Hereditary Total Depravity Last Response
Mark did a runner. He agreed to debate Hereditary Total
Depravity but then tried to change it to the depravity of the total
man. Mark did not even attempt to answer Kieran's first paper. Mark
you signed up to debating Hereditary Total Depravity but you failed
to discharge your duty. Shame on you!
Kieran accused Mark of believing that "Infants
possess a nature identical to that of Satan himself." Mark's
reply was "So what if that is the case? … Scripture makes
no differentiation between the nature of children, and the nature of
anyone else." Let us see. Scripture calls God, "The Father
of spirits" (Heb 12:9). He formed our spirit within us (Zech
12:1b). If as Calvinists teach, the soul is spiritually corrupt, then
it stands to reason, God is responsible for it's corruption. How
repulsive! Jesus called a child to Himself and set him before them
and said, "Truly I say to you, unless you are converted and
become like children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven"
(Mt 18:2-3). Mark, you could never say, "unless you are
converted and become like children" (Mt 19:14). The Scripture
also says, "For though the twins (Rebekah's) were not yet born
and had not done anything good or bad" (Rom 9:11). HTD is a
denial of that passage. "Brethren, do not be children in your
thinking; yet in evil (Gr. KAKIA, stands for whatever is evil in
character, badness in quality) be infants" (1 Cor 14:20). Think
about it! No difference in the nature of a child and an adult,
rubbish! The Holy Spirit assures us that small children do not know
enough to refuse evil and choose good (Isa 7:16). Mark thinks all
these Scriptures are "an anecdotal appeal to emotion." How
sad!
When Mark affirms about Christ "If sin cannot be
imputed then salvation is impossible," he is also implying the
imputation of Adam's sin to his descendants in that statement. But
when he talks about Ezekiel 18 he contradicts himself by saying,
"Total Depravity does not mean that each person bears the sins
of their father and so on." Well Mark, Adam is our father so we
cannot bear his sin! Your Westminster Confession of Faith teaches,
that the guilt of this transgression was also imputed to their
children, "and the same death in sin … conveyed to all
their posterity" (chap VI, Art. 3). Mark you are contradicting
the WCF as well as yourself! The legs of the lame are not equal!
Micah gave a number of verses to try to prove Hereditary
Total Depravity. Romans 3:10-18 is typical of the passages used. The
passage teaches, "all have turned aside, together they have
become useless." This verse does not say, "all were
conceived astray and were born useless." So, Micah, this passage
(and the others) do not prove your THD doctrine. The truth is we
cannot sin by proxy because sin is something we do ourselves, "But
each one is tempted when he is carried away and enticed by his own
lust. Then when lust is conceived, it gives birth to sin; and when
sin is accomplished, it brings forth death" (Js 1:14-15). "Sin
is lawlessness" (1 Jn 3:4). A newborn infant has not broken
God's law. S/he is not guilty of any sin.
M&M say, "There is nothing in Scripture to
suggest Adam was inherently righteous." Yet the Scripture says,
"Behold, I have found only this, that God made men upright, but
they have sought out many devices" (Eccl 7:29). "For you
were blameless in your ways from the day that you were created until
unrighteousness was found in you" (Ezk 28:15). Adam was made
upright in God’s image (Isa 26:7; Ps 25:8; 92:15). The word
upright means, "honest, honourable or just." Adam bore the
image of God. He was blameless, upright and without unrighteousness.
He was therefore inherently righteous. Yet, M&M said, “There
is nothing in Scripture to suggest Adam was inherently righteous.”
Who do you believe M&M or Scripture?
Mark conveniently overlooks so much in Ezekiel 18. Mark
does not say anything about the wicked becoming righteous or the
righteous man losing his salvation by turning to wickedness. It is
very revealing to substitute (natural man) for wicked, and (Spirit
led man) for righteous. Try it and see. Mark also turns a blind eye
to God's confirmation of man's ability to "turn from his ways
and live" (Vss 23, 30-32). Note this chapter by itself answers
his "inability of man" argument!
Verse 20 says, God's way is to treat each person
individually so the sinner alone will bear the guilt and/or the
punishment for his own sin. Incredibly M&M quote "The
wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself," to prove the
very opposite, namely, we all bear the guilt and the punishment of
Adam's sin. I am reminded of a sign over an ironmonger's shop, "All
sorts of fancy twisting and turning done here."
Throughout this debate Kieran and I have given a
detailed commentary on each verse in Romans 5:12-21. Reader please
take note, we have not been afforded the same courtesy from Mark and
Micah. Our position is abundantly clear and consistent (re-read note
1 on the Questions and Answers paper).
This is a summation of note 1. The "free gift"
(V 15) is not like the transgression (Adam's), in that the "free
gift" (life, temporal and eternal) arose because of many
transgressions (all human transgressions including Adam's). By
implication the effects of Christ's obedience is "much more"
comprehensive because the resulting justification covers the "one
transgression" and the "many transgressions."
By the transgression of the one (Adam) death reigned
through the one (unconditionally). "Much more," (although
all men have been reconciled to God unconditionally, they have to
receive the reconciliation through Christ, for eternal life (2 Cor
5:18-20). So only those who receive (conditionally) the abundance of
grace (the reconciliation) and the gift of righteousness (forgiveness
and being counted righteous by God) will reign in life through One,
Jesus Christ (V 17).
Verses 18-19 returns to what happened in Adam and how
the death of Christ counteracts (unconditionally) the curse of
physical death that befell all of us because of Adam's sin.
Vss 20-21 shows how the proliferation of personal sins
(under the Law) is covered along with the sin of Adam, in the free
gift. By implication "the justification to life" of verse
19 leaves room to incorporate those who (conditionally) receive the
abundance of grace.
So the reign of sin in death (both temporal and eternal)
is broken. Grace now reigns through righteousness to eternal life,
for those who (conditionally) receive the abundance of grace.
I have noticed when we have exposed a problem in Mark's
position; he uses a decoy tactic. By finding what he perceives to be
a flaw and exaggerating it, he diverts the eye of the reader away
from himself and on to his opponents. The reader then thinks we have
the problem, when all the while he is the one with the problem. He
pretends he had no difficulties with his interpretation of these
verses. Let us see if that is true.
They say, V12 teaches that death (both physical and
spiritual) entered the world through Adam. In keeping with this,
Calvinism teaches we all sinned in Adam and the sin was imputed to
his descendants.
However, Paul argues in V's 13-14, that death reigned
even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of Adam's
offence. Friends, M&M denies this, they believe like Roman
Catholics, that we are guilty of Adam's sin and we died spiritually
and physically because we actually sinned in Adam. They affirm what
Paul denies! Is Paul right or are M&M and the Catholics right?
When Vss 15-16 say, "But the free gift is not like
the transgression." Mark & Micah again say the opposite.
They say the judgment arose from "one transgression"
resulting in condemnation to all men. And the free gift arose from
"many transgressions" resulting in justification (spiritual
life) to the many (the elect). This reductionism makes the contrast
in V16 between the "one transgression" and the "many
transgressions" null and void. Friends, Calvinists have the
problem with the ‘alls’ in these verses. They teach
“justification of life” applies only to the elect not to
all men. So they contract and expand the ‘alls’ in these
verses to suit their doctrine. No, Mark, we do not have a problem
with the ‘alls.’ You do!
The "much more" of V 17 becomes "much
less" in their interpretation because according to Calvin
Christ's justification to life only covers the elect.
Micah's comment on Vss 18-19 is revealing, "Adam's
fall," he said, "brought 'condemnation to all men,' …
and the second Adam brings 'justification of life,'" but he
deliberately left out, "to all men" (v 18). Why did he do
that? Because Calvinists have a problem with "all men" in
these verses. Although they see, "the condemnation"
(spiritual and physical death) is to all men, when it comes to "the
justification of life," they do not want it to be to all but to
many. Since the verse says "to all men," then all men are
saved. If this does not add up to universal salvation then 1+1=3.
I would like to know since all men are condemned
(spiritually and physically) in Adam, could individual transgressions
make them any more condemned? If not then the idea of grace abounding
(V 20-21) is nonsense.
Good reader none of these monumental problems were
tackled. No explanation offered. So don't be fooled by Mark's decoy.
M&M are going to poke fun at my description of the
natural man. Please re-read point 3 on my Questions and Answers
paper. Their elucidation of the natural man makes him nothing more
than a robot preprogrammed by God for failure. He cannot change
unless the Programmer installs a program for change. However God will
not do that because God wants the natural man to fail. He must fail
because God destined him for hell.
The Scriptures teach that Adam and Eve sinned in the
garden of Eden (Job 31:33). They were driven away from the tree of
life so they could not eat and live forever (Gen 3:24). Because their
descendants had no access to the tree of life, they also were doomed
to die physically (Rom 5:12). When a child is conceived God forms the
spirit in each one (Zech 12:1). Although born into a sinful world,
each child is pure and sinless in the image of God (Eccl 7:29).
However, in their youth they go astray by sinning against God (Gen
8:21). They are then (spiritually) dead in their transgressions and
sins (Eph 2:1-3). God makes them aware of the imminent danger they
are in through the Gospel (Mk 16:15-16). He points out Jesus is the
way, the truth and the life. That no one comes to the Father but by
Him (Jn 14:6). God demands a freewill response from us. We must
believe (Jn 8:24), repent (Lk 24:47), and be baptized for the
forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38). Being born again of water and the
Spirit makes us children of God (Jn 3:3,5). Christians must then
co-operate with God by setting their minds on the things of the
Spirit (Rom 8:5-7) for eternal life. Through repentance, God
continues to justify us (forgive our sins and count us righteous) in
this way our eternal life is secured (1 Jn 1:5-10).
The reader will see that Kieran and myself answered the
arguments and Scripture presented. We take seriously "Anyone who
goes too far and does not abide in the teaching of Christ has not
God. He who abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son"
(2 Jn 9). For our part, we were deeply concerned to explain every
Scripture in its context, and to have it harmonize with all other
Scriptures. It seems Mark and Micah were more concerned about their
theology than word of God (2 Tim 3:16-17).
Hereditary Total Depravity is unscriptural, and it has
not been proved Scriptural in this debate.
Steve Kearney
**********
Printer friendly version of this article
Micah's final paper
Micah's first paper
Kieran's first paper
