The Cavlinist doctrine of Total Depravity teaches that, because man is dead in sin (“spiritually dead”), he cannot do anything spiritually good before God and thus cannot ever initiate movement toward Him. The reason that anyone is saved, in Calvinism, is because God has predestined them to receive His irresistible grace.
As I’ll attempt to show here, Scripture never says that man’s sin precludes him from reaching out to God. Sin, which was indeed chosen, has clouded man’s vision, however, preventing him from being able to see the true beauty of God. The real enemies are man’s hard-heartedness and ignorance, which are themselves chosen. Therefore, God must reveal Himself before man has any ability to move toward God. But God has revealed Himself to all mankind (Heb. 1:3, Tit. 2:11), and though what is known about God has been made evident, many humans have suppressed the truth and are thus without excuse (Rom. 1:18-23). Furthermore, Jesus is said in Scripture to be the “true light, which enlightens everyone” (John 1:9), a metaphor which draws from a motif in Genesis, showing that Christ brings a “light” to a dark world that displays the very presence of God. Through the power of truth and love, then, Christ also acts to draw all people to himself (John 12:32). And since this prevenient, revelatory grace has been given to all mankind, God commands all people everywhere to repent and believe (Acts 17:30).
If man is totally depraved (i.e. constrained by total inability), God must unilaterally conduct salvation. I grant that. But I do not think this is the case, based on both Scripture and reason. The first step to argue this is to distinguish depravity and inability. Depravity has to do with a person’s sin and moral character, inability has to do with free will (or lack thereof). I believe that humans are depraved, each in his own slightly unique way, in that they have all sinned and their sin puts an estrangement between them and God.
Calvinists use verses like Genesis 6:5 as evidence for Total Depravity. Genesis 6:5 states: “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.” Does this verse describe anything about human ability or inability? Obviously, humans are able to behave sinfully, even constantly. But in the previous chapters, several cases describe people who willingly turned to God and walked with Him (Gen. 4:26, 5:22). And later in the chapter, God sees that the earth has become corrupt, “for all flesh had corrupted their way on earth” (Gen. 6:12). It was the initiation and action of the human agents to corrupt themselves.
It makes even less sense in context to believe God has sovereignly ordained this human corruption, for in verses 6 and 7 God’s response to this great sin in the earth was sorrow and grief in His heart. God “was sorry that he had made man on the earth.”
For a commentary on Genesis 8:21, see my Deliberate Depravity & State of Accountability.
Another verse they often use is Job 15:14: “What is man, that he can be pure? Or he who is born of a woman, that he can be righteous?” This sounds like it’s saying all men cannot help but sin and become impure, but perhaps the context shows otherwise. In verses 12 and 13 Eliphaz asks Job, “Why does your heart carry you away…that you turn your spirit against God and bring such words out of your mouth?” (Of course, Eliphaz’s criticizing question is unfounded, since Job was indeed blameless and upright in God’s sight [Job 1:1].) The question might be taken to express that no man can be pure if he turns his spirit against God.
However, other interpreters see Job’s comforting friends (Eliphaz included) as holding to a presupposition which is false: that God ordains and brings about all things, and does so for specific reasons in certain circumstances. “If everything happened as God willed,” Paul Marston and Roger Forster write, explaining the argument of Job’s friends, “and if he is just, then the innocent could never suffer” (God’s Strategy in Human History, 11). “It was not God,” they point out, “but Satan who initiated Job’s sufferings.”
I suggest that both Job’s and his friends’ words were inspired in the sense that they were recorded accurately (at least so far as Hebrew poetry would allow), but they were not inspired in the sense that God endorsed and sanctioned all of the theology and meaning behind their words. In this case, we may study what Job or his friends meant by saying what they said, but it would be vain to study how it fits into the larger theology of the Old Testament or the Bible as a whole.
(Also, contrast Job 25:4-6 with Psalm 8:3-8.)
Psalm 51:5 reads: “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.” This Psalm was written by David after his sin with Bathsheba. It utilizes poetic language to describe his four part repentance: the first part consists of his acknowledgement of sin (v. 3-6), then pleading for personal renewal (v. 7-12), request for reinstatement of his position as a spiritual leader (v. 13-17), and his plea for blessing on his people (v. 18-19).
Some interpreters suggest that the act of conception itself was sinful, and thus the object of sin in both clauses of the verse is David’s mother. Since David’s mother had unclean relations with the pagan king Nahash before she was married to Jesse, these interpreters suggest that David might have been fathered by Nahash rather than Jesse, which would explain why Jesse did not bring David before Samuel with all his other sons (1 Sam. 16:10-12). This would certainly do justice to the literal meaning of the verse, but it is uncertain as to why David would mention this during his personal repentance.
Another interpretation of Psalm 51:5 is that David used poetic, hyperbolic language at times to express his inner anguish and desire for spiritual renewal. On this view, David is exaggerating his sin to express what he is feeling. After all, several things in Psalm 51 cannot be taken literally. He says in verse 4, “Against you, you only, have I sinned,” but we know that he also sinned against Bathsheba and Uriah. This is poetic exaggeration. We know that being purged with hyssop should not be taken literally, as the only thing that can truly wash away sins is God through the blood of Christ (and even the blood of Christ is a metaphor, of sorts, for the way God goes about forgiving and renewing). Again, this fits a poetic interpretation but not as much a literal one. We probably do not see David’s bones literally rejoicing; rather, this is a metaphor for the joy he wishes to feel again in his inner being when God blesses and favors him.
In this view, being “brought forth in iniquity” and being conceived in sin is simply a hyperbolic metaphor showing David to be a symbol of sin through-and-through. David was also called a man after God’s own heart, though, so it is likely the case that verse 5, too, should be take figuratively rather than literally. It certainly does not seem like David is trying to express a doctrine of total inability here, but rather simply a poetic confession and repentance.
It is likely the case that Psalm 58:3 is using hyperbolic language as well. Its immediate context should be enough to verify this.
Calvinists might also cite Ecclesiastes 7:20: “Surely there is not a righteous man on earth who does good and never sins.” The interpretation Calvinists might come to is that, since there is no righteous man who never sins, man is incapable of denying sin. Of course, the verse does not say anything about ability. It says there is no one righteous who has never sinned. Likewise, Romans 3:10-11 cites the Psalms (14 and 53) to emphasize that there is no one who has done good enough (achieved perfection) or who has never sinned (cf. Jam. 2:10). Moreover, rather than seeking for God, all have turned away from him and become corrupt (language from Psalms 14 and 53). The wordage “turned away” and “become corrupt” implies a moral choice was made, that at some point or points a decision was made to “turn away” from something and “become corrupt” (cf. Gen. 6:12, Is. 53:6). It implies nothing about sin being something that makes up human constitution, or something inborn, rather it implies sin corrupts a person’s character and destroys even the possibility of a proper relationship with God without repentance and faith.
Why would God even look down from heaven on the children of man to se if there are any who understand and act wisely (Ps. 14:2) if He knows it is impossible?
These verses give us assurance that when the Bible calls someone righteous, blameless, or upright (e.g. Job 1:1), it does not necessarily mean they lived sinlessly their entire life. All have sinned, even those who have responded to God’s grace and cleansed themselves of the sins of flesh and mind.
In Jeremiah 13:23, the Lord asks a rhetorical question: “Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard his spots? Then also you can do good who are accustomed to do evil.” The question assumes a negative answer. I will grant that this verse has to do with ability as well as depravity, but this verse should also be interpreted in light of other verses. Earlier in the same chapter, the Lord urges readers to “Hear and give ear, be not proud… Give glory to the Lord your God… But if you will not listen, my soul will weep in secret for your pride; my eyes will weep bitterly and run down with tears, because the Lord’s flock has been taken captive” (Jer. 13:15-17). God urges them to obey and return to Him, but if they refuse, He will weep and mourn. There is a genuine and significant choice in the hands of the people.
Furthermore, in Jeremiah 4:14 God says to Israel, “O Jerusalem, wash your heart from evil, that you may be saved. How long shall your wicked thoughts lodge within you?” This verse, too, has to do with both depravity and ability, as Israel must have the ability to repent and turn if God commands it. That is the point of His question to them. Moreover, God declares to them, “Your ways and your deeds have brought this upon you” (Jer. 4:18), implying that their sin (and the ensuing consequences) could have been avoided.
Perhaps the best way to understand Jeremiah 13:23 is to understand that Israel’s heart had become so hardened to God that they could no longer turn back of their own will, for they had already established their choice in their will. At that point, only God’s interceding discipline would bring them back to Him.
Isaiah 64:6 says “We have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous deeds are like a polluted garment.” This verse, as taken by the Calvinists, is interpreted as prooftext for Total Depravity. Of course, this verse comes in the midst of Isaiah praying to God for instruction and demonstration of His salvation. The reason Israel’s righteous deeds were “like a polluted garment” in God’s sight was that they were being two-faced: making offerings to God and then insulting His name (Is. 65:7). Their good deeds did not come from the heart.
Similarly, no one should interpret verse 7 as teaching that man is incapable of good deeds because God has hidden His face from them, for God explicitly denies that He has hidden Himself from them in Isaiah 65:1-2. Also compare Isaiah 63:17 (humans talking) to Isaiah 65:12 (God talking), where in the latter the Lord affirms that it was not his doing but their own choice to reject his call and go against his desire for them.
What about verse 8?: “But now, O Lord, you are our Father; we are the clay, and you are the potter; we are all the work of your hand.” Does it make sense to say that since Israel was the work of God’s hand, it was God who ultimately caused them to turn to evil? Certainly not! God has spread out His hands all day to a rebellious people, wanting them to return to Him (Is. 65:1-2). Isaiah was praying for His people, for repentance so that His people could become what God had intended them to be, but most of all for God’s mercy. The metaphor of Israel being clay in God’s hands seems deterministic, but it is not used that way elsewhere in the Bible (e.g. Jer. 18).
Mark 7:21-23 reads: “For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.” Again I ask, does this verse pertain to depravity or ability? Most certainly, it pertains to depravity, since it mentions nothing about ability. Rather than proving man incapable of any good, it shows that man is totally responsible for what comes out of him. Jesus is refuting the idea that certain types of food defile a person with the idea that the thing which originates inside a person’s heart is what defiles him (cf. Matt 15:19-20).
As the Preacher from Ecclesiastes said, “God made man upright, but they have sought out many schemes” (Eccl. 7:29). But, the heart, or will, of man is also capable of keeping God’s commands and being committed to God (1 Kings 8:61, 1 Kings 15:14, 2 Kings 20:3, 1 Chron 29:9, Is 38:3, Prov 4:4,21,27). And we know man must obey the gospel out of the heart in order to be saved (Rom 6:17). Clearly, man’s heart is capable of more than evil.
Let’s look at John 3:19-21: “And this is the judgement: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil. For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed. But whoever does what is true comes to the light, so that it may be clearly seen that his works have been carried out in God.” Here, Calvinists reason that since all have sinned (Rom. 3:23), all hate the light.
Furthermore, John emphasizes that no one can come to Jesus “unless the Father who sent me [Jesus] draws him” (6:44) and “unless it is granted him by the Father” (6:65). God is clearly seen as the arbiter and initiator of salvation, and man, as dust, cannot receive a divine gift unless it is given to him from the Divine (John 3:27). But John also emphasizes God’s universal love and desire for all to be saved (John 3:17, 12:32, 16:8-11; 1 John 2:2). Truly, “whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16). Moreover, those who do not believe are repeatedly invited to do so (John 3:16, 18, 36; 7:38; 10:9–10; 11:26).
Man is capable of accepting God only by the gracious work of God, but the decision of whether to follow God or not still rests within them.
For a commentary on John 8:34, Ephesians 2:1-3, Titus 3:3, and other passages on humans being “slaves to sin”, see my Human Nature and Depravity and my “Dead to Sin”. Remember that Paul declares in Romans, “You are slaves to the one whom you obey–whether you are slaves to sin,…or to…righteousness” (Rom. 6:16).
Romans 8:7-8 says, “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.” This is often taken as a prooftext that humans cannot do anything pleasing to God, thus they cannot accept God’s gift of salvation. That is not what the verse implies, however. Verse 6 says that those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the flesh, but those who live according to the spirit set their mind on the spirit. Thus the capability to set one’s mind on the things of the spirit exists. It is impossible to please God only if you have chosen to set your mind on the things of the flesh. Perhaps it is the inclination or the “natural state” of man to set one’s mind on the things of the flesh, but this does not mean it is impossible to choose the spiritual.
And we cannot interpret verse 8 as saying nothing in the flesh can please God, for Christ came in the flesh. Rather, “those who are in the flesh” refers to those who have set their minds on the things of the flesh.
Likewise, 1 Corinthians 2:13-16 distinguishes between the “natural man” and the “spiritual man”. The passage does not require that all humans cannot discern spiritual things, only that the “natural man” (i.e. the man who has set his mind on the things of the flesh) cannot discern them. Without knowledge of God, I will admit, I think the natural state of man is to be locked into the “mind of the flesh”. After all, “how can they believe in him unless they hear about him?” (Rom. 10:14) But I joyously acknowledge that God has made himself known and now commands and wishes for all to come to repentance and saving faith.
2 Corinthians 4:4 and 2 Timothy 2:26 teach that the “god of this world” rules the hearts of non-believers. But even this submission to the devil is consensual and chosen. Paul writes in the previous chapter of 2 Corinthians that Jews still read the books of the law with hardened minds because Moses “put a veil over his face.” But “through Christ is it taken away….when one turns to the Lord, the veil is removed” (2 Cor. 3:12-16). The “veil” is not something forced upon someone which inhibits their ability to humbly submit to God’s free gift of grace. Rather, the “veil” is the religion which the Jews had slowly modified through the centuries, most clearly manifested in the Pharisees, which had lost sight of God’s true purpose for them. When one willingly submits to God as revealed in Christ Jesus, the veil of legalism is removed and true relationship with God can be restored. Through the truth of Christ’s message the veil of legalism is torn down. No one is subjected to the devil completely void of free choice or against their will, even if they were nurtured into believing something false.
Filed under: TULIP
you said: “Jeremiah 4:14…has to do with both depravity and ability, as Israel must have the ability to repent and turn if God commands it.”
really? why “must” they?
here is the real point of contention between calvinists and others. and make no mistake, you are not arguing from scripture here, your foundation is human philosophy, which teaches that, from a moral standpoint “if I’m not capable of A, then you can’t reasonably ask me to do A.”
So you see commands in the bible like “I set before you life and death…choose life…” or “Repent and believe!” and you assume – based on your extrabiblical foundation – that capacity to obey must be implied.
Matt5:48Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
Deut6:5/Matt22:37Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength.
OTOH, you have commands like these which you must similarly conclude that man has the natural capacity to obey…which demonstrates the weakness of your foundation. Can anyone born of a human father possibly obey these commands completely? and if we fail to keep one part of the law, we are guilty of breaking it completely. (Jam2:10)
God is simply not subject to extrabiblical notions of morality to which you subscribe.
You run into an example of this when reading about Pharaoh. The first thing God tells Moses is that Pharaoh will not let the people go until God opens up a can. (exod3:19-20) The story becomes even more problematic because God isn’t gentle and loving toward Pharaoh, but rather hardens him in his opposition…and claims to have raised him up in the first place because his opposition would allow God to display His power. Just kinda “lucky” that God was able to establish the passover/Lord’s supper through Pharaoh’s obstinance? Or if God intended Pharaoh’s opposition all along, does that excuse Pharaoh? Of course not.
Rom9:17For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” 18Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.
19One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?” 20But who are you, O man, to talk back to God?…
This is you in verse 19 – if God wanted pharaoh to sin by opposing Him -if pharaoh could not have done otherwise – if God hardened him rather than simply stepping back and “allowing” him to make a free will choice – then pharaoh cannot be blamed according to human philosophy. you would look at the evidence and judge God as guilty of entrapment. but God is not willing to be constrained by a human verdict.
Dan4:35 All the peoples of the earth are regarded as nothing.
He does as he pleases with the powers of heaven and the peoples of the earth.
No one can hold back his hand or say to him: “What have you done?”
God intended that His Son suffer as a result of perjury and be killed unjustly – He planned it and set it up perfectly. It’s silly to argue that the jews of that time were free to do otherwise. but does that excuse those who participated in His murder or did they need to repent as many of them did when confronted with peter’s preaching?
Acts2:23This man was handed over to you by God’s set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross.
Isa53:10 Yet it was the LORD’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer…
your foundational argument is that pharaoh “must have” had the ability to foil God’s intention…the 1st century jews “must have” been capable of making a lie out of centuries-old prophecy. you might want to take another look at that foundation.
human beings have a limited freedom to do as they want (as calvinists teach) but not the freedom to do anything at all. and if their hearts are as sinful as the bible teaches, then they will never want to follow God unless He acts to soften their hearts. (ezek36:26)
Charles,
You object to the “ought-can” ethical system, saying God is simply not subject to it, yet you really only cite the stories of Pharaoh and Jesus. It’s important to remember that Exodus portrays the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart as attributable both to the work of God and to that of Pharaoh.
Remember, before God said He would harden Pharaoh’s heart, Pharaoh commanded the Hebrew midwives to kill male newborns and when they did not obey, he commanded his own people to do it.
And the initial reason the Egyptians turned against the Israelites was because they feared their numbers and might, not because God hardened them. Pharaoh’s feelings toward the Israelites were not warm and kindly before God hardened his heart.
Even in Exodus 3:19, God does not speak about His action in Pharaoh, He speaks as if He knows Pharaoh’s heart as it already is. In Exodus 4, God says “I will harden his heart” so as to imply a future action, not one which has already occurred.
Based on the Biblical text, the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart was only an assurance that He would refuse to let the Israelites go so that God could show His power in retribution. Pharaoh’s heart was hardened toward the Israelites, which is why he was responsible for his disdain for God’s people.
Careful not to read too much into Acts 2:23. It does not say that God foreordained which exact wicked men would crucify Jesus. It said it was God’s plan for wicked men to crucify Jesus – and they would have to be wicked to crucify the Son of God!
I never said that my foundational argument is for Pharaoh to have free will. I said that humanity, in general, has free will. I think you are universalizing what may be particular cases in Pharaoh and Jesus.
if you interpret 2pet3:9 as teaching that God doesn’t want anyone (such as Pharaoh) to perish, but to come to repentance, then it is a problem for God to harden him to destruction at all.
(maybe not as much of a problem as 1Sam2:25, but still a problem.)
it is also amazing to me that you suggest that God did not foreordain which exact men would crucify Jesus. He knew from the foundation of the world – yet He still created them.
Isa46:10 I make known the end from the beginning, from ancient times, what is still to come.
I say, ‘My purpose will stand, and I will do all that I please.’
Prov16:9 In his heart a man plans his course, but the LORD determines his steps.
Prov16:4 The LORD has made everything for its own purpose, even the wicked for the day of evil. (NASB)
it’s pretty dangerous to suggest that God didn’t really know… (Psa73:11)
and the bible doesn’t teach that anyone has “free will.” as spurgeon put it in his sermon “free will – a slave”: “The will is well known by all to be directed by the understanding, to be moved by motives, to be guided by other parts of the soul, and to be a secondary thing.”
OTOH, you imagine that a person who is allergic to shellfish is just as likely to order shrimp as anyone else. someone who hates Jesus is just as likely to follow Him as someone who loves Him. our wills are just “free” to choose anything for no reason…
the bible does teach that we are free to choose what we want. BUT what we want is determined by our understanding, our emotions, our nature…in other words, “who we are.”
Matt7:16By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 33Make a tree good and its fruit will be good, or make a tree bad and its fruit will be bad, for a tree is recognized by its fruit.
Luke6:43No good tree bears bad fruit, nor does a bad tree bear good fruit. 44Each tree is recognized by its own fruit. People do not pick figs from thornbushes, or grapes from briers. 45The good man brings good things out of the good stored up in his heart, and the evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in his heart. For out of the overflow of his heart his mouth speaks.
James3:10Out of the same mouth come praise and cursing. My brothers, this should not be. 11Can both fresh water and salt water flow from the same spring? 12My brothers, can a fig tree bear olives, or a grapevine bear figs? Neither can a salt spring produce fresh water.
This is the teaching about our nature, which goes along with this teaching:
Jer13:23 Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard its spots? Neither can you do good who are accustomed to doing evil.
of course, God does not have to “turn people evil.” that is how they have been born since the time of adam.
Gen6:5The LORD saw how great man’s wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time.
Gen8:21The LORD smelled the pleasing aroma and said in his heart: “Never again will I curse the ground because of man, even though every inclination of his heart is evil from childhood.
but we do need God to make us new.
pharaoh was free to do what he wanted, which was to oppose God. God was free to harden him in that choice.
paul was free to “breathe out murderous threats” and plan to imprison or kill every christian he found. God was even more free to actively mercy paul (Rom9:18) rather than harden him in his disobedience, and take out his rock-solid heart and replace it with a heart of flesh and cause him to turn and obey. (ezek36)
paul had zeal without knowledge (gal1:14) exactly like a lot of his kinsman (rom10:2) – yet God dealt with them differently (john12:39-40; luke10:21)
, based on His sovereign freedom to choose.
the amazing thing is that God chooses any of us, as none of us sought Him – all have turned away. (rom3)
1Cor1:26 Brothers and sisters, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth. 27 But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. 28 God chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things—and the things that are not—to nullify the things that are, 29 so that no one may boast before him. 30 It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus…
sounds pretty universal to me…
Charles -
Firstly, I interpret 2 Peter 3:9 as teaching that God’s character is love (1 John 4:8), and this agape love is impartial (Acts 10:34-35, Rom. 2:11) and universal (1 Tim. 2:3-4). Secondly, I don’t interpret the God’s action of hardening Pharaoh’s heart to be eternal, but temporary, in nature. He was not necessarily condemning Pharoah to hell this particular instance.
Careful in tossing around verses, like 1 Samuel 2:25. God’s will here is not represented as being a decree from eternity past. It was the will of the Lord to put them [Eli's sons] to death because of their willful rejection of him. See Jer. 18 and Ezek. 18.
You suggest that God knew from before the foundation of the world which exact men would crucify Jesus. You scolded me earlier about philosophical presuppositions, but here I’ll push you about it: where do you find the idea that God exhaustively knows the future (and thus which exact men would crucify Jesus) in the Bible?
Please see my post “Types of Prophecy” because any argument I give would be from it. And as a response to your comments about human freedom, see my “Biblical Case for Free Will”.
You say “of course, God does not have to “turn people evil.” that is how they have been born since the time of adam.”
If you would, please point me to where you get this notion from Scripture. And then explain what you believe the essence of sin and evil to be.
Btw, John 12:40 quotes Isaiah 6:10, in which God is merely confirming the state of Israel’s heart in order to ultimately discipline them.
Another btw, you mentioned God having sovereign freedom. And I do believe God is both sovereign and free. But I often hear Calvinists using “sovereign” as a prefix to myriad things about God: sovereign grace, sovereign choice, sovereign freedom, sovereign love. Why choose the word “sovereign” to convey your belief that God determines everything from a divine decree established before creation?
Granted, Acts 4:24 mentions God as sovereign in relation to His creatorship, but that is likely referring to God’s kingship over creation and no implication of an eternal divine decree is made. 1 Timothy 6:15 also uses it in relation to kingship without mention of any eternal decrees. The only other usage in the New Testament (to my knowledge) is Revelation 6:10, in which believers ask God how long He will withhold judgement – judgement being a kingly task.
re: “It was the will of the Lord to put them [Eli's sons] to death because of their willful rejection of him.”
that’s actually the complete reverse of what the verse states.
His sons, however, did not listen to their father’s rebuke (and repent), for it was the LORD’s will to put them to death.
the verse teaches that the sons did not heed their father and repent because God wanted to put them to death.
so you conclude that God put them to death because they wouldn’t repent. that’s interesting…
God was free to mercy saul despite his similarly willful rejection. God is not limited to a response action…He was free to judge them or free to be patient with them – and remove their hardened hearts and replace them with soft hearts that would repent of their former actions (ezek36).
re: “where do you find the idea that God exhaustively knows the future in the Bible?”
i already listed a few verses, but here are a few more. sounds like you are actually eager to affirm psa73:11 which limits the discussion a bit…
Matt10:29 Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground outside your Father’s will.
Psa33:10 The LORD foils the plans of the nations; he thwarts the purposes of the peoples.
11 But the plans of the LORD stand firm forever, the purposes of his heart through all generations.
re: “You say “of course, God does not have to “turn people evil.” that is how they have been born since the time of adam.”…If you would, please point me to where you get this notion from Scripture.”
i did – not sure how much more clear “every inclination of the thoughts of men were only evil all the time” needs to be.
in our natural born state, we only desire to please ourselves. dying to ourselves and bowing to the Son are completely undesirable.
Eph2:1As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, 2in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. 3All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath.
1Cor2:14The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.
Why choose the word “sovereign” to convey your belief that God determines everything from a divine decree established before creation?
He “works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will…and predestined us according to His plan” Eph1:11 and Dan4:35 as mentioned above.
Psa135:6 The LORD does whatever pleases him, in the heavens and on the earth, in the seas and all their depths.
not sure what word would be better suited to One completely above us who does as He pleases with the powers of heaven and peoples of earth and works out everything in space and time in order to suit Himself.
i’ll go look at your “Biblical Case for Free Will”…
I would agree with your interpretation of 1 Sam. 2:25 if I was looking at this verse only without its context. But I believe the context shows otherwise.
Certainly God was judging Eli’s sons because they were sinful (1 Sam. 2:12). But God’s judgement/purpose to kill them did not precede their wickedness. Rather, their wickedness is the purpose for God’s resolution that they should be put to death. God hardened them to their father’s voice only after He saw their sin.
Furthermore, it is important to note that God was in effect choosing Samuel over Eli’s sons for the role of a prophet. Eli, too, was cursed by God for his sin (1 Sam. 3:13) but despite this he never fell away from God (1 Sam. 4:18).
It is also important to note that God changes His mind in response to Eli and his sons’ sins (1 Sam. 2:30-34). First God promised that they shall “go in an out before me forever” but in response to their sin He curses them.
I do not see how Matt 10:29 or Ps. 33:10-11 teach a doctrine of exhaustive divine foreknowledge. I understood you might be using them to argue everything that happens is God’s will, which I think would be stretching the intent of those verses quite a bit.
In response to my question, you cite Gen. 6:5. But this verse is simply talking about the state of the generation of that time. There are exceptions which prove that man is not sinful by necessity (Enoch in Gen. 5:24 and Noah in Gen. 6:9). Moreover, the earth was corrupt “for all flesh had corrupted their way on the earth” (Gen. 6:12).
Rather than responding feebly here to Ephesians 2, I would point you to my post “Dead in Sin” where I have a more fully fleshed out argument.
yep – your “Biblical Case for Free Will” is purely based on the assumption that if God commands something, then it must be possible based on human moral teaching about “ought/can” – and predictably, you left out these verses as examples:
Matt5:48Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
Deut6:5/Matt22:37Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength.
the assumption that “if God commands something, then He must not already know the outcome” is even more problematic.
you say that “This, of course, in no way implies that God is ultimately responsible for everything in creation. ”
yet when job says that God was as responsible for his pain as He was for job’s blessings – “the Lord gives and takes away” – the bible tells us that job did not sin in saying so. that was not a false accusation.
when God comes to answer job after job fell into questioning His justice, what does He say? “it’s not my fault? i only ‘allowed’ the bad things to happen?” nope – He says, “who are you to judge me?” (again, this is the exact same answer given in rom9:20.)
that answer is not satisfying to you – you hate it – but it is biblical…
First of all, I certainly do not hate any answers the Bible gives. I merely disagree with you about what the Bible says.
I didn’t include Matt 5:48, but I could have, along with Gen. 17:1, Deut. 6:5, and Deut. 18:13. God does command moral perfection of the heart, but He also supplies the ability to achieve it (1 Cor. 10:13).
Yes, I do follow an “ought-can” ethical system, because that seems to be the most natural way to read the Bible. Do you wish to argue that all moral commands in the Bible are merely God teasing us? That is an incredibly unnatural interpretation of all these verses.
But only some of the verses I cited follow this idea. All the verses about Zedekiah and Rehoboam were about man’s control over the moral state of his heart.
About Job, he is not suffering because God wants to chasten him or because of his own sin but because Satan is being allowed to afflict one of God’s blameless and upright servants. Satan suggested that God should “put forth his hand” to afflict Job but there is no indication that He actually does so. Because he never knew about the meeting in heaven between Satan and God, Job mistakenly attributes his suffering to God rather than Satan.
And the Bible does not say Job “did not sin” in saying that God gives and takes away. It says “In all this [his sudden afflictions] Job did not sin or charge God with wrong” (Job 1:22).