The distinction between total and utter depravity in the quoted objection
Claim examined: God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit
Scriptural Answer
"I'm human, I forget. Don't start conspiracies." Wow David, I didn't intend to start any "conspiracies". I only made a statement with no ill will intended at all. "Because (using your hermeneutic of interpreting scripture) God really did not know where Adam was. God, at that time, was ignorant of Adam's location." I merely asked a question, and did not mean to "imply" that God was ignorant. You were the one who made that statement. "Does God know all things, past present and future exhaustively? Yes or No?" Yes, God knows "all things". "If you say yes, then why do you bring up verses to try to prove otherwise?" I don't know why I brought up those verses. I guess the reason for posting those verses would be to see your reply, and as typical instead of debating the post, you are quick to offer judgment even though I never said that I held to the position of an "open theist". It is amazing that I can quote two or three passages of scripture and then be judged without even offering any commentary. I asked questions 1 and 2. "1. Can the child of God be "devoured" by the devil??? 2. If not, then why should the Christian fear the devil if "the elect" cannot be lost???" To which David replied, "Jesus accomplishes the will of the Father, thus the elect cannot be lost. Satan, as well as yourself, do not believe in this truth. Satan also believes he can oust Jehovah." If the elect cannot be lost, then please answer question number 2??? Yes the elect "can" be lost. Go back and re-read the parable of the sower. I wrote, "3. Were these disciples of Jesus as mentioned in John 6:66 saved before they left Jesus???" To which David replied, "What a terrific job Christ did preaching, eh? A crowd from 5,000 men preached down to 12 (one which was the devil). No, they were not saved; they were just seeking another meal. You wanted prove of inability, well there is it. When presented with the truth, these men clung to their sin and rebellion and walked away. As Christ said, No man can come to him unless the Father grants it to him." How do you know they were "just seeking another meal"??? The text says nothing of the sort. Yes, these "disciples" walked away from Jesus. What is a disciple David??? Were these disciples "called" by the Father??? If not, who called them??? I wrote, "4. What does this statement mean David??? "It is written in the prophets, 'And they shall all be taught by God.'" (John 6:45)." To which David replied, "It means the elect hear and learn from the Father." Where does the word "elect" appear in the text of John 6:45??? The text I quoted says "all"... David would you please elaborate???? David then quoted John 10:27, "My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; (NASB)" Please notice that the sheep follow Jesus. A sheep can "cease" to follow Jesus. A sheep can also get lost or be caught by a wolf and devoured. I wrote, "5. Where is it written that we require a "direct operation of the Holy Spirit" in order to understand God's word???" To which David replied, "It is right next to the verse that mentions the word Trinity (not). You see, the words "direct operation" is not found in the Bible, but the concept is. Look at John 6, 1 Peter 1:3." It is amazing that someone can hold to a doctrine and the words that would prove his doctrine can "not" be found in the Bible. I looked at the verses that David provided and a "direct operation" of the Holy Spirit is never said to be required to bring one to faith in Jesus Christ. David quoted Ezekiel 36:26-27, "26 And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. 27 And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules." These two verses do "not" say that a "direct operation" of the Holy Spirit is required in order for one to be saved now does it??? The Holy Spirit "only" resides in us "through faith". How does one get faith again??? The Bible states it is "through faith" and "not" through a direct operation of the Holy Spirit. David then quoted, John 3:6-8, "6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. [1] 7 Do not marvel that I said to you, ?You must be born again.? 8 The wind [2] blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit." 1 Peter 1:23 says, "having been born again, not of corruptible seed but incorruptible, through the word of God which lives and abides forever," We are born again "through the word of God" and "not" through a "direct operation" of the Holy Spirit. I wrote, "6. Is the gospel God's power to salvation for "all men" or only for the "elect of God"???" To which David replied, "The gospel is God's power to salvation for "all men"...who believe ;) Don't leave out scripture." It was not my intention to leave out "who believe". Does "all men" mean "all men" or only the "elect" of God??? David then quotes Romans 1:16, "For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. (KJV)" How can the gospel be God's power to salvation if one must have a "direct operation" to understand God's word??? Did God make his word so far above any of us that we are too stupid to understand it??? This is close to the doctrine of Catholics that say that we cannot understand God's word, hence we need an interpreter. Both of these doctrines are false to the core. Satan wants to make sure that no one can understand God's word because those who understand and do what God requires one must do to be saved will actually be saved. The devil wants everyone to burn in the lake of fire with him. If a "direct operation" of the Holy Spirit saves, then how is it possible for Satan to "take away the word out of their hearts" (Luke 8:12), if this call is "irresistable"??? I wrote, "7. Why did Jesus never teach that man was depraved or blamed mans sin on Adam. Rather he always held each man responsible for his own sin." To which David replied, "Read John 6, Jesus himself says man is unable to come to him." David this is not true. Jesus himself said in Matthew 11:28, "Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest." He does not say "come to me through a direct operation of the Holy Spirit" now does He??? I wrote, "8. If every newborn is "utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, and wholly inclined to all evil", then: a. how do we account for the goodness of the "unregenerate" like Cornelius, Acts 10:1-4, 22, or anyone else today. How do we account for all the good things that non-Christians do? " To which David replied, "You insert the word 'utterly'. No one teaches that one is born utterly depraved. We teach that sin affects the mind, the heart, etc. so one is "totally" depraved. "good" is in the eyes of the sinner. Unregenerate men cannot do good in God's sight." This also is "not" true. Ezekiel 18:21 says, "But if a wicked man turns from all his sins which he has committed, keeps all My statutes, and does what is lawful and right, he shall surely live; he shall not die." I wrote, "b. then how can "evil men proceed from bad to worse" 1 Ti 3:13?" To which David replied, "Because one is not born utterly depraved. No Calvinist teaches that. This is why I have asked you to go to a pro-calvinist site if you really want to learn our doctrine. I guess you don't. Keep up with the straw men." How can one get worse than being "totally" depraved to a worse condition??? I wrote, "9. Why is the Greek word "sarx" (English=flesh, Mistranslated "sinful nature" throughout the NIV) which Calvinists say teaches the inherited depraved sinful nature of man, also used in scripture of Jesus in Heb 2:14; 1 Pe 4:1; 3:18; 1 Jn 4:2? " To which David replied, "I don't know Greek, therefore I cannot answer this. If you really want an aswer to this question, you can visit James White' channel and ask him yourself. He knows Greek, teaches it, and can answer your question." I didn't ask if you "knew" Greek now did I David??? Please answer the question. "All I can say is: The word is probably used in a different context. This (i.e. context) is something you know nothing of, and if you want prove of this I can bring up your discussion with Max about James 2." I didn't ask you to bring up my conversation with someone else, I asked David to answer the question not Max. If the word is used in a different "context", then please explain what this "context" is since you are the expert here and I know nothing about it according to what you posted above. "I can give people a preview of your argument: "God wrote the Bible, therefore everything written is from God's Point Of View". Max simply ripped you to shreds showing you how absurd this is, so don't make me re-post it here. BTW, The Bible was written by Men Inspired by the Holy Spirit, I would never say otherwise." This is your opinion that "Max ripped" me to shreds. There you go again trying to put words in my mouth with your "preview". I wrote, "10. Why would Jesus not inherit the guilt of sin & depravity from his mother Mary?" To which David replied, "Sin is passed through the father. Jesus had no human father therefore had no sin." Where is it written that "Sin is passed through the father"??? I wrote, "11. If Mary was "conceived sinless" so that Jesus would not get inherited sin then: a. wouldn't Jesus' brothers and sisters also be born without inherited sin? d. If God could conceive Mary without sin why did He not simply conceive Jesus without sin?" To which David replied, "Mary was a sinner, thus making your "a" and "d" sections irrelevant." Ok, I suppose this question was geared more for Catholics. I wrote, "b. wouldn't all the children of Christians today (whose depravity has been removed) are born without inherited sin. c. If we can inherit the corrupt nature of our parents, then why can we not inherit the righteousness of our parents?" To which David replied, "Job 14:4 "Who can bring what is pure from the impure?" Where is it written that we are "born" impure??? David continued, "That which is flesh is flesh.." (John 3)" Ok, this still does not prove that we are born sinners. David wrote, "Those that are enlightened by God are not made sinless-an error the authors of these questions keep making. www.monergism.com if you really want to know what we teach. I doubt you'll visit as you have no intention of discussing what we actually believe." When one is saved does God cleanse us of all of our sins yes or no??? If those "enlightened by God are not made sinless" then what happens to ones sins when they are saved??? I wrote, "c. If we can inherit the corrupt nature of our parents, then why can we not inherit the righteousness of our parents?" To which David replied, "Answered." Not... I wrote, "12. What is the difference in "nature" between Adam before his sin, Mary who was "immaculate" and Christians who have their depravity removed, and Jesus?" To which David replied, "Mary was a sinner. Jesus is perfectly righteous and sinless. Christians are still sinners but forgiven. Adam was righteous before he chose to sin. Sin then seperated him from God." Are all of ones sins removed when they are saved??? Yes or No??? I wrote, "13. If baptism removes the depraved nature of man, then why does he continue to sin afterward?" To which David replied, "Re-read your conversations with Max about this." I didn't ask Max, I asked you... I wrote, "14. If Adam became depraved only after he sinned, then why did he sin before he was depraved? We sin, it is said, because we are "wholly inclined" towards evil and "utterly indisposed" towards good. That may explain why we sin, but why did Adam sin? Adam was totally hereditarily righteous, yet he still sinned!" To which David replied, "More lies and misconceptions. www.monergism.com I can't do your homework for you. We do not teach utter depravity. Read the Westminister Confession too, and then get back to me. Also, Adam sinned because he chosed to sin." Okay, so what is the difference between "utterly depraved" and "totally depraved"??? Was Adam saved even though he sinned??? I wrote, "15. If Adam choose to sin while dead to sin, may we not also choose to do right while dead in sin?" To which David replied, "Adam was not dead to sin. Your next point is irrelevant because it assumes the first." Really??? If Adam was not dead to sin befored he sinned, then what was he??? Did God create Adam with a propensity to sin??? I thought that everything that God created was "good"??? I wrote, "16. If "non-elect" infants do not die in infancy (as E.K Garrett, primitive Baptist taught, using Job 21:7 as his proof text) then were all the babies killed in the flood and in Sodom and Gomorrah elect and predestined to be saved?" To which David replied, "If "non-elect" infants that do not die, die?? Is that what you are trying to say? If you are asking about their eternal state, you must first answer how many ways of salvation is there? One or Two? Jesus is the way the truth and the life as far as I know." Where do infants go that die before they have had a chance to come to Jesus??? If God "knew" before hand that they would die and not be saved, then why did He even create them in the first place??? I wrote, "17. Is it possible for a wicked man to turn from his sins and be saved???" To which David replied, "Apart from being drawn by the FAther (John 6), No. They will continue in sin and rebellion and walk away when presented with the truth. They do not desire salvation. Read Romans 3." Go back and re-read Ezekiel 18:21-23. I wrote, "18. Is it possible for a righteous man to turn away from his righteousness and die???" To which David replied, "In otherwards, can the elect be lost? No, Jesus is not a failure." This also is "not" true. God says in Ezekiel 18:24, "But when a righteous man turns away from his righteousness and commits iniquity, and does according to all the abominations that the wicked man does, shall he live? All the righteousness which he has done shall not be remembered; because of the unfaithfulness of which he is guilty and the sin which he has committed, because of them HE SHALL DIE." I wrote, "19. Did Christ taste death for every man or only for the elect???" To which David replied, "I don't know what you mean by this. Do you mean if Christ died for all or the elect? If that is what you mean, Christ only died for the elect." Where does it state in the Bible that Christ died "only for the elect"??? I wrote, "20. If Christ come to seek and save that which was lost how is it that Calvinists allege the elect were chosen unto salvation before the foundation of the world is true??? What was lost that Christ could save???" To which David replied, "I can't answer this as it is a trick question and just word play." Oh please just answer the question. Do you choose not to answer because in answering this question you might see that you have been wrong??? I will respond to the rest of David's post later...
KJV Scriptures Used
Read each passage in its chapter and compare the Scriptures together.