Redeeming God

Liberating you from bad ideas about God

Learn the MOST ESSENTIAL truths for following Jesus.

Get FREE articles and audio teachings in my discipleship emails!


  • Join Us!
  • Scripture
  • Theology
  • My Books
  • About
  • Discipleship
  • Courses
    • What is Hell?
    • Skeleton Church
    • The Gospel According to Scripture
    • The Gospel Dictionary
    • The Re-Justification of God
    • What is Prayer?
    • Adventures in Fishing for Men
    • What are the Spiritual Gifts?
    • How to Study the Bible
    • Courses FAQ
  • Forum
    • Introduce Yourself
    • Old Testament
    • New Testament
    • Theology Questions
    • Life & Ministry

Are People Born in Sin? (Psalm 51:5)

By Jeremy Myers
31 Comments

Are People Born in Sin? (Psalm 51:5)

Psalm 51:5 is often used to defend the idea that humans are sinners before they are born.

Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me (Psalm 51:5)

In his commentary on this text, John Calvin wrote that this proves that David was a transgressor before he ever saw the light of the world (Calvin, Calvin’s Commentaries, Psalms v2: 290).

in sin my mother conceived me Psalm 51:5

This sort of idea is then used to prove that people are totally depraved, even from conception, not because of what they do but because depravity is part of who we are.

There are, however, several other ways of understanding this statement of David in Psalm 51:5.

Born in Sin = Learn to Sin

First, David could be saying that since he was born as a human, he learned to sin, in the same way that infants and toddlers learn to talk. It is not uncommon for the Biblical authors to speak of being “born into” something in just this way.

For example, Acts 2:8 refers to people who were born into a language, but clearly, they were not born already knowing this language, but had to learn it just like everyone else. If this is how to understand Psalm 51:5, David is saying that since he was born in sin, he learned to sin just like everyone else.

Born in Sin = Born in a Sinful World

Second, it could be argued that what David meant was that he was born into a world of sin. The phrases “in iniquity” and “in sin” would thus be understood as metonymy for “a world full of sin.” Metonymy, where a word or phrase is used in place of a different word or phrase with which it is associated, is frequently used in Scripture, and even in modern everyday speech (e.g., “the White House” is often used to refer to the President of the United States, his staff, and the decisions and policy that come from them).

So in the case of Psalm 51:5, David could be referring to the world of sin in which he was conceived and subsequently born.

Born in Sin = Poetic Exaggeration

born in sin Psalm 51 5Third, we could simply say that Psalm 51:5 is poetic hyperbole. David is, after all, confessing his sin of committing adultery with Bathsheba, and so in the midst of this confession, he my seek to exaggerate his own sinfulness by saying that he has always been sinning, even from conception.

The Psalms are full of such exaggeration, as are the rest of Scriptures. In one place, the Psalmist writes that he drowns his bed with a single tear (Psalm 6:6; the Hebrew word for “tears” is singular), and even Paul writes that he is the chief of sinners (1 Timothy 1:15).

Even today, people often use hyperbole in exactly the same way. It is not uncommon to hear a child who misses several problems on a math test to cry out in despair, “I never get any problems right!” In reality, they get most of the problems right most of the time, and in fact, got most of the problems right on that very test. So this is a possible explanation for David’s statement as well.

Born in Sin = David’s Mother Was Accused of Adultery

One final possibility is based on a traditional Jewish reading of Psalm 69.

According to various Jewish historical writings, David’s father and brothers thought that David’s mother, Nizbeth, had committed adultery and borne him out of wedlock (See my post yesterday on David’s Mother Nizbeth for more on this).

They thought David was a bastard (the word “stranger” in Psalm 69:8 has the same Hebrew root as muzar, meaning “bastard”). The truly guilty one was David’s father, Jesse, who, as a result of having Moabite blood (from Ruth) and due to some strange twists of Jewish law, believed that his marriage to Nizbeth was illegitimate and stopped having sexual relations with her to keep her from sinning. Yet he also feared that his seven sons were illegitimate, and so he had sought to gain a legitimate heir for himself by sleeping with his wife’s maidservant (Yes, it sounds strange, but you have to understand Jewish law for it to make sense).

Anyway, Nizbeth’s maidservant loved her mistress dearly, and so switched places with her before Jesse entered her bed, much like Leah and Rachel had switched places so many years before on Jacob’s wedding night. So Jesse ended up sleeping with his wife, even though he thought it was his wife’s servant. Nizbeth became pregnant, but never told her family how she had become pregnant, because she wanted to protect Jesse from public shame. The result, however, was that Jesse, their seven sons, and the entire community came to believe that Nizbeth was an adulterer. The town urged Jesse to stone his wife for adultery, but out of love for her, he refused, and several months later, David was born.

So David grew up in a family in which he was despised, rejected, shunned, and outcast. He was treated with scorn and derision (Psalm 69:7-8). The community followed the example of the family, and assumed that David was full of sin and guilt (Psalm 69:11-12). If something turned up missing, they believed he stole it, and forced him to replace it (Psalm 69:4). He was often the object of jokes and pranks, filling his plate with gall and his cup with vinegar (Psalm 69:20-21).

There are numerous other details to this story, but the point for our purposes here is that this may be what David is referring to in Psalm 51:5. If this Jewish history is true (and we have no good reason to believe otherwise), then almost everybody—including David’s own father and brothers—believed that David was born as a result of adultery, which is why David writes, “I was brought forth in iniquity; and in sin my mother conceived me.”

What does Psalm 51:5 mean?

No matter which of the views above we adopt, the view that is most unlikely is the Calvinistic idea that David is making some sort of theological statement in Psalm 51:5 about the universal total depravity of all humans.

This sort of theologizing was not David’s intention and it does not fit the context of the chapter. There are numerous other explanations for this verse which make much better sense of the verse itself and the context as a whole.

If you want to read more about Calvinism, check out other posts in this blog series: Words of Calvinism and the Word of God.

God is Uncategorized Bible & Theology Topics: Books by Jeremy Myers, Calvinism, Psalm 51:5, Psalm 69, sin, Theology of Salvation, Theology of Sin, Total Depravity, total inability, TULIP

Advertisement

Genesis 6:5 and Genesis 8:21 do not teach Total Depravity

By Jeremy Myers
9 Comments

Genesis 6:5 and Genesis 8:21 do not teach Total Depravity

Yesterday we briefly looked at the Calvinistic understanding of Genesis 6:5 and Genesis 8:21, and how they use these verses to defend the doctrine of Total Depravity. In this post I want to look at how these verses can be understood differently.

Learning what these texts mean begins with seeing them in the context of the the flood, and the events leading up to the flood.

The flood total depravity Genesis 6 5 genesis 8 21

The Point of the Flood Account in Genesis 6-8

One primary point of Genesis 6–8 is to show what humanity has done with the knowledge of good and evil gained by eating the forbidden fruit in the Garden of Eden. It has not brought anything good, but has resulted in only evil, violence, death, and destruction.

This point is proved by the fact that Genesis 6:5 and Genesis 8:1 form an inclusio around the flood account of Genesis 6–8. An inclusio is a form of writing which emphasizes the point of a text by putting the main idea at the beginning and end of a text to serve as “bookends” around the text. These bookends draw the attention of the reader to the main theme of the text.

Since the account of the flood begins and ends with two verses about the universal sinfulness of humanity, these two texts are making a critical point about the reason and results of the flood. What is most surprising is the point that is made. Genesis 6:5 is written to provide an explanation for why the floodwaters came upon the earth. The idea is that the waters cover the earth because violence covered the earth (Gen 6:11).

The Flood Did Nothing to Fix the Problem of Sin

Yet after the event of the flood, God says the most startling thing: Despite having nearly wiped humanity off the face of the earth, the drastic measure of the flood did nothing to fix or correct the human condition. All the thoughts and imaginations of man’s heart is still only evil, even from youth (Genesis 8:21).

The sinfulness of humanity after the flood is the same as the sinfulness of humanity before the flood!

Does it mean that God failed in His attempt to wipe evil off the face of the earth?

No, it means something else entirely.

It means that while death and destruction is the result of evil, death and destruction cannot solve the problem of evil either. It is always a temptation for individuals, rulers, and governments to think that they can defeat evil with violence, but here, in three of the opening chapters of the Bible, we are told that violence and destruction does not and cannot eradicated evil.

But beyond this, the fact that evil continued to exist in the hearts of men after the flood serves as a warning for all who live after this terrible event.

death in the floodThrough the story of the flood, the author of Genesis is telling his readers to understand that when we form our thoughts after evil instead of after God, only death and destruction follows. Noah serves as a positive example of what happens to those who follow God and faithfully obey Him, even though the entire surrounding society and context is engaging in evil continually.

Genesis 6-8 is Not Teaching Total Depravity or Total Inability

When read this way, Genesis 6–8 is not a passage about humanity’s inability to hear God or follow Him, but rather, is the exact opposite!

Genesis 6–8 is a text which warns the reader that if they form the thoughts of their hearts after evil, only death and destruction will result. 

If, however, like Noah, they form their thoughts after righteousness and godliness, they will find grace in the eyes of the Lord, and He will guide them, protect them, and even deliver them from the floods of violence and destruction that come upon the evildoers.

Due to God’s destruction of humanity in the flood because of the sin which is described in Genesis 6:5, some might be tempted to think that God had wiped out evil for God. But Genesis 8:21 proves that just as evil existed before the flood, it exists after the flood as well.

Noah delivered from the flood

Evil is all around us and even in our own hearts, but we must choose whether to form our hearts after evil, following those who died in the flood, or form our hearts after righteousness, like Noah who survived the destruction of the flood.

So although Genesis 6–8 does reveal that sin and depravity lie within the hearts of all people, these chapters also include a call for all people to form the thoughts and imaginations of their hearts after the holiness and righteousness of God, rather than after the evil and wickedness of the world.

God is Uncategorized Bible & Theology Topics: Books by Jeremy Myers, Calvinism, flood, Genesis 6-8, Genesis 6:5, Genesis 8:21, Theology of Salvation, Theology of Sin, Total Depravity, total inability

Advertisement

Are people “Only Evil Continually”? Calvinism and Genesis 6:5

By Jeremy Myers
30 Comments

Are people “Only Evil Continually”? Calvinism and Genesis 6:5

Genesis 6 5Two key texts for the Calvinistic teaching on Total Depravity are Genesis 6:5 and Genesis 8:21. Both verses state that all the intents, thoughts, and imaginations of mankind are only evil continually. Regarding these verses, Calvinistic author Edwin Palmer says this:

Note carefully the description of the wickedness. It was great. It penetrated to the deepest recesses of man. Not only to his heart, not only to the thoughts of his heart, but also to the imagination of the thoughts of his heart. Such innermost attitudes, according to the Bible, were only evil and that was continually so—all the time. Genesis 8:21 adds the information that this was not only when man was fully matured but also from his youth (Palmer, TULIP, 13).

There are numerous problems with the Calvinistic understanding of these texts.

Problem with the Calvinistic Understanding of Genesis 6:5 and Genesis 8:21

First, the texts are not statements about the sinful condition of all people throughout time, but are specifically about the people who lived at the time of the flood.

Second, the statements in these verses are not saying that men are inherently wicked in everything they do, but that the people at that time became wicked in everything they did. This is seen in part to the mysterious pairing of the sons of God and the daughters of men in Genesis 6:1-4, but also to the fact that when the evil intentions of mankind is described, it is their violent actions that are specifically mentioned (Genesis 6:11-13).

The truth that humanity became evil is further supported by the Hebrew word for “intent” (Heb. yetzer) in Genesis 6:5 and “imagination” in Genesis 8:21 is the same word used in Genesis 2:7, 19 to describe how God “formed” man from the dust of the ground. The point is that just as God formed man to be good, now man is “forming” his thoughts and his actions to be only evil. Humanity was not evil inherently, but was forming himself to be evil continually.

Furthermore, if Genesis 6:5 meant that mankind had always been evil continually (since the fall of Adam and Eve), there would be no explanation for why God was only now upset at their evil, and was only now acting to stop the spread of violence upon the earth (Genesis 6:6-7).

If mankind had always been this way, God’s sorrow at the state of mankind and His decision to allow the flood waters to cover the earth make no sense. If mankind had always been this evil, then God should have always felt this way.

the flood and total depravity

Then there is the problem of Noah himself. Though the proponents of Total Depravity claim that Genesis 6:5 and Genesis 8:21 describe all of humanity all the time, Genesis 6:8-9 and 7:1 indicate that Noah was perfect in his generations and righteous before the Lord, and so was not subject to the depravity, evil, and violence that had covered the earth.

Though Calvinists may claim that Noah was only “perfect in his generations” because of God’s irresistible grace upon Noah’s life, the text of Genesis 6:8 indicates that “Noah found grace” in the eyes of God, not that God irresistibly gave grace to Noah.

It should be pointed out that there are some who argue that the righteousness of Noah had nothing to do with morality, but with the purity of his bloodline. The evil and violence that had come upon the earth, it is said, was a result of the pollution of the human race by the “sons of God” in Genesis 6:1-4. In this case, the fact that Noah was “perfect in his generations” (Genesis 6:9; cf. 7:1), does not mean that he was holy and faithful, but that the bloodline of his ancestors had not yet been corrupted by intermarrying with the “sons of God” (whatever they were) or their offspring, the Nephilim (again, whatever they were).

This post has briefly considered what Genesis 6:5 and Genesis 8:21 do not mean. In tomorrows post, we will look at how properly understand these two verses in their contexts, and what they teach us about the human condition. Until then, what are your thoughts about these verses? Do they teach Total Depravity as Calvinists claim?

If you want to read more about Calvinism, check out other posts in this blog series: Words of Calvinism and the Word of God.

God is Uncategorized Bible & Theology Topics: Books by Jeremy Myers, Calvinism, flood, Genesis 6:5, Genesis 8:21, Theology of Sin, Total Depravity

Advertisement

Calvinists Believe that Regeneration Precedes Faith

By Jeremy Myers
73 Comments

Calvinists Believe that Regeneration Precedes Faith

According to the Calvinistic teaching of Total Depravity (and total inability), the unregenerate person cannot do anything good—they cannot even have faith in Jesus.

Therefore, even if God graciously gave faith to an unregenerate person, it would not matter because the person—as an unregenerate—would not be able to believe! God’s gift of faith to the person would be ineffectual.

To get around this, Calvinists often teach that regeneration precedes faith. That is, before God gives a person the gift of faith so that they can believe in Jesus for eternal life, God knows that He must first remove the problem of “total inability.” So God sovereignly regenerates the person before He gives them the gift of faith so that they are now able to believe when God gives them faith.

regeneration precedes faith

To say that regeneration precedes faith means that God gives new life before He grants the gift of faith. Only in this way can the newly regenerated person exercise the gift of faith they have been given.

Sound a little strange? Let us hear how Calvinists explain it:

When Christ called to Lazarus to come out of the grave, Lazarus had no life in him so that he could hear, sit up, and emerge. There was not a flicker of life in him. If he was to be able to hear Jesus calling him and to go to Him, then Jesus would have to make him alive. Jesus resurrected him and then Lazarus could respond. [Similarly,] the unsaved, the unregenerate, is spiritually dead (Eph. 2). He is unable to ask for help unless God changes his heart of stone into a heart of flesh, and makes him alive spiritually (Eph. 2:5). Then, once he is born again, he can for the first time turn to Jesus, expressing sorrow for his sins and asking Jesus to save him (Palmer, Five Points, 18-19).

Abraham Kuyper observed that, prior to regeneration, a sinner ‘has all the passive properties belonging to a corpse … [Therefore] every effort to claim for the sinner the minutest co-operation in this first grace destroys the gospel, severs the artery of the Christian confession and is anti-scriptural in the highest degree.’ Like a spiritual corpse, he is unable to make a single move toward God, think a right thought about God, or even respond to God – unless God first brings this spiritually dead corpse to life (Boice and Ryken, Doctrines of Grace, 74).

Man is dead in trespasses and sins (Eph. 2:1). He cannot make himself new, or create new life in himself. He must be born of God. Then, with the new nature of God, he sees Christ for who he really is, and freely receives Christ for all that he is. The two acts (new birth and faith) are so closely connected that in experience we cannot distinguish them. God begets us anew and the first glimmer of life in the newborn child is faith (Piper, Five Points, 35).

The Reformed view … teaches that before a person can choose Christ … he must be born again … one does not first believe and then become reborn. … A cardinal doctrine of Reformed theology is the maxim, “Regeneration precedes faith” (Sproul, Chosen by God, 10, 72).

A man is not regenerated because he has first believed in Christ, but he believes in Christ because has been regenerated (Pink, The Sovereignty of God).

The Calvinist says that life must precede faith, and is logically the cause of faith. Faith did not cause the new birth, the new birth caused faith (Cole, “Which Comes First In Conversion–Life or Faith?”).

Calvinists put the new birth before faith, since they believe that spiritually dead humans cannot exercise faith and, therefore, need to be born again before they can believe (Olson, Beyond Calvinism and Arminianism, 39).

… Regeneration logically must initiate faith (MacArthur, Faith Works, 62).

Reformed theologians … place regeneration before faith, pointing out that the Holy Spirit must bring new life before the sinner can by God’s enabling exercise faith and accept Jesus Christ (Killen, “Regeneration,” 1449).

The reformed view of predestination teaches that before a person can choose Christ his heart must be changed. He must be born again … one does not first believe, then become reborn. … In regeneration, God changes our hearts. He gives us a new disposition, a new inclination. He plants a desire for Christ in our hearts. We can never trust Christ for our salvation unless we first desire Him. This is why we said earlier that regeneration precedes faith (Sproul, Chosen by God, 72, 118).

A man must be born again in order to exercise faith (Wells, Faith, 58).

The Reformers taught not only that regeneration does precede faith but also that it must precede faith. Because of the moral bondage of the unregenerate sinner, he cannot have faith until he is changed internally by the operative, monergistic work of the Holy Spirit. Faith is regeneration’s fruit, not its cause (Sproul, Willing to Believe, 23).

regeneration precedes faithAnd a long quote from R. C. Sproul:

After a person is regenerated, that person cooperates by exercising faith and trust. But the first step is the work of God and of God alone.

The reason we do not cooperate with regenerating grace before it acts upon us and in us is because we can- not. We cannot because we are spiritually dead. We can no more assist the Holy Spirit in the quickening of our souls to spiritual life than Lazarus could help Jesus raise him for the dead.

When I began to wrestle with the Professor’s argument, I was surprised to learn that his strange-sounding teaching was not novel. Augustine, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Jonathan Edwards, George Whitefield – even the great medieval theologian Thomas Aquinas taught this doctrine. Thomas Aquinas is the Doctor Angelicus of the Roman Catholic Church. For centuries his theological teaching was accepted as official dogma by most Catholics. So he was the last person I expected to hold such a view of regeneration. Yet Aquinas insisted that regenerating grace is operative grace, not cooperative grace. Aquinas spoke of prevenient grace, but he spoke of a grace that comes before faith, which is regeneration.

These giants of Christian history derived their view from Holy Scripture. The key phrase in Paul’s Letter to the Ephesians is this: “…even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace have you been saved)” (Eph. 2:5). Here Paul locates the time when regeneration occurs. It takes place ‘when we were dead.’ With one thunderbolt of apostolic revelation all attempts to give the initiative in regeneration to man are smashed. Again, dead men do not cooperate with grace. Unless regeneration takes place first, there is no possibility of faith.

This says nothing different from what Jesus said to Nicodemus. Unless a man is born again first, he cannot possibly see or enter the kingdom of God. If we believe that faith precedes regeneration, then we set our thinking and therefore ourselves in direct opposition not only to giants of Christian history but also to the teaching of Paul and of our Lord Himself (R. C. Sproul, “Regeneration Precedes Faith”).

What are your thoughts on the idea that regeneration precedes faith? Have you encountered this idea before? Do you believe it matches up with what Scripture teaches? Weigh in below!

If you want to read more about Calvinism, check out other posts in this blog series: Words of Calvinism and the Word of God.

God is Redeeming Theology Bible & Theology Topics: Books by Jeremy Myers, Calvinism, faith, regeneration, Theology of Salvation

Advertisement

Calvinists Believe Faith is a Gift from God

By Jeremy Myers
34 Comments

Calvinists Believe Faith is a Gift from God

Yesterday we learned about the Calvinistic idea that faith is a work. I briefly mentioned that as a result of this idea, Calvinists believe that people cannot on their own place faith in Jesus Christ for eternal life.

faith is a gift from GodYet if faith is something good that we do, if faith is a work, why does God call people to place faith in Jesus for eternal life (John 3:16; 5:24; 6:47)? Why does God seem to hold people responsible for something which they are not able to do? The Calvinistic answer to this is that faith itself is a gift of God.

Since God requires faith in Jesus, and since God knows that it is impossible for the unregenerate person to place faith in Jesus, the Calvinist argues that God Himself gives faith to the person so that they can then believe. So then, faith becomes a gift from God.

Again, let me allow Calvinists to explain this idea that faith is a gift in their own words:

Genuine faith … is granted by God … faith is a supernatural gift of God … faith is not something that is conjured up by the human will but is a sovereignly granted gift (cf. Php 1:29) (MacArthur, The Gospel According to Jesus, 172-173).

Faith is God’s gift. In no degree could a natural man produce faith. It is utterly beyond him. Let us adore the God who gives it (Wells, Faith, 55).

Faith and repentance are divine gifts and are wrought in the soul through the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit (Steele, The Five Points of Calvinism).

Faith is a gift from God … it is permanent … the faith that God gives begets obedience … God gave it to you and He sustains it … May God grant you a true saving faith, a permanent gift that begins in humility and brokenness over sin and ends up in obedience unto righteousness. That’s true faith and it’s a gift that only God can give, and if you desire it, pray and ask that He would grant it to you (MacArthur, Transcribed Tape GC 90-21).

Have you encountered this idea in any other writings? If so, where? What are your thoughts on the idea that faith is a gift from God? 

If you want to read more about Calvinism, check out other posts in this blog series: Words of Calvinism and the Word of God.

God is Uncategorized Bible & Theology Topics: Books by Jeremy Myers, Calvinism, faith alone, faith and works, Theology of Salvation

Advertisement

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • …
  • 20
  • Next Page »
Join the discipleship group
Learn about the gospel and how to share it

Take my new course:

The Gospel According to Scripture
Best Books Every Christian Should Read
Study Scripture with me
Subscribe to my Podcast on iTunes
Subscribe to my Podcast on Amazon

Do you like my blog?
Try one of my books:

Click the image below to see what books are available.

Books by Jeremy Myers

Theological Study Archives

  • Theology – General
  • Theology Introduction
  • Theology of the Bible
  • Theology of God
  • Theology of Man
  • Theology of Sin
  • Theology of Jesus
  • Theology of Salvation
  • Theology of the Holy Spirit
  • Theology of the Church
  • Theology of Angels
  • Theology of the End Times
  • Theology Q&A

Bible Study Archives

  • Bible Studies on Genesis
  • Bible Studies on Esther
  • Bible Studies on Psalms
  • Bible Studies on Jonah
  • Bible Studies on Matthew
  • Bible Studies on Luke
  • Bible Studies on Romans
  • Bible Studies on Ephesians
  • Miscellaneous Bible Studies

Advertise or Donate

  • Advertise on RedeemingGod.com
  • Donate to Jeremy Myers

Search (and you Shall Find)

Get Books by Jeremy Myers

Books by Jeremy Myers

Schedule Jeremy for an interview

Click here to Contact Me!

© 2025 Redeeming God · All Rights Reserved · Powered by Knownhost and the Genesis Framework