The first point of Calvinism’s TULIP is Total Depravity.
Total Depravity forms the logical and theological foundation for the rest of the Calvinistic system, and as such, we will spend additional space laying out what Calvinism teaches about Total Depravity, and how it forms the foundation for everything that follows. If we can grasp all the intricacies and implications of Total Depravity, and see how it does not fit with Scripture, the rest of the Calvinistic system will fall like a set of dominoes.
It is not an overstatement to say, as does R. C. Sproul, that all five points of Calvinism stand or fall on the basis of Total Depravity.
If one embraces this aspect [inability] of the T in TULIP the rest of the acrostic follows by a resistless logic. Once cannot embrace the T and reject any of the other four letters with any degree of consistency (Sproul, Grace Unknown, 128)
Though my journey away from Calvinism ended by dropping Total Depravity, Sproul is correct: Total Depravity is foundational to TULIP Calvinism. As a result, I will be spending many posts discussing Total Depravity and related concepts.
What is Total Depravity?
On the surface, the doctrine of Total Depravity seems acceptable. In fact, it is because of the surface level explanation of Total Depravity that I believed it for so long.
Just as many evangelists today begin their gospel presentation with the “bad news” about our sinfulness before God, so the five points of Calvinism also begin with the sinful condition that mankind finds itself in. The term “Total Depravity” refers to the sinfulness of humanity in relation to God’s righteous standards, and especially to our inability to do anything that helps us earn or merit eternal life from God.
I agree with this.
The reason I finally rejected Total Depravity, however, is not because I believe that people can “save themselves” or earn their way into heaven, or do anything good to merit eternal life. I believe nothing of the sort. Instead, I eventually rejected Total Depravity because I understood what most Calvinists meant when they talked about Total Depravity.
For Calvinists, Total Depravity means way more than just sinfulness.
But let us allow Calvinists to define and explain Total Depravity in their own words.
Total Depravity According to Calvinists
Many people, including many Calvinists, object to the term “Total Depravity” because it gives the impression that human beings are totally and completely sinful. When some people hear about “Total Depravity” they think of someone who always and only does the most evil thing possible.
This clearly does not happen. No person in history always does the most evil thing they can do in every situation.
Thankfully, Calvinists recognize this as well and so are careful to clarify that the teaching on Total Depravity is not the same thing as “absolute depravity,” and that in general, humanity is not without some good. They say instead that Total Depravity means that mankind is as bad off as man can be (Spencer, TULIP, 32).
Here are some other quotes on Total Depravity from Calvinists:
Total depravity does not mean that each man is the epitome of the devil. For, as a matter of fact, man does not commit all the sins possible; and those he does commit are not always as bad as possible. Furthermore, we see that he can even perform a certain amount of relative good. … Total depravity means that natural man is never able to do any good that is fundamentally pleasing to God, and, in fact, does evil all the time (Palmer, The Five Points of Calvinism, 12-13).
Human nature has been and is utterly corrupted by sin so that man is totally incapable of doing anything to accomplish his salvation (Rose, TULIP, 2).
When Calvinists speak of man as begin totally depraved, they mean that man’s nature is corrupt, perverse, and sinful throughout (Steele & Thomas, Five Points of Calvinism, 18).
Total Depravity means that unregenerate man is hopelessly enmeshed in sin, bound by Satan with the chords of spiritual death, and wholly disinterested in the things of the Creator (Spencer, TULIP, 36).
To be totally depraved, however, does not mean that a person is as intensively evil as possible, but as extensively evil as possible. It is not that he cannot commit a worse crime; rather, it is that nothing that he does is good. Evil pervades every faculty of his soul and every sphere of his life. He is unable to do a single thing that is good (Palmer, The Five Points of Calvinism, 9).
What total depravity is meant to convey is the idea that sin has affected the whole person down to the very core or root of his or her being (Boice & Ryken, Doctrines of Grace, 71).
By nature we are slaves to sin. This does not mean that the fall has destroyed or eradicated the human will. Fallen man still has all the faculties to make choices. WE still have a mind and a will. The problem is not that we cannot make choices. Natural men make choices all the time. The problem is that, in our fallen condition, we make sinful choices. We make these choices freely. We sin precisely because we want to sin, and we are capable of choosing exactly what we want to choose (Sproul, Grace Unknown, 130).
For the most part, though I would not state it in exactly the same way, I am not that opposed toward the teaching on Total Depravity as expressed in the quotes above.
I firmly believe that in and of ourselves, there is nothing we can do to earn or merit eternal life before God, or even to place ourselves in good standing with God. We cannot become righteous on our own. Even all of our righteous works are like filthy rags (Isaiah 64:6). On this, I am in agreement with Calvinism.
Future posts will show, however, that Calvinists have numerous teachings that come from Total Depravity which I am not too excited about. We will look at the first of these tomorrow. Until then, what do you think about the doctrine of Total Depravity as expressed above? Is it biblical or not? Is it wise to base our theology on a foundational idea of sin?
If you want to read more about Calvinism, check out other posts in this blog series: Words of Calvinism and the Word of God.
incongruous to COMMAND dead people if they are incapable of acting, so being dead must not preclude the ability to obey
A man was asked the way to the Post Office: ‘Well I wouldn’t start from here’ was his reply.
The problem with Christianity, not just Calvinism, is that it doesn’t understand the origin of sin. It’s whole mythology blinds the Christian to the obvious and traps her into a legalistic framework with a vengeful god who demands a blood sacrifice. That misconception, together with the elevation of the Bible into godhood, blights the Christian’s spiritual development. The total depravity of man — another utterly anti-human doctrine, along with God ordained genocides. Misconception built upon misconception, Christianity is fractally wrong.
This is many years later so receiving a reply may be weird at this point but I just wanted to point out that you are correct, God requires a sacrifice, but one thing that I want to add, which is the foundation of Christianity, is that God didn’t want His people to have to make this sacrifice, and that’s why we celebrate Jesus, God came in human form as Jesus and chose to make this sacrifice Himself. so yes, God does require a sacrifice but He’s amazingly the only one who has to make it.
Total depravity is indeed biblical. All have sinned; all are in bondage to sin till Christ frees us; all pursue the works of the flesh rather than the Spirit; evil behaviors come from within the heart rather than from the outside; good deeds are done more often to salve the conscience than please God. Total depravity is why.
And it’s an Arminian doctrine as well as a Calvinist one. The Calvinists’ five points were their answer to the Remonstrants’ five points. They kept total depravity.
But Calvinists do go overboard about total depravity. Then again, everybody goes overboard about one thing or another. Humans are creatures of extremes. Which is a symptom of—drumroll please—total depravity. It’s not enough to believe something: We must outdo everybody else, to the point of nullifying reason, in our affirmation of it. But taking it to logical extremes bends it into something it’s not.
On occasion I have come into contact with those Christians (and I do beleive them to be Christians) who feel that CALVINISM must be the truth from Scripture…and they look at me with what amounts to almost sorrow when I tell them that I have no time for Mr. Calvin and his “Institutes”…here are just a few reasons why:
1. Calvinism impugns the character of God saying that it is his “good intention” to love some into eternal fire.
2. Calvinism impugns the sovereignty of God by saying that man cannot have a free will and a God still able to do whatever he chooses to do.
3. Calvinism does damage to the Word of God because it requires a reinterpretation of so many verses which are plainly stated like “For God so loved the World…” and “To as many as RECEIVED Him…” and “God is not willing that ANY should perish…” etc etc
4. Calvinism is internally contradictory because it describes a situation where God has already determined the destiny of all His creatures and still demands that we do evangelism.
5. Calvinism declares that it is the essence of the REFORMATION and yet both Calvin and its modern promoters rely heavily on Augustine who is also considered one of the greatest doctors in Catholic tradition.
6. Calvinism is determined to declare to all people “once saved always saved” but those within Calvinism (even on at least one published occasion RC Sproul of all people) are never sure they are of the “elect” and so never know with certainty that they are even saved. Instead the Bible clearly states “To as many as received Him gave He the RIGHT to be called the children of God.” “I am writing this that you may KNOW that you have eternal life…”
From just these six telling arguments I would argue that Calvinism is overcome ” …but to question Calvin is to question only a man…Paul on occasion questioned the leading Apostle Peter so if you think it is out of line to question so august a name as Calvin, then you must not agree with Paul on his direct criticism of Peter either. Calvin is nobody just another human being like me.
Finally Calvinism is based on an error of epistomology (how one knows what he knows) If I am so depraved of mind that I cannot read the Word of God as published, as a book for men to read, then what made Calvin able to do so? Was only Calvin no so depraved as to be able? And if you say that he was aided by the Holy Spirit, then why indeed cannot I be also? You cannot have it both ways. So indeed, if Calvin’s words about depravity are the truth,
then no man can ever be certain that he has read and understood the Scriptures, including Calvin.
Dennis Wilson
da*********@fr******.com
1 ShareLikeLike
I’d have to disagree. I do not find calvisnt to be Christians. For they have created for themselves a separate god. Our God does not pick and choose who is going to heaven and who is going to hell. Does God know these things yes. However to say he picks and chooses creates for you a new god, much in the same way the name it claim it doctrine created a new god for themselves and the Mormons so on and so forth.
Total depravity does not allow for anyone to read the Bible including Calvin.
Apart from God’s enlightenment, I believe that mankind is unable to understand God’s Word. That is why the Holy Spirit must provide the understanding, conviction and faith if one is to have those at all. The crux of the matter is if God actually loved the whole world—or just the elect. That is what Calvinism turns on.
I laughed out loud at this great comment: “Total depravity does not allow for anyone to read the Bible including Calvin.” (Dennis – keep reading before you get offended)
But that said, it is true in its own way. I’ve come across people who are incapable of reading the Bible, not because they’re illiterate, but because they are spiritually blind and they can’t understand what it’s saying. The resulting discussions are interesting, to say the least. Is it only by God’s grace that my eyes were opened enough to understand any of it in some small way? Should we be more grateful that we can read?
I’ve also come across people who, if given a choice, will often choose the worse, more evil way. Corruption is where it can be most obvious, if you’re ever ‘privileged’ enough to get close enough to see it. You end up with a massive culture clash between those who want to see ‘right’ happen and those who are totally dedicated to doing ‘wrong’, and do more wrong to follow up the first wrong, and so on. But even the depraved love their wives and children and do nice things for their friends. And God can open anyone’s eyes anytime they’re interested enough to see.
Maybe the dispute is the starting point: I see total depravity as more an endpoint. We’re all given a conscience as an inner witness to the Holy Spirit. How we respond dictates where we end up. I’m not sure, though, where that would fit on the sliding scale of Calvinism –> Armenianism.
“We’re all given a conscience as an inner witness to the Holy Spirit.”
Is it possible that God can require a person to suspend their conscience?
In comparison to God can a man be wise, or generous, or empathic, or patient?
The wise know their ignorance, the generous their selfishness, the patient their intolerance.
“I know nothing” insists Socrates. “I am not a Christian” insists Kierkegaard. The spiritual man looking at the Creator feels his self-illusions annihilated.
Are we to conclude then, that man is totally depraved? Not at all.
To feel our emptiness doesn’t lead us to despise ourselves and our neighbors, our eyes are on God. We marvel at the majesty of God. Empty, we turn to Him, our teacher, our salvation. Empty, we marvel that He finds delight in us, loves us, sustains us, and leads us into communion with Himself and each other. Oh, confused by words. All is not well in the Tower of Bible. Reaching for heaven, confounded by language.
Perhaps If “Total depravity” were renamed “inescapable inability” it would be more easily understood in the proper context. Doing so would better direct the conversation to the true point of the term. It is humankind’s inability to choose God over himself because of his inherited sinful nature as sons of Adam addressed in this doctrine. If we accept Pauls’s inditement of all of mankind as natural (in our most basic natural state) enemies of God, as expressed in the first chapter of Romans We have no other choice but to accept we need God’s loving grace to receive God’s saving grace.
Salvation is not a D.I.Y. Project. God does it all.
Some exchange the term “total inability” for “total depravity”. I’m not sure if you would find “total” to be a satisfactory exchange for “inescapable”, but figured I’d throw that out there, just in case it was helpful. Take care.
I just want to say how excited I am to have found your site. So many believe in Calvanism; my husband and I are part of a very few even in our church that disagree. It is very difficult to find sites that presents Biblical truth. I believe this to be an easy road to travel including the belief in the rapture. I find your site refreshing & challenging. I also see the Lord teaching me as He poses questions to me then you seem to present answers even the following day. I would love to read your book once you have completed it. Godspeed to you.
Total Depravity is just the logical conclusion to Original Sin. It is not this which hinges Calvinism, but Irresistible Grace. Arminians also believe in total depravity and Enabling Grace. Both imply that humans can’t make the first move towards God, and both believe that without the Restrainer, all humans would to the most evil thing at all times. Both believe that the essence of humanity is sinful and incapable of goodness, and consequently that Jesus was not really one of us (except by a technicality). That’s why they call Mary the mother of Jesus as a man, because she can’t possibly give birth to the “God” part. Meanwhile, Jesus and the non-western church portrays sin as a disease to be cured, and the Bible says that people, by faithfulness and charity, are capable of being upright in the sight of God.
The attitude of Augustine, the founder of Catholicism and Calvinism, is that reaching up two feet to take God’s hand reaching ten thousand miles downward is somehow equivalent to reaching up ten thousand miles by yourself. Only an angry, deluded gnostic like Augustine could have come up with such idiocy in his time and gotten away with it.
It seems that total depravity then means that man’s actions are not totally evil and in fact he may do some good, but even the good things he does, or the bad things he consciously avoids doing, are due to corrupt purposes or motives.
Not only is Total Depravity one of the most pernicious, awful doctrines I have ever heard; it is totally contradicted by the words of Jesus, who taught people “You are the light of the world”; not just “I am the light of the world” but “YOU are the light of the world.”
Jesus himself taught that we ought to see the good in people, not condemn them as trash. From Matthew 5, the Sermon on the Mount….
You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled by men.
14
“You are the light of the world. A city on a hill cannot be hidden.
15
Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house.
16
In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven.