Arminian - Total depravity - what is this

[OzSpen]

That's correct. When you read the Articles of the Remonstrants (Arminians) their doctrine was almost identical to that of the Calvinists, yet different in some respects.

However this idea of Total Depravity ignores two important Bible truths: (1) that all human beings have a conscience, and therefore the unsaved can actually do righteous deeds (Romans 2) and (2) the Gospel itself is the power of God unto salvation, and can bring sinners to the Savior under the convicting and convincing of the Holy Spirit (Romans 1 and 10).

Because of this idea of Total Depravity, Calvinists put the cart before the horse. They teach that under so-called "Irresistible Grace" God gives the Holy Spirit to the so-called "elect", who are then regenerated, and thus receive the so-called "gift of faith". And all of this is because God has predestined some for salvation, and others for damnation, therefore Christ died only for the "elect". This is all summed up in Five Point Calvinism as TULIP (another gospel).

Nathan,

To whom is God's grace available for salvation? Is it available to all people or only those unconditionally elected to salvation?

Oz

 

[Nathan12]

Nathan,To whom is God's grace available for salvation? Is it available to all people or only those unconditionally elected to salvation? Oz

Oz, let's get the answer from Scripture (Titus 2:11-14)
11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, [MANKIND] [Note: the modern versions say "all people"]
12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;
13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;
14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.

Verse 11 is sufficient to refute Calvinistic Unconditional Election. At the same time, only those who obey the Gospel (repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ) are saved by grace. And that is why the preaching of the Gospel "to every creature" is so critical (Mk 16:15,16).

 

[OzSpen]

I know that those debating Calvinism seem to argue FOR Arminianism. I don't know too much about Arminianism,,,but I will read your link...there's a lot there, I've checked it already.

I do know this about Arminius, and it surely does seem that he did believe in total depravity. I do agree more with him than with John Calvin...I don't agree with anything of John Calvin, actually.

Thanks for the link.....

1. Total Depravity

The basis for Calvin's teaching on predestination is the total and complete sinful nature of humanity.

According to the Calvinist Corner: "In light of the scriptures that declare man’s true nature as being utterly lost and incapable, how is it possible for anyone to choose or desire God? The answer is, He cannot. Therefore God must predestine."

Arminianism recognizes the fall of Adam is responsible for man's sinful state, but humanity is not incapable of choosing between good and evil.

wondering,

Firstly, that statement by Calvinist Corner about Arminianism is false, as the following will demonstrate.

To be in harmony with the OP, I'll address only the Arminian view of total depravity.

The Society of Evangelical Arminians has provided an accurate description of Arminian Total Depravity, but I consider Arminius's statement has some stronger elements:

Total Depravity (the T in FACTS) [Cf. Article 3 of the 5 Articles of the Remonstrance]

Humanity was created in the image of God, good and upright, but fell from its original sinless state through willful disobedience, leaving humanity in the state of total depravity, sinful, separated from God, and under the sentence of divine condemnation (Rom 3:23; 6:23; Eph 2:1-3).

Total depravity does not mean that human beings are as bad as they could be, but that sin impacts every part of a person’s being and that people now have a sinful nature with a natural inclination toward sin. Human beings are fundamentally corrupt at heart. As Scripture tells us, “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick” (Jer 17:9; cf. Gen 6:5; Matt 19:17; Luke 11:13). Indeed, human beings are spiritually dead in sins (Eph 2:1-3; Col 2:13) and are slaves to sin (Rom 6:17-20). The Apostle Paul even says, “I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh” (Rom 7:18). Elsewhere he testifies, “as it is written: ‘None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one’ ” (Rom 3:10-12; cf. Rom 1:18-32; Eph 4:17-22).

In their natural state, human beings are hostile toward God and cannot submit to his Law nor please him (Rom 8:7-8). Thus, human beings are not able to think, will, nor do anything good in and of themselves. We are unable do anything that merits favor from God and we cannot do anything to save ourselves from the judgment and condemnation of God that we deserve for our sin. We cannot even believe the gospel on our own (John 6:44). If anyone is to be saved, God must take the initiative.

Arminius's stronger language was:

VII. In this state, the free will of man towards the true good is not only wounded, maimed, infirm, bent, and weakened; but it is also imprisoned, destroyed, and lost. And its powers are not only debilitated and useless unless they be assisted by grace, but it has no powers whatever except such as are excited by Divine grace.

For Christ has said, “Without me ye can do nothing.” St. Augustine, after having diligently meditated upon each word in this passage, speaks thus: “Christ does not say, without me ye can do but Little; neither does He say, without me ye can do any Arduous Thing, nor without me ye can do it with difficulty. But he says, without me ye can do Nothing! Nor does he say, without me ye cannot complete any thing; but without me ye can do Nothing.”

That this may be made more manifestly to appear, we will separately consider the mind, the affections or will, and the capability, as contra-distinguished from them, as well as the life itself of an unregenerate man (Arminius 1977:525-526).

These strong statements that all people throughout history have been and are comprehensively depraved - and not just people like Emperor Nero, Hitler, The 9/11 suicide bombers, and the fellow who shot 50 people dead in 2 Christchurch NZ mosques. All of us are thoroughly perverted.

The scriptural language that confirms this is that we are 'dead in our sins' (Eph 2:1).

How can all human beings who are enslaved in sin respond positively to the offer of salvation. This is where Arminianism has a very different answer to Calvinism but that's for another topic. Some of my views are in the article: Is prevenient grace still amazing grace?

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

ok..--all-- mankind is called to repent, believe upon Jesus, and obey God. And yet...only The Elect have been selected, out of the masses of humanity (remember: broad road for most of us) to be provided with what would be needed to obey The Gospel, repent and be saved, etc.

CE,

Answering this question of yours takes us away from the OP to election/predestination and not total depravity.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

Oz, let's get the answer from Scripture (Titus 2:11-14)
11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, [MANKIND] [Note: the modern versions say "all people"]
12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;
13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;
14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.

Verse 11 is sufficient to refute Calvinistic Unconditional Election. At the same time, only those who obey the Gospel (repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ) are saved by grace. And that is why the preaching of the Gospel "to every creature" is so critical (Mk 16:15,16).

Nathan,

I agree that Titus 2:11 is a clincher that buries unconditional election. See my article, How to interpret ‘appeared’ in Titus 2:11.

I don't accept Mk 16:15-16 as Scripture. It is not in the earliest MSS but seems to have been added by later transcribers. Matt 28:18-20 is more than adequate to propel me to proclaim the Gospel wherever I can.

Oz

 

[GodsGrace]

wondering,

Firstly, that statement by Calvinist Corner about Arminianism is false, as the following will demonstrate.

To be in harmony with the OP, I'll address only the Arminian view of total depravity.

The Society of Evangelical Arminians has provided an accurate description of Arminian Total Depravity, but I consider Arminius's statement has some stronger elements:


Arminius's stronger language was:

These strong statements that all people throughout history have been and are comprehensively depraved - and not just people like Emperor Nero, Hitler, The 9/11 suicide bombers, and the fellow who shot 50 people dead in 2 Christchurch NZ mosques. All of us are thoroughly perverted.

The scriptural language that confirms this is that we are 'dead in our sins' (Eph 2:1).

How can all human beings who are enslaved in sin respond positively to the offer of salvation. This is where Arminianism has a very different answer to Calvinism but that's for another topic. Some of my views are in the article: Is prevenient grace still amazing grace?

Oz

Calvinists use the second version,,,the stronger one on the statement by Arminius re total depravity.

This is why I don't really understand why Calvinists are always arguing against Arminius since A believed in total depravity just like C's do.

I read your article. It's really very complete, every idea is covered.
I'm going to print it out and use it, when necessary.

I don't know too much about the remonstrants. There's so much to know. Thankfully, knowing about what saves us is simple!

Thanks for the info.

 

[FrostyKnuckles]

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.

 

[FrostyKnuckles]

OzSpen great website and great article. I will bookmark your site, i like your greek knowledge background. Good stuff broski

 

[OzSpen]

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.

Frosty,

It's great to see you participating - all the way from Finland.

I am convinced the Bible teaches prevenient grace, which is the grace of God that comes before regeneration or conversion.

Titus 2:11 (ESV) teaches this: 'For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people'. See my exposition of this verse in, How to interpret ‘appeared’ in Titus 2:11

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

Calvinists use the second version,,,the stronger one on the statement by Arminius re total depravity.

This is why I don't really understand why Calvinists are always arguing against Arminius since A believed in total depravity just like C's do.

I read your article. It's really very complete, every idea is covered.
I'm going to print it out and use it, when necessary.

I don't know too much about the remonstrants. There's so much to know. Thankfully, knowing about what saves us is simple!

Thanks for the info.

wondering,

My former pastor preached against the Arminians, saying they don't believe in total depravity.

After the service, I asked him: From where did you get the idea that Arminius did not teach total depravity? I also asked: Have you read Jacob Arminius's Works where there is an exposition of total depravity.

He admitted he had not read Arminius but obtained his views on Arminius from his Calvinistic professors/lecturers at theological college.

Therefore, these lecturers promoted a false view of Arminianism.

What did James teach about this? James 3:1 (NLT) states: 'Dear brothers and sisters, not many of you should become teachers in the church, for we who teach will be judged more strictly'.

There is a challenging responsibility placed o the shoulders of God's gifted teachers in the church. We dare not teach falsehood.

Oz

 

[GodsGrace]

wondering,

My former pastor preached against the Arminians, saying they don't believe in total depravity.

After the service, I asked him: From where did you get the idea that Arminius did not teach total depravity? I also asked: Have you read Jacob Arminius's Works where there is an exposition of total depravity.

He admitted he had not read Arminius but obtained his views on Arminius from his Calvinistic professors/lecturers at theological college.

Therefore, these lecturers promoted a false view of Arminianism.

What did James teach about this? James 3:1 (NLT) states: 'Dear brothers and sisters, not many of you should become teachers in the church, for we who teach will be judged more strictly'.

There is a challenging responsibility placed o the shoulders of God's gifted teachers in the church. We dare not teach falsehood.

Oz

Amen to that.
And yet how many false ideas are out there?
It's discouraging, TTYTT, that we Christians cannot agree on everything...I mean we should be able to.

History is history.
Augustine was a mess, and yet he's touted as one of the top brains, if not THE TOP, in Christianity. People use different times of his life to make a point - when, in fact, he might have changed his mind about it at some time, and thus the point would not even be valid!

I'm beginning to like the ECFs. They more or less agreed with each other. By Early Church Fathers, I mean those before Nicea...325 AD. It seems to me that they had the purest doctrine, although even IT began to change after Jesus' death.

We're not even absolutely sure about the Sabbath....If we knew for certain when the Apostles worshipped, there would be no question about it. Yet, here we are, a case could be made for Saturday, and a case could be made for Sunday.

Sometimes, I just wish the N.T. had been more clear...(so that there would be no controversy).

 

[FrostyKnuckles]

Frosty,

It's great to see you participating - all the way from Finland.

I am convinced the Bible teaches prevenient grace, which is the grace of God that comes before regeneration or conversion.

Titus 2:11 (ESV) teaches this: 'For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people'. See my exposition of this verse in, How to interpret ‘appeared’ in Titus 2:11

Oz

Thank you friend. I have escaped calvinism myself recently. It is a rough system and I feel they are using deceptive tactics to lure people into their system.

Not that I got anything against them personally, but I feel like I was "duped" by creating a false dichotomy of synergism vs monergism. I was only presented with two options: Either you are saving yourself, or God saves.

So obviously any regular person chooses God saves.

 

[Christ_empowered]

Thank you friend. I have escaped calvinism myself recently. It is a rough system and I feel they are using deceptive tactics to lure people into their system.

Not that I got anything against them personally, but I feel like I was "duped" by creating a false dichotomy of synergism vs monergism. I was only presented with two options: Either you are saving yourself, or God saves.

So obviously any regular person chooses God saves.

that's interesting. from the rc sproul I've read, id have to say...i agree. :-(

 

[FrostyKnuckles]

that's interesting. from the rc sproul I've read, id have to say...i agree. :-(

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!!

 

[Nathan12]

If God is the one who saves people and grants them faith, why doesnt God make every saved person a calvinist

Exactly. Especially when the Bible tells us over and over again that God desires the salvation of all mankind.

It is sad to see how Calvinists distort the true Gospel of Christ, and simply refuse to accept that as being a fact.

 

[Christ_empowered]

-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...

 

[OzSpen]

Amen to that.
And yet how many false ideas are out there?
It's discouraging, TTYTT, that we Christians cannot agree on everything...I mean we should be able to.

History is history.
Augustine was a mess, and yet he's touted as one of the top brains, if not THE TOP, in Christianity. People use different times of his life to make a point - when, in fact, he might have changed his mind about it at some time, and thus the point would not even be valid!

I'm beginning to like the ECFs. They more or less agreed with each other. By Early Church Fathers, I mean those before Nicea...325 AD. It seems to me that they had the purest doctrine, although even IT began to change after Jesus' death.

We're not even absolutely sure about the Sabbath....If we knew for certain when the Apostles worshipped, there would be no question about it. Yet, here we are, a case could be made for Saturday, and a case could be made for Sunday.

Sometimes, I just wish the N.T. had been more clear...(so that there would be no controversy).

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.

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).

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.

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

 

[OzSpen]

Thank you friend. I have escaped calvinism myself recently. It is a rough system and I feel they are using deceptive tactics to lure people into their system.

Not that I got anything against them personally, but I feel like I was "duped" by creating a false dichotomy of synergism vs monergism. I was only presented with two options: Either you are saving yourself, or God saves.

So obviously any regular person chooses God saves.

Frosty,

You have presented the situation well. Because many of them support limited atonement, they don't have a theological mechanism for the biblical teaching on unlimited atonement. In my view, that's because of their rejection of free will and a biblical understanding of Titus 2:11, John 6:44 and John 12:32.

When I'm in discussions with them, they readily raise John 6:44. I agree with that verse and ask: Who can be drawn for salvation? The immediate answer is: the elect.

Then I raise John 12:32 and there is silence. Their theological system doesn't have an answer for this verse and 1 John 2:2.

Most Calvinists I talk to regard free will as works for salvation, which is false.

Since the OP is total depravity, many Calvinists with whom I discuss theology are not aware that Jacob Arminius also taught total depravity which is in harmony with Calvinism's view.

Oz

 

[FrostyKnuckles]

Be careful reading Origen as he tended to allegorize Scripture

Hey! He is my favorite ECF to read! I love the man even though I've never met him, dont know why I just get a good "vibe" from him. He has such an interesting mind the way he looks at things.

 

[OzSpen]

Hey! He is my favorite ECF to read! I love the man even though I've never met him, dont know why I just get a good "vibe" from him. He has such an interesting mind the way he looks at things.

However, Origen's allegorization of Scripture puts his spin on Scripture rather than exegeting the text. Clement of Alexandria also followed allegorical interpretation - which is different from the inclusion of allegory in Scripture.