Total Depravity
When we speak of man's depravity we mean man's natural condition apart from any grace exerted by God to restrain or
transform man.
There is no doubt that man could perform more evil acts toward his fellow man than he does. But if he is restrained
from performing more evil acts by motives that are not owing to his glad submission to God, then even his "virtue" is evil in the
sight of God.
Romans 14:23 says, "Whatever does not proceed from faith is sin." This is a radical indictment of all natural "virtue"
that does not flow from a heart humbly relying on God's grace.
The terrible condition of man's heart will never be recognized by people
who assess it only in relation to other men. Romans 14:23 makes plain that depravity is our condition in relation to God primarily,
and only secondarily in relation to man. Unless we start here we will never grasp the totality of our natural depravity.
Man's depravity is total in at least four senses.
(1) Our rebellion against God is total.
Apart from the grace of God there is no delight in the holiness
of God, and there is no glad submission to the sovereign authority of God.
Of course totally depraved men can be very religious and
very philanthropic. They can pray and give alms and fast, as Jesus said (Matthew 6:1-18). But their very religion is rebellion against
the rights of their Creator, if it does not come from a childlike heart of trust in the free grace of God. Religion is one of the
chief ways that man conceals his unwillingness to forsake self-reliance and bank all his hopes on the unmerited mercy of God (Luke
18:9-14; Colossians 2:20-23).
The totality of our rebellion is seen in Romans 3:9-10 and 18. "I have already charged that all men,
both Jews and Greeks, are under the power of sin, as it is written: None is righteous, no not one; no one seeks for God....There is
no fear of God before their eyes."
It is a myth that man in his natural state is genuinely seeking God. Men do seek God. But they do
not seek him for who he is. They seek him in a pinch as one who might preserve them from death or enhance their worldly enjoyments.
Apart from conversion, no one comes to the light of God.
Some do come to the light. But listen to what John 3:20-21 says about them.
"Every one who does evil hates the light, and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. But he who does what is
true comes to the light, that it may be clearly seen that his deeds have been wrought in God."
Yes there are those who come to the
light—namely those whose deeds are the work of God. "Wrought in God" means worked by God. Apart from this gracious work of God all
men hate the light of God and will not come to him lest their evil be exposed—this is total rebellion. "No one seeks for God...There
is no fear of God before their eyes!"
(2) In his total rebellion everything man does is sin.
In Romans 14:23 Paul says, "Whatever is
not from faith is sin." Therefore, if all men are in total rebellion, everything they do is the product of rebellion and cannot be
an honor to God, but only part of their sinful rebellion. If a king teaches his subjects how to fight well and then those subjects
rebel against their king and use the very skill he taught them to resist him, then even those skills become evil.
Thus man does many
things which he can only do because he is created in the image of God and which in the service of God could be praised. But in the
service of man's self-justifying rebellion, these very things are sinful.
In Romans 7:18 Paul says, "I know that no good dwells in
me, that is, in my flesh." This is a radical confession of the truth that in our rebellion nothing we think or feel is good. It is
all part of our rebellion. The fact that Paul qualifies his depravity with the words, "that is, in my flesh," shows that he is willing
to affirm the good of anything that the Spirit of God produces in him (Romans 15:18). "Flesh" refers to man in his natural state apart
from the work of God's Spirit. So what Paul is saying in Romans 7:18 is that apart from the work of God's Spirit all we think and
feel and do is not good.
NOTE: We recognize that the word "good" has a broad range of meanings. We will have to use it in a restricted
sense to refer to many actions of fallen people which in relation are in fact not good.
For example we will have to say that it is
good that most unbelievers do not kill and that some unbelievers perform acts of benevolence. What we mean when we call such actions
good is that they more or less conform to the external pattern of life that God has commanded in Scripture.
However, such outward conformity
to the revealed will of God is not righteousness in relation to God. It is not done out of reliance on him or for his glory. He is
not trusted for the resources, though he gives them all. Nor is his honor exalted, even though that's his will in all things (1 Corinthians
10:31). Therefore even these "good" acts are part of our rebellion and are not "good" in the sense that really counts in the end—in
relation to God.
(3) Man's inability to submit to God and do good is total.
Picking up on the term "flesh" above (man apart from the
grace of God) we find Paul declaring it to be totally enslaved to rebellion. Romans 8:7-8 says, "For the mind that is set on the flesh
is hostile to God; it does not submit to God's law, indeed it cannot; and those who are in the flesh cannot please God."
The "mind
of the flesh" is the mind of man apart from the indwelling Spirit of God ("You are not in the flesh, you are in the Spirit, if the
Spirit of God really dwells in you," Romans 8:9). So natural man has a mindset that does not and cannot submit to God. Man cannot
reform himself.
Ephesians 2:1 says that we Christians were all once "dead in trespasses and sins." The point of deadness is that we
were incapable of any life with God. Our hearts were like a stone toward God (Ephesians 4:18; Ezekiel 36:26). Our hearts were blind
and incapable of seeing the glory of God in Christ (2 Corinthians 4:4-6). We were totally unable to reform ourselves.
(4) Our rebellion is totally deserving of eternal punishment.
Ephesians 2:3 goes on to say that in our deadness we were "children of wrath." That is,
we were under God's wrath because of the corruption of our hearts that made us as good as dead before God.
The reality of hell is God's
clear indictment of the infiniteness of our guilt. If our corruption were not deserving of an eternal punishment God would be unjust
to threaten us with a punishment so severe as eternal torment. But the Scriptures teach that God is just in condemning unbelievers
to eternal hell (2 Thessalonians 1:6-9; Matthew 5:29f; 10:28; 13:49f; 18:8f; 25:46; Revelation 14:9-11; 20:10). Therefore, to the
extent that hell is a total sentence of condemnation, to that extent must we think of ourselves as totally blameworthy apart from
the saving grace of God.
In summary, total depravity means that our rebellion against God is total, everything we do in this rebellion
is sin, our inability to submit to God or reform ourselves is total, and we are therefore totally deserving of eternal punishment.
It
is hard to exaggerate the importance of admitting our condition to be this bad. If we think of ourselves as basically good or even
less than totally at odds with God, our grasp of the work of God in redemption will be defective. But if we humble ourselves under
this terrible truth of our total depravity, we will be in a position to see and appreciate the glory and wonder of the work of God
discussed in the next four points.
Irresistible Grace
The doctrine of irresistible grace does not mean that every influence of the Holy Spirit cannot be resisted. It
means that the Holy Spirit can overcome all resistance and make his influence irresistible.
In Acts 7:51 Stephen says to the Jewish
leaders, "You stiff-necked people, uncircumcised in heart and ears, you always resist the Holy Spirit as your fathers did." And Paul
speaks of grieving and quenching the Holy Spirit (Ephesians 4:30; 1 Thessalonians 5:19). God gives many entreaties and promptings
which are resisted. In fact the whole history of Israel in the Old Testament is one protracted story of resistance, as the parable
of the wicked tenants shows (Matthew 21:33-43; cf. Romans 10:21).
The doctrine of irresistible grace means that God is sovereign and
can overcome all resistance when he wills. "He does according to his will in the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth;
and none can stay his hand!" (Daniel 4:35). "Our God is in the heavens; he does whatever he pleases" (Psalm 115:3). When God undertakes
to fulfill his sovereign purpose, no one can successfully resist him.
This is what Paul taught in Romans 9:14-18, which caused his
opponent to say, "Why then does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?" To which Paul answers: "Who are you, O man, to
answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, 'Why have you made me thus?' Has the potter no right over the clay, to
make out of the same lump one vessel for beauty and another for menial use?" (Romans 9:20f).
More specifically irresistible grace refers
to the sovereign work of God to overcome the rebellion of our heart and bring us to faith in Christ so that we can be saved. If our
doctrine of total depravity is true, there can be no salvation without the reality of irresistible grace. If we are dead in our sins,
totally unable to submit to God, then we will never believe in Christ unless God overcomes our rebellion.
Someone may say, "Yes, the
Holy Spirit must draw us to God, but we can use our freedom to resist or accept that drawing." Our answer is: except for the continual
exertion of saving grace, we will always use our freedom to resist God. That is what it means to be "unable to submit to God." If
a person becomes humble enough to submit to God it is because God has given that person a new, humble nature. If a person remains
too hard hearted and proud to submit to God, it is because that person has not been given such a willing spirit. But to see this most
persuasively we should look at the Scriptures.
In John 6:44 Jesus says, "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws
him." This drawing is the sovereign work of grace without which no one can be saved from their rebellion against God. Again some say,
"He draws all men, not just some." But this simply evades the clear implication of the context that the Father's "drawing" is why
some believe and not others.
Specifically, John 6:64-65 says, "'But there are some of you that do not believe.' For Jesus knew from
the first who those were that did not believe, and who it was that should betray him. And he said, 'This is why I told you that no
one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.'"
Notice two things.
First, notice that coming to Jesus is called a gift.
It is not just an opportunity. Coming to Jesus is "given" to some and not to others.
Second, notice that the reason Jesus says this,
is to explain why "there are some who do not believe." We could paraphrase it like this: Jesus knew from the beginning that Judas
would not believe on him in spite of all the teaching and invitations he received. And because he knew this, he explains it with the
words, No one comes to me unless it is given to him by my Father. Judas was not given to Jesus. There were many influences on his
life for good. But the decisive, irresistible gift of grace was not given.
2 Timothy 2:24-25 says, "The Lord's servant must not be
quarrelsome but kindly to every one, an apt teacher, forbearing, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant that
they will repent and come to know the truth."
Here, as in John 6:65 repentance is called a gift of God. Notice, he is not saying merely
that salvation is a gift of God. He is saying that the prerequisites of salvation are also a gift. When a person hears a preacher
call for repentance he can resist that call. But if God gives him repentance he cannot resist because the gift is the removal of resistance.
Not being willing to repent is the same as resisting the Holy Spirit. So if God gives repentance it is the same as taking away the
resistance. This is why we call this work of God "irresistible grace".
NOTE: It should be obvious from this that irresistible grace never implies that God forces us to believe against our will. That would even be a contradiction in terms. On the contrary, irresistible grace is compatible with preaching and witnessing that tries to persuade people to do what is reasonable and what will accord with their best interests.
1 Corinthians 1:23-24 says, "We preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but
to those who are called, both Jew and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God." Notice the two kinds of "calls" implied
in this text.
First, the preaching of Paul goes out to all, both Jews and Greeks. This is the general call of the gospel. It offers
salvation to all who will believe on the crucified Christ. But by and large it falls on unreceptive ears and is called foolishness.
But
then, secondly, Paul refers to another kind of call. He says that among those who hear there are some who are "called" in such a way
that they no longer regard the cross as foolishness but as the wisdom and power of God. What else can this call be but the irresistible
call of God out of darkness into the light of God? If ALL who are called in this sense regard the cross as the power of God, then
something in the call must effect the faith. This is irresistible grace.
It is further explained in 2 Corinthians 4:4-6, "The god of
this world has blinded the minds of unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the
likeness of God...It is the God who said, 'Let light shine out of darkness,' who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the
knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ."
Since men are blinded to the worth of Christ, a miracle is needed in order for
them to come to see and believe. Paul compares this miracle with the first day of creation when God said, "Let there be light." It
is in fact a new creation, or a new birth. This is what is meant by the effectual call in 1 Corinthians 1:24.
Those who are called
have their eyes opened by the sovereign creative power of God so that they no longer see the cross as foolishness but as the power
and the wisdom of God. The effectual call is the miracle of having our blindness removed. This is irresistible grace.
Another example
of it is in Acts 16:14, where Lydia is listening to the preaching of Paul. Luke says, "The Lord opened her heart to give heed to what
was said by Paul." Unless God opens our hearts, we will not heed the message of the gospel. This heart-opening is what we mean by
irresistible grace.
Another way to describe it is "new birth" or being born again. We believe that new birth is a miraculous creation
of God that enables a formerly "dead" person to receive Christ and so be saved. We do not think that faith precedes and causes new
birth. Faith is the evidence that God has begotten us anew. "Every one who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God"
(1 John 5:1).
When John says that God gives the right to become the children of God to all who receive Christ (John 1:12), he goes
on to say that those who do receive Christ "were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God."
In other words, it is necessary to receive Christ in order to become a child of God, but the birth that brings one into the family
of God is not possible by the will of man.
Man is dead in trespasses and sins. He cannot make himself new, or create new life in himself.
He must be born of God. Then, with the new nature of God, he immediately receives Christ. The two acts (regeneration and faith) are
so closely connected that in experience we cannot distinguish them. God begets us anew and the first glimmer of life in the new-born
child is faith. Thus new birth is the effect of irresistible grace, because it is an act of sovereign creation—"not of the will of
man but of God."
The Doctrines of Grace
(T - U - L - I - P)
(Taken from: www.desiringGod.org)
Historical Introduction
John
Calvin, the famous theologian and pastor of Geneva, died in 1564. Along with Martin Luther in Germany, he was the most influential
force of the Protestant Reformation. His Commentaries and Institutes of the Christian Religion are still exerting tremendous influence
on the Christian Church worldwide.
The churches which have inherited the teachings of Calvin are usually called Reformed as opposed
to the Lutheran or Episcopalian branches of the Reformation. While not all Baptist churches hold to a reformed theology, there is
a significant Baptist tradition which grew out of and still cherishes the central doctrines inherited from the reformed branch of
the Reformation.
The controversy between Arminianism and Calvinism arose in Holland in the early 1600's. The founder of the Arminian
party was Jacob Arminius (1560-1609). He studied under the strict Calvinist Theodore Beza at Geneva and became a professor of theology
at the University of Leyden in 1603.
Gradually Arminius came to reject certain Calvinist teachings. The controversy spread all over
Holland, where the Reformed Church was the overwhelming majority. The Arminians drew up their creed in Five Articles (written by Uytenbogaert),
and laid them before the state authorities of Holland in 1610 under the name Remonstrance, signed by forty-six ministers. (These Five
Articles can be read in Philip Schaff, Creeds of Christendom, vol. 3, pp. 545-547.)
The Calvinists responded with a Counter-Remonstrance.
But the official Calvinistic response came from the Synod of Dort which was held to consider the Five Articles from November 13, 1618
to May 9, 1619. There were eighty-four members and eighteen secular commissioners. The Synod wrote what has come to be known as the
Canons of Dort. These are still part of the church confession of the Reformed Church in America and the Christian Reformed Church.
They state the Five Points of Calvinism in response to the Five Articles of the Arminian Remonstrants. (See Schaff, vol. 3, pp. 581-596).
So
the so-called Five Points were not chosen by the Calvinists as a summary of their teaching. They emerged as a response to the Arminians
who chose these five points to oppose.
It is more important to give a positive Biblical position on the five points than to know the
exact form of the original controversy. These five points are still at the heart of Biblical theology. They are not unimportant. Where
we stand on these things deeply affects our view of God, man, salvation, the atonement, regeneration, assurance, worship, and missions.
Somewhere
along the way the five points came to be summarized under the acronym TULIP.
T - Total depravity.
U - Unconditional election
L - Limited
atonement
I - Irresistible grace
P - Perseverance of the saints
NOTE: We are not going to follow this order in our presentation. There is a good rationale for this traditional order: it starts with man in need of salvation and then gives, in the order of their occurrence, the steps God takes to save his people. He elects, then he sends Christ to atone for the sins of the elect, then he irresistibly draws his people to faith, and finally works to cause them to persevere to the end.
We have found, however, that people grasp these points more easily if we follow a presentation based on the order in which we experience them.
1. We experience first our depravity and need of salvation.
2. Then we experience the irresistible grace of God leading us toward faith.
3. Then we trust the sufficiency of the atoning death of Christ for our sins.
4. Then we discover that behind the work of God to atone for our sins and bring us to faith was the unconditional election of God.
5. And finally we rest in his electing grace to give us the strength and will to persevere to the end in faith.
This is the order we will follow in our presentation.
We would like to spell out what we believe the Scripture
teaches on these five points. Our great desire is to honor God by understanding and believing his truth revealed in Scripture. We
are open to changing any of our ideas which can be shown to contradict the truth of Scripture. We do not have any vested interest
in John Calvin himself, and we find some of what he taught to be wrong. But in general we are willing to let ourselves be called Calvinists
on the five points, because we find the Calvinist position to be Biblical.
We share the sentiments of Jonathan Edwards who said in
the Preface to his great book on THE FREEDOM OF THE WILL, "I should not take it at all amiss, to be called a Calvinist, for distinction's
sake: though I utterly disclaim a dependence on Calvin, or believing the doctrines which I hold, because he believed and taught them;
and cannot justly be charged with believing in every thing just as he taught."