Total Depravity Explained

Article “Worse Than We Think – What Total Depravity Is (and Is Not) by Dr. Robert Letham, lecturer in systematic and historical theology at Wales Evangelical School of Theology and author of Systematic Theology – source: https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/worse-than-we-think#modal-3117-h5xsuc56

The doctrine of total depravity is widely misunderstood. It is almost as important to know what it does not mean as what it affirms. Moreover, we will not grasp its full import unless we see it in a wider context.

In the phrase total depravity, the word depravity refers to a corrupt nature inherent in humanity ever since the sin of Adam. The necessary presupposition on which the doctrine of inherited depravity rests is the solidarity of the human race. Without that presupposition, the doctrine does not make sense.

We are not individuals in isolation. We are part of a collective whole, rather like slices of a gigantic pizza. In the Old Testament, people were seen in connection with their ancestors from the past and their tribal connections in the present; you were A the son of B the son of C of the tribe N. Hence, when Achan sinned, all Israel sinned (Joshua 7:1120). Likewise, the actions of the one man Adam directly affected the many (Romans 5:12–21).

Not only did we all incur guilt in Adam’s sin, but his vitiated nature was and is communicated to all his descendants. As the Westminster Confession of Faith puts it,

By this sin they [our first parents] fell from their original righteousness and communion with God, and so became dead in sin, and wholly defiled in all the parts and faculties of soul and body. (6.2)

They being the root of all mankind, the guilt of this sin was imputed; and the same death in sin, and corrupted nature, conveyed to all their posterity descending from them by ordinary generation. (6.3)

The modifier total in total depravity denotes that sin affects every facet of our nature. It does not mean that sinners are as bad as they possibly can be or that any one person is as bad as he possibly can be. Nor does it mean that fallen humans lack a conscience or that the world since the fall is entirely miserable and incapable of making any progress or appreciating the beauty evident all around. It means that no part of the personality is uncorrupted: the mind, the emotions, and so on. In William Shedd’s words, total depravity means “the entire absence of holiness, not the highest intensity of sin” (Dogmatic Theology, 2:257).

Real and Total Corruption

In contrast, Thomas Aquinas, whose treatment of this topic had a defining effect on later Roman Catholic theology, held that original sin simply wounded human nature. He argued that it does not make us averse to virtue, although it weakens us in this pursuit and brings the penalty of death, all stemming from our inheriting Adam’s loss of original innocence. Sin stains us and makes us guilty, deserving punishment. It is like an illness, some sins being curable, others mortal (see Summa Theologiae, 1a2ae.85–87). Rome came to define corruption in purely negative terms, as the loss of the righteousness that was given by God as an addition to humanity’s naturally created condition.

On the other hand, the Reformers stressed that the depravity we inherited from Adam was real, total corruption (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 2.1.8). The biblical basis for their position is clear in that sin is universal (Genesis 6:5Romans 1:18–3:20). It renders humans blind to the gospel (1 Corinthians 2:142 Corinthians 4:1–6) and enemies of God (Romans 8:7Ephesians 2:1–3), and is deceitful (Jeremiah 17:9). This sinful nature is the source of evil thoughts and actions (Matthew 15:16–20).

Blindness and Inability

In practice, total depravity means that there is no human faculty left untouched by sin, even in relative terms. The mind, as well as the emotions and appetites, is biased against God. We need renewal in the whole person. Moreover, the aesthetic sensibilities are also corrupted. The aversion of fallen people to all that reflects the evidence of the Creator in the world renders them incapable of appreciating his glory and beauty. The creation is viewed in itself rather than as the ravishing and resplendent gift of God.

Because of this, there is an inevitable distortion in humanity’s reception of God’s creation, for it is not seen as in reality it is. The joy is absent that should arise from grasping the real identity of the creation as penultimate and seeing beyond it the beauty of God. Only the renewing work of the Holy Spirit can take the scales from our eyes and turn us around to appreciate the creation appropriately, for otherwise we idolize it for its own sake or denigrate it out of spiritual blindness and indifference.

A direct corollary of total depravity is that fallen people cannot rescue themselves from their guilt and depravity. This is an ethical “cannot”; they cannot because they will not. “Those who are in the flesh cannot please God” (Romans 8:6–8), cannot receive the revelation of God (Matthew 16:171 Corinthians 2:14John 6:44–4564–65), cannot submit to the law of God (Romans 8:7), cannot respond of themselves to the grace of God in Christ, and cannot rescue themselves because they are covenantally dead (Ezekiel 37:1–6Ephesians 2:1–3).

It is true that fallen people can do much good of a moral, social, and cultural nature. They can show love to family, perform acts of kindness, produce great works of art, and make major contributions to civic welfare. However, apart from regeneration by the Spirit, they cannot do these activities to the glory of God. Nor, as a consequence, can they share the exultant joy of the psalmists in the wonders of God’s works (Psalms 19, 145, 147, 148). It requires a radical change, altering the entire bias of the human will, in order to respond positively to the gospel, a change that can be brought about only by the Holy Spirit.

Hearts Made Willing

Augustine put his finger on the consequences that arise from the denial of original sin and its impact throughout the depraved mind. In Against Two Letters of the Pelagians, he lists a number of elements of the Pelagian heresy. Its denial of original sin led to their supposition that salvation is based on our own merits and so is not properly grace at all. Augustine opposed both Manicheism and Pelagianism in his saying human nature is healable, since according to the Pelagians it did not need to be healed, whereas according to the Manicheans it cannot be healed since they considered evil to be coeternal and immutable.

For Pelagianism, faith and obedience are to be attributed to those who exercise them and so any failure is due to their not trying hard enough. J.I. Packer maintained that Pelagianism is the default position of zealous Christians who have little interest in doctrine (“‘Keswick’ and the Reformed Doctrine of Sanctification”). Leaving other matters aside, this heresy eradicated Christian joy, since it encouraged dependence on the constant uncertainties of our own efforts.

The root of Pelagianism, flowing from its denial of original sin and the totality of depravity, was a focus on morality, with an assertion of the ability of fallen people to respond to the gospel unaided by divine grace. It rested on the assumption that a command of God entailed the ability of those commanded to fulfill it. Augustine argued in reply that humans respond, but we do so since God makes us willing, and changes our hearts, so that we believe freely.

In short, the reality of total depravity leaves no possibility of salvation by our own efforts. It points to our dire condition from the fall and the sovereign work of God in rescuing us. Only the Holy Spirit can change us and transform us into the image of Christ, who is the image of the invisible God. This is a cause for unbounded thanksgiving to God and delight in his grace and goodness in Christ.

Luther On Justification

Some quotes:

“Justification by faith alone is the article of the standing or falling Church.”

“Whoever departs from the article of justification does not know God and is an idolater . . . For when this article has been taken away, nothing remains but error, hypocrisy, godlessness, and idolatry, although it may seem to be the height of truth, worship of God, holiness, etc. . . If the article of justification is lost, all Christian doctrine is lost at the same time.”

“When the article of justification has fallen, everything has fallen. Therefore it is necessary constantly to inculcate and impress it, as Moses says of his Law (Deut. 6:7); for it cannot be inculcated and urged enough or too much. Indeed, even though we learn it well and hold to it, yet there is no one who apprehends it perfectly or believes it with a full affection and heart. So very trickish is our flesh, fighting as it does against the obedience of the spirit.”

“This doctrine [justification by faith alone] is the head and the cornerstone. It alone begets, nourishes, builds, preserves, and defends the church of God; and without it the church of God cannot exist for one hour. For no one who does not hold this article or, to use Paul’s expression, this ‘sound doctrine’ (Titus 2:1) is able to teach aright in the church or successfully to resist any adversary . . . this is the heel of the Seed that opposes the old serpent and crushes its head. That is why Satan, in turn, cannot but persecute it.” – Martin Luther

Back in the 16th century, the Roman Catholic Church believed (then as it does now) that justification is by grace, through faith and because of Christ. What Rome does not believe is that justification is by faith alone, or by grace alone, or by Christ alone. For Rome, justification is by grace plus merit, through faith plus works; by Christ plus the sinner’s contribution of inherent righteousness. In contrast, Martin Luther and the Reformers called the Church back to the one true Biblical Gospel: Salvation is by God’s grace alone, received through faith alone, because of Christ alone, based on the Scriptures alone, to the Glory of God alone.

Can we talk about that word ‘catholic’?

The word ‘catholic’ simply means universal. It is actually a good word rather than a bad word. The Reformers did not see themselves as separate from the catholic (universal) faith. In fact, they saw themselves as the true proclaimers of the historic faith of the Bible, embraced by all orthodox Christians throughout the ages of the Church. They were more than happy to align themselves with the ancient creeds of the Church and recited them in the Reformed worship services. These creeds affirmed the great essential doctrines of Christianity, including the Bible as the word of God, the Holy Trinity, the full deity and humanity of Christ, His sinless life and atoning, substitutionary death, as well as His physical resurrection from the dead. Though vehemently opposed to Rome’s aberrant doctrines they would describe themselves as truly catholic, though not of the Roman variety.

When Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformers opposed the Roman Catholic Church, what was being proclaimed was not some new doctrine never seen before. Instead, justification by grace alone, through faith alone in Christ alone was something the Bible proclaimed in both the Old and the New Testaments, and affirmed by many in the early Church fathers, even to men like Augustine (who was often quoted in the Reformers’ writings). The Reformation was a back to the Bible movement and marked a return to, and a recovery of, the one true biblical gospel embraced by all true believers in Christ. There was nothing new; nothing novel at all! This was the universal faith once for all delivered to the saints.

– John Samson

Is the Reformation Over?

Dr. Leonardo de Chirico has spoken at a number of Ligonier Conferences in recent years. Italian himself, and pastoring a Protestant Church in the heart of Rome, Italy, he has a strong desire to reach those entrapped in Roman Catholic doctrine. Leonardo recently traveled to Munich, Germany (September 25-27, 2020), and while there, taught two public lectures on the theme “Is the Reformation Over?” The talks were captured on video and include a German translation.

Lecture1:

Lecture 2:

The Will of God: Found!

“Therefore do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is.” – Eph. 5:17

How do you and I find the will of God? Is God’s will something hard to find? Has God left us in the dark? Has He left us hints – clues that He expects us to find if we are spiritually mature enough to work out? Or is finding the will of God a much more simple process than that?

What the Bible teaches about this SETS US FREE to live a life of God-glorifying obedience. And that is the point of the teaching.

https://embed.sermonaudio.com/player/a/9302091817545/

Decision Making

Its been a blessing to read Pastor Jim Osman’s new book “God Doesn’t Whisper”. Its an outstanding book dealing with a problem prevalent in the church of our day. Pastor Jim was recently interviewed about his book on a podcast (found here: https://podcasts.strivingforeternity.org/programs/rapp-report/god-doesnt-whisper-with-jim-osman/) and I made a transcript of a brief segment of the interchange. Once the illegitimate and dangerous decision making models have been thrown out (from Scripture) the question then becomes, so how are we as Christians to make God-honoring decisions. Here’s the relevant discussion:

Interviewer: How then do we make decisions?

Jim Osman: Well, I would say we make decisions in the same way that the Apostles made decisions. That is if we have an opportunity to choose between two options, A and B, we need to ask two questions.

What does the moral will of God reveal concerning this decision? And that is His will in Scripture. The thing that He has said. That I need to flee from immorality, and that I need to do all things for the glory of God. The scripture lays out the moral parameters in which we are to live as believers. It is a big circle, but it leaves a lot of options when we are choosing between A and B.

It still leaves probably most options open to us.

Then the second question we need to ask is what does wisdom say? What does God’s word reveal that would be the wise thing to do? Are there warnings of foolishness that I need to avoid here?

And once we have answered those two questions, and we found that there is nothing about this decision for these options that violates God’s clearly revealed moral will or the wisdom that is given to us in Scripture, then we are free to make, and this is going to sound shocking to some people, we are free to make either decision with God’s blessing. We are free to decide to do anything we want, so long as it does not violate scripture, and it does not violate God’s sound wisdom.

That leaves the option open to us. We are free to marry any woman we want, if it does not violate God’s moral will or violate God’s wisdom. We are free to take any job we want or to buy any house we want, as long as it does not violate God’s moral will revealed in Scripture or sound wisdom. It is not that God does not care which choice we make, as if he is apathetic. It is that God is not intent on revealing to us which choice to make. We are free to make that choice with the firm conviction that in doing so, we are not violating God’s will, and we can make that decision with the conviction that he will bless or use whatever decision it is that we end up making.

… If you read Paul in the book of Romans, he talks about wanting to go to the city of Rome and eventually to visit them. He talks about his strong desire to do so, and then he said, “Maybe, perhaps, at last in the will of God, I will be able to make this trip to come and see you.”

He does not say, “The Lord is revealing to me that this is what my travel plans should be,” or “The Lord gave me a vision of Rome.” or “The Lord laid Rome on my heart,” or “The Lord has whispered to my heart ‘Rome’ over and over again.”

He did not use any of that language. He just says, “I have a desire to come see you. There is a spiritual benefit to this. I am called to be the apostle to the Gentiles. So, it makes sense that this is within God’s moral will. There is nothing non-wise about it, and maybe the Lord will open up the door to do so, and then I will be able to come and do it.”

Basically, the apostle Paul was not waiting to hear a word from God. He was just making a decision that was in keeping with what God had revealed in scripture and in keeping with what he desired ultimately to do. I start the book by talking about that crisis at college on whether I should go back to the second year or not. The end of the book tells you exactly how it is that I made that decision. I ended up doing exactly what I wanted to do. I wanted to go study Scripture.

That was what I wanted to do. So, I decided to do that. I did not hear the voice of God in deciding to do that. God did not speak to me and tell me which woman to marry or which city to live in or which church to pastor or which house to buy or what to name my kids. None of that. I do not need anything from God. He has given to me everything in Scripture to make God-glorifying decisions. And so, if I am making it within the parameters of what God has revealed in Scripture in terms of his moral will and his wisdom, then I am free to make any of those decisions with the promise, or the full confidence, that I am not violating God’s will in doing so.

Was that You Lord?

I was delighted to see that this resource has been made where Pastor Jim Osman (of Kootenai Community Church) is interviewed regarding his new book “God doesn’t whisper.” The interview focuses on the common thought that Christians are hearing the voice of God as a regular occurrence or at least, it should be common. Along the way, the following themes are addressed:

1) Do we need to hear from God outside Scripture.

2) Should we expect to hear from God outside of Scripture.

3) Must we learn to hear from God outside of Scripture?

Then Jim addresses some of the most common arguments for hearing the voice of God and then explains how to make decisions as a Christian without hearing the voice of God.

Here is the link: