Calvinism is Gospel !

[Dave123]

The importance of the Gospel Doctrine of Total Depravity:

III. What Is The Importance Of This Doctrine? There are two remarks which we must make by way of conclusion. In the first place, the importance of this doctrine is theological. This means two things. First of all, the truth of total depravity is not an isolated doctrine. It is closely connected to and interwoven with the other four points of Calvinism. And because this is true, this doctrine is closely connected with the whole truth of Scripture. It is with good reason that our beautiful Heidelberg Catechism begins its entire discussion of the truth with the significant statement of total depravity: Are we then so corrupt that we are wholly incapable of doing any good (by righteous standards), and inclined to all wickedness (added by the system, not Scripture)? Indeed we are; except we are regenerated by the Spirit of God. It is on this foundation that the Catechism erects the whole structure of the truth. The truth of total depravity is part of the whole truth of Scripture. If this truth is denied, softened, vitiated in any respect, it becomes impossible to preserve any of the truth of God's Word. Historically this has proved true. And this lies in the nature of the case. And so this is true also of the five points of Calvinism. A denial of total depravity leads to a denial of sovereign grace. This in turn leads to a denial of limited atonement and unconditional election. And the preservation of the saints necessarily falls by the wayside. This cannot be demonstrated in detail in this chapter. This shall be amply made clear in the chapters to follow. But it ought to be clear that if man is not totally depraved, then grace cannot possibly be sovereign. To the extent that he is not totally depraved, he is capable of doing good. And to that extent he is capable of participating in the work of salvation. And to that extent grace is not sovereign at all. The two truths stand or fall together. And so it is with the whole of the truth. Secondly, all this means (and this is most serious) that the truth of total depravity is the only truth which preserves intact the glory of God. To the19extent that good is ascribed to man, glory is taken away from the only adorable God. To the extent that man is said to be other than the awful sentence of Scripture. God is no more the glorious sovereign and holy God of heaven and earth. And this brings us to the last point. This truth is also important as far as the life of the child of God is concerned. The doctrine of total depravity is not cold and abstract dogma. It is the living confession of the people of God. But even that confession is not something which they make of themselves. It is the fruit of grace. For characteristic of the sinner is that he exalts himself in pride, haughtiness and arrogance. In his frightening conceit he refuses to admit his total depravity and boasts of his own goodness before the face of the Most High. But when the shining light of God's holiness and the sovereign power of grace penetrates into the heart of God's elect child, and he sees himself standing exposed before the face of Him Who searches the hearts, then he hears thundering in his ears the awful sentence of Scripture. He sees himself as worthless, corrupt, depraved, incapable of doing any good. And the words of the saints of all ages ring in his own heart: "Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me." "God be merciful to me, a sinner." "Oh, wretched man that I am. Who shall deliver me from the body of this death?" This is the living confession of the child of God. And when that confession grips his soul and he sees himself as he truly is, as God's Word describes him, then, with tear-filled eyes, he can also see the cross. Only then. For in the consciousness of sin he can see the wonder, the power of the cross; the mercy and grace revealed there; the infinite splendor and love of God manifested in that blood-spattered tree. And seeing this, he sees the wonder of sovereign grace; and from his heart arises a doxology of praise and glory to God - the God of his salvation. https://cdn.sanity.io/files/z7a7pv3g/production/37f3292dbce08bff47ae23725c09a47b072efba9.pdf

The two emboldened statements in the quote above added by me

This argument above actually admits to interpreting Scripture by the system. And assumes things into statements that are never made. I agree, we can do nothing good from the flesh. At least, nothing that can be considered righteous and good by the Law's standards. But that does not include desire. Man can desire to do good. He just cannot do it without sin tainting it so as it cannot be called good or righteousness according to the Law. In other words, these cannot do anything that could be part of justifying themselves. That's Pauls' point in Romans 3. Romans 3 is about justification. It's about inability. The "T" in Tulip stands for total inability. That's the correct way to understand it. The inability is not in the desire, rather, it's in the ability to perform righteousness or good from the flesh.

Desire....

Romans 7:18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) nothing good dwells; for to will is present with me, but how to perform what is good I do not find.

Here you go. Not born again, not indwelt with the Spirit, yet they believed.

John 7:38-39 He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water." But this He spoke concerning the Spirit, whom those believing in Him would receive; for the Holy Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.

 

[Cameron143]

Wrong. This says nothing about a regenerated divine nature.

Romans 2

14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another

The law written in their hearts is not a redeemed individual? That's part of the new covenant.

 

[Dave123]

He denies being a sheep. Think of the implications of that!

The sheep were OT believers, already declared righteous, like Abraham, and predestined to be "in Christ" (Romans 8:28-30). We see that transition for the ones still alive recorded in Acts. All that the Father gave to Me (OT believrs).....

 

[Magenta]

The sheep were OT believers, already declared righteous, like Abraham, and predestined to be "in Christ" (Romans 8:28-30). We see that transition for the ones still alive recorded in Acts. All that the Father gave to Me (OT believrs).....

So you are not a sheep either? Not an heir of the Lamb of God?

Jesus not your Shepherd? Jesus not your door or gate?

The gate to the sheepfold. You came in some other way?

 

[brightfame52]

The two emboldened statements in the quote above added by me

This argument above actually admits to interpreting Scripture by the system. And assumes things into statements that are never made. I agree, we can do nothing good from the flesh. At least, nothing that can be considered righteous and good by the Law's standards. But that does not include desire. Man can desire to do good. He just cannot do it without sin tainting it so as it cannot be called good or righteousness according to the Law. In other words, these cannot do anything that could be part of justifying themselves. That's Pauls' point in Romans 3. Romans 3 is about justification. It's about inability. The "T" in Tulip stands for total inability. That's the correct way to understand it. The inability is not in the desire, rather, it's in the ability to perform righteousness or good from the flesh.

Desire....

Romans 7:18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) nothing good dwells; for to will is present with me, but how to perform what is good I do not find.

Here you go. Not born again, not indwelt with the Spirit, yet they believed.

John 7:38-39 He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water." But this He spoke concerning the Spirit, whom those believing in Him would receive; for the Holy Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.

You claim that Total Depravity is strictly about performance and does not include desire. You argue that an unregenerate person living in the flesh can independently possess a genuine spiritual desire to believe and please God, even if they lack the strength to execute it. This is a massive theological blunder that flatly contradicts the explicit wording of the texts you just quoted.

Let let us place your timeline and your proof-texts under an unyielding grammatical and covenantal lens.

1. The Catastrophic Misreading of Romans 7:18

You wave Romans 7:18—"to will is present with me, but how to perform what is good I do not find"—as a trophy to prove that an unregenerate person can "will" the good.

This interpretation completely collapses the moment we look at how Paul defines the unregenerate mind just one chapter later. Look at Romans 8:7-8:

"Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God."

If a person "in the flesh" is in a fixed state of enmity against God and cannot subject themselves to God's law, it is a spiritual impossibility for that same carnal mind to simultaneously generate a holy, humble desire to submit to Christ.

The "will" present in Romans 7:18 is not the desire of a dead, unregenerate fleshly sinner. It is the internal wrestling of a regenerated apostle who has a new nature that loves the law of God (Romans 7:22), but who is still trapped in a mortal body battling indwelling sin. By applying the holy spiritual desires of Romans 7 to a spiritually dead, unregenerate man, you are claiming that an enemy of God can independently desire the things of God, making Paul flatly contradict his own definition of the carnal mind in Romans 8.

2. The Unlocking of John 7:38-39 and the Indwelling Timeline

You point to John 7:38-39—"this He spoke concerning the Spirit, whom those believing in Him would receive; for the Holy Spirit was not yet given"—and claim this proves people believed before they were born again or given spiritual life.

Your argument completely ignores the explicit distinction between the passive quickening of regeneration and the active indwelling of the Spirit of Promise.

As a text-critical workman following the legacy of John Gill, we must look at the exact historical-grammatical context of John 7. When John says the Holy Spirit was "not yet given," he does not mean the Holy Spirit was entirely inactive in the world or that the elect were savingly believing while remaining spiritually dead corpses.

• If a person could believe while remaining unregenerate and dead in the flesh, then Jesus’ words to Nicodemus would be false: "Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God" (John 3:3). A dead man cannot see the beauty of Christ to believe in Him.
• What was "not yet given" in John 7:39 was the New Covenant Pentecostal outpouring of the Spirit of Adoption—the permanent, corporate sealing of the believer (Ephesians 1:13).

The timeline is flawless: The Holy Spirit secretly and passively quickens the elect sinner, giving them the spiritual capacity to see their sin and see Christ. Empowered by this new life, they immediately exercise initial faith. After they believe, they are judicially awarded the indwelling Person of the Spirit as a seal of their adoption. You are confusing the root (the quickening) with the fruit (the indwelling seal), forcing faith to exist in a dead soul. [1, 2, 3]

3. The Definition of Inability: Desiring is Performing

You try to split "desire" from "ability," claiming man can desire salvation from the flesh but simply can't earn it. But in the economy of God's law, a genuine spiritual desire is itself a righteous spiritual act.

• Mark 12:30 commands us to love the Lord with all our heart, soul, and mind.
• Loving, desiring, and willing to submit to God are the ultimate spiritual fulfillments of the law.

If a totally depraved sinner can independently generate a genuine desire for Christ from their own unrenewed soul, then they have performed the greatest spiritual good in the universe entirely on their own. Salvation would no longer be of sovereign grace; it would be a joint venture where man provides the holy desire, and God provides the power.

Conclusion
Your theology attempts to build a halfway house between life and death. You want a sinner who is legally dead but behaviorally searching; a sinner who hates God in their carnal mind but secretly desires Him in their willpower.
The Scriptures allow for no such compromise. Left to the flesh, man has zero holy desires. He does not seek after God, and he cannot please God. When an elect sinner desires Christ and cries out for mercy, it is not because their corrupt flesh suddenly made a good choice. It is because the sovereign voice of the Spirit has already quickened them from the grave, making their very desire the first kinetic heartbeat of a new, blood-bought life. [1, 2, 3, 4]

---

The poster wants to separate 'desire' from 'ability,' claiming that a dead sinner in the flesh can independently generate the holy desire to believe. But Philippians 2:13 completely obliterates this carnal philosophy. Paul does not say God only works the 'performance'; he states unequivocally that God works in us both to will and to do. The very first inkling of a desire for Christ, the very first heartbeat of saving faith, is not a product of human willpower—it is an omnipotent, internal creation of the Holy Spirit (energōn). You cannot claim a sinner believes prior to being quickened, because according to Philippians 2:13, a sinner cannot even possess the will to believe unless God has already gone to work inside their dead soul."

---

 

[Anchorite]

The law written in their hearts is not a redeemed individual? That's part of the new covenant.

These are gentiles in Romans 2 who have not the law and have not repented, but by nature, not by Spirit, do what is in the law.

3 And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?

4 Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?

 

[brightfame52]

These are gentiles in Romans 2 who have not the law and have not repented, but by nature, not by Spirit, do what is in the law.

3 And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?

4 Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?

see post 4328 https://christianchat.com/threads/calvinism-is-gospel.223761/page-217#post-5785741

 

[Dave123]

So you are not a sheep either? Not an heir of the Lamb of God?

Jesus not your Shepherd? Jesus not your door or gate?

The gate to the sheepfold. You came in some other way?

In the context of the modern Calvinist argument, and the passages that they use to try to prove that the sheep were sheep from the foundations of the world, those passages are speaking of OT believers. The sheep, those who already belong to God. And yes, I'm His sheep. Different context.

 

[Anchorite]

We know that the gentiles, who do by nature the things contained in the law, are not regenerated.

Regenerated gentiles, and Jews, are called the church of God.


I Corinthians 10:32

Give no offense, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God,


Thus, unregenerated Gentiles, not being totally depraved, can obey the things contained in the law, becoming a law unto themselves. They then accuse or (what Brightflame censored from the scripture text) excuse each other.


Romans 2

14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another

 

[dkontner]

Romans 2​

28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

 

[Dave123]

You claim that Total Depravity is strictly about performance and does not include desire. You argue that an unregenerate person living in the flesh can independently possess a genuine spiritual desire to believe and please God, even if they lack the strength to execute it. This is a massive theological blunder that flatly contradicts the explicit wording of the texts you just quoted.

Your position assumes a two option theory. The flesh or born again. But there are many ways that God can draw people to Himself, like His Word or His presence. In fact, the whole OT is proof of this. Again, they believed, but were not born again, and were not indwelt (John 7:38-39) is perfectly in line with what I've stated. perfectly hostile to you system. Call it what you like, but todays Calvinist claims that two option theory when they claim that man must be born again to believe, and then deny that very same argument in the same post, when you said this.

Bright said:
"Your argument completely ignores the explicit distinction between the passive quickening of regeneration and the active indwelling of the Spirit of Promise."

Is there now a third option for you, or is it still born again or the flesh? Are you trying to build a halfway house from death to life, Bright? Remember, with the Spirit of Christ in us, we have Christ Jesus, without the Spirit of Christ in us, we are dead, don't have Jesus. There is no regeneration without the indwelling.

Yet, they believed. (John 7:38-39)

Let let us place your timeline and your proof-texts under an unyielding grammatical and covenantal lens.

1. The Catastrophic Misreading of Romans 7:18

You wave Romans 7:18—"to will is present with me, but how to perform what is good I do not find"—as a trophy to prove that an unregenerate person can "will" the good.

This interpretation completely collapses the moment we look at how Paul defines the unregenerate mind just one chapter later. Look at Romans 8:7-8:

If a person "in the flesh" is in a fixed state of enmity against God and cannot subject themselves to God's law, it is a spiritual impossibility for that same carnal mind to simultaneously generate a holy, humble desire to submit to Christ.

The "will" present in Romans 7:18 is not the desire of a dead, unregenerate fleshly sinner. It is the internal wrestling of a regenerated apostle who has a new nature that loves the law of God (Romans 7:22), but who is still trapped in a mortal body battling indwelling sin. By applying the holy spiritual desires of Romans 7 to a spiritually dead, unregenerate man, you are claiming that an enemy of God can independently desire the things of God, making Paul flatly contradict his own definition of the carnal mind in Romans 8.

Lets read more context, and we'll see that this is exactly what I've been saying. Man cannot satisfy God's righteous requirements, not one time, therefore they cannot even contribute, if that were even possible, to justify themselves. That's Paul's whole argument in Romans 3. If you have the Spirit indwelling, you have the life. If you don't have the Spirit indwelling you don't have the life. The life is the regeneration.

Romans 8:7-11 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be. So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God. But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His. And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is life because of righteousness. But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you.

Here's your test, ready? When did these receive the life, before or after they believed?

Ephesians 1:13 In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise,

Having believed, they received the indwelling life that regenerates them. Simple simple.

Galatians 3:2-3 This only I want to learn from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun [that life] in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh?

Jesus is the Author and Finisher of that life, the life that is received as a result of our believing.

These are OT believes, who were given the right to be Sons of God, born again (John 1:12-13), but they had to wait for Jesus to be lifted up first (John 3:14-15). That's when the Holy spirit was given, at Pentecost, the LIFE. Why do you think that the Apostles were bumbling, stumbling, unlearned scaredy cats before Pentecost, but after they received the promised indwelling, and became born again, there were the exact opposite? This is the power, the life, the indwelling...

John 16:7-14 Nevertheless I tell you the truth. It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you. And when He has come, He will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: of sin, because they do not believe in Me; of righteousness, because I go to My Father and you see Me no more; of judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged. I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you.

This same promise is repeated over and over in John, John 3:1-16, 14:26, 15:26, 16:7-16, all the way back to Ezekiel 36:26-27. This what John the Baptist prophesied about Matthew 3:11, confirmed in Acts 1:1-5.

That's the promise that the OT believers died not receiving. Hebrews 11:39-40.

I'll do the rest later

 

[brightfame52]

Your position assumes a two option theory. The flesh or born again. But there are many ways that God can draw people to Himself, like His Word or His presence. In fact, the whole OT is proof of this. Again, they believed, but were not born again, and were not indwelt (John 7:38-39) is perfectly in line with what I've stated. perfectly hostile to you system. Call it what you like, but todays Calvinist claims that two option theory when they claim that man must be born again to believe, and then deny that very same argument in the same post, when you said this.

Bright said:
"Your argument completely ignores the explicit distinction between the passive quickening of regeneration and the active indwelling of the Spirit of Promise."

Is there now a third option for you, or is it still born again or the flesh? Are you trying to build a halfway house from death to life, Bright? Remember, with the Spirit of Christ in us, we have Christ Jesus, without the Spirit of Christ in us, we are dead, don't have Jesus. There is no regeneration without the indwelling.

Yet, they believed. (John 7:38-39)



Lets read more context, and we'll see that this is exactly what I've been saying. Man cannot satisfy God's righteous requirements, not one time, therefore they cannot even contribute, if that were even possible, to justify themselves. That's Paul's whole argument in Romans 3. If you have the Spirit indwelling, you have the life. If you don't have the Spirit indwelling you don't have the life. The life is the regeneration.

Romans 8:7-11 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be. So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God. But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His. And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is life because of righteousness. But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you.

You accuse me of creating a "third option" and a "halfway house from death to life." You confidently state that "there is no regeneration without the indwelling" and that "the life is the regeneration." By collapsing these two distinct works of the Holy Spirit into one vague category, you have boxed yourself into an absolute theological and logical disaster.

Let let us place your exact words under the microscopic lens of Scripture to expose the fatal crash in your system.

1. The Catastrophic Dilemma of Your Timeline

Let’s look at the absolute absurdity your timeline creates. You state:

• "Without the Spirit of Christ in us, we are dead, don't have Jesus."
• Then you state: "Having believed, they received the indwelling life that regenerates them."

Follow your own math. If a person is completely spiritually dead and in the flesh before they receive the indwelling Spirit, and they only receive that Spirit after they believe—then who performed the act of believing?

According to your timeline, the dead man in the flesh believed while he was still dead and in the flesh! You have a spiritually dead corpse, a man who is actively at enmity with God and cannot please God (Romans 8:7-8), suddenly producing the ultimate spiritual good—saving faith—entirely from his own corrupt flesh, just to convince God to give him the Spirit.

This isn't lazy theology; this is pure Pelagianism. You have made the flesh the author of faith, and you have made the holy, sovereign grace of God a mere reactionary prize that responds to human performance.

2. The Absolute Distinction: The Seed vs. The Seal

You ask me if there is a third option. No. There are only two states: dead in Adam, or alive in Christ. But within the state of life, there is an objective, biblical distinction between the passive infusion of the principle of grace (quickening) and the active indwelling of the Spirit of adoption (the Seal).

As a text-critical workman following the legacy of John Gill, we see this distinction perfectly preserved in the text, while your system completely blurs it:

• The Principle of Grace (The Seed / Quickening): This is God's secret, instantaneous, monergistic voice commanding life into a dead soul (Ephesians 2:5, John 5:25). It is the removal of the heart of stone and the creation of a heart of flesh (Ezekiel 36:26). This gives the soul spiritual eyes to see its sin and a spiritual capacity to desire Christ (Philippians 2:13). At this millisecond, the sinner is quickened, but they are not yet sealed with the corporate indwelling Spirit of adoption.
• The Gift of the Spirit (The Seal / Indwelling): This is what Ephesians 1:13 and Galatians 3:2 are talking about. Equipped with a newly quickened heart, the sinner immediately hears the Gospel and exercises initial faith. The moment they believe, they are judicially awarded the indwelling Person of the Spirit as the permanent, comforting Seal of their adoption.

By keeping the passive root (quickening) distinct from the active fruit (indwelling), the biblical timeline remains flawless. Faith is the effect of the initial quickening, and the cause of the experiential sealing. Your system forces faith to exist in a dead soul, flatly violating Romans 8:8.

3. The Pentecost Trap: Disproving Your Own Point

You point to the bumbling, scared disciples before Pentecost and their bold transformation after Pentecost to argue that they weren't born again until Acts 2. You have completely misunderstood the historical-grammatical theology of the Covenants.

If the disciples were completely unregenerate, dead in the flesh, and lacked the Spirit before Pentecost as you claim, then how do you explain Jesus' explicit words to them in John 15:3—"Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you"? How do you explain Peter's confession in Matthew 16:17, where Jesus says, "Flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven"?

Flesh and blood cannot reveal Christ. A dead man cannot confess Christ. The disciples were internally quickened by the Spirit under the Old Covenant economy to believe in the Messiah. The explosive difference at Pentecost was not that they finally transitioned from death to life; it was that the finished work of Christ allowed for the New Covenant, permanent, corporate indwelling of the Spirit of Promise—a glory that could not legally be poured out until the King was glorified (John 7:39).

Conclusion

Your system presents a chaotic contradiction. You quote Romans 8:7 to prove the flesh cannot please God, and then you immediately turn around and claim that the flesh pleases God by believing the Gospel before it has any spiritual life. You are trying to get the fruit of faith without the root of quickening.

The Scriptures present a far more majestic and consistent truth. God does not wait for a corpse to make a good choice. He sovereignly smashes the heart of stone, creates the heart of flesh, and gives the sinner the very eyes they need to look to the cross. Faith is not a work generated by a dead soul to get the Spirit; faith is the very first gasp of air from a soul that has already been sovereignly quickened by the Almighty. Also:

"My rival is trapped in a hopeless contradiction. He claims the disciples were not born again until Pentecost, yet John 1:12-13 explicitly states that anyone who received and believed in Jesus during His earthly ministry was born, not of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. The Greek text uses the aorist passive egennēthēsan, proving that their spiritual birth was a completed, sovereign act of God prior to their act of believing. If they weren't born of God until Pentecost, then their three years of faith and discipleship were a spiritual impossibility, because a dead corpse cannot confess Christ. John 1:13 proves that the disciples were internally quickened before Pentecost, and completely explodes your theory that faith is generated by the unrenewed flesh." [1, 2, 3, 4]

---

---

 

[John146]

You became elect "in Christ" (Ephesians 1). Think of the implications of that.

I don't see the word "elect" in Ephesians 1. I see the word chosen as in the spiritual blessings in the heavenly places that, before the foundation of the world, were chosen to be given to those who are in Christ.

 

[Roger316]

Nit picking. The world lies under Satan's control. (1 John 5:19). Satan offered Lord Jesus all the kingdoms of the world. Kingdoms are made up of people. And those Kingdoms belonged to Satan. Adam handed his God given authority to Satan. Satan imagined that Lord Jesus could be tempted to do the same.

Satan is the sinner from the beginning. 1 John 3:8. So he sinned even before Adam was created. So yes, the lost are slaves to Satan and to sin.

​

I agree with you that the world lies under Satan’s influence and that his power operates through deception. But that’s exactly why I’m pushing back on the word slavery. Jesus never says we are slaves of Satan. He consistently says we are slaves of sin, because the bondage comes from our own desires, not from Satan forcing us.

Satan’s control is real, but it is not coercive. He doesn’t own people the way a master owns slaves; he deceives, lies, and manipulates. People follow him voluntarily because they follow the desires of their own hearts. That’s why Jesus locates the slavery in sin itself, not in Satan as a master.

So yes, Satan is a deceiver from the beginning, and yes, the world lies under his sway — but the bondage Scripture describes is moral, not metaphysical. We are not chained to Satan; we are trapped by our own sin until Christ frees us.

 

[JimiSurvivor]

1. Dismantling the Semantic Escape: "Depravity" vs. "Sin Nature"

Your refusal to use the word "depraved" because you think it means "incapable of doing anything" proves you are fighting a strawman.

• As previously established, Total Depravity does not mean a person is a completely inactive block of wood or a zombie. It means that sin has entirely corrupted every part of man’s nature—his mind, his emotions, and his will.
• A depraved man can run governments, perform surgery, and build civilizations. But what he is utterly incapable of doing is performing a spiritually good act, such as choosing, loving, or submitting to the true God (Romans 8:7-8).
• He is not physically paralyzed; he is spiritually dead (Ephesians 2:1). By admitting man is "unable to know God," you have conceded the entire definition of Total Depravity, whether you like the label or not.

You assume that those who oppose the theology of Augustinian-Calvinism do so because they DO NOT UNDERSTAND the concepts of that theological system. I, for one, do not take depravity the way such people define it as being "incapable of doing anything" which is itself a straw man.

You said here that total depravity means sin has entirely corrupted every part of man’s nature—his mind, his emotions, and his will the special emphasis being on the WILL being INOPERATIVE at least with regard to doing anything good. However, this is not what the scriptures say, which often calls individuals "righteous" under the OLD Covenant as well as the NEW.

The Hebrew word for righteousness, "tsedeq," and the Greek word "dikaios," both convey the idea of being just, virtuous, and in right standing with God. Righteousness is not merely an external adherence to rules but involves a heart aligned with God's will.

A. Old Testament Examples:
1. Noah · Noah is described as a righteous man, "blameless among his contemporaries" (Genesis 6:9). He walked with God and was chosen to build the ark, saving his family and the animal kingdom from the flood due to his faithfulness and obedience.

2. Abraham · Known as the father of faith, Abraham's belief in God was "credited to him as righteousness" (Genesis 15:6). His willingness to obey God, even to the point of sacrificing his son Isaac, exemplifies his righteousness.

3. Job · Job is portrayed as a man of integrity who "feared God and shunned evil" (Job 1:1). Despite severe trials and suffering, Job maintained his righteousness, trusting in God's justice and sovereignty.

B. New Testament Examples:
1. Joseph, Husband of Mary · Joseph is described as a righteous man (Matthew 1:19). His decision to quietly divorce Mary upon learning of her pregnancy, and later his obedience to the angel's message, demonstrate his just character.

2. John the Baptist · John is noted for his righteous life and his role in preparing the way for Jesus (Mark 6:20). His call to repentance and baptism for the forgiveness of sins was a hallmark of his ministry.

3. Simeon · Simeon, who awaited the consolation of Israel, is described as "righteous and devout" (Luke 2:25). His recognition of Jesus as the Messiah highlights his spiritual insight and righteousness.

4. Cornelius · A centurion described as "a righteous and God-fearing man" (Acts 10:22), Cornelius's prayers and almsgiving were acknowledged by God, leading to the spread of the Gospel to the Gentiles.

B. Many times the Bible, described people were as righteous. We do not take this to mean in the absolute sense. None of those people were PERFECTLY or PERPETUALLY righteous. Only the Lamb completely met God's standard and, because of that, He has the special can be the sacrifice for sin. The Son is worthy to receive all glory honor and power and because of that He has the right to sit at God's right hand on the throne.

C. In Augustinian-Calvinism, Total Depravity is based on the idea of ORIGINAL SIN which, I have pointed out, was the result of Augustines translational misinterpretations of Romans 5:12. Since he was ignorant of the Koine Greek language in which Paul and the had writtem, Augustine depended on corrupt Latin translations. These led him to read Romans 5:12 as: “in quo omnes peccaverunt” or “in whom [in Adam] all sinned”. If all mankind had indeed sinned in Adam then ALL MANKIND would be just as guilty of Adam's sin as Adam himself.

D. This would necessarily have included all descendents of Adam including the unborn fetuses, newly born as well as children.
Augustine was okay with this since all he had been looking for was a doctrinal rationale for the practice of INFANT BAPTISM.
Romans 5:12 SEEMED to give Augustine this rationale although, in reality, had completely misunderstood it. It is worth noting that none of the other Church Fathers who lived and taught for the 300 years PRIOR to Augustine had ever taught Original Sin. Even to this day the Eastern Orthodox Chuch denies ORIGINAL SIN.

 

[JimiSurvivor]

A. If you believe Paul was setting up a "stark textual contrast"between TWO SEPARATE KINDS OF CALLS , one which is outward and human and the other which is inward and divine in hich verses does Paul does make this point? Chapter 7 is about the inadequacy of the law to produce life in Him. After struggling with and failing to do what he knew he SHOULD do he finally came to the conclusion (at the end of that chapter 7) that HE could not deliver himself but needed Christ to deliver Him.

B. Chapter 8 begins with how his experience radically changed once he became a believer in Jesus. The very first thing that changed was that he was "set free from the law of sin and death." Thus began his new way of life walking in the Spirit, which he describes throughout chapter 8

C. Do you see any place where he takes the time to explain the "TWO CALLS" you have alluded to? He does not say anything about this.
The sequence of God's redemptive plan outlined in Romans 8 BEGINS with the person already IN CHRIST.

D Paul introduces the chapter saying There is therefore NOW no condemnation for those who are IN CHRIST JESUS. 2 For the law of the Spirit of life IN CHRIST JESUS has set us free from the law of sin and death (Romans 8:1-2)
Jesus what follows is a description of what it is like to walk in the Spirit. The Spirit is mentioned in almost every verse.


To say God Himself issued two calls one of which He deprives of power rendering it INEFFECTUAL makes God deceitful - like a counterfeiter.

Romand 8:28-30 is NOT separate from the spiritual walk we commence once the Spirit is no longer alienated from us.
The ENTIRE chapter is not about living apart from God but living BY the Spirit. He guides, empowers and fills us so we can walk as Christ would have us. The New Covenant is not just about receiving forgiveness. It is also about having His nature of love moved into our hearts

Chapter 8 begins with being IN CHRIST which, according to Jesus Himself and His beloved disciple John refers to our covenant union with Him. In John 15:4-5 Jesus tells us to: 4 Abide [remain, continue, stay] in Him, and He will remain [abide, continue, stay] in US.
The word abide in this verse 4 is in the imperative mood which makes it a command. It is also in the present tense. which, ordinarily, tells less about when the action occurs as HOW it unfolds. Paul's use of the Greek present tense indicates that the required action is supposed to go on continually or repeatedly

Here is His promise of abundant life. At the same time, He also does not deny that there is a possibility of our NOT REMAINING IN HIM:
6 If anyone does not remain in Me, he is like a branch that is thrown away and withers. Such branches are gathered up, thrown into the fire, and burned.
(John 15:6)


So far, you have not yet shown yourself to be a text-critical workman. Most of your points cannot be found in the written text but have been imported from extra-Biblical sources like Calvin and Luther. You have become so blinded by confirmation bias that you can no longer read the scriptures any other way.


1). Since the written text of scripture says NOTHING about an outward versus inward call I reject the way you have framed this
question.
2). Second, I never said, nor do I believe that mankind comes to a saving knowledge of the truth totally INDEPENDENTLY.
3). The Holy Spirit plays an essential role in PERSUADING us that we are sinners, and in BEARING WITNESS TO US that His claims are
true and he really does have the power to save us if we will but trust HIm
4). Although the Spirit's influence is absolutely necessary in this process it is not sufficient since we must believe the truth and submit
ourselves to Him.
5). The Holy Spirit's influence is not irresistable. The Bible says we can RESIST, HARDEN OUR HEARTS, GRIEVE AND QUENCH the Holy
Spirit's influence
6). Next when the word has God saying All day long I have stretched forth my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people.
this gesture is meant to convey God's great mercy and condescention
7). Saying that God Himself was blocking their reception of the truth make His "reaching out" to them theater.
8). If God were simultaneously hardening their hearts then it would be gross insincerity and deception, a mere game
9). These verses say that EVERYONE who heard the report DID NOT BELIEVE IT but we already knew that SOME BELIEVED WHILE OTHERS
DID NOT
10) Where we differ is on the WHY. Since I believe mankind by virtue of having been created in the image of God was given the gift of self determination or moral agency. I can easily explain their resistance as being hard headed and unwilling to mend their ways.
11). You have to resort to claiming the existence of some sort of polluted ESSENCE
12). Let us consider the times when Jesus called people. Not everyone left all to follow after Him. Many times the scriptures tell us WHY they remained in disobedience and their excuses were not mysterious. One had bought a field, another had purchased oxen, and a third had just married. These excuses reveal misplaced priorities and a lack of commitment to God's kingdom.
12). In your scheme, their different responses were due to the fact that GOD gave them DIFFERENT KINDS of CALLS.
Some were given true calls that had the grace to compell obedience while others were given callings which appeared to be INDENTICAL but which God had deprived of power. This strikes me as being deceptive. However, In order to preserve what you see as God's POWER you find it necessary to make God responsible for our sins.
13). Since people are punished for not obeying this makes God responsible both for their rebellion and for ensuring their punishment

 

[brightfame52]

You assume that those who oppose the theology of Augustinian-Calvinism do so because they DO NOT UNDERSTAND the concepts of that theological system. I, for one, do not take depravity the way such people define it as being "incapable of doing anything" which is itself a straw man.

You said here that total depravity means sin has entirely corrupted every part of man’s nature—his mind, his emotions, and his will the special emphasis being on the WILL being INOPERATIVE at least with regard to doing anything good. However, this is not what the scriptures say, which often calls individuals "righteous" under the OLD Covenant as well as the NEW.

The Hebrew word for righteousness, "tsedeq," and the Greek word "dikaios," both convey the idea of being just, virtuous, and in right standing with God. Righteousness is not merely an external adherence to rules but involves a heart aligned with God's will.

A. Old Testament Examples:
1. Noah · Noah is described as a righteous man, "blameless among his contemporaries" (Genesis 6:9). He walked with God and was chosen to build the ark, saving his family and the animal kingdom from the flood due to his faithfulness and obedience.

2. Abraham · Known as the father of faith, Abraham's belief in God was "credited to him as righteousness" (Genesis 15:6). His willingness to obey God, even to the point of sacrificing his son Isaac, exemplifies his righteousness.

3. Job · Job is portrayed as a man of integrity who "feared God and shunned evil" (Job 1:1). Despite severe trials and suffering, Job maintained his righteousness, trusting in God's justice and sovereignty.

B. New Testament Examples:
1. Joseph, Husband of Mary · Joseph is described as a righteous man (Matthew 1:19). His decision to quietly divorce Mary upon learning of her pregnancy, and later his obedience to the angel's message, demonstrate his just character.

2. John the Baptist · John is noted for his righteous life and his role in preparing the way for Jesus (Mark 6:20). His call to repentance and baptism for the forgiveness of sins was a hallmark of his ministry.

3. Simeon · Simeon, who awaited the consolation of Israel, is described as "righteous and devout" (Luke 2:25). His recognition of Jesus as the Messiah highlights his spiritual insight and righteousness.

4. Cornelius · A centurion described as "a righteous and God-fearing man" (Acts 10:22), Cornelius's prayers and almsgiving were acknowledged by God, leading to the spread of the Gospel to the Gentiles.

You have constructed a massive, historically inaccurate smoke screen to avoid the unyielding text of Scripture. You claim that Total Depravity is a "4th-century invention" born out of Augustine's ignorance of Greek, and you throw out a list of "righteous" biblical characters to prove that the human will is not spiritually bound.

Let let us place your historical claims and your linguistic assumptions under an absolute text-critical microscope to expose the fraudulent nature of your argument.

1. Slaying the Historical Lie: The Pre-Augustine Church Fathers

You boldly claim that "none of the other Church Fathers who lived and taught for the 300 years prior to Augustine had ever taught Original Sin." This is historically and patristically false. You are repeating internet myths instead of reading the early church text.
Long before Augustine was even born, the early Greek-speaking and Latin-speaking fathers explicitly taught the total ruin of the human race and the binding of the will inherited from Adam:

• Irenaeus of Lyons (AD 130–202) — A Greek Father: In Against Heresies (Book 5, Chapter 16), he wrote that in the first Adam, "we offended God, not performing His commandment," and that we were "bound by debt" to death because of Adam’s transgression. He states we lost the image of God and became spiritually dead.
• Tertullian (AD 155–220): In De Anima (Chapter 40), he explicitly coined the concept of vitium originis (the fault of our origin), stating that every soul is "condemned in Adam" and remains under spiritual deadness until it is renewed by the Spirit.
• Cyprian of Carthage (AD 200–258): Writing in AD 253 (Epistle 58), long before Augustine, Cyprian explicitly defended infant baptism for the exact reason you claim Augustine invented! He stated that an infant needs baptism because "he has by his first birth contracted the contagion of the ancient death from Adam."

Your claim that Augustine invented this doctrine out of a corrupt Latin text completely collapses under historical scrutiny. The early church universally recognized that the entire human race fell into spiritual bankruptcy in Adam.

2. The Absolute Exegesis of Romans 5:12: You Cannot Escape the Greek text

You attempt to evade Romans 5:12 by claiming Augustine misspelled a Latin phrase (in quo omnes peccaverunt). Let’s throw Augustine and the Latin translation in the trash entirely. Let's look exclusively at the literal Koine Greek text that Paul wrote:

δι’ ἑνὸς ἀνθρώπου ἡ ἁμαρτία εἰς τὸν κόσμον εἰσῆλθεν καὶ διὰ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ὁ θάνατος, καὶ οὕτως εἰς πάντας ἀνθρώπους ὁ θάνατος διῆλθεν, ἐφ’ ᾧ πάντες ἥμαρτον

Even if you translate the Greek phrase eph' hō (ἐφ’ ᾧ) as "because" or "inasmuch as" rather than "in whom," you still completely destroy your own theology in the very next verses. Look at the plain wording of Romans 5:14-19, which you deliberately ignored:

• Romans 5:15: "...through the offence of one many be dead..."
• Romans 5:17: "...by one man's offence death reigned by one..."
• Romans 5:18: "...by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation..."
• Romans 5:19: "...by one man's disobedience many were made sinners..."

Paul says it four times in five verses. He doesn't say, "Many became sinners because they copied Adam's bad example." He states unequivocally that by the disobedience of ONE man (Adam), the many were judicially constituted as sinners.

The Greek verb for "were made" is κατεστάθησαν (katestathēsan), which is an aorist passive indicative meaning "to be judicially appointed or legally constituted." Before any human being ever commits a personal act of sin, they are born legally constituted as a sinner under the federal condemnation of Adam. That is the ironclad Greek text, and no amount of complaining about Augustine will alter Paul's grammar.

3. The Re-Contextualization of Your "Righteous" Characters

You bring out Noah, Job, Simeon, and Cornelius as if their moral behavior disproves Total Depravity. You are making the exact same error I exposed in my last post: confusing external civil morality with intrinsic spiritual righteousness.

Let’s look at your own examples to see how they became righteous:

• Noah (Genesis 6:8-9): You state Noah was righteous and blameless. But why? Look at the verse immediately preceding your proof-text: "But Noah found grace [unmerited favor] in the eyes of the Lord." Noah wasn't righteous by his independent free will; he was righteous because God sovereignly covered him in grace.
• Abraham (Genesis 15:6): You admit his belief was "credited to him as righteousness." If his righteousness was inherent or generated by his fleshly will, God wouldn't need to "credit" it to him. It was an external, imputed righteousness. Left to his own nature, Abraham was a pagan idolater in Ur whom God sovereignly quickened (Joshua 24:2).
• Cornelius (Acts 10): You claim Cornelius was righteous before the Gospel. But look at what Peter explicitly confesses about the Gentiles in Acts 11:18 when describing Cornelius’s house: "Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life." Cornelius’s prayers and fear of God were the direct fruit of God having already granted him repentance.

Every single "righteous" person you listed was a flawed, broken, fallen sinner whose righteousness was a sovereign gift of God's grace, not a product of their unrenewed human will.

Conclusion

Your argument relies on a carnal, fleshly pride that refuses to look at the diagnostic report of Scripture. You want a salvation where Adam's sin didn't really break us, where the human will is still completely capable of pleasing God on its own, and where "righteousness" is a badge man earns by his own performance.

But Paul's Greek text remains an unyielding executioner. In Romans 3:10, he leaves zero exceptions for your characters: "There is none righteous, no, not one." If Noah, Job, or Abraham were righteous by their own willpower, Paul would be a liar. They were righteous because they were internally quickened by the Spirit, covered in sovereign grace, and legally credited with a righteousness that did not belong to their fleshly nature. You are fighting against the clear covenantal theology of the scriptures to protect human autonomy, but the text remains absolute: "By one man's disobedience, the many were made sinners" (Romans 5:19).

---

 

[Genez]

Well, God knows we do not deny His Son and the gospel. You, are judged by the words you use to judge others which you do in frequency and with great nastiness.

You are judged, because you do not judge righteously. You judge people's hearts and that is not your place. God looks on the heart and no matter how right you think you might be, you have no business calling others names and accusing them because you disasgree.

Are you having fun?

Hebrews 12:15 covered what she appears to suffer from.

"See to it that no one falls short of the grace of God ​

and that no bitter root grows up to cause trouble and defile many."​

​

It could effect the entire forum if too many fail to maintain their own personal walk in the filling of the Spirit.

grace and peace ...........

 

[Gideon300]

I agree with you that the world lies under Satan’s influence and that his power operates through deception. But that’s exactly why I’m pushing back on the word slavery. Jesus never says we are slaves of Satan. He consistently says we are slaves of sin, because the bondage comes from our own desires, not from Satan forcing us.

Satan’s control is real, but it is not coercive. He doesn’t own people the way a master owns slaves; he deceives, lies, and manipulates. People follow him voluntarily because they follow the desires of their own hearts. That’s why Jesus locates the slavery in sin itself, not in Satan as a master.

So yes, Satan is a deceiver from the beginning, and yes, the world lies under his sway — but the bondage Scripture describes is moral, not metaphysical. We are not chained to Satan; we are trapped by our own sin until Christ frees us.

I'll agree to disagree.

 

[Gideon300]

You are ignoring all the righteous acts performed by these and other individuals.

Your Calvinist “total depravity” theory is unbiblical.

God called David a man after His own heart.

Abraham is called the father of faith.


1 Kings 15:11

Asa did what was right in the eyes of the Lord, as his father David had done.


2 Chronicles 26:3-5

Uzziah was sixteen years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem fifty-two years. His mother’s name was Jekoliah; she was from Jerusalem.

He did what was right in the eyes of the Lord, just as his father Amaziah had done.

He sought God during the days of Zechariah, who instructed him in the fear of God. As long as he sought the Lord, God gave him success.

Everyone is born dead in trespass and sin. All man's righteousness is filthy rags. There is none that do good, no one who seeks God. "None, all, no one". Pretty comprehensive. You' will find that in your bible too.

I do not subscribe to any "ism". I can agree to disagree on many doctrines. I attend an Anglican church. There is a lot that I disagree with. But the pastor loves Jesus and treats my wife and with respect. I've been to a number of the churches locally and received at best a lukewarm reception.

There are some doctrines that are harmful, such as SDA promote. Many disputed doctrines are not. I don't see why Calvinism is such a big deal. It has a basis in scripture. Some of the truly great preachers subscribed to it, Spurgeon for example. Wesley did not. They were both giants of the faith.