Calvinism's Total Depravity verses Scriptural Hardening

[William C]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
You are correct in your evaluation of the salient points of difference and in identifying that in my view - the depravity does not get to freely manifest itself - unaffected by the Drawing power of God until after one is fully hardened.

So what is the "point"? The point is that my view accounts for all the "totaly depravity" examples where the sinner not only DOES not choose obedience - he "CAN not" and not only that "HE CAN not even comprehend spiritual things".

There are no "Total Depravity examples," there are only totally hardened by God examples of where man "CAN not" understand or believe. Plus, according to your view there has never been a person who "CAN not" because God has been drawing all man unto himself for all generations.

It also accounts for the sweeping statement "there is NON righteous no not ONE" and "NO one seeks after God" by saying that this is in the context of "man on his own".

Tell me why Arminians need to "account" for this passage? I agree no one is righteous. I agree that no one seeks after God. I do not agree that all man is born unable to believe the revelations of God. What does man's being unrighteous and not seeking him have ANYTHING to do with that???? You have bought into the false Calvinistic reasoning by apply texts that don't even say anything about what you are attempting to prove.

We are talking about MAN'S ABILITY TO BELIEVE. To my knowledge the only people in the scripture who are said not to have this ability are those who have been hardened by God as seen in John 12:37-41. Can you show me any other reason that a man would not have the ability to believe.

And please don't go to Cor. 2 again because that is not talking about man's inablity to understand the gospel. That is about understanding Spiritual things or "the deep things of God," which according to chapter 3 these believers in Corinth were having a difficult time with understanding themselves. This verse isn't in reference to being saved or recieving the Spirit it only points out the difference between what a person with the Spirit can understand and what a person without the Spirit can understand. People without the Spirit have not chance of understanding the "deep things of God." But those with the Spirit can seek these things out with the help of the Spirit, something that the believers in Corinth haven't been able to do to that point apparently.

It also accounts for the "slavery to sin" texts of Eph 2:1-7 and Romans 6 (and Romans 7:1-5) where we see that as long as man is not yielding to the supernatural drawing of God - he is caught in the cyclone of rebellion and sin - unnable to do anything else.

Slavery to sin? Sounds like that could fall under the established doctrine of hardening to me. Why create a new doctrine entitled Total Depravity when hardening explains these truths of man's sin nature perfectly?

Bob, look at Romans 1. Where those people born depraved? Were they born defiled? Were they born hardened? No. They BECAME that way after two things:

1. The saw God's revelation and recognized it as being from God
2. The refused God's revelation to follow their own sin.

The same is true of the Jews who saw God's revelation through the law and rebelled against it.

They weren't born rebellious they became rebellious by ignoring God's calling to righteousness through the law.

But, now there is a "new" righteousness being revealed and it has been the source of true righteousness all along. It is not through the works of the law, it is through Faith, of which all are capable. Faith is never said not to be within man's capasity.

Plus, Bob again look at the inconsistancy in your believes. You say your views account for the slavery to sin verses etc, but you don't believe that anyone ever really has been a slave to sin because of Total Depravity do you? You can't if you believe that Christ has been drawing all man to him for all ages. So you make all of the passages seem like nonesense if they truly are about being Totally Depraved.

Truth is they are not about Totally Depravity because once again they never deal with the issue of man being "UNABLE TO BELIEVE."

That one phrase: "UNABLE TO BELIEVE" is the part of Calvinism's teaching on Total Depravity that I disagree with. I agree with what they teach about original sin and the imputed sin nature. I just take issue with how far they go in saying that this sin nature makes man "UNABLE TO BELIEVE" when in fact the only thing that makes man unable to believe according to scripture is when they are hardened by God. This was done uniquely to Israel for the purpose of ingrafting the Gentiles and accomplishing God's purpose of redemption through the crucifixtion of Christ. This hardening was temporary and purposeful and should not be considered as God's "regular" activity to all mankind from birth as TD suggests.

 

[BobRyan]

Bill -- There are no "Total Depravity examples," there are only totally hardened by God examples of where man "CAN not" understand or believe.

1Cor2 says nothing about hardening. It speaks of being taught by the Spirit and combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words.

It speaks of "the things freely given to us by God".

Your view that the Gospel is explicitly or implicitly excluded from that list of spiritual topics/concepts etc is not supported in the text.

In fact in 1Cor1 :18 Paul has explicitly identified the Gospel as "foolishness" to the lost - to the unsaved world. Instead of "excluding" that - it is explicitly included.

Bill
Plus, according to your view there has never been a person who "CAN not" because God has been drawing all man unto himself for all generations.

No. In my view all of mankind that is turning away from the Drawing of God (which is ALL the lost at any point in time ) is subject to the conditions listed. The "door" is only in submitting to the drawing of God. It is not in being able to comprehend the spiritual concepts of 1Cor 1:18 the cross "on your own". Paul is correct in saying that it appears to be "foolishness" at the very start - to the unbeliever.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It also accounts for the sweeping statement "there is NON righteous no not ONE" and "NO one seeks after God" by saying that this is in the context of "man on his own".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bill --
Tell me why Arminians need to "account" for this passage? I agree no one is righteous. I agree that no one seeks after God.

Because IF a free will condition existed apart from God, apart from the drawing - then man ON HIS OWN should be "choosing God" and "seeking God" -- "Seeking LIFE". He should be able to discern that He is lost and going to hell and that eternal LIFE is better than eternal death.

Maybe not ALL would "choose life" but "some should". To say that "NNE seeks after God" is to say that ALL are CHOOSING hell.

It would be like saying "well of course ALL choose to starve themselves to death". When in fact that is not what "ALL" should choose IF they really had the power of choice.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

#1. Hardening - responding to a compelling urging of God to accept the Gospel - by turning from it. Resulting in rapid progression toward total coldness and non-response to the drawing of God.

#2. Slavery to sin - CHOOSING to turn from the solution that God provides - and deal with sin (temptation) in your own power. You are overcome by it.

Bill
Slavery to sin? Sounds like that could fall under the established doctrine of hardening to me. Why create a new doctrine entitled Total Depravity when hardening explains these truths of man's sin nature perfectly?

One may not be turning from an urgent demand by the Holy Spirit to accept the Gospel - and still sin.

In other words - you are not "always under conviction" to accept the Gospel. Conviction comes in waves - but sinning happens on a more constant basis. They are not the same thing.

It is useful to observe the Bible concept of depravity since it accounts for the slavery that we see in Romans 6, and Ephesians 2:1-7 where the god of this world dictates to the lost and they must obey. In addition their own sinful nature dictates to them and they are "slaves to sin" without the ability to free themselves.

IN that context - waves of conviction enter in. That conviction prompts them to repent, confess and accept Christ. It does not give them power over sin APART from Christ.

Bill
Bob, look at Romans 1. Where those people born depraved? Were they born defiled?

Yes in the sense that by their very nature - the sinful nature - they were "At war" against God's law (Romans 7). The heart set on the flesh DID not and COULD not submit to the will/word/law of God.

Were they born hardened? No.

Agreed. They were not born "hardened". The waves of conviction had not been rejected.

Bill

They BECAME that way after two things:

1. They saw God's revelation and recognized it as being from God
2. They refused God's revelation to follow their own sin.

The same is true of the Jews who saw God's revelation through the law and rebelled against it.

True but they were not saints FIRST and then turning from sainthood - they find themselves in rebellion. Rather "The HEART IS deceitfully wicked" to start with. There is no one who seeks God - to start with. There is no one righteous - to start with.

We are not born saints - with Godly characters that then turn to rebellion.

We start with the heart that is "deceitfully wicked".

Bill
They weren't born rebellious they became rebellious by ignoring God's calling to righteousness through the law.

From our very birth we "need salvation".

From our very birth we "need the new birth"

From our very birth we need the atoning sacrifice of Christ.

Bill
Plus, Bob again look at the inconsistancy in your believes. You say your views account for the slavery to sin verses etc, but you don't believe that anyone ever really has been a slave to sin because of Total Depravity do you?

I believe that the ONLY choice that lost has IS NOT "sin or not sin" nor is it "spiritually discern the Gospel or not" - it is to "yield to the convicting work of the Holy Spirit" or not.

As long as they are not yielding to the Holy Spirit - they are "enslaved to sin". They are continuing down a course that will eventually harden them. Notice that in Ephesians 2:1-7 we have that very theme as well as Romans 6 speaking of our walk apart from Christ as slavery as being dictated to by the god of this world.

Bill
Truth is they are not about Totally Depravity because once again they never deal with the issue of man being "UNABLE TO BELIEVE."

The Calvinist means "Unable to believe on your own without the drawing power of God".

And so do I.

The difference is, I accept that God "Draws all mankind".

Your argument regarding "unable to believe" in opposition to that can only be "ABLE to believe ON your own WITHOUT the drawing power of God".

That is a hard point to sustain from scripture for the heart that is "Deceitfully wicked" and that "does NOT seek after God".

Bill I just take issue with how far they go in saying that this sin nature makes man "UNABLE TO BELIEVE" when in fact the only thing that makes man unable to believe according to scripture is when they are hardened by God.

God does not harden anyone - by malice. It is the "goodness of God that leads you to repentance" but it is also the goodness of God that (when rejected) hardens the heart. Only in that sense does God harden.

Bill This was done uniquely to Israel for the purpose of ingrafting the Gentiles and accomplishing God's purpose of redemption through the crucifixtion of Christ. This hardening was temporary and purposeful and should not be considered as God's "regular" activity to all mankind from birth as TD suggests.

You are wrong there. The hardening of the Jews was not the will of God. In fact in Luke 7 Christ says of those who turned from God "They rejected God's Purpose for Them". He says "We played the flute and you did not dance so we sang a dirge and you would not weep".

In Matt 23 He says that He LONGED to spare their children "But you would not". He shows himself sending messenger after messenger - but they refuse HIS KINDNESS and in so doing - they harden themselves. God did not "require" their loss.

Even in the OT - the mission of Israel was "A kingdom of PRIESTS", "A light to the nations" they were sent as "My witnesses" to teach the nations about the Messiah - the ONE Gospel, the fall of mankind and the promise of salvation. From the very start God's house was to be "A house of Prayer for ALL nations".

In Christ,

Bob

 

[William C]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
1Cor2 says nothing about hardening.

Nor does it say anything about Total Depravity.

Even the believers in Corith are not able to recieve the spiritual things that Paul is refering to. Read chapter 3.

In fact in 1Cor1 :18 Paul has explicitly identified the Gospel as "foolishness" to the lost - to the unsaved world. Instead of "excluding" that - it is explicitly included.

Is it foolish because they are total depraved? According to your view it can't be because they are TD because the drawing of Christ removed their TD, so that is not consistant.

Bill
Plus, according to your view there has never been a person who "CAN not" because God has been drawing all man unto himself for all generations.

No. In my view all of mankind that is turning away from the Drawing of God (which is ALL the lost at any point in time ) is subject to the conditions listed.

You label the "conditions" you speak of as "Totally Depraved," which you say has been disabled through Christ's drawing. You are not being consistant in your arguments here.

"All of mankind that in turning away from the Drawing of God" cannot be Totally Depraved because of the fact that the drawing has disabled their Total depravity, therefore these verses cannot be supporting Total Depravity, they must be supporting hardening, which is the result of man's refusal of God's calling, not something they are born with (as is TD).

Can't you see this blantant inconsistancy in your arguments?

You continue to speak of this, "on your own" stage of man. But according to you no one has ever been in the "on your own" stage therefore you must believe that all the verses that you say support TD are theoritical of what would be had Christ not done what he did. The problem with this view is that the verses are describing actual people and actual events, not theoritical people.

Are the people of Romans 1 Totally depraved or not? You must say "no" if you indeed believe that Christ draws all man in all ages thus removing their depravity. Therefore, Romans 1 cannot be a support text for Total depravity in your view. The same is true with all of the other passages that you point to.

 

[BobRyan]

Romans 1 identifies both the principle of total depravity AND of Hardening.

Total depravity: The condition we are BORN in that makes us uNABLE to comprehend spiritual truth and makes us UNABLE to submit to God's Word.

Harding: - The REJECTION of the DRAWING of God resulting in further hardening against future drawing of God - and advancement down the path of sinful rebellion.

If we ACCEPT the DRAWING of God - we do not lose our sinful nature - but rather - Romans 7 "War" is declared between the newly created "NEW" creation and the OLD nature. We must choose to yield to Christ by using the ENABLING given to us through the DRAWING of God, the work of the Holy Spirit, the NEW creation setup within.

But the OLD sinful depraved nature still exists. If we choose to turn from the DRAWING of God - we are choosing to remain in a life of total slavery to sin (Romans 6, Eph 2:1-5.).

If we turn away from that drawing AFTER being saved then we are RETURNING to the state of total depravity whose ONLY means of escape is NOT "to seek God on our own" or to "understand spiritual truth of our own power" - but to "yield AGAIN to the DRAWING power of God".

In Christ,

Bob

 

[William C]

Ok, Bob, one more time. I love you as a brother but I can't understand why you can't see the obvious inconsistancy in your view. Let me take one more stab at it.

Originally posted by BobRyan:
Romans 1 identifies both the principle of total depravity AND of Hardening.

Nope. It never says anything about anyone being born unable to believe or submit. It says they became defiled after they lived in sin.

Originally posted by BobRyan:
Total depravity: The condition we are BORN in that makes us uNABLE to comprehend spiritual truth and makes us UNABLE to submit to God's Word.

Harding: - The REJECTION of the DRAWING of God resulting in further hardening against future drawing of God - and advancement down the path of sinful rebellion.

Ok, here is the inconsistancy. Plain and simple:

In your system, there is no instance in which any of the people are Totally Depraved. None. They have all been drawn by Christ throughout all ages. Therefore, the condition of Total Depravity cannot be what Romans 1-3, Eph. 2; Romans 8 or anyother text is refering to because this condition doesn't exist in your system. The people of Romans 1 were not Totally Depraved because, according to you, they were being drawn by Christ, so anything the text says about their unrighteousness or lack of seeking God can not be in reference to Total Depravity but to hardening, which you define as man's refusal to rejection of God's drawing.

In short, all of your support texts for Total Depravity must be applied to hardening because all man have already been drawn. Any discriptions given of men in these texts are discriptions of men who have been drawn by Christ and are not influenced by Total Depravity; therefore, they must be discriptions of hardening as you have defined it here.

So, all these passages that speak about man's refusing the gospel, their slavery to sin, their spiritual death etc etc cannot be discribing Total Depraved men because they have been drawn by Christ and could not be Totally depraved. In your view these passages instead must be in reference to hardening because all the people being refered to have already been drawn by Christ.

Can you see my point?


Please tell me you understand.

 

[BobRyan]

Bill --
In your system, there is no instance in which any of the people are Totally Depraved. None. They have all been drawn by Christ throughout all ages. Therefore, the condition of Total Depravity cannot be what Romans 1-3, Eph. 2; Romans 8 or anyother text is refering to because this condition doesn't exist in your system.

Romans 3 does not say "SOME have come to the point that they do not seek after God after considerable hardening".

It says "NNE seeks after God" in the same context as "ALL both Jews and Greeks are under sin... ALL have sinned... by the works of the law shall NO FLESH be justified".

#1. There is no good way to get that worked back into "SOME are hardened and do not seek after God but others are not so hardened and they DO seek after God".

#2. The case I describe is comparable to "ALL metals are heavier than air - they drop to the ground like a ROCK". But then you observe "Oh not so - for a metal plated cannister on an airplane flies through the air without falling". However IF the point is to identify the property OF the metal - it is STILL true that it is heavier than air and will in fact drop like a rock if left on its own. It is still an accurate description of the cannister. And the fact that there ARE some cannisters that ARE outside the plane and DO drop - does not change the case that this is a property of ALL cannisters EVEN one's in airplanes. Their starting condition and their nature is that they are "heavier than air".

Bill
The people of Romans 1 were not Totally Depraved because, according to you, they were being drawn by Christ, so anything the text says about their unrighteousness or lack of seeking God can not be in reference to Total Depravity but to hardening, which you define as man's refusal to rejection of God's drawing.

I do agree that their actions are a result of the fact that they are turning from God's Drawing AS WELL as their internal natural starting condition of being totally depraved at the start. You are correct in saying that hardening is taking place in Romans 1.

In short, all of your support texts for Total Depravity must be applied to hardening because all man have already been drawn.

In the case of Romans 1 where we see a combination of depravity, drawing and hardening - the resulting actions certainly include hardening.

But in the Case of Romans 3 where we are talking about ALL mankind saint and sinner apart from the drawing process of God - it is the internal, inherent starting condition that is being identified it CAN NOT be the Romans 1 case of declaring that the Apostles and saints are all "NOT seeking God" in the combined environment of ALL forces in play (as we see in Romans 1).

Your conclusion below represents the differences

Any discriptions given of men in these texts are discriptions of men who have been drawn by Christ and are not influenced by Total Depravity; therefore, they must be discriptions of hardening as you have defined it here.

How can you "isolate total depravity" from the text. It seems much HARDER to isolate total depravity from Romans 3 - than to isolate the saints from "ALL flesh" or from "ALL" or from "THERE IS NOT ONE who seeks after God".

Bill
So, all these passages that speak about man's refusing the gospel, their slavery to sin, their spiritual death etc etc cannot be discribing Total Depraved men because they have been drawn by Christ and could not be Totally depraved.

The slavery to sin, is like saying "this cannister falls like a rock. Now if we CHOOSE to place it on the plane - it gains altitude". The properties of the cannister remain "the same". But the combined "result" is different based on the choice that is made.

Bill
In your view these passages instead must be in reference to hardening because all the people being refered to have already been drawn by Christ.

They are "BEING drawn" and are "choosing to remain away" but "away" is "slavery to sin" because that is the constant state of their sinful nature - by not choosing to yield to the drawing of God - they are not "on the plane".

But even if they DO choose the drawing - the sinful nature REMAINS - the war of Romans 7 takes place. Imagine that Romans 7 "SIN IN ME" that is waring with Paul - WITHOUT Paul yielding to the DRAWING - it would enslave him.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[William C]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
Romans 3 does not say "SOME have come to the point that they do not seek after God after considerable hardening".
It says "NNE seeks after God" in the same context as "ALL both Jews and Greeks are under sin... ALL have sinned... by the works of the law shall NO FLESH be justified".

You are right. And I don't believe that man is ever able to seek after God. No one seeks God. He seeks them. But the part of Total Depravity that I disagree with has NOTHING to do with that. The part I disagree with is the part that says, "When God seeks man through his appointed means, such as the gospel message, that man is completely unable to respond."

To claim that the sin nature makes it where man is unrighteous and doesn't seek after God is accurate. But that DOES NOT mean that man is completely unable to respond to God seeking him.

Let's say we communicated with God by phone. And someone said, "Your phone cannot call God." Would you assume from that statement that when God calls you that you can't answer the phone? Of course not, but that is exactly what Total Depravity assumes from this passage.

#1. There is no good way to get that worked back into "SOME are hardened and do not seek after God but others are not so hardened and they DO seek after God".

I wouldn't know, I have never tried.

#2. The case I describe is comparable to "ALL metals are heavier than air - they drop to the ground like a ROCK". But then you observe "Oh not so - for a metal plated cannister on an airplane flies through the air without falling". However IF the point is to identify the property OF the metal - it is STILL true that it is heavier than air and will in fact drop like a rock if left on its own. It is still an accurate description of the cannister. And the fact that there ARE some cannisters that ARE outside the plane and DO drop - does not change the case that this is a property of ALL cannisters EVEN one's in airplanes. Their starting condition and their nature is that they are "heavier than air".

Ok, but if you were trying to claim that because cannisters are heavier than air it is impossible for them to fly, you would clearly be wrong. And if you added to that fact that there had never been a cannister that couldn't fly you would even have a more difficult dilema, which is the one your doctrine affords.

I do agree that their actions are a result of the fact that they are turning from God's Drawing AS WELL as their internal natural starting condition of being totally depraved at the start. You are correct in saying that hardening is taking place in Romans 1.

In the case of Romans 1 where we see a combination of depravity, drawing and hardening - the resulting actions certainly include hardening.

But in the Case of Romans 3 where we are talking about ALL mankind saint and sinner apart from the drawing process of God - it is the internal, inherent starting condition that is being identified it CAN NOT be the Romans 1 case of declaring that the Apostles and saints are all "NOT seeking God" in the combined environment of ALL forces in play (as we see in Romans 1).

Your conclusion below represents the differences

As I've already stated, I don't think the statements made in Rom. 3 are concerning those who have just be hardened, but it is an accurate view of man following his inherited nature.

The slavery to sin, is like saying "this cannister falls like a rock. Now if we CHOOSE to place it on the plane - it gains altitude". The properties of the cannister remain "the same". But the combined "result" is different based on the choice that is made.

So, the actual people that Paul is refering to as being "slaves to sin" aren't actually slaves to sin, nor have they ever been slaves because they have been drawn. These verses are completely theorical in discribing what man would have been had Christ not drawn them. That is a huge stretch Bob. Paul specifically say you were once slaves to sin. That cannot be about Total Depravity in your view, it is impossible.

They are "BEING drawn" and are "choosing to remain away" but "away" is "slavery to sin" because that is the constant state of their sinful nature - by not choosing to yield to the drawing of God - they are not "on the plane".

You are describing Hardening not Total Depravity. Look back at your definations if you think I'm wrong. Choosing to "remain away" from "being drawn" is becoming hardened. It's not Total depravity. In your view, it can't be because the drawing negates Total depravity.

I can't be anymore clear than this Bob. If you can't see the blantant inconsistancy of your views based on what I've already said then there really is not need to presist on because I can't be any clearer than I've been.

No hard feelings. Practically speaking we hold to the same views, I just don't see the point in conceding to a doctrine that is completely unsupported in the text and contradicts the clear teaching concerning the hardening process.

God bless.

 

[KenH]

Hey, can't you Arminians get your act together and make up your minds what you believe?

Just kidding.

 

[BobRyan]

Bill--
The part I disagree with is the part that says, "When God seeks man through his appointed means, such as the gospel message, that man is completely unable to respond."

I agree with you there. But not because it is inherit in man's "ability" but rather - because the seeking of God includes the "DRAWING of ALL mankind" John 12:32 - and that drawing enables all to choose life. So although the internal "natural" response is "not to seek after God" - the "Drawing of God" enables man to choose. God places internal (supernatural) warfare in man - against sin-Satan-evil (I will put hatred between the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent). But that is not the natural element of the sinful nature. It is the supernatural element that God places in the heart of man.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[William C]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Bill--
The part I disagree with is the part that says, "When God seeks man through his appointed means, such as the gospel message, that man is completely unable to respond."

I agree with you there. But not because it is inherit in man's "ability" but rather - because the seeking of God includes the "DRAWING of ALL mankind" John 12:32 - and that drawing enables all to choose life. So although the internal "natural" response is "not to seek after God" - the "Drawing of God" enables man to choose. </font>[/QUOTE]Once again Bob you are equating man's inability to seek God with what you believe is his inability to respond to God's seeking. That makes no sense.

Look back at my last post and read the illustration about the phones and please respond to that issue. thanks

 

[William C]

Bob,

I wanted to see how you respond to this argument:

Let's say we communicated with God by phone. And someone said, "Your phone cannot call God." Would you assume from that statement that when God calls you that you can't answer the phone? Of course not, but that is exactly what Total Depravity assumes from Romans 3:10 which says, "no one seeks God."

Just because no one seeks God on their own doesn't mean that no one can respond to God when He seeks them.

What do you think?

 

[rufus]

Brother Bill, Still at it and Still WRONG!!!

rufus &lt

 

[William C]

Originally posted by rufus:
Brother Bill, Still at it and Still WRONG!!!

rufus &lt

Wow rufus. You make such compelling and relevant arguments I just don't know how I could ever keep up. So much substance in one post, how do you do it?

 

[rufus]

Originally posted by Brother Bill:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by rufus:
Brother Bill, Still at it and Still WRONG!!!

rufus &lt

Wow rufus. You make such compelling and relevant arguments I just don't know how I could ever keep up.

</font>[/QUOTE]Thanks, Bro. Bill. It's easy for me!

rufus 0)

 

[William C]

Yeah, Rufus your posts are probably about as easy as debunking your theology; both are without substance.

 

[rufus]

Originally posted by Brother Bill:
Yeah, Rufus your posts are probably about as easy as debunking your theology; both are without substance.

Debunk this, good brother:

Proved By Scripture.

The decisiveness of men's disposition by nature is also asserted in Scripture in the strongest possible terms. All men are the “servants of sin,” (John 8:34; Rom. 6:20; 2 Pet. 2:19). They are “sold under sin” (Rom. 7:14). They are “in the bond of iniquity” (Acts 8:23). They are “dead in sins” (Eph 2:1). They are “blind”; yea, “blindness” itself (Eph. 4:18). Their “hearts are stony” (Ezek. 36:26). They are “impotent” for evangelical good (2 Cor. 3:5); (John 15:5; Rom. 5:6; Matt. 7:18; 12:34; John 6:44). “The carnal mind is enmity, and cannot be subject to the law of God” (Rom. 8:7). Surely these are enough to prove against all ingenious Arminian glosses, that our view of man’s disposition is true. But if man’s free agency is misdirected by such active principles as these, original, uniform, absolutely decisive, it is folly to suppose that the mighty revolution to holiness can originate in that free agency; it must originate without, in almighty grace.

rufus

 

[ScottEmerson]

Originally posted by rufus:
Proved By Scripture.

The decisiveness of men's disposition by nature is also asserted in Scripture in the strongest possible terms. All men are the “servants of sin,” (John 8:34; Rom. 6:20; 2 Pet. 2:19). They are “sold under sin” (Rom. 7:14). They are “in the bond of iniquity” (Acts 8:23). They are “dead in sins” (Eph 2:1). They are “blind”; yea, “blindness” itself (Eph. 4:18). Their “hearts are stony” (Ezek. 36:26). They are “impotent” for evangelical good (2 Cor. 3:5); (John 15:5; Rom. 5:6; Matt. 7:18; 12:34; John 6:44). “The carnal mind is enmity, and cannot be subject to the law of God” (Rom. 8:7).

Hey, let me tell you a secret. Pure Arminianism agrees with all of this. Bet you didn't know that, huh?

Surely these are enough to prove against all ingenious Arminian glosses, that our view of man’s disposition is true.

The similarity between Calvinism and Arminianism is that both agree that man is "as bad as he can possibly be." We agree that although man can do "good deeds," they are for "wrong reasons." Man is utter and completely depraved.

But if man’s free agency is misdirected by such active principles as these, original, uniform, absolutely decisive, it is folly to suppose that the mighty revolution to holiness can originate in that free agency; it must originate without, in almighty grace.

The difference is this: We believe that God sent the Holy Spirit to enlighted all the world. That every man and woman is convicted of his or her sin by the Holy Spirit. With that enlightenment, man can indeed make a choice. Without the Holy Spirit, man will never choose God. The revolution for holiness does, indeed, originate from almighty grace.

Anything else I can "debunk" for you?

 

[rufus]

God’s Hardening What?

When it is said that God hardens the non–elect, it is not, and cannot be intended, that He exerts positive influence upon them to make them worse. Can God be the author of sin. See especially James. 1:13 God is only the negative cause of hardening—the positive depravation comes only from the sinner’s own voluntary feelings and acts. And the mode in which God gives place to, or permits this self–inflicted work, is by righteously withholding His restraining word and Spirit; and second, by surrounding the sinner (through His permissive providence) with such occasions and opportunities as the guilty man’s perverse heart will voluntarily abuse to increase his guilt and obduracy. Even when God’s decree and providence concerning sins are thus explained, our opponents cavil at the facts. They say that the rule of holiness enjoined on us is, not only to do no sin, but to prevent all the sin in others we righteously can. They say that the same rule obliges God. They say we represent Him as like a man who, witnessing the perpetration of a crime, and having both the right and power to prevent it, stands idly by: and they refer us to such Scriptures as Prov. 24:11, 12. And when we remind them, that God permissively ordains those sins, not for the sake of their evil, but for the sake of the excellent and holy ends He will bring out, they retort, that we represent Him as “doing evil that good may come.” These objections derive all their plausibility from forgetting that we are creatures and bondsmen of God, while He is supreme judge. The judicial retribution of sin is not our function: He claims it as His own. Rom. 12:19.

Perhaps "hardening" and "total depravity" are different terms with distinctive meanings, especially as modified and defined by the Holy Spirit in Scripture.

rufus

 

[rufus]

Originally posted by ScottEmerson:
[QB]

Originally posted by rufus:
Proved By Scripture.

Scott said
"Without the Holy Spirit, man will never choose God. The revolution for holiness does, indeed, originate from almighty grace."

Thanks for affirming my post, Scott. You are not pure Arminian, as witnessed by your own testimony, written large for the whole forum to attest.

rufus