The Theological Trifecta: Original Sin / Sin Nature /Total ... · PDF fileThe Theological...

Christians Promoting Revival

1

The Theological Trifecta: Original Sin / Sin Nature /Total Depravity

By: Bruce Moylan Introduction Some of the most commonly accepted sets of beliefs in the Christian faith are that of Original Sin (OS) and the subordinate doctrines of Sin Nature (SN) and the Total Depravity (TD) of man. The teachings of St. Augustine and the works of John Calvin and other protestant reformers have heavily influenced our current understanding of these three concepts. These doctrines are coupled together in this one paper due to their interrelated nature. This paper will delve into these doctrines to see if they can withstand thorough hermeneutical scrutiny. One may understand this relationship in this way:

Basically, man was not initially created with these impediments to holiness, but we inherited them from Adam once he became tainted with sin. Sin reeked in his body such a tsunami of sin that it has carried undiluted to every member of the human race. Every person born post-Adam does not have the level playing field that God had created initially, but is now placed on a cliff so steep that falling to our death is assured. Only by the miraculous intervention of Christ can anyone arrest this freefall into Hell. The relationship between these doctrines can be seen to combine at the headwaters of the Garden of Eden. All three of these debilitating effects on Mankind were initiated due to the Fall of Adam in the Garden. Upon Adam’s sin, his body was changed in such a way as that all of his offspring inherited a crooked and depraved nature that would most assuredly carry them into the depths of sin. This nature would be so complete that everything that they would ever do would not lead them to God, but to drive them farther and farther from Him and His holiness. This depravity would make any righteous act a total impossibility. So complete is this depravity that no man even has the ability to seek God as seeking God would be a good thing. Even if God offered salvation to such an individual, no one would have the ability to accept this offer. This doctrine is the reason why Calvinists believe in “Irresistible Grace” or the “I” in TUPIP. Here man cannot seek God. It is not that they will not, but that they cannot. Therefore, God must intervene and change man before they can come to him. As salvation is “all of God”, God sovereignly decides to change some, and lets the others go unchanged. The others will speed recklessly into Hell without a second thought. These sad fellows have an incurable birth defect and are unable to accept or even comprehend God’s call, but God sends them to Hell anyway.


2

If this wasn’t a grim enough situation to find ourselves in, we got another serious issue to deal with, Original Sin. This doctrine states that not only was Adam guilty for disobeying God, but that God will hold every single one of his offspring guilty also. Talk about a gift that keeps on giving! Therefore, even before you are born and have a chance to exercise your totally depraved sin nature thereby becoming guilty all by yourself, you are already a sinner and worthy of Hell. Yes, even before you exit your mother’s womb, your destiny is Hell. Before you breathe your first breath, your fate has already been determined. The realities of these doctrines taken together are that you have three strikes against you as soon as your father’s sperm inseminates your mother’s egg. No human stands a chance of finding God. Unless God chooses you apart from anything you have done and converts you (remember as you are totally depraved, you haven’t done a single righteous thing before God, therefore God’s choice has nothing to do with what you have or haven’t done), you do not have the ability to choose Him. Theologians will tell us that this is simply what happened when Adam sinned. All I can say is wow, what a bum deal! And all I read that God did to Adam in Genesis was curse the ground. I know that I tend to have a small, insignificant, hardly noticeable sarcastic streak, but I have to ask if all of this was true, don’t you think something might have been recorded in the Bible at the time? These are some pretty serious penalties to be levied without comment. It makes me think anyhow. But then again, it doesn’t take too much for that. As I proceed I will treat OS, and then SN and TD together to hopefully make it easier for the reader to digest the pros and cons of each doctrine. Finally, this introduction addresses the orthodox understanding of these doctrines. This doesn’t mean that everyone who now ascribes to them would hold with these definitions but this is what they will teach in the seminaries. In Christianity today, there exists an endless smorgasbord of views on these topics as many just make stuff up as they go along; therefore, one paper simply cannot address all of them. I will mention some modifications that people have introduced in each section as best I know. I have found however that most start out with the orthodox view and make modifications as they find out the problems that the orthodox view creates. Basically, if one is not a five point Calvinist, modifications are required in order to hold any of these doctrines. Arminianist believers may also pick and choose which ones they believe and modify. My hope is that the reader will conclude at the end of this paper that these doctrines are too flawed to be salvaged with any modification. Not to jump to the punch line, but I believe these doctrines seriously impugn the character and wisdom of God and if they are not blasphemous, they border on it. I do not make this charge lightly, so I hope that the reader will move on to see if I can make my case.

Original Sin The basics of this doctrine are that the sin of Adam has been passed down to all humanity. We are not born righteous or innocent, we are all born sinners. (In Adam all sinned.) As the trite expression goes, “We aren’t sinners because we have sinned; we sin because we are sinners.” This cleanly establishes why “no one is righteous”, and why everyone will go to Hell outside a saving relationship with Jesus Christ. Let me list some of the most classic proof texts for this view.


3

Psalm 51:5 Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me. Romans 5:12, 18-19 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned. Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men. For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous. Exodus 20:5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me Numbers 14:18 'The LORD is slow to anger, abounding in love and forgiving sin and rebellion. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation. I have always found St. Augustine’s view of these last two Scriptures as fascinating. When asked how God could be loving for punishing us for our sins, those of Adam, as well as our Father, Grand Father, Great Grandfather, and Great Great Grandfather, Augustine would say: “God should punish us for every sin our ancestors ever committed since the Fall, but in love he only punishes us in Hell for the sins of just three to four generations.” Wow, with such love before me, pardon me as I need to wipe a tear from my eye. So with these verses, the reader can see that the concept of Original Sin is certainly Biblically based. However, the real question is not if one can find a handful of proof texts to support a given thesis, but is that thesis hermeneutically sound. Let’s start looking at this to find out. Is Original Sin True to Scripture? I am not going to take up a significant amount of the reader’s time showing how each of the above listed Scriptures does not have to mean what it may appear to state at first glance. It would take a while to build up a convincing case for the reader to see that these verses should most likely be viewed in a different light. If someone wants to ask any questions on these verses however, I would be delighted to engage, but as many of my papers are more than 30 pages in length, I thought that I would at least try and keep this one a little shorter. (You can thank me later. �)


4

The point however is that I do not need to address all of the proof texts of opposing side, but as they make certain positive assertions, I can merely show that the assertions are incorrect. What then do we do with these verses? If the assertions cannot be supported, then we are obviously viewing these passages out of context. We may not know the correct context, but we can know that they cannot mean what people say they do. Here I will demonstrate (hopefully) that there is enough Biblical support for one to see that the interpretation one might jump to as a gentile living in the 21st century, might not have been the way the Jews viewed the same words. So now, let’s look at some other Scriptures. Ezekiel 18:1-4 The word of the LORD came to me: "What do you people mean by quoting this proverb about the land of Israel: " 'The fathers eat sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge'? "As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, you will no longer quote this proverb in Israel. For every living soul belongs to me, the father as well as the son—both alike belong to me. The soul who sins is the one who will die. The reader really needs to read the entire eighteenth chapter to see the entire power of this point, but this section is good enough for now. Here we see that God is rather upset that the Jews appear to believe in something akin to Original Sin. They keep saying that God will judge the children for the sins of their fathers. God appears not to like this expression at all, and goes on to instruct the people through the prophet Ezekiel that they are to no longer use this expression. My interpretation on why God did this was because this very notion impugned his character and he was tired of it and demanded it stop. Then God goes on to innumerate that on the contrary, only the person who committed the sin will die. Their offspring will not suffer the same fate unless they perform the same deeds. The eighteenth chapter of Ezekiel appears to completely refute the commonly held doctrine of Original Sin. (As a hint, when God says that he will judge the children for the sins of their fathers in the OS proof texts above, ask yourself if this must be literal or can God be speaking figuratively in an effort to demonstrate how magnificent his compassion was in relation to his wrath.) Jeremiah 31:29-30 In those days people will no longer say, 'The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge.' Instead, everyone will die for his own sin; whoever eats sour grapes—his own teeth will be set on edge. Here again we see the same thing repeated. Now how can one harmonize these clear and emphatic statements with the doctrine under review? Here we have God himself telling the people to stop saying these things. Are they true, but God doesn’t want anyone to find out? Psalm 8:2 From the lips of children and infants you have ordained praise �

Now isn’t this a rather unique ability from sinful children with totally depraved natures? One may think that praising God would be “good”, but we actually know from our theology that this


5

must be “bad”. Remember, unregenerated man can do nothing good. Next we see Jesus adding a bit of power to this verse by quoting it. Matthew 21:15-17 But when the chief priests and the teachers of the law saw the wonderful things he did and the children shouting in the temple area, "Hosanna to the Son of David," they were indignant. “Do you hear what these children are saying?" they asked him. "Yes," replied Jesus, "have you never read, " 'From the lips of children and infants you have ordained praise'?" Isn’t it amazing that God is so resourceful that he can use wicked and depraved children to perceive who Jesus was and was fulfilling the Scripture written in Psalms? (Sorry, I just couldn’t resist that bit of sarcasm!) I Corinthians 14:20 Brothers, stop thinking like children. In regard to evil be infants, but in your thinking be adults. Here we see that Paul is stating that it isn’t wise to think like children, but in regards to evil, we are to be like children. Well how can this be if all children are born sinful? Is Paul telling us that we need to be sinful in regards to evil? How hard is this? It is hoped that one can see here that Paul believes little children to be innocent; therefore we need also to be innocent in regards to evil. We are not to mimic them in regards to thought because clearly adults have more rational understanding of things then children do and this is good. However, when it comes to innocence, be like a child. Matthew 18:2-4 He called a little child and had him stand among them. And he said: "I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. If there is one thing that we can all probably agree on is that if anyone knew for a fact whether Original Sin was truth or fiction, it had to be Jesus. Here he seems to indicate that in order to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, we need to “change” and “become” like little children. Then he goes on to say that this child standing before him would be great in the Kingdom of Heaven. Now how could Jesus say such a thing about a sinful utterly depraved individual? Did Jesus covert him on the spot just to make an example? This makes no sense as he could have converted an adult. Why did he choose a child? I hope that in this section the reader may understand that the foundation for the doctrine of Original Sin is far from a slam dunk. There are significant issues to be answered before one can claim that this doctrine is Biblically accurate. With this foundation laid, let’s use some of our other hermeneutical tools. Is Original Sin True to Reason?

1. One inescapable conclusion of Original Sin is that all babies who die go to Hell. Therefore every mother who aborts her child is sending them to eternal torment. Every


6

child who dies in their crib is Satan’s slave. Calvinists try to get around this by saying that only the unelected infants who die go to Hell. God does ordain some for heaven; therefore in their minds they have salvaged the reputation of God. Well isn’t this heart warming? God does send most infants to Hell, but not all. Now that sets so much better in my spirit. (sarcasm implied)

I would hope that anyone who is reading this would recoil at such a thought. How could a good God send infants to Hell? Every fiber in my being recoils at such a notion. To me this would make God to be a monster. Can one see why this doctrine can be taken to impugn the character of God?

2. The next quagmire that doctrine brings to the table is that the only way around God not

sending infants to Hell is that there must be two ways of being saved. This really sends some strong reverberations into the Christian community. You see if God lets infants into heaven who have already been counted as having sinned, then by what mechanism does he do so? He cannot claim that they accepted Jesus as their personal Lord and Savior as they haven’t even figured out how to roll over yet. If God can give them a pass on it, then God doesn’t treat OS the same as all the other sins. Therefore, from my perspective, the only safe theological position to have if you ascribe to Original Sin is that babies do in fact go to Hell. Anything else makes matters worse. If anyone can develop a mechanism for God to forgive this sin without it making the entire doctrine meaningless, I would be glad to hear it.

3. Why don’t we see this stated at the Fall?

Genesis 3:17-19 To Adam he said, "Because you listened to your wife and ate from the tree about which I commanded you, 'You must not eat of it,' "Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat of it all the days of your life. It will produce thorns and thistles for you, and you will eat the plants of the field. By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return." This verse is all that is written about what God did to Adam as a result of the Fall. I see no reference at all about his genes changing, and his sin being imparted to all of his progeny. While this is certainly not a fool proof argument, it does seem rather strange to me that this shattering impact on all of humanity is simply not even mentioned. God deems it fitting to discuss with Adam and have forever recorded in the Bible that the ground was now cursed so that Adam would have to toil endlessly in order to produce his food, yet we don’t see a mention about every man and woman from this moment on being cursed? These priorities seem a bit strange to me.

4. Next we must look into the possible mechanisms whereby sin may be transferred from generation to generation. As the only thing that our parents give us is a portion of their DNA, it must follow that Original Sin is somehow contained in our genes (more on this will be discussed later). Just like any genetic defect, we can see that Original Sin must be


7

some sort of genetic mutation. Maybe we can call this the first known disease? However, the problem here is that God would send us to eternal torment for a genetic malfunction that He actually designed into Adam? This sounds to me like passing the buck. God designs a flawed system whereby one bug get infinitely replicated bringing the entire machine down to ruin. This sounds like a bad design to me.

5. Problems also arise when we look at how the Bible defines a sinful act. First, sin is a

moral choice. A person sins when they know what is right, but choose to do what is wrong. I know that this is maybe a simple view of sin, but hopefully we can agree that this is sin in its essence. So how can a moral choice be inherited? This puzzle only gets worse when we start to develop our Christology. We see in Hebrews that Jesus had to be exactly like us in order to offer up the Atonement. Hebrews 2:14-17 Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might destroy him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil— and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death. For surely it is not angels he helps, but Abraham's descendants. For this reason he had to be made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people. I hope that it is obvious that Jesus did not have Original Sin, a Sin Nature, or was Totally Depraved. If we cannot agree on this please stop reading here. However, how could he miss such monumental obstacles to holiness and still be said to be like us in “every way:”? To me this seems to give Jesus a decided advantage over the rest of us do you agree? As Jesus was a descendant of Adam, how did he miss the trifecta of depravity? Next we see: Hebrews 4:15 For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet was without sin. Now I am sorry, but if these doctrines are true, I just cannot buy that Jesus was tempted “just as we are”. To me, either all of these doctrines are wrong, or this is a crock. I am born steeped in sin, my nature has been so totally corrupted that I cannot even seek God, yet Jesus is spared all of this and gets to say that he knows how hard it is? To me this is the height of hypocrisy. If the reader can show me how these doctrines can be true and how these passages can be understood without impugning the character and truthfulness of God, I would be grateful.

Because of this problem, theologians have resorted to all sorts of mental gymnastics to avoid these obvious problems. There are the two main ways that theologians through the ages have used to dodge this bullet. I will characterize them as the Catholic Method, and the Protestant Method.


8

The Catholic Method All theologians understand that no matter what they say in regards to any of these three doctrines, that none of them can apply to Jesus. It just wouldn’t do to say that Christ had a sin nature or was totally depraved. Somehow the mechanism that produced Jesus must somehow bypass all of these things. The problem still holds however, that he cannot then be tempted just like us, but that isn’t’ the problem at hand. We all know that Jesus didn’t have an earthly father. Therefore, it can be reasoned that Jesus was not corrupted with Original Sin, Sin Nature, or Total Depravity by the action of the Holy Spirit. Therefore, the only way remaining to inheriting these attributes would be through his mother Mary. The Catholics deftly eliminate this possibility by inventing the concept of the Immaculate Conception. You see, that God sovereignly had Mary conceived with out any of these attributes also. This miracle of God is as stunning as it is undocumented. However, needing documentation to develop doctrine has never been an impediment to the Catholic Church before, and therefore this is no big deal. So there we have it, Jesus did not inherit these things as God doesn’t have them, and God created Mary not to have them either! The one problem comes in however when one reasons if God could just dispense with all of these things for Mary, then why doesn’t he do it for everyone? I hope the reader can see that no matter how you try to dodge these bullets, you just line yourself up for another shot. The Protestant Method The Protestants must modify the Catholic model because they tend to stick a bit closer to the Scriptures when they develop doctrine. (I hope that this doesn’t come across as sarcastic, it is simply true. Any fair reading of Catholic doctrines will quickly see that this is a fact.) Since the Immaculate Conception of Mary isn’t mentioned in the Bible, the Protestants cannot use this as a method of avoiding the sinful trio from being imparted to Jesus. No, instead the Protestants take the logical approach. As Jesus had an earthly mother and the Holy Spirit as his father, then it is obvious that all of our depravity is inherited from the man. You see, Adam sinned and therefore the curse comes from him! No need to introduce Mary into the mix, as she doesn’t play a role. So while everyone has these sinful qualities, only the man passes his on to the next generation. The mother’s traits must be passive. Therefore while girls can inherit sin, they cannot pass it on. Only the man can pass it on from generation to generation. Such a concept would be sure to place a smile on any feminist’s face. As this approach may have proven useful in years gone by, it hardly holds any water today. With all of our understanding and knowledge of the genetic code, this concept is simply not viable. So here we see what the best minds of the past have developed in


9

regards to these questions, and the reader can decide if they are sound enough to believe. For me they look more like a drowning man gasping for air. The interesting thing here however is that as time goes on the foundations to these doctrines decay and collapse, but somehow the doctrine lives on. I call this theological levitation. It is held up without any visible support. The reason for this is that most Christians are completely ignorant of the foundations and the reasons for their beliefs. This is a major problem. We believe things to be true without any evidence. This is by and large why most non-Christians believe that we are gullible, fools. We swallow absurdity without even gagging. It is certainly time were we must know why we believe what we believe. We cry foul when evolution books teach our children out of date “facts” that were disproved years ago, but we are guilty of the same thing. The reason for this paper is in fact to lay bare the theological underpinnings of these doctrines. It is my hope that the best way to change your mind is simply to teach you the foundations of your own doctrines.

6. Original Sin also seems to me to impugn God’s intelligence from a basic level. Any

engineer worth his paycheck would not build a system whereby a single fault would cause catastrophic failure to the entire system. No, we do fault tree analyses to identify such single point failures, and design in systems such that such an event can be avoided. If part “A” breaks, then the system can be rerouted around this and have the system still functional. We see this in aircraft design with double and triple redundancy of critical systems.

The problem comes in however that if man understands this basic concept of robust design, then what about God? It shouldn’t be too much of a controversial statement to say that God doesn’t want people to go to Hell. Therefore, he must have clearly understood that Adam had the ability to sin, and what would happen if he did. I think that in light of this, a wise designer would not have built in this mechanism, but would have designed around it. If God knew that one sin would propagate downstream endlessly reeking havoc on the system and causing all ruin, and he did nothing to prevent it, a case could be made that God was either unwise, or he wanted this outcome. Clearly either of these alternatives should be soundly rejected by any Believer. Therefore, how can we get around impugning God’s intelligence? I simply do not know.

Is Original Sin True to Life? Finally, we must ask ourselves if we live as if OS is true, or do we deny it with our everyday existence? You see, no matter how much you tell yourself that you believe something, if you cannot be consistent with it in your everyday life, it is simply an unworkable abstract thought. For OS to be true to life, we would have to deem it acceptable to hold a child responsible for the crimes of their parents, grandparents, etc. We would send them to jail without a moment’s hesitation. No mercy would be extended to these vile sinners. Would you consider doing this an unconscionable act? Saddam Hussein recently horrified the world when they discovered that he not only killed dissidents, but also their wives, children and close relatives. The doctrine of Original Sin says that God does the same thing. Is this the light by which we want the unsaved


10

world to view our Father? How can one harmonize a God of love, and a God who would do such a thing? I personally cannot fathom how OS can be true to life. It casts God in a very unfavorable light and adds him to the company of some of the world’s worst criminals. For these reasons, I must deny the truth of this doctrine. If the reader has a different way of looking at this that salvages God’s reputation, I would surely entertain your ideas.

Sin Nature and Total Depravity Now let’s look at the foundations for the tag team doctrines of SN and TD. Here we are taught that we have an inbred nature that is opposed to God. We have a desire to sin from the womb and despite our parents best efforts; we are simply monsters in the making. We are so evil in fact that we cannot even do a single righteous thing in God’s eyes. Everything we do simply delves us deeper and deeper into sinful lusts and passions. On the surface, things seem pretty grim. Well let’s look at some proof texts that will bring us to the brink of this sad “truth”. Ephesians 2:3 All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts.

Romans 7:18-20 I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it. I don’t really want to put in much commentary here in the pro-sin nature proof texts, but when I read this my mind automatically jumps to the sound like Flip Wilson’s voice saying his famous tag line, “The Devil made me do it!” If we just take the simple surface reading of this verse, Paul seems to be in total denial and claiming that he is unaccountable. “Don’t blame me; it was sin that did it!” I hope that it is obvious that such a fanciful interpretation simply cannot be true. It is left up the reader to search for a more acceptable interpretation of this verse. If you get stuck, please contact me. Romans 3:9-18 Not at all! We have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under sin. As it is written: "There is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God. All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one." "Their throats are open graves; their tongues practice deceit." ”The poison of vipers is on their lips." "Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness." "Their feet are swift to shed blood; ruin and misery mark their ways, and the way of peace they do not know." “There is no fear of God before their eyes."


11

(Reference Psalms 14:1-3; 53:1-3; Eccles. 7:20, Psalm 5:9, Psalm 140:3, Psalm 10:7, Isaiah 59:7-8, Psalm 36:1. Paul strings all of these OT passages together to make a point. The problem is that all of these are pasted together and the reader loses the original context that the Jews would have had as they knew the OT. Be very careful with this verse.) Isaiah 64:6 All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags; we all shrivel up like a leaf, and like the wind our sins sweep us away. Psalm 58:3 Even from birth the wicked go astray; from the womb they are wayward and speak lies. I really like this last one. To use this as a proof text would require you to claim that somehow babies speak lies from the womb. If you feel that this must be taken literally, I would love to hear from you and I promise not to laugh. So here again we see that these doctrines are Biblically based. This shouldn’t be too surprising as few Christians would believe such things without at least some level of Biblical support. The strong point however to these beliefs for most people; however, is not their Scriptural backing, but the overwhelming consensus we see in everyday life. Everyone sees the world around them rushing towards iniquity. We see teenage rebellion, a complete breakdown of the family and the moral restraints of society, and it is just easy to believe that these doctrines are true. One may say that on a certain level, these doctrines may be true to life. Our pastor has a saying that you can see sin nature easily demonstrated by placing two small children in a room with one toy. I believe that everyone could predict the result of such an event. However, does this really prove SN or TD? For this to be true, the children in this instance would have to be sinning. Is this even possible with small children? Are we saying that they are sinning before their brains are developed enough to say “momma”? This is where we all must first understand what sin is before we can go about labeling it. I agree with John when he says: I John 5:17 All wrongdoing is sin, and here is a sin that does not lead to death. While I could delve into a good rabbit trail here, I think that it is enough for the reader to see that God doesn’t place all sins into the same category. There is a sin that does not lead to death. Now to not let the reader hang, I will give you my Reader’s Digest version of how I view this verse. Yes, children can do wrong, and that wrong is a sin in God’s eyes, but God does not count that wrongdoing against the child because they have not yet perceived right and wrong. While it is a “sin” in an absolute sense (it was wrong), it is not sin in a relative sense when God views the individual. Therefore while a 3 year-old hitting his older brother in the head with a toy sword for teasing him is wrong, God does not hold this against his child forever damning him to Hell.


12

However, if the brother is now 18 and uses a real sword, this would be a different story. Can the reader see that we make these judgments all the time? This is the reason why we have a juvenile court system and why all mentally handicapped people will walk straight into heaven. Find yourself a child afflicted with Downs Syndrome and you are gazing at a future inhabitant of heaven, not some completely wicked being. What sort of monster would send a mentally handicapped child to Hell? Now, from this vantage point, do we really believe that sin can be transferred like some sort of commodity? Can a small child sin? If so, then all small children must go to Hell if they die. Do children have a special place in God’s heart and Kingdom? Isaiah 7:14-16 Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel. He will eat curds and honey when he knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right. But before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste. Here we see in the prophecy of Isaiah, that there would be a time when Jesus would not know enough to reject the wrong or choose the right. So was the entire Atonement hanging in the balance until Jesus got his first real clue? Did the Father have to control him like some robot just to be sure he didn’t do something unwise? What would have happened if he would have sinned before he knew not to? Clearly this cannot be the case. Jesus could not have sinned in this time due to the fact that he did not have sufficient mental capacity to decide intelligently. Therefore, could Jesus have whacked Jude or James over the head with a stick when Mary wasn’t looking? This passage seems to indicate that “yes” would be the correct answer. Only after he “knew” could he “choose” and therefore become either guilty or righteous. Many people get confused on this issue and think that children are either good or bad. Such is not the case. Until the “age of accountability” they are neither. All children up to the point where their minds are formed sufficiently to comprehend “good” and “evil” are innocent or morally neutral. Now I know that some may say that the age of accountability is no where found in Scripture. This would be true if one required that it had to be explicitly stated before a doctrine could be true, but using this hallmark for truth, then the Trinity, God’s Omnipotence, Omnipresence, and Omniscience wouldn’t be true either. Have you ever read in the Bible that God is Transcendent? With this said, let’s look into the age of accountability to see if it can be Biblically supported. If it can be, then SN and TD must be false or these sinful proclivities must hibernate until adolescence before springing to life. This would of course require theologians to wade into an area that even they haven’t delved into yet. I hope that everyone may now start to see that SN and TD are clearly misplaced when addressing children. Numbers 14:27-33 "How long will this wicked community grumble against me? I have heard the complaints of these grumbling Israelites. So tell them, 'As surely as I live, declares the LORD, I will do to you the very things I heard you say: In this desert your bodies will fall—every one of you twenty years


13

old or more who was counted in the census and who has grumbled against me. Not one of you will enter the land I swore with uplifted hand to make your home, except Caleb son of Jephunneh and Joshua son of Nun. As for your children that you said would be taken as plunder, I will bring them in to enjoy the land you have rejected. But you—your bodies will fall in this desert. Your children will be shepherds here for forty years, suffering for your unfaithfulness, until the last of your bodies lies in the desert. Are we to believe that not a single child under the age of 20 grumbled against God? What wonderful children! So here we see that God treated people differently and he categorized them by age. The younger people were not judged while the older ones were. Is this some sort of a double standard or is there more at work here? Romans 7:9-10 For apart from law, sin is dead. Once I was alive apart from law; but when the commandment came, sin sprang to life and I died. I found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life actually brought death. So is Paul advocating someone who lost their salvation, or someone who reached an age whereby he finally understood “the Law”? Clearly Paul says that he was alive, and then he died. What else could this mean? I see this as a clear example that before one can comprehend the “Law”, they are morally neutral and alive in God. Only upon the dawning of moral enlightenment can they choose their course for life. Paul said here that at this very near this moment, he chose wrongly and in doing so reaped the consequence which is death. Matthew 19:14-15 Jesus said, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these." When he had placed his hands on them, he went on from there� Are we to believe that the Kingdom of Heaven belongs to unrepentful monsters of iniquity? Is it too hard to believe that Jesus is saying that you must be as innocent as these in order to enter the Kingdom? Once we have been tainted with sin, there is only one remedy for us to again be innocent. However, these children simply don’t seem to have to do anything. Why is this? Romans 1:21-25 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles. Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen��

Here is the quintessential verse for youthful innocence. Paul in Romans 1 starts a treatise on Natural Law. Here is says that everyone “knew God”. This is stating that everyone at some point in their past knew God. We were born to know God. Now this is more than a simple knowledge of a supreme being, it is that they had a special relationship with Him. Basically,


14

every child is in a relationship with God. Next we see that “their thinking became futile and then their hearts were darkened”. With this they “became” fools for what they did. Not that they were fools since conception, but when they made the moral choice to dump God at the altar. Now with this in view, what does God do? “Therefore” God gives them over to their sinful desires. When did he do this, was it at conception, or when they decided to leave God? Finally we see that they “exchanged the truth”. You cannot exchange something you never had can you? Natural Law is a crucial theology for all Christians to know. It helps you quickly weed out fantasy theology from fact, and it easily answers that most common question of a guy dying on a deserted island without ever hearing of Jesus. Mark 9:42 And if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a large millstone tied around his neck. Here again we see that children hold a very special place in God’s Kingdom. The message is clearly understood that to lead a child into sin is a horrific deed. But one must ask them self, why is this a problem if they are already battle hardened sinners? What difference would this be? Isn’t the person only helping them live out their totally depraved natures? Matthew 18:10 See that you do not look down on one of these little ones. For I tell you that their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven. Is Jesus saying that all sinners have an angel looking at the face of God? Do we lose this when we become saved? God holds children very close to his heart, and truth be told we do also. Isn’t this why child molestation is so horrid? Rape is certainly a crime and horrible, but doesn’t it become more vile if the person violated was a 5 year old little girl? Even the criminals in jail have little compassion for child molesters. Yes, even the criminals view these people as criminals. At this point in the paper, I have attempted to demonstrate that God does not view children as vile sinners. If this is true however, how can SN and TD be true also? According to our doctrines, by the time Jesus could have called a child over to him, that child must have been a least a couple of years old. This child would have original sin condemning him, and because his sin nature and total depravity had been active since conception, this child would have thousands and thousands of sins counted against him by this point. Adding to this the sins of the last three of four generations, and this child would have been as sinful as one could possibly be. How could Jesus ignore such a history of licentiousness? Could it be that he was ignorant of the monster of iniquity standing before him? The truth is that this simply cannot be. Nowhere in the Scriptures do you see God calling or treating children as reprobates. What sort of doctrine therefore do we have when God himself refutes it? A very strong hermeneutical approach is coined in our current culture, “What would Jesus Do?” As Jesus states that if we have seen him we have seen the Father, it is a good practice to always align our views with the demonstrated practices of Jesus. Let’s look at how powerful a tool this is. I’ll take a slight detour to show the reader why we always must harmonize our theology with the demonstrated actions of God.


15

Rabbit Trail: God’s Desire to Reveal Himself to Mankind As an example of this hermeneutical principle we see many of our Church leaders today saying that there are things of God that we just cannot understand. However, do we ever see Jesus take such an approach? No, we see Jesus using everyday language and examples to express deep Kingdom principles. Jesus was able to take things that everyone knew and understood and showed them that this life is simply just one big metaphor to help us understand the Kingdom of God. This is how God made it, and why in Romans 1 we see we are all without excuse. As an illustration of this let’s look at a passage in Luke. Luke 20:34-40 Jesus replied, "The people of this age marry and are given in marriage. But those who are considered worthy of taking part in that age and in the resurrection from the dead will neither marry nor be given in marriage, and they can no longer die; for they are like the angels. They are God's children, since they are children of the resurrection. But in the account of the bush, even Moses showed that the dead rise, for he calls the Lord 'the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.' He is not the God of the dead, but of the living, for to him all are alive." Some of the teachers of the law responded, "Well said, teacher!" And no one dared to ask him any more questions. Here we see Jesus responding to the Sadducees, a group not known for their support of Jesus’ ministry. They come with a question, not to be informed in the ways of the Kingdom of God, but in order to trap Jesus. So what does Jesus do? He not only gives them a wonderful lesson in Biblical exegesis (explaining the words of God spoke from the bush), but as a bonus he tells them things of heaven that had never been previously revealed to anyone. Nowhere in the Old Testament is it revealed that we will not marry in heaven. Even when we see people asking questions with ill motives, we see our Savior giving them not only an answer, but insight into things that they didn’t even imagine. In the end, they saw the heart of our Master and were impressed. Their hearts were so darkened however that they didn’t perceive the opportunity that Jesus offered for them to turn from their corrupt ways and see the light of God, but Jesus still offered it to them. With this in view, how much more will God reveal the deep thoughts of God to those who earnestly seek him? I ask the reader to indulge me just a little bit longer on this topic, before I get back to the main point. We need to fully understand how willing God is to reveal to us the deepest parts of his being. For this let’s look in Corinthians. II Corinthians 12:2-5 I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven. Whether it was in the body or out of the body I do not know—God knows. And I know that this man—whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, but God knows— was caught up to paradise. He heard inexpressible things, things that man is not permitted to tell. I will boast about a man like that, but I will not boast about myself, except about my weaknesses. Here we see that God allowed Paul to experience things of heaven far beyond his imagination. God even allowed him to hear things that he could NEVER tell. Why did God do this? I would


16

say that it is because God longs to show us things, but he cannot because of our character. It is not that God is hiding things, but that it would be unwise to show us these things. However, when we reach such a state of sanctification as Paul did, God will show us mind blowing truths about himself and his kingdom. Realize here also that because of this exceedingly great revelation, Paul was given a messenger from Satan to torment him. I believe that we can see how great this revelation was by Paul’s reaction. He gets a revelation and then a demon to torment him and he appears to believe that this is a good deal. Can you even conceive of what someone could tell you that would make getting your own personal demon to torment you a great deal? Such are the things of God. God has things to show us that we cannot even fathom from our current situation, but God also longs to reveal them to us. So when our “leaders” tell us that “we cannot understand something” could they really be saying is that their character hasn’t yet reached a point whereby God will reveal it to them? One of the main problems we have in the church today are people and leaders who do not seek God with all their hearts. They are content to stay just where they are. God longs to show us fantastic things, but we do not prepare ourselves. Back to Sin Nature and Total Depravity! Romans 2:13-15 For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.) Here we have an interesting verse. Paul says that at times the Gentiles (read unsaved) “do” what the Law requires. Now how can one be “totally depraved” and yet still do what is right at times. This doesn’t mean that they are saints, and if they died they would still go to Hell, but it does say that they are not totally depraved either. There is good in most everybody. The theologian who tells you that nothing a sinner does is right, they are mistaken. Do you think that God sees Hitler and your unsaved neighbor in the same light? True they may both be walking in darkness, but is your neighbor as evil as he could be? Don’t you think that God is pleased that they yet have a spark of life left in them? This is the spark that God uses to bring us back, the flicker that God fans into a flame. Only when it is totally snuffed out are we beyond the atonement. Until such time, God can work with the goodness that we have allowed to survive. I have heard on many occasions, preachers claiming that sinners are utterly vile and “all their righteous acts are like filthy rags.” (Is 64:6) They even delight in telling us what the “rags” were in the original language. However is this how we view others? Is this how Jesus was shown to view the unsaved? Didn’t he say that they were sick, and needed a physician? I would have to say that you would offend and forever put off someone coming to the Lord if you said this to them. They have the common sense to know that they can do good, and on frequent occasions many do. This is not to say that these good acts will mean anything on Judgment Day, but God is certainly pleased when any of his children choose to do what is right. TD simply destroys this distinction.


17

Luke 11:13 If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!" This is another reference to those separated from God actually doing good. Such a verse should not be in the Bible if TD were true. The fact that Jesus said it adds even more power to the message. Colossians 1:21 Once you were alienated from God and were enemies in your minds because of your evil behavior. This final example illustrates that we are enemies because of evil actions. Not that we do evil acts because we are an enemy. This is the exact opposite of what theologians quote when they say, “You are not a sinner because you sin, you sin because you are a sinner.” I in fact heard this quote at a Bibleman show that I took my children to. Just goes to show you how far theology goes. The problem is what came first. The believers in OS/SN/TD believe that we sin because that is who we are, pretty much like a dog barks because he is a dog. Now barking doesn’t make us a dog therefore sin doesn’t make us a sinner: so the story goes. No they say, we sin because we are a sinner. I however believe that we become sinners when we choose to sin. This is a very important point that the reader should not gloss over. What you believe here is crucial. The question that cries out is why do we even need these doctrines? What do they bring to the table? Everyone would admit that both Adam and Eve didn’t have a sin nature, were not totally depraved, and they certainly didn’t have their sins counted against them before they sinned. However they still sinned! They were free of this horrendous triple anchor strung about their righteous necks, but they still chose to sin. They were in the most perfect of places, they had perfect minds unclouded by sin, and they had daily walks with God. All of this and they still sinned! Now, is it any wonder why we who don’t live in the garden, are saturated with depravity on parade in television, radio, newspapers, and magazines, who haven’t talked a step with God in person, would also choose to sin? I would think that theologians would concoct something wrong with Adam and Eve that made them take the plunge into sin instead of the other way around. Let’s now consider Lucifer. Again, no depravity, no sin nature, and he was even in heaven! Talk about a sweet deal. He was a servant of the most high God, and yet he chose to sin in heaven. Let’s not stop there, one third of the entire heavenly host (most likely in the millions or billions) also chose to leave. Again, all of these actions were unaided by a sin nature or total depravity. So why do we suppose that we need these doctrines to explain why people sin? We don’t need a reason any more than Adam or Lucifer did. The problem is that theologians have confused our free wills with a sin nature. We try to free ourselves from the very thing that is made in the image of God.


18

Galatians 5:16-17 So I say, live by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the sinful nature. For the sinful nature desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature. They are in conflict with each other, so that you do not do what you want. I don’t think that this statement will be too controversial, but even once we are saved, we battle with sinful desires that raise their hideous head from time to time. However, once we are saved, we choose to ignore it even if it means that we refuse to do what we “want to”. Well, isn’t Jesus, the Cross, and the Holy Spirit residing in us enough to slay this inner monster of sin nature? Boy, did Adam really mess us up! � Even the Holy Spirit cannot undo the damage. We should realize that just like developing our “sin nature” took a lot of sinning, in the same way developing our holy nature will take a lot of work. Just as we climbed into the sewer of sin one rung at a time, we must crawl out the same way. It will take time, but God is faithful, and he is our help in times of trouble. We aren’t forced or coerced to sin. We aren’t constrained to sin like some ill fated robot. No, we are guilty before a holy God because he gave us everything to live a holy life and we have all decided not to. This is why we are guilty, not because we were born that way. We have all chosen to spit in God’s face and turn away. It is for these reasons that we will burn in Hell, not because we didn’t have a choice. Is Sin Nature and Total Depravity True to Reason? To answer this, let’s look at how someone becomes depraved and sinful. From this, we can see if it is reasonable to believe that this happened at conception. Romans 6:16 Don't you know that when you offer yourselves to someone to obey him as slaves, you are slaves to the one whom you obey—whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? This verse is pretty clear that we “offer” ourselves up to be slaves. We choose. It is not pre-chosen for us by Adam 6,000 years ago. We are not fated to be sinners, sin is not a default setting. God desires us to choose rightly. Also notice that there are no qualifiers here. Wasn’t Paul talking to the Christians at Rome? Notice that he says that his audience should understand that you are slaves to whoever you choose, whether sin or holiness. Doesn’t this mean that even Christians can choose to be unholy? (Sorry, that is another paper available upon request.) Proverbs 28:14 Blessed is the man who always fears the LORD, but he who hardens his heart falls into trouble. We can see from this verse in Proverbs that the Lord is warning us not to harden our hearts. We have a choice in this matter. We fall into trouble when we harden our hearts. Are our hearts already as hard as concrete at birth?


19

Hebrews 3:15 As has just been said: "Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as you did in the rebellion." Again we see the warning not to harden our hearts. Now if we are totally depraved with a sin nature, then what could this possibly mean. How can we harden our hearts more than totally depraved? Ephesians 4:18 They are darkened in their understanding and separated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them due to the hardening of their hearts. Here we see the clear path to how one is darkened. Reading this sentence backwards we see: your hardened heart produces ignorance that leads to darkness. This reminds me of something I tell my boys constantly: “You can choose your actions, but you cannot choose your consequences.” This is exactly what this verse is saying. If we choose to sin, our hearts will be hardened. This hardening leads to an ignorance of the things of God, and this ignorance produces a darkening in our hearts. This is why sinners don’t seem to understand why certain things are wrong anymore. They have seared that part of their hearts with a hot iron. Now this doesn’t mean the whole heart but only a part. Each sinful act however sears another part until such time as they can achieve total darkness whereby God must give them over. They have stepped beyond the atonement. Please notice the comparison here. We must “understand” truth in order to leave holy lives, but to live sinful lives we must become “ignorant”. It is simply all about our minds and what we believe is true. If we believe a lie, we will lead a sinful life. If we believe the truth we will live holy lives. It really isn’t much more complicated than this. God is truth, period! Romans 1:28-32 Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them. We can see the same principle at work here. If we reject truth, our minds “become” depraved. Are we to believe that little children are rejecting truth? Do little children “know” God’s righteous decrees? We must work hard to become depraved, sadly we all do. Romans 6:18-19 I put this in human terms because you are weak in your natural selves. Just as you used to offer the parts of your body in slavery to impurity and to ever-increasing wickedness, so now offer them in slavery to righteousness leading to holiness. �


20

Again, we don’t see that we are ultimately evil at conception, but we are “ever-increasing” as we sin. Consequently, as we strive in holiness, we reverse our former position. God provides the means, we must choose to follow. I Timothy 1:19-20 holding on to faith and a good conscience. Some have rejected these and so have shipwrecked their faith. Among them are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satan to be taught not to blaspheme. Here we see that people who were once believers have now rejected the faith. These people have literally been handed over to Satan to be taught a lesson. We may disagree about what this means, but I am sure that we can agree that this isn’t a good situation to find one’s self in. While this section is not exhaustive, I have shown that there is a Biblical basis to believe that we become sinners when we sin, and we don’t start off that way. When we sin, it makes it that much easier to commit the next sin. A good way to look at what the NIV translates as “sin nature” is simply our character. We build our character by the choices we make. One choice after the other we construct it like a building. Once our building is complete, this is our “nature”. When we come to God, we must demolish the old building and start the process over again. This is what the Bible refers to as sanctification. As an example, you do not classify a child as a liar or a thief. But you do classify people as such if they have demonstrated these traits over and over again. At a certain point, you don’t believe anything they say as they are a liar. This has become their “nature”. To reference an example I sometimes use, I have said, no one would go straight out and inject heroin under their fingernails, but this isn’t the way it starts. First we start to drink alcohol, next maybe marijuana, then maybe cocaine, and some amphetamines. Soon we are injecting smack under our nails. Sin is a process the same way that righteousness is. We can see this clearly from Scripture. Romans 12:2 Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. I find this verse interesting because it says that we need to have our minds renewed. The dictionary defines this word as:

1. To make new or as if new again; restore: renewed the antique chair. 2. To take up again; resume: renew an old friendship; renewed the argument. 3. To repeat so as to reaffirm: renew a promise. 4. To regain or restore the physical or mental vigor of; revive: I renewed my spirits in the

country air.

Isn’t it interesting that God wants our minds to be restored, and revived? How can this be as we are told that our minds are totally depraved and controlled by a sin nature from conception? God


21

here is saying that our minds must be restored back to their original state. We need to again become like children. (To quote Jesus.)

Galatians 5:13, 24 You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature This passage makes it quite clear that God does not take away our “sinful nature’ post-salvation. If they we still have a sinful nature, why are we now commanded not to sin? Was our sin nature only wounded? Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires. Here we see that it is those who belong to Christ that have crucified their sinful nature. How can man crucify this inherited nature? Don’t we need Jesus for this? As going back to the original language of the Bible is always enlightening, let’s look at the Greek Word that the NIV translates “Sin Nature”. Greek word for NIV “sin nature” is translated in other versions as “flesh”. The exact work is “sarx” and Thayer’s Lexicon defines this word as:

• Flesh: The living body that covers the bones and is permeated with blood of both men and beasts.

• The body: the material substance of the living body

• A living creature: man or beast

• In an ethical sense and denotes mere human nature, the earthly nature of man apart from divine influence, and therefore prone to sin and opposed to God.

Here the first three definitions are not what we are looking for, but the forth one hits the nail on the head. Here we see that flesh is a synonym for human nature. Now why would that “nature” be different from Adam? Next it says that our natures “apart from God’s influence”. This is a very key part. Our natures are not evil or corrupt, but left alone without God’s influence; we are “prone” to sin. Not that we have to, not that we are hard wired to, but that we tend to. Why? It is because God’s influence in our lives must be an essential part of our daily living. If we need truth to choose holiness, and only God has truth, anything that reduces God’s influence in our lives will increase the chances of us believing lies. Lies lead to sin.

This is the way God designed us and why the Garden of Eden was the way that it was. However since the Fall, God’s influence in our lives has been greatly diminished. Does God walk with you every night? Do you have a conversation every day strolling with God in a perfect garden that you don’t have to weed, spray pesticides on, or hook up a bug zapper so that the mosquitoes don’t carry you off? Well if not, then I would say that God’s influence in your life has been diminished below what Adam and Eve enjoyed in the Garden. This reduction makes it far more likely that somewhere along the line we will start to believe one of the many lies that Satan puts in our path. Remember, it only takes one lie before we will commit sin. It is like taking your


22

hands off of the steering wheel. You may not run off the road immediately, but you will eventually.

Now on the other side of the fence, has Satan’s influence been lessened proportionally? I don’t think that you can make this case; therefore, the scales have been tipped against us. Now we aren’t totally depraved, or have a sin nature, we just have a vision problem. We cannot see God as well as God had originally intended. Therefore when we reach the point of our first moral choice, we simply don’t have all of the facts at hand they way God intended. God provided a level playing field for Adam. Adam handed us an up hill climb. However, this climb is not impossible, but your chances of ever exiting this life without a single sin are almost zero. This doesn’t mean that God wouldn’t be overjoyed if you did, but being wise, he knows that the game has been shifted in the wrong direction. The deck has been stacked against us. Therefore, when we first exercise our God given free wills, we make very bad uninformed decisions that lead us down the wrong path.

As an aside, I hope that everyone can see the monumental importance of solid Christian teaching to our children. Sure we may be a poor substitute for God’s presence, but we can help smooth out that hill quite a bit. However, we cannot be teaching false theology. If we do, we are helping the enemy destroy our own children. For this reason, we should all be diligently searching our doctrine for lies and falsehoods. Bad theology is and has sent many people to Hell already. By clearly demonstrating the true God before their eyes, they can see God in a sense. This will help them make much better choices when the time comes. While this will probably not forestall all sin, it should greatly reduce the occurrences, and the magnitude of their rebellion. It also will greatly amplify that small voice in their souls that will convict them of sin and lead them back. Parents, we must mimic Jesus to our children if they are to stand a chance in this world. We owe the little sinful depraved beings no less. �

The problem of inheritance of depravity only comes up because Adam sinned before he had any offspring. Therefore by default, we all were essentially kicked out of the Garden. Do you think had Able been born before the Fall that God would have kicked him out of the Garden also? Would his nature have suddenly become depraved? Would his nature had been changed to sinful? God only judges those who have done wrong. However, since God evicted those who sinned (and this just happened to be everyone there), then in essence Adam’s sin did effect us all. However, had thing been different, the only people God would have thrown out would have been Adam and Eve. The rest of us could have remained and not suffered any impact for their sin. So we do have an impediment due to Adam and Eve’s disobedience, but it is not in some genetic or spiritual sense, only that we were born outside the Garden of Eden which was not God’s plan.

Total Depravity Modification

My pastor is such an Arminianist believer. Therefore being an intelligent man, he knew that you cannot simultaneously believe in total depravity and sin nature while maintaining universal salvation and not speed headlong into universalism. He knew that the definitions had to change. He then deftly modified his theology to state that man was depraved, simply not totally. Now on the surface this may seem like the answer, but is it really? How does a partially depraved person


23

act? Is there a shred of evidence from the Bible for partial depravity? Basically, this is nothing short of having your cake and eating it to. The problem is that this solution does get rid of some problems but not all. In the end however, how depraved and sinful are we? Are we born sinful enough to be judged by a holy God as being guilty, or does God have to let us off the hook due to our mental insanity? Where do we draw this line? This modification however cannot explain rationally how Adam’s sin actually gets passed down to us. If by our body, then we have a DNA problem. Then we are not sinful just sick. Why would God send a diseased person to Hell? Would he send a person with a cleft palate there? If it is sin is translated spiritually, then God must create sinful depraved spirits. Hebrews 12:9-10 Moreover, we have all had human fathers who disciplined us and we respected them for it. How much more should we submit to the Father of our spirits and live! So who created our spirits? If Father created our spirits, then it would be blasphemy to claim the he created them with a sinful nature and totally depraved; incapable of doing any good. Zechariah 12:1 This is the word of the Lord concerning Israel. The Lord, who stretches out the heavens, who lays the foundation of the earth, and who forms the spirit of man within him declares… Again we see that it is the Lord who creates our spirits. Yes our parents contribute DNA to form our earthly bodies, but who we are, our eternal essence, is all from God. Therefore, the only way that these curses could be transferred is through genetic mutations. In this age of microbiology, does anyone want to ascribe sinful behavior via genetics? If so, then I would suggest you start a charity so that we can develop a cure and wipe this scourge of all people off the face of the earth. That would be the Christian thing to do for sure. Jeremiah 2:27 They say to wood, “You are my father,”, and to stone, “You gave me birth”. They have turned their backs to me and not their faces… Here the prophet is speaking for God that the people have gone insane. Reality has left the building. The obvious meaning is that God is their father, and that God gave them birth. Now the primary meaning of this is concerning the birth of the Israelite nation, but from the previous verses we can see that this is also true from an individual standpoint. However, using proper hermeneutics, this can only be a secondary proof text. Psalms 33:13-15 From heaven the Lord looks down and sees all mankind; from his dwelling place he watches all who live on earth – he who forms the hearts of all, who considers everything they do. Now this is a really good one. It says that God forms our hearts. Now our hearts are Biblically the seat of our emotions and understanding. So is stating that God creates deformed hearts a


24

good thing? I don’t use this word frequently, but to suggest that our loving Lord creates anything sinful is blasphemy. We must avoid such an accusation at all costs. Isaiah 42:5 This is what God the Lord says – he who created the heavens and stretched them out, who spread out the earth and all that comes from it, who gives breath to its people , and life to those who walk on it.

In concluding this section, inheriting a SN and becoming totally depraved are not proved in Scripture, are not required to address our current situation or explain the world we see, and they either impugn the wisdom and character of God or are just plain idiotic. For these reasons, I would say that these doctrines are not true to reason.

Is Sin Nature and Total Depravity True to Life? At first glance, the reader may answer in the affirmative. We see everyone sinning, and we see sin increasing, therefore there must be a reason. Yes, this is true, but is the current theology the only way we can explain our observations? As parents, why do we correct our children? Do we not know that they have been hardwired into a life of sin and debauchery? Do we not realize that all efforts are futile and in fact we are fighting against God’s design by even attempting to swim upstream? The point is that if you believe that proper parenting has anything to do with behavior, you have just denied SN and TD. You see, if we truly believed these doctrines were true, we would just resign ourselves that we are raising little Hitlers, and hope and pray that they won’t become a serial killer. Any sane person would lock their bedroom doors t night so that their sinful depraved monsters will not attempt to kill them in their sleep! But is this true to life? Do we expect our children to tell us the truth or to obey our rules? Why? Do we not realize that these are impossible dreams? Don’t you understand what Adam did to us? The bottom line is that we all know that living with these expectations would be crazy. We all expect and demand good behavior. Even most sinners expect their children to obey the law and not lie, cheat and steal. Therefore, regardless of what you claim to believe theologically, it is merely an abstract notion. If you ever lived these doctrines, our society would really go down hill fast. Could you imagine what would happen if all parents simply gave up and let little Johnny do whatever he felt? We really would be dealing with a monster. Why do we react with horror when people commit crimes against society? Why do we not see this as a sickness? In court, we see that people are guilty and deserving of punishment rightly because they did not have to do what they did, they had a choice. They violated the laws of our society. So are these people really just souls of misfortune created in sin because of the sin of Adam? Were their crimes a forgone conclusion since conception? Is it any wonder why more people are not out there committing crimes, remembering that every sinner is totally depraved?


25

Again, we expect good behavior simply because we know we are capable of it. No one would cast a person in jail for breathing, but they would for car jacking. One cannot be helped, it is merely a fact of life, and the other is a voluntary choice. Finally, do you believe that everyone is out to steal from you? Do you really believe that when you pump 15 gallons of gas into your car that the measurement is accurate? Wouldn’t a depraved person change the calibration and make more money from unsuspecting people? I say this just to provide an example. You see that if you truly believed that all sinners were totally depraved with and unstoppable sin nature, you wouldn’t be paranoid, you’d be right. They all would be out to swindle, maim, and kill you. The fact that you trust many sinners and expect them to follow the laws of society proves that you disbelieve sin nature and total depravity. Have you ever expected a sinner to keep to his word? If so, you either don’t understand the doctrines you say you believe or you are certifiable. These few examples demonstrate that these doctrines are simply not workable in the real world. You can choose to disassociate your theology from reality, but that just makes it a fantasy. For any doctrine to be true, you must be able to live it. Sinners who see Christians holding to such fanciful beliefs are expecting us one day to ask Scotty to beam us up. We hold about that much credibility in their eyes. Now I have said before that any doctrine that sinners look at and ridicule had better be correct. You see that idea or theological construct is giving them a justification to reject and rebel against God. If these doctrines are false, and God has had to send some of His children to Hell because we are propagating falsehoods about Him, then shame on us. This is not to say that sinners dictate Christian doctrine, but they are a wonderful theological filter. Tell a sinner a doctrine and see if he laughs or thinks we are nuts. If so, that one would be a good one to investigate further to be sure that we aren’t the ones who are nuts. Maybe you will eventually decide that these doctrines are in fact true, but you owe it to yourself and God to really check it out. For these reasons, I cannot see how SN and TD are true to life.

Summing it all up: Is There a Better Answer? The best answer to this question would clearly be one that squared with the Bible, logic, and our observed world. I believe that that Arminian understanding of human nature (or as properly translated “flesh”) is superior to the Augustinian model. The Arminian model does not claim that our flesh is corrupted, but rather it is incomplete.

The case goes that in the garden, Adam had both his nature and God working in blessed union to achieve all of the goals of true holiness. He was able to “live according to the Spirit and not according to the flesh” as he was being fed the truth of God directly by God himself. While our free wills were active and functioning, it was also closely connected (or augmented) by the Holy Spirit’s truth in order to function as God designed it to be. The human nature was free to operate and explore all that God had made, as it was being given proper illumination by the Spirit of God for correct functioning. You see Adam was able to view each option and properly consider the correct and intelligent action in any situation.


26

Then Adam and Eve did a very foolish thing, they believed that Satan was telling the truth, and that God was lying. (This is part of our free will, we decide who to believe. This is how a sinner can choose against his established nature and choose to heed the call of God that up to that point he had been resisting.) After the Fall, Adam and Eve became separated from God’s and God’s spirit could no longer dwell in the same way with sinful Adam. Adam’s believed God to be a liar, and this “truth” created a separation from the Holy Spirit. This fateful decision was crippling to him. From that time until the present, mankind has been like a one legged man. Yes he can walk in a way, but he can no longer function as he was designed, and can no longer do those things that were once natural. We no longer had that strong presence of God each day imparting truth into our lives. We couldn’t ask God direct questions and listen as he enlightened us to reality and truth.

So how were things passed down then? Adam’s sin has affected us all because no one born outside the Garden of Eden could ever enter. In this way Adam’s sin did affect us all, but no more than if I don’t pay my mortgage and I get evicted. My children didn’t do anything wrong, but they are homeless nonetheless. Therefore there was no impact of this on the basic nature of the children. Children are not born righteous (with a positive moral character) they are born innocent (free from moral guilt). Therefore they cannot be indwelt by the Holy Spirit until such time as they are able to make a moral choice, and then proceed to make the proper moral choice. This is not to say however that God’s spirit doesn’t influence children. For sure He does, but not in the same way that He can post-salvation.

This is how Jesus lived on this earth. He was born just like us. He lived his life just like us (Is 7:14-16, Heb 5:8-10, 2:18, Luke 2:52), however the crucial difference was that when he approached the dawning of moral accountability (Rom 7:7-12) he (unlike Paul and the rest of us) chose the path of righteousness. Later on in his life we see the final culmination of this (Mark 1:9-11) as the Holy Spirit descended on him. Luke 4:1 says after this event “Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit”. Now I am not declaring that Jesus didn’t have the Holy Spirit before this, but this clearly symbolizes the New Testaments infilling of the believer that would occur post-Pentecost. God would finally be able to increase his interaction and illumination of all who believe. While it is different than what the Garden would have provided, it is clearly enough to transform us and to call us back from the darkness.

So what about mankind? We, unlike Jesus who sought after the Father, are greatly influenced by a society of crippled individuals we hold as roll models, complete with active demonic activity and sinful examples around us. When we reach the dawning of moral accountability we quickly succumb to these influences and we too start to limp. Not due to any uncontrollable force, but we all choose this path. This is the beginning of our moral guilt and we start down the path of moral darkness. Please remember here what I said earlier about the importance of a solid Christian education and world view. This will help minimize and can possibly prevent your child’s excursion into the world of sin. Even if it doesn’t however, it will help minimize it. (With this said, we again have free will, they can choose against all of their training no matter how well it is established. Remember, free will is powerful and unstoppable.)

However, sinning is not an irreversible situation. God worked for 4,000 years in order to bring the atonement. The atonement of Christ gave God a significant weapon that is used to arrest our ongoing moral decay so that He could again impart His Spirit into man, finally bringing man


27

back to a much higher level of illumination. This doesn’t mean that we are totally back, but the Atonement of Christ is sufficient when it is properly understood to subdue all sin. The atonement gives us a chance to see our true condition. Just like when a crippled man, knowing only those who have been likewise crippled, finally sees someone standing erect. His heart is quickened to things greater than he has known and he purposes in his heart to see the Great Physician. Here he can finally know wholeness again.

This view also explains why we still have “fleshly” desires post-salvation. Our characters, or in a sense our natures, have not been changed by God. If they were, He did a rather poor job of it. We understand that up to the point of salvation we have had a long history of limping and that we need extensive physical therapy to get back on track. We don’t need new legs, only to have God rehabilitate the ones He had already given us. So what do we need to do? What is God’s physical therapy? It is simply to renew our minds to the truth we once knew.

Colossians 1:9 For this reason, since the day we heard about you, we have not stopped praying for you and asking God to fill you with the knowledge of his will thought all spiritual wisdom and understanding. This was Paul’s prayer, not for their old natures to be transformed, but that their minds may see the truth. Please read to verse 13 for what this knowledge and understanding will yield. We see in John 8:31 If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free. Philippians 1:9-11 And this is my prayer: that your love may abound more and more in knowledge and depth of insight, so that you may be able to discern what is best and may be pure and blameless until the day of Christ, filled with the fruit of righteousness that comes through Jesus Christ. John 14:16 Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. Why is Jesus saying that he is the truth? II Thessalonians 2:10b-13 They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness. But we ought always to thank God for you, brothers loved by the Lord, because from the beginning God chose you to be saved through the sanctifying work of the Spirit and through belief in the truth.


28

This is a very powerful passage to study. First we see that “because” they refused to love the truth, they perished. Now if they were depraved with a sin nature, they didn’t actively refuse to believe, they had no choice. It was a set-up and a forgone conclusion from their conception. This would be akin to asking someone to lift your house up so that you can look under it, and then sentencing them to eternal torture because they couldn’t do it. Anyone who would punish someone for not doing what they cannot do is evil. It doesn’t matter if it were God or you. What would you think of a person who would go up to a blind man and ask him to read, and when the man couldn’t do it you beat him into the ground? This is exactly how sinners see our God because of these doctrines. Is it any wonder why they are not flocking to worship Him? Next we again see how important the truth is. Here “because” they refused to believe the truth, God has them believe a lie. Lies will always lead to sin. Finally, we see how God saves souls. Before one can be saved, they must come to believe the truth and reject the lies that they have to that moment embraced. Here we are saved “through” the work of the Spirit, and “through” belief in the truth. So what is the Holy Spirit’s job? John 15:27 "When the Counselor comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father, he will testify about me. One of the primary jobs of the Holy Spirit is to show us truth. In fact, he is called the Spirit of Truth. Who is he to testify about? Look back to John 14:16 listed above. �

I Timothy 2:3-4 This is good, and pleases God our Savior, who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. I John 2:20-21 But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and all of you know the truth. I do not write to you because you do not know the truth, but because you do know it and because no lie comes from the truth. Titus 1:1 Paul, a servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ for the faith of God's elect and the knowledge of the truth that leads to godliness In Paul’s opening address to Titus we see that knowledge of truth leads to godliness. So what happens if we reject truth? What happens when we abandon the truth and suppress it? All of this is very simple; as we follow God he shows us truth. Truth accepted naturally leads to godliness. If we turn away from God and reject his truth, this leads to depravity. Continuing to practice depraved ways will lead to establishing a sinful “nature”. There is nothing mystical about this. We are not sent to Hell because we have inherited some depraved nature, we are sent there because we have toiled tirelessly for decades to reject all truth that God brings to our minds. We have been tireless in developing mechanisms so that God’s truth will not break through to our minds. What is drinking, sexual perversion, drug addiction, and other things for? They function as blinds on the windows to our souls. No one enters Hell passively, but many make the same trip due to their actions.


29

John 6:45 It is written in the Prophets: “They will all be taught by God. Everyone who listens to the Father and learns from him comes to me. “ Again, this is not magical. When our minds clearly perceive the truth of God, our intelligence will choose rightly. It is only when we believe a lie as Adam and Eve did, that they believed that the intelligent choice was the wrong one. This is why knowing the truth is absolutely vital for any Christian to live as God intended. This is why sound doctrine and theology are indispensable to Godly living. For an interesting study, look up how many times in the Gospels that Jesus says the phase, “I tell you the truth”. (NIV translation) While there is much more I could say here, hopefully this is enough to show that there are alternatives to believing in Augustinian and Calvinistic doctrines that cast a shadow over the nature, wisdom, and character of God. The lessons and cross of Christ, and Holy Spirit in our lives is all that we need to see that we are indeed wallowing in a cesspool. He picks us up, cleans us off, and expects us to look to him for guidance and motivation and TRUTH. Sure we can look back and fall back into the cesspool. In reality, we may do this quite often in the beginning. But as we choose right, God renews our minds and these minds are able to make good choices once again.

It will truly take the rest of this life for God to heal the damage to our minds that we caused during our rebellion, but that is a work that He looks forward to. May we learn to forever follow the example set by our great Lord and Savior.

Theology and Evangelism After writing this paper it struck me about how these doctrines affect how we view and perform evangelism. You see, no matter how you try and compartmentalize things, our theology really does work itself out of the abstract and start to influence how we think and what we do. Nowhere do I see this more importantly than in the area of evangelism. When we believe that people are inherently sinful, born with sinful proclivities, there is nothing that we can do. You see, if it is genetic, we cannot reach in there on the street corner and perform gene therapy. Likewise, if their depravity is more spiritual, than we certainly are out of luck. That is a realm reserved solely for God. Therefore, when we evangelize it has nothing to do with us. Salvation must be all of God, and we don’t really have a part except maybe as a point of contact. For a person to be born again requires that God somehow remake them so that they can shed their sinful nature. In this vein, our role in the evangelic experience is little more than manikins on a string. We trot up to a random sinner, slap down the four spiritual laws and have them go through them, and then either God does his thing, or he doesn’t. If for some reason God chooses not to save them at that moment, we just move on to the next vile sinner. So what is wrong with all of this? You see, the person going out on the mission trip or to canvas the local mall doesn’t have to really know or understand anything. Their knowledge or lack


30

thereof simply doesn’t come into the equation. This is why we never ever even ask if those about to board the boat to the next mission trip if they even know the basics of the faith. Well it just doesn’t matter. I’m just a warm body going along and being “obedient”. First off, do we ever see anyone being sent out in the Bible who is completely untrained? Do you see the recent converts evangelizing? Acts 8:34 The eunuch asked Philip, "Tell me, please, who is the prophet talking about, himself or someone else?" Then Philip began with that very passage of Scripture and told him the good news about Jesus. Here we see Philip explaining to the eunuch the Gospel of Christ. He was able to take a passage of the Old Testament and relate it to Christ. Now how many of us today are so studied in the Word of God that we could do likewise. Do you thing that this man would have been saved if Philip had simply recited the four spiritual laws? No, he had a need and Philip was able to fulfill it.

There are many people out there in our world who are perishing because no one can explain the truth to them. They have legitimate questions about the character and goodness of God because of our sad and twisted theology. We are helping many right into the pit of Hell. People’s souls are hanging in the balance, and we think someone is super spiritual if they have the guts to place a track in a restroom stall. Who will study to show themselves approved? We may even believe ourselves to be mature, but are we? Can you demonstrate to people why Christianity is the only true religion? Can you explain why God required the cross; can you explain why faith is rational? Can you answer the nagging questions about why God made Lucifer, why God allows demons to roam the earth, why there is sickness and disease, and why Jesus is the only way? How about my all time favorite: If God is good and loving, why did he make a world with such cruelty and innocent suffering? Can you refute evolution? Can you even demonstrate to someone who believes that the Bible is full of thousands of errors, the error of his thinking? Now with these small subset real questions posed by sinners everyday, do you know anyone who is actually qualified to tinker with men’s souls? As a wonderful man of God (Harry Conn) once said, “When you go to tinker with men’s souls, sincerity is not enough!”

I got my wake-up call years ago when I was out “evangelizing” homeless people. I was in a Christian band, and after our sets, we would witness to anyone who wanted to talk. This one man came up to me and started saying things that I knew were wrong, but I had no way of answering his questions. I later found out that the man was well versed in Calvinism, of which I had no idea it existed at the time. Panicked, I cried out to God in prayer to give me the right thing to say and nothing. Silence was the order of the day. Then God did say something to me, and what he said has changed me forever. God said that I had been lazy and he was not going to bail me out of my lack of diligence. He said that he would bring to memory that what he had taught me, but he was not about to place things in my mouth that were only required because I was too lazy to discover them myself. Since this time, I have studied God’s word and other areas of evangelism quite extensively. This is not to say that I am some expert, but I never want to be called down by God like that again. The thought that I will never see this man again, and that


31

this could have been his one open opportunity to witness the Gospel pulls me up short. I say all of this so that maybe the reader might not have to be so upbraided by God like I was.

I do not mean to rant, but we send people out to witness who don’t even know the most basic Christian principles. We send people to the mission fields with sin ripe in their lives? Why? Because we believe that it doesn’t matter. All that matters is that someone goes. God is supposed to do the rest. I mean, look in the Book of Acts at Stephen. His job in the Church was to wait on tables and look at what he was able to say at his trial. The man knew his Scriptures. The bottom line is that people come back from the “mission field” claiming so many souls were added into the Kingdom, and truth be told, they don’t even know what salvation is themselves.

If I am correct and these doctrines under review are wrong, we can easily see why the church is in such a state as it is today. We have as much sin in our churches as outside of it. Sinners are mostly right when they call us hypocrites. If we don’t see “second stringers” saving souls in the Bible, what makes us think that we can do so today? I would say it is that their theology told them that that sending people to witness who didn’t understand the faith was a less than brilliant thing to do. We do not see this today because we have been hobbled by such doctrines as sin nature, total depravity, and original sin. Maybe we ought to just sit around and wait until God wants to change their sin natures? Or maybe we need to realize the truth of the words of Jesus:

John 8:31-32 To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, "If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."

As a parting thought:

Question: Who was the group of people who believed in total depravity and sin nature! John 9:34 To this they replied, “You were steeped in sin at birth, how dare you lecture us!” And they threw him out. Answer: The Pharisees. I rest my case with the words of Jesus. Matthew 5:20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven. In conclusion, whatever one may finally believe concerning these doctrines, I ask you to continue to research and question every Biblical belief you have. Truth must be apprehended! Any lie you believe will lead to sin. There is simply no way around this. God Bless Bruce Moylan

The Theological Trifecta: Original Sin / Sin Nature /Total ... · PDF fileThe Theological...

Documents

Transcript of The Theological Trifecta: Original Sin / Sin Nature /Total ... · PDF fileThe Theological...