Depravity? Nay!

[sculleywr]

"What has not been assumed has not been redeemed".
-Athanasius of Alexandria

One of the doctrines which really perplexes me from some Protestant viewpoints is the teaching that human nature is totally depraved. The quote above illustrates the main reason that I reject the doctrine. If man is totally depraved in his nature, then unless Christ is totally depraved, then Christ is not truly human, because He does not have a human nature.

 

[Rick Otto]

"What has not been assumed has not been redeemed".
-Athanasius of Alexandria

One of the doctrines which really perplexes me from some Protestant viewpoints is the teaching that human nature is totally depraved. The quote above illustrates the main reason that I reject the doctrine. If man is totally depraved in his nature, then unless Christ is totally depraved, then Christ is not truly human, because He does not have a human nature.

Christ is the exception.
His fully human nature was not "fallen".
"Fallen" is not the created human nature's condition.
Depravity is a condition of human nature, not an intrinsic feature of it.

But anything that doesn't sound orthodox, won't be accepted where loyalty is more important than truth.

 

[smithed64]

"What has not been assumed has not been redeemed".
-Athanasius of Alexandria

One of the doctrines which really perplexes me from some Protestant viewpoints is the teaching that human nature is totally depraved. The quote above illustrates the main reason that I reject the doctrine. If man is totally depraved in his nature, then unless Christ is totally depraved, then Christ is not truly human, because He does not have a human nature.

We are totally depraved. We are born with sin.

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.

Christ couldn't be totally depraved, because God isn't totally depraved. Jesus is God so therefore He isn't totally depraved.
Yet while on earth Jesus was fully man and fully God. And being Human, he also had the attributes of Human nature. He cried, felt sympathy, anger, and was tested just as we have been in our lives. He know exactly what we go through.
The difference is, He never sinned. He was not conceived in sin, so was not shaped in iniquity. As we are.
Christ relied solely on His Father's grace.

5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me

(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

This was done by a very blessed man of God, John Piper

 

[SeventyOne]

"What has not been assumed has not been redeemed".
-Athanasius of Alexandria

One of the doctrines which really perplexes me from some Protestant viewpoints is the teaching that human nature is totally depraved. The quote above illustrates the main reason that I reject the doctrine. If man is totally depraved in his nature, then unless Christ is totally depraved, then Christ is not truly human, because He does not have a human nature.

That is a good argument against the immaculate conception of Mary, but not against the nature of Jesus. We derive our sinful nature through Adam, but Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit. This sets Him apart from everyone else. He is the only man without a nature inherited from Adam.

If you overlook or dismiss this difference, then, of course, you will get your doctrine in this area wrong.

That said, not having a sinful nature doesn't make someone less than human, which is where your conclusion takes you. Using this conclusion, Adam was never a human prior to the fall because he did not have a sin nature yet (because you improperly equate the nature of man with the humanity of man). In order to make your argument against the nature of Jesus work, you would also have to prove the change of Adam from non-human to human as a result of the fall. Good luck with that one.

 

[BobRyan]

"What has not been assumed has not been redeemed".
-Athanasius of Alexandria

One of the doctrines which really perplexes me from some Protestant viewpoints is the teaching that human nature is totally depraved. The quote above illustrates the main reason that I reject the doctrine. If man is totally depraved in his nature, then unless Christ is totally depraved, then Christ is not truly human, because He does not have a human nature.

The sinful nature is described in Romans 3 -
- Christ did not have a sinful nature - but he had the "weakness" of fallen human nature. Just not the moral depravity - the inner bent to evil that you see in Romans 3.

 

[Wordkeeper]

Quote
Rather than describing the human condition as “fallen,” Paul may well have thought of the situation as a failure to “rise” to what God had offered. He describes those who reject the truth once they have had a relationship with God as having fallen away (Galatians 5:4, NRSV).

Paul’s view corresponds with the rest of the biblical account in that Genesis records that Adam and Eve were denied access to the tree of life, which would have afforded them eternal life. Thus, although they were cut off or alienated from God because of sin and driven from the Garden of Eden, they had never really engaged the relationship with God that He desired, which would have been accomplished only by eating of the tree of life.

Tragically, Augustine’s misreading and misinterpretation of sin based on looking at Scripture through the prism of dualism is accepted as dogma by most contemporary Christian theologians. The doctrine of original sin owes more to Augustine’s desire to emulate the philosophers than it does to the Scriptures.

The Original View of Original Sin

https://www.vision.org/visionmedia/article.aspx?id=227

 

[prodromos]

That is a good argument against the immaculate conception of Mary, but not against the nature of Jesus. We derive our sinful nature through Adam, but Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit. This sets Him apart from everyone else. He is the only man without a nature inherited from Adam.

He certainly did inherit Adam's nature. He got it through His mother. He then took our nature to hades, then raised it up and glorified it. If it wasn't our nature He raised back to life, then we are still in bondage to sin and death.

 

[Wordkeeper]

He certainly did inherit Adam's nature. He got it through His mother. He then took our nature to hades, then raised it up and glorified it. If it wasn't our nature He raised back to life, then we are still in bondage to sin and death.

If the sin nature of humans is inherited through their mothers, then who did Adam inherit his sin nature from?

 

[sculleywr]

The sinful nature is described in Romans 3 -
- Christ did not have a sinful nature - but he had the "weakness" of fallen human nature. Just not the moral depravity - the inner bent to evil that you see in Romans 3.

Glad to know you believe Christ wasn't really human. That's the problem. If you believe human nature is sinful, then you believe Christ is NOT human, because He does not have a human nature.

There's a heresy for that, called Gnosticism, and Monophysitism.

 

[sculleywr]

That is a good argument against the immaculate conception of Mary, but not against the nature of Jesus. We derive our sinful nature through Adam, but Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit. This sets Him apart from everyone else. He is the only man without a nature inherited from Adam.

If you overlook or dismiss this difference, then, of course, you will get your doctrine in this area wrong.

That said, not having a sinful nature doesn't make someone less than human, which is where your conclusion takes you. Using this conclusion, Adam was never a human prior to the fall because he did not have a sin nature yet (because you improperly equate the nature of man with the humanity of man). In order to make your argument against the nature of Jesus work, you would also have to prove the change of Adam from non-human to human as a result of the fall. Good luck with that one.

It's actually a mention of the nature of man. If sin is part of human nature, then Christ is not human because HE has ALL of the human essence, the physis of man. The idea that Christ doesn't have a human nature is a heresy called Monophysitism, and was dealt with in Chalcedon.

 

[sculleywr]

We are totally depraved. We are born with sin.

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.

Christ couldn't be totally depraved, because God isn't totally depraved. Jesus is God so therefore He isn't totally depraved.
Yet while on earth Jesus was fully man and fully God. And being Human, he also had the attributes of Human nature. He cried, felt sympathy, anger, and was tested just as we have been in our lives. He know exactly what we go through.
The difference is, He never sinned. He was not conceived in sin, so was not shaped in iniquity. As we are.
Christ relied solely on His Father's grace.

5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me

(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

This was done by a very blessed man of God, John Piper

And John Piper didn't address what I said at all. If man's nature is totally depraved, then we are left with only one thing: Christ, not having a human nature, was not REALLY tempted in all ways like we were, because we are, many times, tempted by our own lusts, our own passions. Without the human nature, Christ lacks that scripture. That Scripture is just not true because we are not tempted like Christ is.

The problem is that John Piper believes sin to be nothing but action, and not infection. He treats the symptoms, and not the cause.

 

[BobRyan]

"What has not been assumed has not been redeemed".
-Athanasius of Alexandria

One of the doctrines which really perplexes me from some Protestant viewpoints is the teaching that human nature is totally depraved. The quote above illustrates the main reason that I reject the doctrine. If man is totally depraved in his nature, then unless Christ is totally depraved, then Christ is not truly human, because He does not have a human nature.

The sinful nature is described in Romans 3 -
- Christ did not have a sinful nature - but he had the "weakness" of fallen human nature. Just not the moral depravity - the inner bent to evil that you see in Romans 3.

Glad to know you believe Christ wasn't really human.

Is it your claim that Adam and Eve "weren't really human"???

Were does that idea come from??

They did not have a sinful nature - you have responded as if you are not reading Romans 3 at all.

 

[sculleywr]

Christ is the exception.
His fully human nature was not "fallen".
"Fallen" is not the created human nature's condition.
Depravity is a condition of human nature, not an intrinsic feature of it.

But anything that doesn't sound orthodox, won't be accepted where loyalty is more important than truth.

Then Christ isn't man. Period. No human nature, then there is no human Christ. The Gnostics were correct.

 

[BobRyan]

If the sin nature of humans is inherited through their mothers, then who did Adam inherit his sin nature from?

- Christ had no sinful nature. Adam was not created with a sinful nature - but he sure found a great way to "acquire one" -- all he had to do was 'sin'

 

[sculleywr]

Is it your claim that Adam and Eve "weren't really human"???

Were does that idea come from??

They did not have a sinful nature - you have responded as if you are not reading Romans 3 at all.

No, it's my claim that YOUR PERSONAL INTERPRETATION, which is only about 500 years old, is wrong. Romans 3 does not say that man is naturally sinful as he was created. If he is, then God created sin and is therefore a sinner. God created hate. God created murder. God created rape. Therefore, God is a hateful homicidal rapist. Sorry, but if God hadn't created evil, then He wouldn't be responsible for it, which means that evil came from something outside God.

 

[sculleywr]

- Christ had no sinful nature. Adam was not created with a sinful nature - but he sure found a great way to "acquire one" -- all he had to do was 'sin'

That's called an infection. I wasn't born with rhinovirus, but I certainly did find a way to acquire one, all I had to do was breathe it in. Does that make rhinovirus part of the real me, or an invasive virus?

Sin is an illness, it isn't genetic.

 

[BobRyan]

Christ is the exception.
His fully human nature was not "fallen".
"Fallen" is not the created human nature's condition.
Depravity is a condition of human nature, not an intrinsic feature of it.

But anything that doesn't sound orthodox, won't be accepted where loyalty is more important than truth.

There are two conditions to be considered here
Fallen human nature - that dies early, subject to diseases - weakened. Clearly Genesis 4-9 describes long-lived races of mankind. Adam in his sinless state with access to tree of life - would never die at all.

Depraved sinful nature - Romans 3. This one has a "bent" to do evil - it needs salvation - it needs a Savior not just a better physical environment.

Christ had no "bent toward depravity" and needed no Savior.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Are you not reading Romans 3 at all???

No, it's my claim that YOUR PERSONAL INTERPRETATION,

Hint - I did not write Romans 3. IT is more than 500 years old -- but we can all read it.

Stick with the facts of the subject please.

 

[BobRyan]

If the sin nature of humans is inherited through their mothers, then who did Adam inherit his sin nature from?

- Christ had no sinful nature. Adam was not created with a sinful nature - but he sure found a great way to "acquire one" -- all he had to do was 'sin'

That's called an infection. I wasn't born with rhinovirus, .

That is an interesting fiction.

Here is the actual Bible -

Romans 3
9 What then? Are we better than they? Not at all. For we have previously charged both Jews and Greeks that they are all under sin.
10 As it is written:
“There is none righteous, no, not one;
11 There is none who understands;
There is none who seeks after God.
12 They have all turned aside;
They have together become unprofitable;
There is none who does good, no, not one.”
13 “Their throat is an open tomb;
With their tongues they have practiced deceit”;
“The poison of asps is under their lips”;
14 “Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness.”
15 “Their feet are swift to shed blood;
16 Destruction and misery are in their ways;
17 And the way of peace they have not known.”
18 “There is no fear of God before their eyes.”

19 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. 20 Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
===============================

In that text Paul points to the elements of the sinful nature - that all have - all except Christ.

All condemned -- all except Christ.

All need a savior -- all except Christ.

 

[SeventyOne]

It's actually a mention of the nature of man. If sin is part of human nature, then Christ is not human because HE has ALL of the human essence, the physis of man. The idea that Christ doesn't have a human nature is a heresy called Monophysitism, and was dealt with in Chalcedon.

I never said he didn't have a human nature, in fact, I claimed a human nature. Specifically, a non-fallen human nature. Sin is part of a fallen nature only, not human nature as a whole since there are both fallen and non-fallen aspects to human nature.

You're the one equating the absence of a sin nature to be less than complete humanity.