Holy Spirit's keeping force, if we just allow Him to keep us. Anyone on this thread could have reassured her of her salvation telling her that it was HER DECISION to accept God and that if she did, she was definitely saved.

Calvinism changes the very character of God....It changes Him from a loving, merciful, just God, into an unloving, cold, merciless and unjust God - basically since He would choose who is saved or not based on nothing at all ! How anyone could accept to serve such a God remains a mystery to me.

I thank God that you have a clear and loving way to see God and how He really is.

And, yes, all those ways you had of reading scripture were wrong....you took YOUR ideas to scripture...instead of just reading it and coming away with an idea.

The example you are giving about someone wondering about their foundation in Christ responded to as if there is discernment in each individual about their state.
This is salvation by self conviction rather than faith resting in Christ and His deeds.
Faith builds on knowing Christ more, and realising His will and love, that literally calls out to anyone who will listen. Any believer who wants to go deeper and doubts they have enough of God is truly alive in Him, because we never know or experience enough.

It is like saying you are only saved if you have the faith to walk on water, because with enough faith we all could. Peter was the only one who for a short time succeeded, so maybe none of us are the elect ...... and the presumption of being the elect denies its reality, rather His people know Christs work and desire more. Paul is a classic example of knowing so much but never assuming and John says to presume one is sinless is sinful, because only God can judge this.

 

[Nathan12]

Maybe we could call them the early heretics? I'm not certain what title they held....

While the Early Church Fathers (ECF) were resisting heresies such as Arianism, they were also promoting heresies, such as baptismal regeneration.

People have elevated the Church Fathers (primarily bishops) to the level of minor gods. But every Christian has a duty to examine all teachings in the light of Scripture. And even though the Protestant Reformers made that their primary objective, they also continued to hold on to some teachings from the Catholic Church (e.g. clergy vs laity).

 

[GodsGrace]

While the Early Church Fathers (ECF) were resisting heresies such as Arianism, they were also promoting heresies, such as baptismal regeneration.

People have elevated the Church Fathers (primarily bishops) to the level of minor gods. But every Christian has a duty to examine all teachings in the light of Scripture. And even though the Protestant Reformers made that their primary objective, they also continued to hold on to some teachings from the Catholic Church (e.g. clergy vs laity).

Jesus made baptism very important.
I don't believe we're lost if we are not baptised...
OTOH, why wouldn't a believer want to be baptised?
They seem to go hand in hand.

The ECF understood that baptism was, at least, very important.
If Jesus said to do this,,,we should; even though we may not really understand why.

As to protestantism...if I remember correctly, they did accept the first 7 councils from the early church.

I agree, of course, about reconciling all concepts or doctrine with scripture.

 

[Nathan12]

Jesus made baptism very important. I don't believe we're lost if we are not baptised... OTOH, why wouldn't a believer want to be baptised?

I think you missed the point. Baptism is indeed very important, and every believer must be baptized. But no one is regenerated through the water of baptism. And that is what baptismal regeneration teaches.

 

[FrostyKnuckles]

OTOH, why wouldn't a believer want to be baptised?
They seem to go hand in hand.

Yeah if someone doesnt want to get baptized i call false convert right away. Unless of course its due to ANXIETY reasons etc. But if they just dont even want to...... problems.

 

[RevSRE]

YES, mankind is Totally Depraved!
That is if you mean " NO person can SAVE themselves. The only way to God of the work of Jesus Christ. Read all of Romans ch 3. The Righteousness of GOD is required to come before GOD. This was made known in the Law and the Prophets, and was manifested in the work OF CHRIST. Because there is no difference in people, ALL HAVE DISOBEYED GOD.

This is a long and complex study there is a lot here, Read my blog for my full discussion. http://revsre.blogspot.com/

 

[Nathan12]

YES, mankind is Totally Depraved! That is if you mean " NO person can SAVE themselves.

Christians all agree that no one can save themselves. But the doctrine of Total Depravity turns Scripture on its head. Calvinists claim that the so-called "elect" are regenerated BEFORE they believe, and that they believe because they are regenerated, therefore saving faith is a gift of God to the elect. And that is NOT what the Bible teaches at all.

 

[OzSpen]

YES, mankind is Totally Depraved!
That is if you mean " NO person can SAVE themselves....

Rev,

Are you saying that is the meaning of 'total depravity' that people cannot save themselves?

Oz

 

[GodsGrace]

YES, mankind is Totally Depraved!
That is if you mean " NO person can SAVE themselves. The only way to God of the work of Jesus Christ. Read all of Romans ch 3. The Righteousness of GOD is required to come before GOD. This was made known in the Law and the Prophets, and was manifested in the work OF CHRIST. Because there is no difference in people, ALL HAVE DISOBEYED GOD.

This is a long and complex study there is a lot here, Read my blog for my full discussion. http://revsre.blogspot.com/

No one can save themselves JUST by good works.
It takes faith to be born alive to God and become a child of His.

However, this does not mean we are TOTALLY depraved....as calvinists would mean it.

It means we have a sin nature we must overcome..which is quite different. Totally depravity carries with it the idea that we cannot even DECIDE to serve God...we must wait for HIM to make us want to.

 

[RevSRE]

Christians all agree that no one can save themselves. But the doctrine of Total Depravity turns Scripture on its head. Calvinists claim that the so-called "elect" are regenerated BEFORE they believe, and that they believe because they are regenerated, therefore saving faith is a gift of God to the elect. And that is NOT what the Bible teaches at all.

I said "IF YOU MEAN".
ON MY BLOG I explain tat there are TWO WAYS a person may go. Obey God and keep his commandments, or do as "I" Pease and reject God.
I feel so often people see al mankind as "Toally Deprvied. I do not see Christians saved be grace through faith, iindwelled by the Holy spirit, adopted into the family of God, old things past all made new, I do not see CHRISTIANS as totally depraved.
The C have so much wrong, I am so not Calvinist, I am not Armenian EITHER, such is not necessary.
God made us in his image He gave us a choice and the right and ability to choose OBEY ME OR NOT!
YES I BELIEVE IT IS JUST THAT SIMPLE!