All,
I apologize, someone must have re-arranged my "heresy" book shelf because I can't find Boettner's book.
What I do have, however, is a ten page paper I've written some time ago with footnotes.
Here it is:
Calvinism in its many forms has been heralded as anything from the pinnacle of Christian theological thought to the deepest depths of heresy. Despite the raging debate that has continued for over four hundred years most Christians have yet to come to a theologically sound understanding of why they are or why they are not a Calvinist. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate that each of the five points of Calvinism are flawed and must be either rejected or drastically reinterpreted in order to arrive at a biblically correct theology. Due to the fact that a reinterpretation of all five points on a thorough scale is beyond the scope of this paper, its method shall be to identify the errors within the doctrine of Total Depravity, and in doing so illustrate the fallacy of the entire Calvinist system.
As one begins to consider the Calvinist Doctrine of Total Depravity its becomes quickly evident that words within the Calvinist system often times possess multiple meanings. This practice in itself is not necessarily problematic. Calvin himself clearly stated in his Institutes that his aim in organizing the scriptures was “to prepare and qualify students of theology for the reading of the divine word, that they may have an easy introduction to it, and be enabled to proceed in it without any obstruction”. It is understandable, therefore, that certain terms might warrant a greater degree of explanation. However, it seems unreasonable that so many biblical terms would be redefined within the Calvinist system to represent concepts that are radically different from their biblical counterparts. This indeed presents a serious problem.
Specifically in regards to Total Depravity it is recognized that, to a Calvinist, the term Total Depravity is synonymous with the term Total Inability. The Westminster Confession of Faith states it this way “Man, by his fall into a state of sin, hath wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation; so as a natural man, being altogether averse from good, and dead in sin, is not able, by his own strength, to convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto". Likewise, Faber offers that “Man’s corruption in consequence of the fall of Adam, is such, that all are conceived in sin and are born the children of wrath, unapt to any salutary goodness, propense to evil, dead in trespasses, and the slaves of iniquity”. Both of these verses at face value may be taken to mean that depravity simply refers to the inability of man to save himself and the fact that men are sinners. However, it is only when one considers the following statement by John Calvin that the real meaning of these statements becomes clear “As the spiritual life of Adam consisted with a union to his Maker, so an alienation from him was the death of his soul” .
It is evident then, that within Calvinism the term Total Depravity refers to more than the fact that man cannot save himself or that “there is none that seeketh after God” (Ro 3:11). Rather, Calvinism teaches the very soul of man has either been lost or corrupted to the point where it has ceased to exist. John Calvin believed that as a result of the fall the “Divine image was not utterly annihilated and effaced in him, yet it was so corrupted that whatever remains is but a horrible deformity.” Other men who followed Calvin have taken this thought further and taught that “not only that man lost the image of God through sin, but also that it changed into its reverse”
It is claimed that the scriptural evidence for these assertions are based on the many texts that speak of man being spiritually dead. Logical analogies are therefore drawn between being physically dead and spiritually dead. Consider the following statement by Boettner “If a man were dead, in a natural and physical sense, it would be readily granted that there is no further possibility of that man being able to perform any physical actions…If a man is dead spiritually, therefore, it is surely equally as evident that he is unable to perform any spiritual actions.”
This statement by Mr. Boettner illustrates a very subtle characteristic of the Calvinist system; the fact that it is in its entirety it is based on logic rather than the Word of God. For example, logically it is impossible to deny the truthfulness of the above statement. However, not all truth is logical and certainly not all logic is biblical. Logic simply means that conditionally true statements will result in equally true subsequent statements. Therefore if “A” equals “B” and “B” equals “C”, “A” and “C” will also be equal. However, if “A” does not equal “B” then the argument that “C” equals “A” is invalid. The point is that Mr. Boettner’s argument may well be logically true, but it is far from biblically true. There are significant differences between an inanimate body that has been vacated by the soul and an animate soul that has been separated from God. The scriptures do not teach annihilation of the soul or non-existence. To draw a corollary between physical death and spiritual death is therefore invalid.
Furthermore, we read in the scriptures that spiritually dead men do perform “spiritual” acts. For example, “dead” men attempt to keep the law (Ro 2:14), serve society on God’s behalf (Ro 13:4), exist forever in Hell where they are both conscious and thinking (Lu 16:23), resist the Holy Ghost (Acts 7:51), pray (Luke 18:10), and even worship what they believe to be God (Jn 4:20). Granted, this is not to say that any of these acts are looked upon with favor by Almighty God or endow the practitioners with any merit, quite the opposite is true. In Matthew 7:23 we read that that Jesus calls the many “wonderful” spiritual works that were performed by unbelievers “iniquity”, a term that is hardly synonymous with meritorious. What these instances and others do illustrate, however, is that mankind does retain an innate sense of God and “spirituality” in the
broad sense and is not “Totally Depraved” in the sense of soulful nonexistence.
Of course, Calvinism cannot deny the existence of spiritually positive acts in the lives of unregenerate men. The dilemma then becomes that fact that the presence of these acts contradicts their doctrine of Total Depravity. It is necessary therefore to create another doctrine to support the inadequacies of the initial doctrine. There are two ways in which Calvinists account for the presence of this spirituality in the unredeemed. The first way is to discount these acts by redefining the terms “moral”, “good”, and “spiritual”. From this view it is asserted that these acts are really none of the three but simply the “glimmerings of natural light” that yet reside within a man’s soul. Those who propose this view will quickly point out that this light merely “keeps him (man) a sinner and inexcusable before God.” What is being proposed then is that basically all “good” deeds that are performed by the unsaved are really insidious attempts to do evil. Needless to say, this argument is based on the fact that it is logically necessary to make the Calvinist doctrines work, not because there is warrant for such a position in the scriptures.
The second way in which Calvinists account for spiritual acts in the unredeemed is to declare the doctrine of Common Grace. This view suggests that God endows “common grace” upon the unrighteous in such a way as to allow them to perform good deeds and experience temporal blessings. Boettner defines the term this way “Common Grace is the source of all the order, refinement, culture, common virtue, etc. which we find in the world, and through it the moral power of truth upon the heart and conscience is increased and the evil passions of men are restrained. It does not lead to salvation, but keeps the world from becoming a veritable Hell”.
Again, this idea is based on logic and is not grounded in scriptural truth. The bible teaches that it is the presence of God’s people and God’s word that is the restraining element within the world (Matt 5:13) but also that there are principles in nature that are created by God that, when followed, will result in temporal success. (Ro 2:14) It may well be prudent to retain the term “common grace” to refer to the longsuffering of God and the many blessings associated with His goodness, but it is incorrect to use this phrase to refer to a blanket regeneration or spiritual endowment to all humankind. A simple look at the world will support this conclusion and illustrate that the common grace of Calvinism is not so common. Rather, the degree of virtue and civilization among people groups may be directly related to how they have received and responded to God’s Word throughout their history or how they have pragmatically followed the principles in nature that He has established.
It is worthy of pause at this point to comment on another characteristic of Calvinism, the fact that it is a unified whole. As mentioned, Calvinism is a logical system in which all of its points fit perfectly together. It must be understood therefore, that by use of the term Total Depravity not only is the other meaning of Total Inability in view, but also the doctrines of Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace, and Perseverance of the Saints. It is virtually impossible therefore to discuss the Calvinist doctrine of Total Depravity without discussing the other related doctrines. This illustrates a major strength of the Calvinist system, the fact that it possesses a vast number of logical collective arguments against which no popular theological system seems to be able to compare. This also illustrates another important point, the fact that Calvinism must be accepted or rejected wholeheartedly as a composite system and not on the relative merits of any of the individual points.
This fact is specifically illustrated in regards to the relationship of the doctrine of Total Depravity to the doctrine of the Sovereignty of God. When discussing the origin of Total Depravity, a Calvinist would agree at one level that Total Depravity is a result of Adam’s disobedience in the Garden of Eden. They would also maintain that at the time of Adam sinned he possessed a free, although untested will, but was fully free to choose obedience as opposed to evil. However, what Calvinism does not always so clearly communicate is that Calvinism teaches the Fall of Man must have occurred because that it was decreed by Almighty God. In reality therefore, although Calvinism claims that man was totally free (but not able) to avoid sin and that man is totally and completely culpable for his own actions, Adam had no choice but to sin because of God’s decree. If therefore, the decision for Adam to sin was God’s and God did not allow Adam the freedom of choice to do anything other than that which he decreed, God would of course be made responsible, or “the author” of sin. In other words, in Calvinism system a man is a sinner because God made him that way by His sovereign decree. This cannot be the case however as we are told numerous times in the scriptures that God is not the author of sin.
This common sense observation is nothing new to theology. Men as early as Augustine have recognized the fallacy of making God responsible for man’s actions by asserting that man has no free choice. In defense of itself, one would expect Calvinism to offer a legitimate defense of this position. However, in four hundred years of attempts, a legitimate one has not been found. Consider Bonar’s response to this issue when he states “Must God be the author of sin, because it is said that Israel and the Gentiles “were gathered together to do what His counsel had determined”? Let our opponents attempt an explanation of such a passage, and tell us how it can be made to harmonize with their theory.”
While this answer may well cause detractors to examine their own stand, it hardly serves as validation for the Calvinist teaching. Bonar’s response is indicative of the majority of Calvinistic responses to this issue. In short, they may be summed up in indignant assertions that man should not dare question God or that God has a right to do as He pleases. Either way, these types of responses are hardly adequate and only serve to illustrate once again is the fact that the strength of Calvinism lies in its collective reasoning, not in biblical truth.
Another area in which the Calvinist doctrine of Total Depravity contradicts the scriptures is in regards to the process of regeneration. Calvinism teaches that depravity results in the total death or enslavement of man’s will. God therefore sovereignly chooses certain individuals to salvation and equally chooses others to Hell. Man has no part in the process of regeneration, does not cooperate in it, and is the subject of it, not the agent. In the Calvinist system, God accomplishes the process of regeneration in the soul of the human being without the necessity of any condition being met. Men therefore, do not “trust” Christ; rather they are born spiritually in the same manner that they were born physically, totally unaware of the event until afterwards. This doctrine is a gross misinterpretation of the biblical texts.
The bible teaches that men are indeed separated from God and cannot come to Him on their own. However, there does exist a degree of grace that enables men to respond by choice to His call. This fact is demonstrated in many biblical texts. (De 30:10, 2 Kings 17:13, Is 55:6, Is 64:6, Ez 14:6, Joel 1:12-13, Ze 1:3-4, John 1:13, 2 Co 6:2 among others) This “common grace”(not of the Calvinist definition) has been granted to all men so that when they are illuminated by the Word of God they possess the ability to choose whether or not they will respond. (Titus 2:11, Ro 10:17) Regeneration then is a process that is initiated by God in the sense that he sent His unique Son into the world to provide the gift of salvation to all men. While Calvinism teaches that God only did this for the elect, the bible teaches that He did this for everybody.
What then is the correct understanding of the doctrine of Depravity? The bible clearly does teach that “all have sinned” (Ro 3:23), that man is spiritually dead (Eph 2:1) that none of man’s good works are pleasing in the sight of God (Is 64:6), and that man cannot of himself seek God or achieve salvation.(Ro3:11, Eph 2:8) These statements are in no way contradictory to a biblical view of Depravity.
The term that is translated “depravity” in the English language literally means “not standing the test” and refers to the condition of man’s corrupted nature. A biblical view of depravity is therefore reflected in the following statement “this corruption extends to every part of the unsaved person’s human nature (body, soul, spirit). It affects his thinking (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Ro 1:21-23; 3:11; 8:5-8; 1 Co 2:14; Eph 4:17-18), his emotions and his attitudes (Jn. 3:19-20; Ro 1:24-32; 3:18; Eph 4:18), his will (Jn 5:40; Eph 2:2-3), and his body (Ro 8:10; I Co 15:50).” Man is therefore totally depraved in the sense that he is spiritually separated from God and possesses a disposition toward evil, but he is not depraved in the sense that his soul is lost or unrecognizable or that he is unable to respond to God’s offer of salvation.
This understanding does much to explain the many verses that indicate that man has a free will (Josh 21:15), can resist the Holy Spirit (Acts 7:51), and is responsible for his own actions (Jn5:29). It also makes plain the scriptures that refer to the fact that God is not willing that any should perish, the fairness of future judgement, and the eternal state of both the redeemed and the lost. Within the Calvinist system, each of these truths must be reinterpreted in order to conform to the logical system that bears its name. The result, as has been mentioned, is that Calvinism emerges as a logically correct, though biblically bankrupt theology of man.
In summary then, we may conclude that Calvinism is mistaken in regards to the cause, the extent, and the condition of depravity. Unregenerate man is no doubt depraved in the sense that he is spiritually wholly separated from God and his nature has been corrupted, resulting in a disposition towards sin. However, this corruption does not equate to spiritual nonexistence, is not a result of the Sovereign decree of God, nor does it prevent a lost sinner from accepting God’s offer that “Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved” (Ro 10:13). The Calvinist doctrine of Total Depravity, therefore, should be rejected on the basis that it is biblically incorrect and theologically deficient.
I apologize, someone must have re-arranged my "heresy" book shelf because I can't find Boettner's book.
What I do have, however, is a ten page paper I've written some time ago with footnotes.
Here it is:
Calvinism in its many forms has been heralded as anything from the pinnacle of Christian theological thought to the deepest depths of heresy. Despite the raging debate that has continued for over four hundred years most Christians have yet to come to a theologically sound understanding of why they are or why they are not a Calvinist. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate that each of the five points of Calvinism are flawed and must be either rejected or drastically reinterpreted in order to arrive at a biblically correct theology. Due to the fact that a reinterpretation of all five points on a thorough scale is beyond the scope of this paper, its method shall be to identify the errors within the doctrine of Total Depravity, and in doing so illustrate the fallacy of the entire Calvinist system.
As one begins to consider the Calvinist Doctrine of Total Depravity its becomes quickly evident that words within the Calvinist system often times possess multiple meanings. This practice in itself is not necessarily problematic. Calvin himself clearly stated in his Institutes that his aim in organizing the scriptures was “to prepare and qualify students of theology for the reading of the divine word, that they may have an easy introduction to it, and be enabled to proceed in it without any obstruction”. It is understandable, therefore, that certain terms might warrant a greater degree of explanation. However, it seems unreasonable that so many biblical terms would be redefined within the Calvinist system to represent concepts that are radically different from their biblical counterparts. This indeed presents a serious problem.
Specifically in regards to Total Depravity it is recognized that, to a Calvinist, the term Total Depravity is synonymous with the term Total Inability. The Westminster Confession of Faith states it this way “Man, by his fall into a state of sin, hath wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation; so as a natural man, being altogether averse from good, and dead in sin, is not able, by his own strength, to convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto". Likewise, Faber offers that “Man’s corruption in consequence of the fall of Adam, is such, that all are conceived in sin and are born the children of wrath, unapt to any salutary goodness, propense to evil, dead in trespasses, and the slaves of iniquity”. Both of these verses at face value may be taken to mean that depravity simply refers to the inability of man to save himself and the fact that men are sinners. However, it is only when one considers the following statement by John Calvin that the real meaning of these statements becomes clear “As the spiritual life of Adam consisted with a union to his Maker, so an alienation from him was the death of his soul” .
It is evident then, that within Calvinism the term Total Depravity refers to more than the fact that man cannot save himself or that “there is none that seeketh after God” (Ro 3:11). Rather, Calvinism teaches the very soul of man has either been lost or corrupted to the point where it has ceased to exist. John Calvin believed that as a result of the fall the “Divine image was not utterly annihilated and effaced in him, yet it was so corrupted that whatever remains is but a horrible deformity.” Other men who followed Calvin have taken this thought further and taught that “not only that man lost the image of God through sin, but also that it changed into its reverse”
It is claimed that the scriptural evidence for these assertions are based on the many texts that speak of man being spiritually dead. Logical analogies are therefore drawn between being physically dead and spiritually dead. Consider the following statement by Boettner “If a man were dead, in a natural and physical sense, it would be readily granted that there is no further possibility of that man being able to perform any physical actions…If a man is dead spiritually, therefore, it is surely equally as evident that he is unable to perform any spiritual actions.”
This statement by Mr. Boettner illustrates a very subtle characteristic of the Calvinist system; the fact that it is in its entirety it is based on logic rather than the Word of God. For example, logically it is impossible to deny the truthfulness of the above statement. However, not all truth is logical and certainly not all logic is biblical. Logic simply means that conditionally true statements will result in equally true subsequent statements. Therefore if “A” equals “B” and “B” equals “C”, “A” and “C” will also be equal. However, if “A” does not equal “B” then the argument that “C” equals “A” is invalid. The point is that Mr. Boettner’s argument may well be logically true, but it is far from biblically true. There are significant differences between an inanimate body that has been vacated by the soul and an animate soul that has been separated from God. The scriptures do not teach annihilation of the soul or non-existence. To draw a corollary between physical death and spiritual death is therefore invalid.
Furthermore, we read in the scriptures that spiritually dead men do perform “spiritual” acts. For example, “dead” men attempt to keep the law (Ro 2:14), serve society on God’s behalf (Ro 13:4), exist forever in Hell where they are both conscious and thinking (Lu 16:23), resist the Holy Ghost (Acts 7:51), pray (Luke 18:10), and even worship what they believe to be God (Jn 4:20). Granted, this is not to say that any of these acts are looked upon with favor by Almighty God or endow the practitioners with any merit, quite the opposite is true. In Matthew 7:23 we read that that Jesus calls the many “wonderful” spiritual works that were performed by unbelievers “iniquity”, a term that is hardly synonymous with meritorious. What these instances and others do illustrate, however, is that mankind does retain an innate sense of God and “spirituality” in the
broad sense and is not “Totally Depraved” in the sense of soulful nonexistence.
Of course, Calvinism cannot deny the existence of spiritually positive acts in the lives of unregenerate men. The dilemma then becomes that fact that the presence of these acts contradicts their doctrine of Total Depravity. It is necessary therefore to create another doctrine to support the inadequacies of the initial doctrine. There are two ways in which Calvinists account for the presence of this spirituality in the unredeemed. The first way is to discount these acts by redefining the terms “moral”, “good”, and “spiritual”. From this view it is asserted that these acts are really none of the three but simply the “glimmerings of natural light” that yet reside within a man’s soul. Those who propose this view will quickly point out that this light merely “keeps him (man) a sinner and inexcusable before God.” What is being proposed then is that basically all “good” deeds that are performed by the unsaved are really insidious attempts to do evil. Needless to say, this argument is based on the fact that it is logically necessary to make the Calvinist doctrines work, not because there is warrant for such a position in the scriptures.
The second way in which Calvinists account for spiritual acts in the unredeemed is to declare the doctrine of Common Grace. This view suggests that God endows “common grace” upon the unrighteous in such a way as to allow them to perform good deeds and experience temporal blessings. Boettner defines the term this way “Common Grace is the source of all the order, refinement, culture, common virtue, etc. which we find in the world, and through it the moral power of truth upon the heart and conscience is increased and the evil passions of men are restrained. It does not lead to salvation, but keeps the world from becoming a veritable Hell”.
Again, this idea is based on logic and is not grounded in scriptural truth. The bible teaches that it is the presence of God’s people and God’s word that is the restraining element within the world (Matt 5:13) but also that there are principles in nature that are created by God that, when followed, will result in temporal success. (Ro 2:14) It may well be prudent to retain the term “common grace” to refer to the longsuffering of God and the many blessings associated with His goodness, but it is incorrect to use this phrase to refer to a blanket regeneration or spiritual endowment to all humankind. A simple look at the world will support this conclusion and illustrate that the common grace of Calvinism is not so common. Rather, the degree of virtue and civilization among people groups may be directly related to how they have received and responded to God’s Word throughout their history or how they have pragmatically followed the principles in nature that He has established.
It is worthy of pause at this point to comment on another characteristic of Calvinism, the fact that it is a unified whole. As mentioned, Calvinism is a logical system in which all of its points fit perfectly together. It must be understood therefore, that by use of the term Total Depravity not only is the other meaning of Total Inability in view, but also the doctrines of Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace, and Perseverance of the Saints. It is virtually impossible therefore to discuss the Calvinist doctrine of Total Depravity without discussing the other related doctrines. This illustrates a major strength of the Calvinist system, the fact that it possesses a vast number of logical collective arguments against which no popular theological system seems to be able to compare. This also illustrates another important point, the fact that Calvinism must be accepted or rejected wholeheartedly as a composite system and not on the relative merits of any of the individual points.
This fact is specifically illustrated in regards to the relationship of the doctrine of Total Depravity to the doctrine of the Sovereignty of God. When discussing the origin of Total Depravity, a Calvinist would agree at one level that Total Depravity is a result of Adam’s disobedience in the Garden of Eden. They would also maintain that at the time of Adam sinned he possessed a free, although untested will, but was fully free to choose obedience as opposed to evil. However, what Calvinism does not always so clearly communicate is that Calvinism teaches the Fall of Man must have occurred because that it was decreed by Almighty God. In reality therefore, although Calvinism claims that man was totally free (but not able) to avoid sin and that man is totally and completely culpable for his own actions, Adam had no choice but to sin because of God’s decree. If therefore, the decision for Adam to sin was God’s and God did not allow Adam the freedom of choice to do anything other than that which he decreed, God would of course be made responsible, or “the author” of sin. In other words, in Calvinism system a man is a sinner because God made him that way by His sovereign decree. This cannot be the case however as we are told numerous times in the scriptures that God is not the author of sin.
This common sense observation is nothing new to theology. Men as early as Augustine have recognized the fallacy of making God responsible for man’s actions by asserting that man has no free choice. In defense of itself, one would expect Calvinism to offer a legitimate defense of this position. However, in four hundred years of attempts, a legitimate one has not been found. Consider Bonar’s response to this issue when he states “Must God be the author of sin, because it is said that Israel and the Gentiles “were gathered together to do what His counsel had determined”? Let our opponents attempt an explanation of such a passage, and tell us how it can be made to harmonize with their theory.”
While this answer may well cause detractors to examine their own stand, it hardly serves as validation for the Calvinist teaching. Bonar’s response is indicative of the majority of Calvinistic responses to this issue. In short, they may be summed up in indignant assertions that man should not dare question God or that God has a right to do as He pleases. Either way, these types of responses are hardly adequate and only serve to illustrate once again is the fact that the strength of Calvinism lies in its collective reasoning, not in biblical truth.
Another area in which the Calvinist doctrine of Total Depravity contradicts the scriptures is in regards to the process of regeneration. Calvinism teaches that depravity results in the total death or enslavement of man’s will. God therefore sovereignly chooses certain individuals to salvation and equally chooses others to Hell. Man has no part in the process of regeneration, does not cooperate in it, and is the subject of it, not the agent. In the Calvinist system, God accomplishes the process of regeneration in the soul of the human being without the necessity of any condition being met. Men therefore, do not “trust” Christ; rather they are born spiritually in the same manner that they were born physically, totally unaware of the event until afterwards. This doctrine is a gross misinterpretation of the biblical texts.
The bible teaches that men are indeed separated from God and cannot come to Him on their own. However, there does exist a degree of grace that enables men to respond by choice to His call. This fact is demonstrated in many biblical texts. (De 30:10, 2 Kings 17:13, Is 55:6, Is 64:6, Ez 14:6, Joel 1:12-13, Ze 1:3-4, John 1:13, 2 Co 6:2 among others) This “common grace”(not of the Calvinist definition) has been granted to all men so that when they are illuminated by the Word of God they possess the ability to choose whether or not they will respond. (Titus 2:11, Ro 10:17) Regeneration then is a process that is initiated by God in the sense that he sent His unique Son into the world to provide the gift of salvation to all men. While Calvinism teaches that God only did this for the elect, the bible teaches that He did this for everybody.
What then is the correct understanding of the doctrine of Depravity? The bible clearly does teach that “all have sinned” (Ro 3:23), that man is spiritually dead (Eph 2:1) that none of man’s good works are pleasing in the sight of God (Is 64:6), and that man cannot of himself seek God or achieve salvation.(Ro3:11, Eph 2:8) These statements are in no way contradictory to a biblical view of Depravity.
The term that is translated “depravity” in the English language literally means “not standing the test” and refers to the condition of man’s corrupted nature. A biblical view of depravity is therefore reflected in the following statement “this corruption extends to every part of the unsaved person’s human nature (body, soul, spirit). It affects his thinking (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Ro 1:21-23; 3:11; 8:5-8; 1 Co 2:14; Eph 4:17-18), his emotions and his attitudes (Jn. 3:19-20; Ro 1:24-32; 3:18; Eph 4:18), his will (Jn 5:40; Eph 2:2-3), and his body (Ro 8:10; I Co 15:50).” Man is therefore totally depraved in the sense that he is spiritually separated from God and possesses a disposition toward evil, but he is not depraved in the sense that his soul is lost or unrecognizable or that he is unable to respond to God’s offer of salvation.
This understanding does much to explain the many verses that indicate that man has a free will (Josh 21:15), can resist the Holy Spirit (Acts 7:51), and is responsible for his own actions (Jn5:29). It also makes plain the scriptures that refer to the fact that God is not willing that any should perish, the fairness of future judgement, and the eternal state of both the redeemed and the lost. Within the Calvinist system, each of these truths must be reinterpreted in order to conform to the logical system that bears its name. The result, as has been mentioned, is that Calvinism emerges as a logically correct, though biblically bankrupt theology of man.
In summary then, we may conclude that Calvinism is mistaken in regards to the cause, the extent, and the condition of depravity. Unregenerate man is no doubt depraved in the sense that he is spiritually wholly separated from God and his nature has been corrupted, resulting in a disposition towards sin. However, this corruption does not equate to spiritual nonexistence, is not a result of the Sovereign decree of God, nor does it prevent a lost sinner from accepting God’s offer that “Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved” (Ro 10:13). The Calvinist doctrine of Total Depravity, therefore, should be rejected on the basis that it is biblically incorrect and theologically deficient.