5 Point Calvanism

[larryt]

My advice is test the T as hard as you can against God's word. if you take that down the whole thing goes

This is the foundation of Calvinism. If we are not totally depraved then the whole understanding crumbles. If it is true then the next point can be examined.

LT

Good point Larry, first you have to define totally depraved., which is to me, anyway, is to be so wickardly evil, so grossly demonised, that you are beyond redemption, which is contrary to God's purpose to create man in the first place.

Hi eric,

Thank you for your response. Here is a pretty good definition from wikipedia.

The doctrine of total depravity teaches that people are by nature not inclined to love God with their whole heart, mind, or strength, as he requires, but rather all are inclined to serve their own interests over those of their neighbor and to reject the rule of God. Even religion and philanthropy are destructive to the extent that these originate from a human imagination, passions, and will.

Total depravity does not mean, however, that people are as bad as possible. Rather, it means that even the good which a person may intend is faulty in its premise, false in its motive, and weak in its implementation; and there is no mere refinement of natural capacities that can correct this condition. Although total depravity is easily confused with philosophical cynicism, the doctrine teaches optimism concerning God's love for what he has made and God's ability to accomplish the ultimate good that he intends for his creation. In particular, in the process of salvation, it is argued that God overcomes man's inability with his divine grace and enables men and women to choose to follow him, though the precise means of this overcoming varies between the theological systems.

As an after thought. Several passages of scripture have been presented as to how we were born with a sin nature, and I agree with them that it was through Adam. After saying that. I have assume that Adam was not totally depraved when he ate from the forbidden tree, he merely listened to satan's lie and thereby disobeyed God's command not to.

God created Adam with a normal brain if Adam was created in God's image. Not a totally depraved one, unless one accuses God of being totally depraved.

By the above definition Adam was not at all depraved BEFORE the fall. It was by eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil that he became depraved. By the way there is no indication from scripture that Adam ever repented. There is indication that Eve did believe.

Here are several verses that spell out this depravity.

Job 15:14 What [is] man, that he should be clean? and [he which is] born of a woman, that he should be righteous?

Job 15:15 Behold, he putteth no trust in his saints; yea, the heavens are not clean in his sight.

Job 15:16 How much more abominable and filthy [is] man, which drinketh iniquity like water?

Job 25:4 How then can man be justified with God? or how can he be clean [that is] born of a woman?

Job 25:5 Behold even to the moon, and it shineth not; yea, the stars are not pure in his sight.

Job 25:6 How much less man, [that is] a worm? and the son of man, [which is] a worm?

Ps 14:2 The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, [and] seek God.

Ps 14:3 They are all gone aside, they are [all] together become filthy: [there is] none that doeth good, no, not one.

Isa 1:5 Why should ye be stricken any more? ye will revolt more and more: the whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint.

Isa 1:6 From the sole of the foot even unto the head [there is] no soundness in it; [but] wounds, and bruises, and putrifying sores: they have not been closed, neither bound up, neither mollified with ointment.

Jer 2:22 For though thou wash thee with nitre, and take thee much soap, [yet] thine iniquity is marked before me, saith the Lord GOD.

Ro 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

Ro 3:12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

Ro 3:13 Their throat [is] an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps [is] under their lips:

Ro 3:14 Whose mouth [is] full of cursing and bitterness:

Ro 3:14 Whose mouth [is] full of cursing and bitterness:

Ro 3:15 Their feet [are] swift to shed blood:

Ro 3:16 Destruction and misery [are] in their ways:

Ro 3:17 And the way of peace have they not known:

Ro 3:18 There is no fear of God before their eyes.

Ro 7:15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.

Ro 7:18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but [how] to perform that which is good I find not.

Ro 7:19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.

Ro 7:20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

Eph 2:1

[eric]

Thanks a bundle Larry, I reckon I got the message, but that only takes care of the *T*.

I knew I was born with a sin nature, but I can't ever remember being totally depraved lol.........

[larryt]

Thanks a bundle Larry, I reckon I got the message, but that only takes care of the *T*.

I knew I was born with a sin nature, but I can't ever remember being totally depraved lol.........

The idea of total depravity is that man can do nothing to save himself. He is totally incapable of anything that is needed to become right with God. He cannot even desire to serve God in and of himself.

The total despair that Paul expressed in Ro 7:24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? is the reality of our depravity. If someone does not see their wretchedness in the light of the Glory of God they don't know God.

I had met a godly older man shortly after I was born again and he told me that as he got older the struggle with sin seemed to get more intense. I didn't fully understand it then and thought his statement was strange. As I have walked this path I have since found that he was exactly right in that the struggle with sin does get more intense the more I see the greatness of God and His Holiness.

LT

[larryt]

Before moving on to the "U" of TULIP, contrast the "D" of DAISY. Would someone like to present the opposing view?

1. T - Total Depravity: (Also called Radical Corruption) Man is born spiritually dead and cannot come to salving faith on his own at all. He's not sick with sin, he's dead. Therefore...your new heart must come before you actually "accept" Christ.

vs.

D - Diminished Depravity -- Arminians either implicitly or explicitly reject the biblical doctrine of the imputation of Adam's fallen nature and categorically deny "Total Depravity." In other words, each individual is not born inherently sinful, but becomes an enemy of God sometime after a mythical "age of accountability" when he consciously decides to rebel against divine authority. Though it is believed that the person "dies spiritually" at this moment, he is nevertheless supposedly able to later respond to the call of the Gospel and to choose to believe in Christ of his own free will. Thus, faith is not seen as a divine gift, but as a human virtue. Also know as -- D-ead but Somehow Alive.

Either we are dead in trespasses and sin or we are not. Either we were conceived in iniquity or we weren't. As was asked in the OP does anyone have any scriptural backing for the Diminished Depravity of Arminianism?

LT

[eric]

ah. Larry bro. I notice that you are using the grace-bible version of Arminianism, which I suppose, is as good as any other, but I will do a little surfing of my own before I reply

cheers, mate

e

[rtwo]

The question for me is, if God is just, why would he create people for the express purpose of condemning them? Why would he choose people to come to Him, instead of giving everyone the opportnity? It seems to me that a god that would make that sort of arbitrary decision is not only not "just", but doesn't understand the meaning of it. This god would be neither just nor loving.

But by the very nature of God's character, it seems to me, the free will to choose or else knowingly deny the love of Christ must be what sets apart "saint" from "sinner".

[Guest Biblicist]

The question for me is, if God is just, why would he create people for the express purpose of condemning them? Why would he choose people to come to Him, instead of giving everyone the opportnity? It seems to me that a god that would make that sort of arbitrary decision is not only not "just", but doesn't understand the meaning of it. This god would be neither just nor loving.

But by the very nature of God's character, it seems to me, the free will to choose or else knowingly deny the love of Christ must be what sets apart "saint" from "sinner".

rtwo, welcome to Worthy!

That is a very good question and I think it deserves an answer. God did not create people for the express purpose of condemning them. He created all things, people included, for His own glory. Human condemnation came from the disobedience of one man, Adam. God loved us so much that he sent his son to give us a way out of the sin that was brought into the world by Adam.

[larryt]

Before moving on to the "U" of TULIP, contrast the "D" of DAISY. Would someone like to present the opposing view?

1. T - Total Depravity: (Also called Radical Corruption) Man is born spiritually dead and cannot come to salving faith on his own at all. He's not sick with sin, he's dead. Therefore...your new heart must come before you actually "accept" Christ.

vs.

D - Diminished Depravity -- Arminians either implicitly or explicitly reject the biblical doctrine of the imputation of Adam's fallen nature and categorically deny "Total Depravity." In other words, each individual is not born inherently sinful, but becomes an enemy of God sometime after a mythical "age of accountability" when he consciously decides to rebel against divine authority. Though it is believed that the person "dies spiritually" at this moment, he is nevertheless supposedly able to later respond to the call of the Gospel and to choose to believe in Christ of his own free will. Thus, faith is not seen as a divine gift, but as a human virtue. Also know as -- D-ead but Somehow Alive.

Either we are dead in trespasses and sin or we are not. Either we were conceived in iniquity or we weren't. As was asked in the OP does anyone have any scriptural backing for the Diminished Depravity of Arminianism?

LT

Personally, I think both views go to extremes of one sort or another.

Too much time wasted bickering things that are neither important in this life or provable beyond a shadow of doubt either way.

Time much better spent helping a marriage in trouble or feeding a child rather than arguing whether or not God 'ordained' something or not.

Our job is to live as He has called us to live, who cares whether He ordained it or not, just DO it and go help someone who needs some real help.

HI FoC,

Since this is the forum to discuss DOCTRINE, I find your response out of order. We are told that in the later days the men will depart from sound DOCTRINE. Those that believe false doctrine will not see Glory, but will be condemned to hell no matter how many "good works" they do.

Sound doctrine is the impetus of good works.

LT

[rtwo]

The question for me is, if God is just, why would he create people for the express purpose of condemning them? Why would he choose people to come to Him, instead of giving everyone the opportnity? It seems to me that a god that would make that sort of arbitrary decision is not only not "just", but doesn't understand the meaning of it. This god would be neither just nor loving.

But by the very nature of God's character, it seems to me, the free will to choose or else knowingly deny the love of Christ must be what sets apart "saint" from "sinner".

rtwo, welcome to Worthy!

That is a very good question and I think it deserves an answer. God did not create people for the express purpose of condemning them. He created all things, people included, for His own glory. Human condemnation came from the disobedience of one man, Adam. God loved us so much that he sent his son to give us a way out of the sin that was brought into the world by Adam.

Thank you, Biblicist. I quite agree with you on that score. Which is why I don't believe 5-point Calvinism is in line with God's character. I do not believe a just god would or even could knowingly create, say, me, for example, knowing that He would never offer me the opportunity for salvation. If God is just (and I believe He is) then by definition, He must offer everyone the same chance, or else offer none at all.

[eric]

Well after exploring both doctrines of daisy and tulip, I can find flaws in both issues, so I will give the debate a miss. I'll stay with how I have always perceived, creation, the fall, the crucifictin, the resurrection and the promises of hope and salvation,, and the second coming of our Lord.

Man's ways and thoughts are different from God's. He knows the past, present and the future and man can only speculate and the more we listen to man's, version, the more confused we get. Now that doesn't mean I'm going to bury my head in the sand, I will just go with what the bible is saying, with the help of thr H/S. I am a fundamentallist with no denomiational preferences at least as far as the spiritual theme of the word goes, but I am still a long way to go as far as history, custom, culture, greek and hebrew languages, but we have some exremely knowlegeable people that we can learn from right here on Worthy.

So heads down and go for it. I'm a swinger.