T is for Total
One thing that all five of us have in common on this blog, besides being brothers in Christ, is that we probably all have an opinion about the TULIP. Some of us accept all five points and others do not. Therefore, I would like to open up conversation about the holy acronym and its impact on the Christian life. We'll start with "T." The following definitions come from the sinless and without fault, Theopedia .com.
"Total depravity (also called total inability or total corruption) is a biblical doctrine closely linked with the doctrine of original sin as formalized by Augustine and advocated in many Protestant confessions of faith and catechisms, especially in Calvinism. The doctrine understands the Bible to teach that, as a consequence of the the Fall of man, every person born into the world is morally corrupt, enslaved to sin and is, apart from the grace of God, utterly unable to choose to follow God or choose to turn to Christ in faith for salvation."
The doctrine of total inability teaches that people are not by nature inclined to love God with their whole heart, mind, or strength, as he requires, but rather all are inclined to serve their own interests and to reject the rule of God. Even religion and philanthropy are destructive to the extent that these originate from a human imagination, passions, and will."
The following are key passages from the ESV:
- Genesis 6:5: "The LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually."
- Jeremiah 13:23 (NIV): "Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard its spots? Neither can you do good who are accustomed to doing evil."
- John 6:44a: "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him."
- Romans 3:10-11: "None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God."
- Romans 8:7-9: "For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God. You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him."
- Ephesians 2:3b: "[We] were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind."
- 1 Corinthians 2:14: "The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned."
For instance, Genesis 6:5 is a descriptive passage which tells the reader what mankind was like at that time. Now, one can conclude that maybe this has not changed over time, but this passage seems to speak to a certain time in the history of mankind.
I think Jeremiah 13:23 does a good job of buttressing the argument of human depravity and its bent towards evil.
John 6:44 concludes that salvation comes first from the Lord's initiative.
Romans 3:10-11 seems to state that all are not righteous, but sinners. No one seeks God. This, of course, stands in stark contrast to today's philosophy that people do seek God and that is why many churches have "seeker services." If a church has a seeker service does that mean they reject the doctrine of Total Depravity?
The next passage in Romans seems to further the position stated earlier in the book.
The passage in Ephesians states that we are children who deserve God's wrath, presumably because we are in sin from birth.
The passage in 1 Corinthians seems to state that we cannot understand the things of God unless the Spirit sheds light on them.
It seems clear that the doctrine of Total Depravity is more then just, "we're born sinners." It seems to be made of several aspects of the doctrine of man. That man is:
*born corrupted by sin
*born enslaved by sin
*born unable to choose to follow God
*born to serve self rather then God
The opposite of these premises would state that man is:
*born sinless
*born enslaved by no one or no thing
*born able to choose God
*born able to serve God
Obviously the latter projects a much higher view of the doctrine of man then the former.
The questions I pose to you gentlemen are:
1) How does belief in the "T" effect one's spiritual life?
2) How does belief in the "T" effect a church's preaching and message?
3) How does belief in the opposite effect one's spiritual life?
4) How does belief in the opposite effect a church's preaching and message ?
Labels: TULIP
posted by Charlie Wallace at 9:35 AM
5 Comments:
Great post, Charlie. I'm really looking forward to reading what comes out of our conversation.
1. How does belief in TD affect one's spiritual life?
I began to become exposed to the doctrine of total depravity my senior year in college through the writings of John Piper. When placed face-to-face with the enormity of my sin, grace immediately became that much sweeter. In my opinion, one's esteem of grace directly correlates to one's understanding of the depth of their sin. Thanksgiving for grace is so much more real and substantive now.
Secondarily, I have also learned not to trust my first instincts when I am not walking intimately wiht God. If I have been distant from God, the lingering effects of my formerly depraved heart begin to influence how I think and relate to God and others, and I have had to learn to distrust myself at these times.
2. How does belief in TD affect a church's proclamation?
TD means that the cross is for sinners, not just basically moral people who need a little help. TD means that we have not simply "messed up and made some poor decisions." It means that I am corrupted in every part, and that the filth of my sin is intolerable before a infinitely holy God. Sin must and will be preached if people are to comprhend the lavish grace which God offers wicked sinners in the Gospel.
3. How does rejection/ignorance of TD affect someone's spiritual life.
This leads to a spiritual shallowness and a flippant understanding of the cross. If I am essentially moral but have made some mistakes, then the cross merely becomes a stepladder to salvation. On a practical level, it fosters a trust in self for meeting the daily challenges of life and Christian faith. God's grace is not your motivation or driving power, because grace is not savored.
4. How does rejection/ignorance of TD affect a church's message?
The effects will be the same as that of an individual believer: spiritual and doctrinal shallowness, a "feel-good" message, and a neglect of the worshipping of Christ through the magnificent tragedy of the gospel storyline.
Wow! Charlie has done went and opened up the can of worms :-)
Sorry I haven't posted here yet, or on my blog, but I've been in Tennessee for a week and away from a computer. Hope to respond to this soon.
Ross
Drew,
"In my opinion, one's esteem of grace directly correlates to one's understanding of the depth of their sin."
Your point here is well taken and the 'step-ladder' analogy is brilliant. Basically, one is saying who does not believe in TD that "I'm bad, but not that bad. I need a Savior, but only slightly."
In my experience, I have found that this type of thinking seems to permeate throughout Christianity.
This is a good topic. So here's one for you guys, knowing that everyone is either SBC or very familiar with the SBC: how many times have you heard a Southern Baptist pastor/academic/etc., claim to believe in "total depravity," knowing that they would reject the doctrine as it has been historically articulated (including by most Baptists throughout history)?
I think that confusion reigns and when many SBC guys say they affirm the "T", what they really mean is they affirm the universal sinfulness of humanity, which any orthodox Christian of any theological stripe can affirm. But universal sinfulness is not total depravity. Whatcha think?
NAF
Nathan,
That's an interesting and truthful statement. I recall when I was in college or high school that my home church pastor publicly stated from the pulpit that he did not believe in "original sin." What he did believe in, to the best of my understanding, was that we were not born sinners, but we sinned very quickly (if not immediately) after birth. He is not a Calvinist so I took this as his way of stating that he believed in the total depravity of mankind but not through a "sin gene" which if it exists, is a whole 'nother topic.
The way sin is "inherited" is a mystery that my feeble mind cannot grasp. However, I think Nathan raises a valid point.
I think I read in a BP article that 5% of SB pastors "don't know" if they believe in Calvinism or not. The fact that there are pastors who admit that they do not understand the tenets of the doctrines of grace (enough to either accept them or reject them) is scary and I will blame our good 'ol local church autonomy for that problem (whether the blame is warranted or not).
Post a Comment
<< Home