Total Depravity

[ps139]

Hello brothers and sisters in Christ,

I was reflecting on the 5 points of Calvinism tonight, and thought of a question, and I am curious to know the answer. If this is a question you get all the time, or a question you're never asked because its obvious, please forgive me!

If I understand correctly, Calvin taught that all men are 'totally depraved."
We know that Christ had a full human nature (along with his full divine nature).
Obviously you do not believe Christ was totally depraved, that is ludicrous, but how could He, in addition to being 100% God, also be 100% Man, if He was not totally depraved? Does Calvin address this anywhere?

I'm not looking to debate, I'm just curious. Thanks in advance.

 

[cygnusx1]

Hello brothers and sisters in Christ,

I was reflecting on the 5 points of Calvinism tonight, and thought of a question, and I am curious to know the answer. If this is a question you get all the time, or a question you're never asked because its obvious, please forgive me!

If I understand correctly, Calvin taught that all men are 'totally depraved."
We know that Christ had a full human nature (along with his full divine nature).
Obviously you do not believe Christ was totally depraved, that is ludicrous, but how could He, in addition to being 100% God, also be 100% Man, if He was not totally depraved? Does Calvin address this anywhere?

I'm not looking to debate, I'm just curious. Thanks in advance.

hi there ps139 , great to see you again
as far as I am aware the sinful nature of Adam is transferred only through the Male parent , ie, the Geneologies are male not merely as a cultural thing but as a theological implication.
Recalling the first prophecy of the coming Messiah , in the early chapters of Genesis , we are told that it will be the seed of the woman that will conquer the Serpent/Devil . Genesis 3:15
Now there is only one person who can fit that rather odd peculiar prediction , someone who is born of the seed specifically of the woman but NOT a man.
So Jesus had no sinful nature transferred to him , just the frailty , weakness and suffering nature .

hope this helps
Cygnus

 

[CalvinOwen]

If this is a question you get all the time, or a question you're never asked because its obvious, please forgive me!

If I understand correctly, Calvin taught that all men are 'totally depraved."
We know that Christ had a full human nature (along with his full divine nature).
Obviously you do not believe Christ was totally depraved, that is ludicrous, but how could He, in addition to being 100% God, also be 100% Man, if He was not totally depraved? Does Calvin address this anywhere?

The answer the Scriptures give, as you allude to, is rather obvious. Christ did not have an earthly father, His actual birth Father was God Himself which of course broke the curse chain of sin for His birth that the Scripture's teaches would have otherwise been passed down to Him by His mother Mary from Adam. Therefore Mary's total deprvity that she obviously passed down to her other children, also mentioned in Scripture, was broken by God's direct intervention only in the birth of Christ. It was a one time "special" event!

Calvin believed and taught this troughout all his works as he did the rest of Scripture.

 

[frumanchu]

Hello brothers and sisters in Christ,

I was reflecting on the 5 points of Calvinism tonight, and thought of a question, and I am curious to know the answer. If this is a question you get all the time, or a question you're never asked because its obvious, please forgive me!

If I understand correctly, Calvin taught that all men are 'totally depraved."
We know that Christ had a full human nature (along with his full divine nature).
Obviously you do not believe Christ was totally depraved, that is ludicrous, but how could He, in addition to being 100% God, also be 100% Man, if He was not totally depraved? Does Calvin address this anywhere?

I'm not looking to debate, I'm just curious. Thanks in advance.

Hello, ps

You raise an excellent question.

Sin is not a necessary constituent part of human nature. If it were, Adam could not be said to have been fully human until after he sinned So Christ need not be depraved in order to be fully human. Such depravity is simply the negative sanctions of the covenantal transgression of Adam applied to those he represents. cygnus is correct regarding the effects of original sin being conferred and perpetuated through the male. Thus the virgin birth had the significance of solving the covenantal issue of original sin.

 

[cygnusx1]

one last point on the Male element and sin , notice we are all sinners in Adam (not Adam and Eve) we all sinned in Adam , and we all die because of Adams sin ..........


Likewise we all inherit life from a man , even the SECOND Adam , Christ Jesus .


just thought I would add that for those who may be thinking my first reply was without foundation .

 

[ps139]

Pretty interesting answers so far and I appreciate those who have taken the time to respond.
Can anyone give me a citation of where Calvin might have mentioned this? I have his Institutes.

 

[frumanchu]

Pretty interesting answers so far and I appreciate those who have taken the time to respond.
Can anyone give me a citation of where Calvin might have mentioned this? I have his Institutes.

I have not done an exhaustive study on the Incarnation yet, so I did not know Calvin's specific view when I wrote the above. Of course, Reformed theology does not begin and end with Calvin, but it did surprise me to find that my view regarding original sin proceeding through the male only is at odds with Calvin's view:

The absurdities which they wish to fasten upon us are mere puerile calumnies. They reckon it base and dishonouring to Christ to have derived his descent from men; because, in that case, he could not be exempted from the common law which includes the whole offspring of Adam, without exception, under sin. But this difficulty is easily solved by Paul’s antithesis, “As by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin”—“even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life,” (Rom. 5:12, 18). Corresponding to this is another passage, “The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven,” (1 Cor. 15:47). Accordingly, the same apostle, in another passage, teaching that Christ was sent “in the likeness of sinful flesh, that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us,” distinctly separates him from the common lot, as being true man, and yet without fault and corruption (Rom. 8:3). It is childish trifling to maintain, that if Christ is free from all taint, and was begotten of the seed of Mary, by the secret operation of the Spirit, it is not therefore the seed of the woman that is impure, but only that of the man. We do not hold Christ to be free from all taint, merely because he was born of a woman unconnected with a man, but because he was sanctified by the Spirit, so that the generation was pure and spotless, such as it would have been before Adam’s fall.D53 Let us always bear in mind, that wherever Scripture adverts to the purity of Christ, it refers to his true human nature, since it were superfluous to say that God is pure. Moreover, the sanctification of which John speaks in his seventeenth chapter is inapplicable to the divine nature. This does not suggest the idea of a twofold seed in Adam, although no contamination extended to Christ, the generation of man not being in itself vicious or impure, but an accidental circumstance of the fall. Hence, it is not strange that Christ, by whom our integrity was to be restored, was exempted from the common corruption. Another absurdity which they obtrude upon us—viz. that if the Word of God became incarnate, it must have been enclosed in the narrow tenement of an earthly body, is sheer petulance. For although the boundless essence of the Word was united with human nature into one person, we have no idea of any enclosing. The Son of God descended miraculously from heaven, yet without abandoning heaven; was pleased to be conceived miraculously in the Virgin’s womb, to live on the earth, and hang upon the cross, and yet always filled the world as from the beginning.


D53 D53 Calvin thus disposes of the view (which he calls childish and trifling) that Christ was born sinless simply because He was born of a virgin (the underlying assumption in this view being that depravity comes only from or through the male). Christ was born sinless, Calvin asserts, because in His conception in the womb of the virgin Mary, He was sanctified and kept pure from any taint of sin by the operation of the Spirit of God.

​

Calvin, J., & Beveridge, H. (1996). Institutes of the Christian religion (electronic ed.) (II, xiii, 4). Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems.



​

I am thus inclined to spend a little more time on this issue

 

[tigersnare]

If I am understanding at least half right....


Calvin's view-Christ was kept untarnished by original sin by the Holy Spirit

Papacy's view-Mary was kept untarnished by original sin by God (if I'm reading my Catholic Catechism correctly)

Calvin's view shouldn't cause much of a problem to you Bill. If God can santifiy a creation, surely he can santify himself in flesh.

 

[CalvinOwen]

Pretty interesting answers so far and I appreciate those who have taken the time to respond.
Can anyone give me a citation of where Calvin might have mentioned this? I have his Institutes.

Do have his John Calvin's commentaries too? If so, he makes it clear in his Commentary on the Harmony of the Evangelists. If not, I have copied and pasted a quick example here for you. I underlined the applicable sections and put them in bold as well.

COMMENTARY​

ON A​

HARMONY OF THE EVANGELISTS​

LUKE 1:34-38​

Table 1-7​

35. ... Therefore also the holy thing which shall be born. This is a confirmation of the preceding clause: for the angel shows that Christ must not be born by ordinary generation,that he may be holy, and that he may be the Son of God; that is, that in holiness and glory he may be high above all creatures, and may not hold an ordinary rank among men. Heretics, who imagine that he became the Son of God after his human generation, seize on the particle thereforeas meaning that he would be called the Son of God, becausehe was conceived in a remarkable manner by the power of the Holy Spirit. But this is a false conclusion: for, though he was manifested to be the Son of God in the flesh, it does not follow that he was not the Word begotten of the Father before the ages. On the contrary, he who had been the Son of God in his eternal Godhead, appeared also as the Son of God in human flesh. This passage not only expresses a unity of person in Christ, but at the same time points out that, in clothing himself with human flesh, Christ is the Son of God. As the name, Son of God, belonged to the divine essence of Christ from the beginning, so now it is applied unitedly to both natures, because the secret and heavenly manner of generation has separated him from the ordinary rank of men. In other passages, indeed, with the view of asserting that he is truly man, he calls himself the Son of man, John 5:27, but the truth of his human nature is not inconsistent with his deriving peculiar honor above all others from his divine generation, having been conceived out of the ordinary way of nature by the Holy Spirit. This gives us good reason for growing confidence, that we may venture more freely to call God our Father, because his only Son, in order that we might have a Father in common with him, chose to be our brother.

It ought to be observed also that Christ, because he was conceived by a spiritual power, is called the holy seed. For, as it was necessary that he should be a real man, in order that he might expiate our sins, and vanquish death and Satan in our flesh; so was it necessary, in order to his cleansing others, that he should be free from every spot and blemish, (1 Peter 1:19.) Though Christ was formed of the seed of Abraham, yet he contracted no defilement from a sinful nature; for the Spirit of God kept him pure from the very commencement: and this was done not merely that he might abound in personal holiness, but chiefly that he might sanctify his own people. The manner of conception, therefore, assures us that we have a Mediator separate from sinners, (Hebrews 7:26.)


This is everywhere in Calvin's commentaries and his institutes, I only provide this one example because it is at my fingertips and readily available. It would truly be a task to list them all. But I do highly recommend you do the search, it would be greatly edifying to you.

 

[ps139]

If I am understanding at least half right....


Calvin's view-Christ was kept untarnished by original sin by the Holy Spirit

Papacy's view-Mary was kept untarnished by original sin by God (if I'm reading my Catholic Catechism correctly)

Calvin's view shouldn't cause much of a problem to you Bill. If God can santifiy a creation, surely he can santify himself in flesh.

Tigersnare you've pretty much summed it up, and thats what I got out of it as well.
I guess the issue for me was the "total" of total depravity. I thought you held total depravity to be inherent in all men, but it has been pointed out that Adam was not totally depraved. Anyway, to all who answered, thank you. And also thanks to those who provided quotes from Calvin.

 

[tigersnare]

Tigersnare you've pretty much summed it up, and thats what I got out of it as well.
I guess the issue for me was the "total" of total depravity. I thought you held total depravity to be inherent in all men, but it has been pointed out that Adam was not totally depraved. Anyway, to all who answered, thank you. And also thanks to those who provided quotes from Calvin.

Total is the extent to which men are depraved, not the numerical signifigance. Though excluding Adam, our first ferderal representative, and Christ our second, all men are born totally depraved.

 

[rnmomof7]

This is interesting Fue

(Rom. 8:3). It is childish trifling to maintain, that if Christ is free from all taint, and was begotten of the seed of Mary, by the secret operation of the Spirit, it is not therefore the seed of the woman that is impure, but only that of the man. We do not hold Christ to be free from all taint, merely because he was born of a woman unconnected with a man, but because he was sanctified by the Spirit, so that the generation was pure and spotless, such as it would have been before Adam’s fall.D53

This goes to the core doctrine of Calvinism that is sometimes lacking in other doctrinal positions.. That after all is said and done God is sovereign, not one thing happened , or can happen without His ordination.

When one sees God as that omniscient then all questions are answered to our satisfaction . We do not need to try to fit A huge God into a small mans mental box.

All the Glory to God!

 

[rnmomof7]

Tigersnare you've pretty much summed it up, and thats what I got out of it as well.
I guess the issue for me was the "total" of total depravity. I thought you held total depravity to be inherent in all men, but it has been pointed out that Adam was not totally depraved. Anyway, to all who answered, thank you. And also thanks to those who provided quotes from Calvin.

PS, Total does not mean "utter" there is a distinct difference.

Piper puts it this way.

"When we speak of man's depravity we mean man's natural condition apart from any grace exerted by God to restrain or transform man."

Here is a short article on it by John Piper ( my sons pastor


http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/piper/depravity.html

 

[tigersnare]

PS, Total does not mean "utter" there is a distinct difference.

Good Point...hard to guess where someone's confussion lies sometimes.

John Piper ( my sons pastor

Lucky Son

 

[frumanchu]

I guess the issue for me was the "total" of total depravity. I thought you held total depravity to be inherent in all men, but it has been pointed out that Adam was not totally depraved. Anyway, to all who answered, thank you. And also thanks to those who provided quotes from Calvin.

Happy to oblige!

Depravity is not a necessary attribute of man. Adam was not depraved when he was created, yet was fully human, so we can easily infer that depravity and sin are not part of the definition of man. Depravity is part of the curse resulting from the Fall.

 

[ps139]

I think you guys have a correct diagnosis of my misunderstanding, I assumed "total" to mean "utter."

 

[rnmomof7]

I think you guys have a correct diagnosis of my misunderstanding, I assumed "total" to mean "utter."

I think that is a common misconception.

If it were utter we would be eating each other for lunch and "natural man" would never want to do a kind act .



Remember Augustine is a father to Reformed believers ...

 

[ps139]

"natural man" would never want to do a kind act .

Hmm..so who is "natural man"? Me? or Adam?
Do you believe all kind acts are caused by God's grace?
You have gotten me curious.

Remember Augustine is a father to Reformed believers ...

Does that make us siblings?

 

[rnmomof7]

Hmm..so who is "natural man"? Me? or Adam?
Do you believe all kind acts are caused by God's grace?
You have gotten me curious.


Does that make us siblings?

I do not know if that is an "official" term.
To me the natural man is the man without Christ, no Holy Spirit.
It is man without Gods grace.

1Cr 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned.

psuchikos ( yuxiko/v )] the animal man, one who lives in a natural state, and under the influence of his animal passions; for [ ( )] means the inferior and sensual part of man, in opposition to the [ ( )] understanding, or [pneuma ( pneu=ma )] the spirit.

Jud 1:19
These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit.


Gods grace is what leads us to God.

Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God:

It is grace that keeps us and helps us in our walk.

The disciple of the Lord is exhorted to "grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ

We would define grace as Gods unmerited favor.

I like Spurgeon

"Grace is simple, yet complex. The grace that quickens, the grace that convinces of sin, the grace that consoles, the grace that instructs, the grace that sustains, the grace that sanctifies, the grace that perfects — it is all a very simple matter, but how varied are its operations! How marvellous is the 'all grace' which God makes to abound unto us. Think of the triple ray which we find in grace — the grace of the Father in election, the grace of the Son in redemption, the grace of the Holy Spirit in regeneration. Consider, admire, and adore the manifold grace of God. Grace cannot be depraved, it is ever pure and good; it cannot be overcome, it will effect its purposes; it never corrupts, it is the seed of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. Oh, precious grace, if thou be in the soul, if, as yet, it be but thy first day, thou are good." — C. H. Spurgeon [Excerpted from The First Day of Creation MTP Vol 21, Year 1875, pgs. 501-502, Genesis 1:4]


Because of the way you worded your question I have the feeling that grace was not the word you wanted here but ordain.
That God ordains all things would be a consistent Calvinist view.


You can see our family relationship in many things Bill.

You will find no stronger defenders of the creed than Calvinists.
Most of us ( not all) hold a similar end time view.

Our stand on original sin is seen somewhat reflected in the way Catholics view the importance of baptism.
Both of our faiths see that sin as keeping the "natural man " from God .

So yes Bill we would be siblings if your mother was 80... I think aunt might be a better relationship given our age differences