Does the Bible Teach the Doctrine of Total
Depravity?
First Rebuttal
Nick, thank you for the response. I was very pleased that there were no ad hominem attacks and I very much appreciated you sticking to the issue at hand. There are a few things that I would like to respond back to.
First, concerning your understanding of Pelagianism, Semi-Pelagianism and Augustinianism (or Calvinism). Concerning your understanding of Pelagianism, you said, that “you don’t believe that man is so free that he can create his own choices, constantly choose that which is good, and thus merit his own salvation (Pelagianism). Suprisingly, you say that your position is not that of the Pelagians, yet one of your clear statements posits you clearly siding with Pelagius against Augustine and condemned by the Council of Carthage in 418. Allow me to explain.
The Pelagius controversy begins with Augustine’s often used phrase, “Lord Give what thou commandest, and command what thou wilt.[1]” Augustine’s clear meaning, as understood by theologians after him, was that it was well within the right of God to command whatsoever He pleased, yet the very power to obey what God commanded must also come from God himself. For Pelagius, this idea that “the power to obey the commandment of God must come from the same source[2]” was an error. In fact, for Pelagius, he believed that “God does not command that which He knows man has no ability to perform” (your words). On this point, you stand clearly with Pelagius on a fundamental level.
However, you also mention Semi-Pelagianism as a system in which “man initiates the salvation process of his own will before being drawn by the Father, presented with the Gospel, and convicted by the Holy Spirit.” Again, I would submit to you that this is not, technically speaking, the Semi-Pelagian view. The semi-Pelagian view, more correctly stated, is the in-between ground concerning the total inability of man to do anything toward regeneration and conversion apart from the Grace of God alone (Augustinianism) and the Pelagian view that Grace is not necessary for man possesses the inherent ability to will to do the commandments of God, even unto salvation. The Semi-Pelagian position is actually found within modern Roman Catholicism (although it was condemned as well in the Council of Orange, A.D. 529 ?) which is essentially summed up in what is called “prevenient grace” (held by John Wesley as well). “Prevenient grace” is a “grace that goes before”. Essentially the teaching says that God’s gives all men this “grace” so that when they hear the Gospel, this grace comes to them and men are “free” to choose either to accept or reject the Gospel; either to believe in Christ or not. This you make clear that you hold to as well when you say, “If God says that man should do something, then it follows that they can do it. Meaning that the ability is there, although not in and of themselves, but rather in response to God’s grace” (Your words, Italics mine). This same concept is found with “evangelical Arminianism” as well as Roman Catholicism, Mormonism, Jehovah’s witnesses and various other Christian sects and cults.
Certainly, I think the history and theology of Pelagianism and Semi-Pelagianism could use some further research and study.
Secondly, I would like to correct a general misunderstanding of the non-Calvinist position against the doctrine of Total Depravity. It is commonly believed by non-Calvinist that the Calvinist position is that men have “no choice” whatsoever. Thus, the appeal to many texts of Scripture that show choices being made. However, this appeal to Scripture turns out to be nothing more than a straw man since that is not the Calvinist position. The Calvinist position is not that man “has no choices” or “makes no choices.” Rather, it is specifically stated that regarding belief in Christ, “man is not able” to do this. As Christ stated, “no man is able to come to me, unless the Father who sent me draws him” (John 6:44). As Paul put is ever so clearly, “the carnal mind is enmity toward God for it is neither subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be. Therefore, those who are in the flesh cannot please God” (Romans 8:7,8). Thus, men do have a choice for their options are real when the Gospel is presented to them, however, the sinful heart of man cannot and will not choose Christ on its own for its very nature is against God!
The issue is not does man have a choice, but rather if sin influences how we make choices. To this we must ask several questions like: what does it mean to be a sinner? Is it because of actions in a given moment or is it a nature we have inherited from Adam? If we are sinners by nature, then does it not follow that we act according to our nature? If this is so, then how can we sinners possess the ability to choose righteously if our very hearts are corrupted and slaves of sin (cf. Romans 6, John 8:34)?
In the brief amount of space that I have left, I would like to respond back to several passages of Scripture you offered concerning the choices of men. These will be brief as space is limited.
First you quote Isaiah 7:16 as proof that “man has a choice between good and evil.” However, the context of the verse certainly does not allow for this general anthropological statement for the verse is clearly about the “Christ-child” mentioned in verse 14 as the one born to the Virgin. Thus, the logical jump from the Christ-child to all of humanity is unwarranted from the text, unless you are willing to be consistent with your statement and, thus, hold that all men who have a choice between good and evil are this same “Christ-child.”
Secondly, concerning Joshua 24:15 which
you quote as “choose you this day whom you will serve…” and as proof that men
are able to make choices of “eternal significance.” Again, however, context is the
difference. You will note that here
Joshua is exhorting
Third, concerning I King 18:21
which says, “And Elijah came to all the people, and said, ‘How long will you
falter between two opinions? If the LORD
is God, follow Him; but if Baal, follow him.”
You assert that from this text, it is clearly posited that people had a
choice between the two. No disagreement
here. However, who will be the ones that
ultimately chose? Why those who were set
apart, and not for anything in them, but only by grace. The Scriptures concur to this, not once but
twice! In I Kings 19:18 where it is written, “Yet I have reserved for myself
seven thousand in
Space permits me to respond to the assertions made from Acts 13:48 or Romans 2:4. However, I think this exchange will help clear the waters a bit, as well as offer refutation for the belief that man has the ability to choose righteousness, particularly, that man has the ability to serve God while in a depraved state. I should note that John 6:44, Romans 8:7-8, Jeremiah 13:23, and I Corinthians 2:12-14 all remain unrefuted and clear that the natural man, the carnal man, the unregenerate man, posses no ability to believe in Christ apart from a special act of the Father that is not given to all men.