Defining Total Depravity - Romans 8

[rhutchin]

Is not the description of the carnal mind in Romans 8 part of, if not the complete description of, Total Depravity as defined by the Calvinists? The Calvinist claim is that the person living according to the flesh, as defined in Romans 8, is what they call, Totally Depraved. Total Depravity is a term used by Calvinists to identify people who live according to the flesh as defined in Romans 8. You certainly recognize that such people exist unless you want to deny what Paul says. I don't see your issue here. Calvinists just make up a new name for these people. Why is that a problem? What term would you prefer to use?

Missing from the passage is the presupposition that people do not have a choice in the matter.

Whether people have a choice in the matter is not the issue here. For now, we are only identifying how the Scriptures describe the unsaved. The Calvinists took all the descriptions of the unsaved, used these to describe the unsaved as completely as possible, and then created the term, "Total Depravity," as a label for the condition of the unsaved.

I think both Calvinists and non-Calvinists conclude that God must do something to free a person from Total Depravity and thereby enable a person to accept Christ. People have no say in the matter so long as they continue in the condition of Total Depravity. This because "there is none that seeks after God" (Romans 3) and "the carnal mind is enmity against God," (Romans 8). A person who is hostile to God and does not seek God will never be in a position to choose Christ.

It is the initial condition of any person who is born. If not, what is the exception?

This just brings up a question I have never really gotten a satisfactory answer to...if all people are initially Totally Depraved (calvinist definition) then what are believers relative to depravity? Are they only semi-depraved? Not depraved at all? What? I am asking purely out of curiosity...

What do the Scriptures say?

There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. (Romans 8:1)

For they that are after the flesh [the unsaved] do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit [the saved] the things of the Spirit. (Romans 8:5)

And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins. (Ephesians 2:1)

So, rather than being dead in trespasses and sins, the believer has been made alive by God. Rather than being after the flesh, they are after the Spirit. The believer is not totally depraved; he seeks God and he is at peace with God.

[rhutchin]

Paul here is speaking of carnal mindedness, or the carnal mind... He is not speaking, as you mis-quote him, of "the carnally minded (people)"...

The distinction is huge... For he is referring to a flesh-oriented mindset in a person, and not to a person who is a victim of that mindset.

So that a person having a carnal mind, and reading this, might respond: "Well, I am carnally minded, and I am tired of it, and so how can I get this 'Spirit of Christ' to dwell in ME??"

Or not...

Spiritually minded people CAN be carnally minded as well, and thereby be of two minds... And if they hear Paul in this passage, they will be pricked and come to a decision about their carnal mindedness... And indeed, this is what it means to "crucify (or mortify) the flesh", for carnal mindedness resides in the flesh, and putting this off, deadening the "old man" (of the flesh), is what spiritually minded people do...

Or not...

There is no presumption in this passage of the inability of the carnal mind to repent from carnality...
The presumption is that to NOT so repent is death, for the carnal mind is death...

The presumption is that Paul means exactly what he says.

The carnal mind:
1. is enmity against God,
2. is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be,
3. cannot please God.

It is people who have carnal minds. A person who has a carnal mind is a person who is carnally minded.

Believers are not carnally minded and cannot be. You are confusing the believer being still subject to temptation through the weakness of the flesh with the non-believer who is carnally minded and whose whole life is spent pursuing the things of the flesh.

[Phat8594]

Believers are not carnally minded and cannot be. You are confusing the believer being still subject to temptation through the weakness of the flesh with the non-believer who is carnally minded and whose whole life is spent pursuing the things of the flesh

So then is the man in Romans 7 regenerate, or unregenerate?

[Phat8594]

Whether people have a choice in the matter is not the issue here. For now, we are only identifying how the Scriptures describe the unsaved. The Calvinists took all the descriptions of the unsaved, used these to describe the unsaved as completely as possible, and then created the term, "Total Depravity," as a label for the condition of the unsaved

Ahhh...but the Calvinist definition of total depravity has this issue at its very core....so to use these passages to establish the calvinist definition of total depravity seems a little unfounded IMO. In order to use it as proof of the calvinist definition of total depravity, one must assume that the calvinist definition of total depravity is true...and THAT my friend is called bringing a presupposition into a text... (its not unlike how evolutionists "prove" evolution...they already assume it to be true, and therefore all evidence is filtered through that paradigm)

In other words, its looking for scripture to back up a theology rather than looking at scripture to define a theology.

The believer is not totally depraved

So, again, what is the believer in terms of depravity? I understand he is not totally depraved, but is he somewhat depraved? not depraved at all...what?

If you are going to assert that dead in sin = totally depraved, then what does it mean when we are made alive by God (in terms of level of depravity)? Does it mean that he is not depraved at all since alive is the opposite of dead??

[rhutchin]

Believers are not carnally minded and cannot be. You are confusing the believer being still subject to temptation through the weakness of the flesh with the non-believer who is carnally minded and whose whole life is spent pursuing the things of the flesh.

So then is the man in Romans 7 regenerate, or unregenerate?

He would have to be regenerate to express the thoughts that are made. An unregenerate who is hostile to God would not conclude, "So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin."

[rhutchin]

Whether people have a choice in the matter is not the issue here. For now, we are only identifying how the Scriptures describe the unsaved. The Calvinists took all the descriptions of the unsaved, used these to describe the unsaved as completely as possible, and then created the term, "Total Depravity," as a label for the condition of the unsaved.

Ahhh...but the Calvinist definition of total depravity has this issue at its very core....so to use these passages to establish the calvinist definition of total depravity seems a little unfounded IMO. In order to use it as proof of the calvinist definition of total depravity, one must assume that the calvinist definition of total depravity is true...and THAT my friend is called bringing a presupposition into a text... (its not unlike how evolutionists "prove" evolution...they already assume it to be true, and therefore all evidence is filtered through that paradigm)

In other words, its looking for scripture to back up a theology rather than looking at scripture to define a theology.

The Calvinist definition of Total Depravity is that which the Scriptures describe the unsaved to be. It begins with Calvin (and others) actually reading the Scriptures. They read Romans 3 and Romans 8 and conclude that Paul is describing the unsaved in each passage. They collect these descriptions as wells as other descriptions of the unsaved throughout the Scriptures (e.g., The fool says in his heart, There is no God). Once they get a complete Scriptural description of the unsaved, someone summarized that which the Scriptures said as, the unsaved are totally depraved. There is no presupposition.

The problem seems to be that you have developed your theology in reaction to what Calvinism says and not in reaction to what the Scriptures say. You then project your methodology onto the Calvinists. The evolutionists clearly start with the presupposition, There is no God, and then develop the concept of evolution. What presupposition do you imagine the Calvinists to begin with? It cannot be total depravity as that term summarizes that which the Bible says about the unsaved so it doesn't presuppose what the Bible says.

The believer is not totally depraved.

So, again, what is the believer in terms of depravity? I understand he is not totally depraved, but is he somewhat depraved? not depraved at all...what?

If you are going to assert that dead in sin = totally depraved, then what does it mean when we are made alive by God (in terms of level of depravity)? Does it mean that he is not depraved at all since alive is the opposite of dead??

Yep. It means that the former depravity has passed away (if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.). The believer is never described in the Scriptures as being depraved.

[rhutchin]

You should know this Chappie, should you not? The Greek is υποτασσεται and means to be obedient to. Thus, Paul says, "...the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God,..." The observation by Paul is that the carnal mind is not subject, or obedient, to the law of God (worse than that; neither can it be) and thus Paul tells us that the carnal mind is hostile to, or at enmity with, God. And why not based on what Paul tells us in Romans 3, "There is no fear of God before their eyes."

I get the feeling that you may be confusing a "carnal mindset" as having authority over the person. Is not a carnal mind a choice that we make?

If a person is born with that carnal mindset, then there is no choice in the matter. That's my reading of the Scripture.

The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies. (Psalm 58)

Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. (John 3)

Given that all people end up totally depraved having a carnal mindset, it seems reasonable to conclude that they all start that way. Otherwise, couldn't some small percentage reasonably be expected to escape that condition?

No. Again, in Romans 3, "there is none that seek after God." Or do you think that Paul (and actually God) has misled us?

Quite honestly, I rather chose to lay the misleading at your feet.
Here's a couple passages for you...
Isaiah 55:6
Seek ye the LORD while he may be found, call ye upon him while he is near:

2 Chronicles 19:3
Nevertheless there are good things found in thee, in that thou hast taken away the groves out of the land, and hast prepared thine heart to seek God.

1 Chronicles 28:9
And thou, Solomon my son, know thou the God of thy father, and serve him with a perfect heart and with a willing mind: for the LORD searcheth all hearts, and understandeth all the imaginations of the thoughts: if thou seek him, he will be found of thee; but if thou forsake him, he will cast thee off for ever.

Now before you take one passage and start running wild, tiptoeing through the tulips, some reconciliation needs to be done. {Hasta Usted}

Paul's testimony, "But by the grace of God I am what I am." (1 Corinthians 15:10)

Is that not the testimony of any who seek God?

I would say both. It is certainly volitional as this is the nature of the carnal mind again described by Paul in Romans 3, "Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips: Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness:" But also created that way by God who, knowing the corruption of man's nature/mind brought about by Adam's sin, makes no effort to reverse the effects in those born through Adam.

Is this literal or perhaps some hyperbole?

Good use of hyperbole, with some literal (Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness.) to make the point that I think we both can understand.

They know the Scriptures but refuse to acknowledge the truth of that Scripture. The atheists is not seeking to know God is he? Have you met any atheist who, by his speech, was not at enmity with God? I have not.

Describe for me the reality of hating something that you do not believe exist? {enmity: : positive, active, and typically mutual hatred or ill will.}

That is a question I have asked of atheists. Some have such a hatred for God while claiming not to believe that God exists. They will say that they really hate Christians who try to force their Biblical morality on everyone else. Atheists are familiar with the Scriptures (many have come out of the church - Did you see the blurb on this in the recent biography of Steve Jobs?) They know of God but have no desire to know Him. Considering the venom that comes form their mouths, I would say that they hate God. Have you had different experiences?

[Rdr. Arsenios]

Believers are not carnally minded and cannot be.

IF this is Calvinist doctrine, then is Calvinism soooo deluded...

You are confusing the believer
being still subject to temptation through the weakness of the flesh
with the non-believer
who is carnally minded
and
whose whole life is spent pursuing the things of the flesh.

To be tempted through weakness of the flesh IS to be tempted through carnal mindedness...

Flesh is carnal...

To be burned alive in flames is to be tempted through carnal mindedness...
MANY early Christians joyfully died in this manner...
They were NOT carnally minded...

There is NO ONE ON EARTH "whose whole life is spent pursuing the things of the flesh."
Yes, some have tried, I suppose, and have come fairly close... But no one entirely...

I mean, do you really and truly believe that carnal temptations for believers
is somehow different than carnal temptations for non-believers???

Really??

I mean, do you not remember your temptations before you were a believer???



Arsenios

[Rdr. Arsenios]

I have a simple question for Calvinists:

When was Cornelius, the Centurion, saved?

Arsenios

[Phat8594]

The Calvinist definition of Total Depravity is that which the Scriptures describe the unsaved to be. It begins with Calvin (and others) actually reading the Scriptures. They read Romans 3 and Romans 8 and conclude that Paul is describing the unsaved in each passage. They collect these descriptions as wells as other descriptions of the unsaved throughout the Scriptures (e.g., The fool says in his heart, There is no God). Once they get a complete Scriptural description of the unsaved, someone summarized that which the Scriptures said as, the unsaved are totally depraved. There is no presupposition.

Well...Calvin based some of his theology on Augustine..who differed from all the other Church Fathers in a way that tied back to his old roots as a Manichaen. Not to mention, Augustine worked off of a Latin translation as opposed to the original Greek. So no presuppositions? I beg to differ. But perhaps we will just need to agree to disagree on this one.

The problem seems to be that you have developed your theology in reaction to what Calvinism says and not in reaction to what the Scriptures say. You then project your methodology onto the Calvinists.

Well I can tell you that this is just false. Believe it or not, there was a time that I was considering Calvinism. It was in my earlier years as a believer; before that time I had never even heard of it! I was shown verse after verse "proving" the calvinist doctrine of predestination. And who was I to argue? If its what the Bible says, then its what the Bible says; after all..I do believe in the infallibility of the Bible. That being said, the more I examined calvinism, the more I found it to be wanting. I began to learn more about the importance of cultural and scriptural context, authors intent, and how many people fall into the practice of "proof-texting", which often disregards the aforementioned hermeneutical tools.

So if you want to convince me of Calvinism...and I am all ears, since I know that I am a fallible man...please...and I mean PLEASE!..prove it to me by properly exegeting passages, using cultural and scriptural context, etc.

And just to warn you...because of my dealings with JWs, I am very...and I mean VERY..wary of proof texting.

The evolutionists clearly start with the presupposition

Sorry for my miscommunication. I meant that many evolutionist start with the idea now, that evolution is true. Therefore, when they find something, they say "Hey look, this fits with our theory..therefore it proves our theory." However, they do not recognize that it also fits other theories as well.

Yep. It means that the former depravity has passed away (if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.). The believer is never described in the Scriptures as being depraved.

So since Total Depravity means that person always sins, does the fact that believers are not depraved mean that believers do not sin?

[Phat8594]

He would have to be regenerate to express the thoughts that are made. An unregenerate who is hostile to God would not conclude, "So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin."

?? Paul as the writer is a believer...so he can write about an unregenerate man coming to find that he cannot uphold the law.

So you assert that Christians can't be carnal, but then the man in Romans 7 describes himself as Carnal, and as a slave to sin. Are believers slaves to sin? If so, how can they not be Carnal?

[Phat8594]

Good use of hyperbole, with some literal (Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness.) to make the point that I think we both can understand

And the author's intent? That all have fallen short. No one is righteous...everyone BOTH JEW AND GENTILE, need a savior.

[rhutchin]

IF this is Calvinist doctrine, then is Calvinism soooo deluded...

To be tempted through weakness of the flesh IS to be tempted through carnal mindedness...

Flesh is carnal...

To be burned alive in flames is to be tempted through carnal mindedness...
MANY early Christians joyfully died in this manner...
They were NOT carnally minded...

There is NO ONE ON EARTH "whose whole life is spent pursuing the things of the flesh."
Yes, some have tried, I suppose, and have come fairly close... But no one entirely...

I mean, do you really and truly believe that carnal temptations for believers
is somehow different than carnal temptations for non-believers???

Really??

I mean, do you not remember your temptations before you were a believer???

I take it that your view is that believers suffer from dissociative identity disorder sometimes manifesting as carnal mindedness in which the believer is at enmity with God (among other possible characteristics) and at all other times as spiritual mindedness in which the believer is at peace with God. If not, then I don't see where you are going with your comments.

I think you are confusing temptations of the flesh with the desires of the carnal mind.

[rhutchin]

And the author's intent? That all have fallen short. No one is righteous...everyone BOTH JEW AND GENTILE, need a savior.

OK. That none are righteous is the natural expectation in that none seek God. The Jews had the oracles of God yet Paul says that they are no different than the gentiles. The Jews who followed the law needed a savior as much as, and for the same reasons as, the Gentiles. The condemnation of the Jews by Paul is in sharp contrast to that which the Jews thought of themselves. Both the Jew and the Gentile, in line with Ephesians 2, would need to be quickened by God before they could, or would, seek God.

[Phat8594]

The Jews had the oracles of God yet Paul says that they are no different than the gentiles.

In relation to what? Their need for a savior. But the Jews also had an advantage...right?

The condemnation of the Jews by Paul is in sharp contrast to that which the Jews thought of themselves.

Which lines up with Romans 7, where Paul says:

So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin.

Referring to the Jew..who knew the Law of God...loved it...yet couldn't uphold it. Why? Because of the law? No..because of their sinful flesh. So what does that mean? That the law can't save them, because they are incapable of upholding it perfectly? So what do they need? Jesus!

Both the Jew and the Gentile, in line with Ephesians 2, would need to be quickened by God before they could, or would, seek God.

I thought we were talking about Romans? Why are we bringing up Ephesians 2? Lets deal with one passage, one book at a time. We can make up a whole lot of weird theology if we keep on looking at one verse in one book and tie it to another verse in another book (with different audience, intent, cultural situation, etc). So lets deal with one at a time...in context. Please...