Total Depravity

That's the heart of the doctrine of free will.

 

If you have questions about moderating, address them to the moderator through PM. It is there for that purpose.

[ December 29, 2002, 05:32 PM: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]

 

To ignore free will leaves man with no responsiblility for his sins! And no accountability for sinning. So sin on friends, God doesn't need you to know that you are a sinner, he will forgive you whether or not you acknowledge you sin and whether or not ask for forgiveness. You are not held accountable either way. However, if you do exercise your free will, it still doesn't matter 'cause free will is not in the equation so you have nothing to be concerned about!

Oh Great, and just when this free will thing was working miracles in my life.

 

Yelsew; question,why do you refuse to back up what you're saying with scripture? I'm also wondering why you don't belong to a local church?

 

It is not a matter of refusal Brutus, I used to post scripture references on another board, but after a while the 30-40 scripture references each post became cumbersome for me and unread or unresearched by others.

Throughout my 43 years of adult life, I have attended churches, joining most that I attended until I realized that the minute I joined a church I was making a statement that I don't agree with.

First of all, there is no direction in scripture to "join" a local church organization, or to affiliate with a denomination or faction. Those who believe in Jesus Christ are the church, regardless of their pledge of allegiance to a local pastor. Yes, Paul gave us instruction that we not neglect to gather together. Well sir 48 Sundays a year, I am gathered together with one local congregation or another just as Paul says to do. I tithe to the local church that I attend on any given Sunday. I even substitute teach in Sunday School on request. But I see no scriptural reason to join the organization. I am not interested in a church's government, God sets up and administers those governments. I am only interested in what comes from the pulpit. If that is sound the church does not need me as a member. If it is not sound I do not need that church.

The paramount reason is this, I am staunchly a member of the Bride of Christ. As such I can visit with or mingle with and among others who are part of the Bride of Christ wherever they are found. I am also by birthright a member of the Body of Christ which encompasses all local congregations who do the work of the Christ, therefore there is no reason to join only one segment of the Body.

Being unaffiliated as I am, I have no self-imposed "territorial" restrictions levied on me. I can visit a SBC church today, a Conservative Baptist next, a Free will baptist, a pentacostal, Four Square, or a Catholic, Lutheran, Methodist, or Anglican, church any time any where, etc. etc. I take no prejudices with me when I visit the various churches. I have no "indoctrination" in a particular dogma or "religious persuasion". I am an Unhyphenated Christian, full of the Joy of Jesus Christ...and until the Holy Spirit directs me otherwise, I shall remain unconstrained by organized religion.

Do I miss "family"? Absolutely NOT! My church family extends well beyond the local congregation. I am "at home" in over 50 local churches.

So why am I not in church today? Out of state family members who are also my spiritual brothers and sisters are visiting and we are having church here in my home in about an hour, in our pajamas! We will sing, pray, laugh, learn of, and worship our Lord Jesus while gathered together.

 

Yelsew,

My apologies. I thought you were familiar with what "Troll" means in this context.

It doesn't refer to the mythical creatures of ungainly appearance. So my references to you as a Troll are not meant to be a comment on your appearance or your mental abilities in any way.

My apologies for assuming too much knowledge on your part, and for the distress it has obviously caused you.

Troll in this context simply refers to someone who is being contentious, stirring up issues that he has no interest in discussing ina substantive way.

You may feel this does not describe you. But IMO, you impose a philosophy on the Scriures and interpret the Scriptures in the light of your ideas. That for me explains the lack of scripture expounded in context in your presentations, as well as the apparant lack of depth in what you consider a refutation of my use of scriture.

If you wish to actually discuss a relevant passage of scripture, like Romans1:18-3:20 and its implications for Total Depravity, then I will gladly do so. But I warn you: I will expect you to begin with Scripture, and not your concept of free will, which is tossed out into this forum without corroboration from Scripture. In short, you'll have to do better than you have.

 

A rather condescending remark for one making a "sincere apology"

You insult me with your trite labels then compound the insult with a condescending apology?

While you are looking down your nose at me why don't you remove that dangling booger from the end of it.

 

Yelsew,

I'm sorry that you find my apology so offensive. The apology was sincere. My phrasing was merely an explanation f how the misunderstanding came about. If it is inaccurate (ie. you actually did know what a Troll is around here) then point that out, and I will stand corrected. If that is the case thogh I would question the charity evident in the assumption that I would refer to a brother in the Lord as a mythological creature of ungainly appearance and limited intellect.

It is obvious to me that you are not willing to grant forgiveness. For my part, I forgive you the insults that you attempt to harm me with. I can do no more than that.

The invitation to engage in substantive discussion from the Scriptures stands.

 

Apology accepted! There is no need for labels, all they do is cause friction, especially in your local church!

As for Romans 1:18 thru 4:??, look at the words, they are not all inclusive, meaning that each human has all of the characteristics.

Total depravity requires that every human must have every one of those characteristics, and that there is not one quality in anyone that has merit.

That is not Paul's message to the Romans at all. He is telling them. as he summarized in 3:23 "for all have sinned and are thus not worthy of the glory of God. He is not telling them that all of them have committed every sin that Total Depravity requires.

None the less, that doesn't remove the penalty for sin, even the "little white lie" sin results in death.

So, I cannot accept the doctrine of Total Depravity based upon one verse taken out of the context of Pauls dissertation. That is not "rightly dividing the word of truth.

 

"Apology accepted! There is no need for labels, all they do is cause friction, especially in your local church!"

I am glad th eapology is accepted. Be careful about labels however. They are simply shorthand. And they can be accurate.

"As for Romans 1:18 thru 4:??, look at the words, they are not all inclusive, meaning that each human has all of the characteristics."

That isn't so. Roamns 1 deals with the Gentiles. Roamsn 2 makes the asertion that Jews are no better off. All are under sin. Taken in context, follwoing the flow of Paul's argument, does not allow for your conclusion.

"Total depravity requires that every human must have every one of those characteristics, and that there is not one quality in anyone that has merit."

The you don't understand Total Depravity or Paul. Total Depravity doe not teach that every person is as bad as the can be in every way, nor is Paul's vice list meant to be exhaustive or prscriptive. You clearly misunderstand both TD and Paul in Roamns.

"That is not Paul's message to the Romans at all. He is telling them. as he summarized in 3:23 "for all have sinned and are thus not worthy of the glory of God. He is not telling them that all of them have committed every sin that Total Depravity requires."

TD is not a stement that each individual commits every single sin. You are showing defintie ignorance of what you presume to reject.

"So, I cannot accept the doctrine of Total Depravity based upon one verse taken out of the context of Pauls dissertation. That is not "rightly dividing the word of truth."

I have not asked you to accept it based on one verse. I have said that the one verse, taken in context (meaning you have to accept all the surrounding verses as well) supports TD. And it does just that. Not the versionof TD you apparantly think of, but then your versio is not the real doctrine.

I recommend tyou study TD. You don't show an understanding of it, which disqualifies you from critiquing it.

 

Yelsew; Let's see now,you substitute teach S.S. in all of those churches that you mentioned? How do you keep the doctrinal differences straight when you're teaching? When you're teaching in the Catholic church do you teach that Mary is co-redemptress with Christ? Do you teach trans-substanciation? The wine and wafer become the actual body and blood of Christ? Just to name a few doctrines that are not found in the word of God.

 

When one is viewing the subject of Total Depravity, one must have a perspective. My perspective is that Total Depravity is the condition of the individual and not the community or the civilization. I believe my perspective is correct, because God created us as individuals who are generally communal finding ourselves in communities, but He did not create communities.

It is not written that God created cities, towns or villages. It is written that God created man, and then woman from the man, and when man is being fruitful, we do not bring forth cities or even towns or villages, we bring forth individuals. Of course there are exceptions, but the numbers are very small, seldom more than two at a time.

God has spared whole communities from his wrath, and he has destroyed whole communities by his wrath. Those he spared were spared because of a general repentance from the common depravity of the community, not Total Depravity of the Community. Those he destroyed were the result of gross unrepentance, or the total depravity of the community, OR, their worship of false gods.

When speaking of the individual, and I am an individual not a community, Total Depravity means that I the individual must have every one of the sins and persuasions that Paul listed. I don't, lest I be long dead physically and spiritually, because I do not have the strength to carry such a burden. However, I am guilty of some of what Paul described, and in rereading the whole context, I fell to my knees in confession of those sins the Holy Spirit revealed to my mind.

Even before I confessed Jesus as the Son of God, the Messiah, and placed my faith in him, I was not totally depraved, but it takes only one sin to be guilty unto death. If that is how you define Total Depravity, then by your standard I am totally depraved, but look in the mirror to see another who is Totally Depraved by that standard.

For one to be Totally Depraved, that one must have legions of sins and no redemption value about him. Even so, God is able to redeem any one who is willing to be redeemed.

 

Yelsew,

No one is interested in what you think TD is. If you want to address the actual doctrine, you will have to be able to understand it and represent it properly. To date you have not done so.

In point of fact, TD IS about all humanity. It does NOT require that each individual have committed every sin.

Now, unless you are prepared to shed your ignorance and actually learn about what TD is you are not qualified to carry on this discussion and I will not feed a Troll.

 

Come now Brutus, I did say by invitation I substitute teach in Sunday School. Such invitation has never been extended by a Catholic church. I would not, however, have difficulty teaching in a Catholic setting because I find no reason to teach doctrine. I teach scripture, if it's not in scripture I don't teach it. The students form their own doctrine in accordance with the "regular" teachings of their own church.

The thrust of your arguement is sufficient reason to not join a church.

 

Prove your point Latreia!

 

If your hypothesis is true, where collectively all humanity suffers from Total Depravity, then by extension of your reasoning, Salvation is about all humanity where, in order for one to be saved, all must be saved!

That does not wash!

 

Yelsew,

I don't have to "prove" what TD is. It is up to YOU to learn what it is. What you think it must be or should be is irrelevant.

"If your hypothesis is true, where collectively all humanity suffers from Total Depravity, then by extension of your reasoning, Salvation is about all humanity where, in order for one to be saved, all must be saved!

That does not wash!"

This simply demonstrates how little youy don't understand TD. And the Scriptures. Although this is closer than your usual. Read Romans 5 and you wil not ony see where you're close, but also where your assertion about where the reassoning goes is refuted by Paul himself.

But let's be clear: I won't feed you (Troll) any firther unless you can actually give a correct definition of TD. There are many sites by Reformed theologues on the Net. You should have no problem finding a true definition.

In the meantime I won't debate your ignorance, nor will I attempt to educate you if you have no interest in being educated.

Happy trolling.

 

Well, let's see if Pastor Larry catches this obvious inferrence to my inferior intellect by one who deems himself superior to all others.

[Name calling edited]

[ December 29, 2002, 05:35 PM: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]

 

I never said a thng about your intellect. I said you don't know what TD is. I challened yo to educate yourself so that you DO know what it is.

I could tell you what TD is. Not a problem. But that isn't the issue. The isue is whether YOU know what it is. And you don't. So much is aparant from your posts. it is unfortunate that you can't hear such things without firing bacak with sub-Christian language.

[ December 29, 2002, 05:36 PM: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]

 

Yelsew, this is am official warning. This post is totally out of line. Name calling will not be tolerated.

IMO, I did not see a reference to your inferior intellect. I saw a reference to something with which you are not familiar, hence, the term ignorant. It is not always a negative term. It refers to a lack of knowledge, not a lack of capability. Reading through the discussion, it appears that the case has been made that you are not aware of this doctrine as it is typically defined.