-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Sorry, the topic is "Total" depravity. I am not for one moment denying that all men are sinners. What I intended by demonstrating that Elijah was translated into heaven is that all men are not made "totally reprobate" just to be saved. I am quite willing to accept that in a legitimate theocracy, such as Israel constituted and such as the church has strived at from time to time, people grow up, although by no means free from sin, retaining a level of righteousness from continual communication with God that means that they never were "unsaved." If you have never been unsaved, how can you be totally reprobate?
It is not enough to say, if God was totally removed from a person, they would be totally reprobate, because even if that does occur with many people, with some it does not occur.
The Calvinistic doctrine says that all men are totally reprobate simply by virtue of being born. I find this ludicrous. Why did Jesus say the Kingdom of God belonged to the children? (Lk 18;16)
It is not enough to say, if God was totally removed from a person, they would be totally reprobate, because even if that does occur with many people, with some it does not occur.
The Calvinistic doctrine says that all men are totally reprobate simply by virtue of being born. I find this ludicrous. Why did Jesus say the Kingdom of God belonged to the children? (Lk 18;16)
Last edited:
gj
Yes, and in that that condition they can do nothing to please God. Rom 8:7-8
7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
All men without exception are born sinners in the flesh and cannot please God, not even Faith is possible since that pleases God Heb 11:6, so where does that leave man ?
Yes, and in that that condition they can do nothing to please God. Rom 8:7-8
7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
All men without exception are born sinners in the flesh and cannot please God, not even Faith is possible since that pleases God Heb 11:6, so where does that leave man ?
I accept that the reprobate mind cannot please God, but the minds of all men are not reprobate. There are distinctions to be made between the man who is born a sinner and who lapses into enmity to God, and the man who is born a sinner but who recognizes that after sin, there must be repentance. Such a mind is not at enmity with God. Sin is consequent on the flesh, in which nothing good lives, but the condition of one's mind varies between different people. In Rom 7;22 Paul says "For in my inner being I delight in God’s law." This is hardly consistent with the doctrine of total depravity.
Christ rescues the person with the non-reprobate mind. If the mind is also reprobate, one is truly lost forever because one could never delight in the gospel. In Rom 7;21 Paul says "I find this law at work: Although I want to do good, evil is right there with me." Yet there were people like Cornelius the Roman Centurion in Acts 10 who did good apart from Christ, and who it seems had little to repent of.
It seems to me that the doctrine of total depravity is confounding two different concepts. It is confounding the totally reprobate who rejects the gospel, with the sinner who is looking for a way out of his flesh that is captive to sin. Calvinists go on to say that only God can enable someone to accept the gospel. If it is so, it is an indiscriminate gift freely imparted for otherwise God could never judge those who rejected the gospel.
Christ rescues the person with the non-reprobate mind. If the mind is also reprobate, one is truly lost forever because one could never delight in the gospel. In Rom 7;21 Paul says "I find this law at work: Although I want to do good, evil is right there with me." Yet there were people like Cornelius the Roman Centurion in Acts 10 who did good apart from Christ, and who it seems had little to repent of.
It seems to me that the doctrine of total depravity is confounding two different concepts. It is confounding the totally reprobate who rejects the gospel, with the sinner who is looking for a way out of his flesh that is captive to sin. Calvinists go on to say that only God can enable someone to accept the gospel. If it is so, it is an indiscriminate gift freely imparted for otherwise God could never judge those who rejected the gospel.
Last edited:
The fact is Calvinists are institutionally incapable of reading the bible properly. They want to fit all situations and all theology into a tight, narrow system that is easily understandable and leaves no room for doubt or uncertainly. This enterprise is doomed. God isn't like that. Ephesians is written largely to ex-pagans whose minds did formerly have a substantial degree of enmity to God, but Romans was written largely to Jews who understood what the law was from birth and whose knew what good was, although they were powerless to do it under the law. Calvinism is just inadequate and a brutal method of dealing with spiritual issues.
No one said that it was some tight narrow system - if anything it puts a desperate need for grace in the believer - are there not wheat and tares in the church - that some will twist things to suit themselves?
Is our will sovereign?
Is our will our hope?
Is our will not fallen?
Is our will not bent on evil
no room for doubt or uncertainty? there is plenty of that - but it gets put onto a solid foundation - not perfectly, and there is certainly struggle and doubt - at least on my end - I don't know how God is going to do certain things, or bring about discipline that i need in my life - I don't know if my family is elect at all, all i can do is love them, witness when I can and pray to a God who knows all things
Is our will sovereign?
Is our will our hope?
Is our will not fallen?
Is our will not bent on evil
no room for doubt or uncertainty? there is plenty of that - but it gets put onto a solid foundation - not perfectly, and there is certainly struggle and doubt - at least on my end - I don't know how God is going to do certain things, or bring about discipline that i need in my life - I don't know if my family is elect at all, all i can do is love them, witness when I can and pray to a God who knows all things
Grace and sovereignty are important feature of the gospel, but they cannot be used to exclude the others, which is what happens in Calvinism. If everything could be left to a sovereign God, we here on earth wouldn't ever have to do anything. Just refrain from the grosser sins and we're saved? Paul would never have gone on his journeys. He was presdestined, wasn't he? Just write a nice fat tome of theology luxuriating in Antioch by the sea? Why not? This is what Calvinism teaches. Don't ever need to put yourself out, as you're predestined. Don't give up your TV because you're predestined. Just do the minimum and to heaven you'll go. Thus Calvin had Servetus prosecuted for an extra-territorial crime not even committed within the State of Geneva, with absolutely no heed as to whether or not it would affect his salvation. To many his act was just plain murder, yet as Calvin was sure he was predestined, there was no issue with it.
The grace of God appeared in Jesus Christ. He is the grace of God. Ti 2;11. Calvinists seem to think that some other grace is needed (is it "prevenient grace"?) to enable us to accept the grace of God in Jesus Christ? I am none too sure about this. Obviously God works out everything for his own ends and can and does determine who will be saved, but by what means, no-one knows. Nonetheless the gospel isn't all down to God and his grace. It is absolutely clear that election depends on every individual with faith proving the genuineness of their faith in this life.
The grace of God appeared in Jesus Christ. He is the grace of God. Ti 2;11. Calvinists seem to think that some other grace is needed (is it "prevenient grace"?) to enable us to accept the grace of God in Jesus Christ? I am none too sure about this. Obviously God works out everything for his own ends and can and does determine who will be saved, but by what means, no-one knows. Nonetheless the gospel isn't all down to God and his grace. It is absolutely clear that election depends on every individual with faith proving the genuineness of their faith in this life.
R
Why don't you all get it. Calvinism has nothing to do with Calvin. The ignorance on this site is astonishing. It took on his name that is all. The 5 points were put together at the synod of Dort as a rebuttal for the 5 points of Armenianism. If you don't like Calvinism , fine who cares but don't make up stuff. And I am sorry but the servetus story gets old. Calvin was not a nice guy, blah blah blah. The theology that carries his name is biblical. If you don't think so prove it with scripture. If not stop making up nonsense and ad Homs deal with facts.
Mat 7:20 "Thus you will know them by their fruits."
Actions speak louder than words. His theology is just Augustine rehashed. He was a murderer. Augustine was a Manichean who turned mankind into the "evil principle" in the good-evil duality that was Manicheanism. It opposes man to God. Instead of being partners, man and God are antagonists, except for the favoured few that are elect. Hence a caste distinction is introduced. By reducing the status of mankind to the level of animals, it led to centuries of cruelty and Catholic persecution, that was carried on by Calvin against his intellectual superiors, such as Servetus. It is seen today in the sneering contempt of Calvinists for all others except themselves.
Actions speak louder than words. His theology is just Augustine rehashed. He was a murderer. Augustine was a Manichean who turned mankind into the "evil principle" in the good-evil duality that was Manicheanism. It opposes man to God. Instead of being partners, man and God are antagonists, except for the favoured few that are elect. Hence a caste distinction is introduced. By reducing the status of mankind to the level of animals, it led to centuries of cruelty and Catholic persecution, that was carried on by Calvin against his intellectual superiors, such as Servetus. It is seen today in the sneering contempt of Calvinists for all others except themselves.
Last edited:
You said "The theology that carries his name is biblical." I asked, how do you reconcile that with Calvin's desire to kill those who thought differently from him? Is that reflective of biblical authority? You try addressing the issue.
The fact is the doctrine of total depravity is very close to what Hitler taught about the Jews. Look what happened to them at the hands of the "elect" Germans. What, ultimately, did Calvinism do for anyone? Where is Holland now? The most liberal country in Europe.
Europe did not need another rehash of Augustine. Catholicism was bad enough.
The fact is the doctrine of total depravity is very close to what Hitler taught about the Jews. Look what happened to them at the hands of the "elect" Germans. What, ultimately, did Calvinism do for anyone? Where is Holland now? The most liberal country in Europe.
Europe did not need another rehash of Augustine. Catholicism was bad enough.
Last edited:
Ephesians 2
11Therefore remember that formerly you, the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called "Uncircumcision " by the so-called "Circumcision," which is performed in the flesh by human hands-- 12remember that you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world.
looks a little more serious than having a "a substantial degree of enmity to God".
it says excluded and without hope.
it also says:
13But now in Christ Jesus you who formerly were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ
what's the difference then? there isn't one.
Romans 3:9
What shall we conclude then? Do we have any advantage? Not at all! For we have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under the power of sin.
11Therefore remember that formerly you, the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called "Uncircumcision " by the so-called "Circumcision," which is performed in the flesh by human hands-- 12remember that you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world.
looks a little more serious than having a "a substantial degree of enmity to God".
it says excluded and without hope.
it also says:
13But now in Christ Jesus you who formerly were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ
what's the difference then? there isn't one.
Romans 3:9
What shall we conclude then? Do we have any advantage? Not at all! For we have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under the power of sin.
are they and do they?
a kid who lies to his parents before he understands he has misused his free agency in yielding to the lusts of the flesh is not responsible, right?
"did you take that cookie?"
"no" (a lie, but not a sin yet?)
when does that kid know he has misused his free agency in yielding to the lusts of the flesh?
what age?
a kid who lies to his parents before he understands he has misused his free agency in yielding to the lusts of the flesh is not responsible, right?
"did you take that cookie?"
"no" (a lie, but not a sin yet?)
when does that kid know he has misused his free agency in yielding to the lusts of the flesh?
what age?