Total Inability in the WCF (Part 3)
Chapter IX
III. Man, by his fall into a state of sin, hath wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation:(d) so as, a natural man, being altogether averse from that good,(e) and dead in sin,(f) is not able, by his own strength, to convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto.(g)
(d) Rom. 5:6; Rom 8:7; John 15:5.
(e) Rom. 3:10, 12.
(f) Eph. 2:1, 5; Col. 2:13.
(g) John 6:44, 65; Eph. 2:2, 3, 4, 5; I Cor. 2:14; Titus 3:3, 4, 5.
“and dead in sin,”
The proof texts cited for this phrase are:
Ephesians 2:1 And you he made alive, when you were dead through the trespasses and sins 2 in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience-
Ephesians 2:4 But God, who is rich in mercy, out of the great love with which he loved us, 5 even when we were dead through our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved),
Colossians 2:13 And you, who were dead in trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses,
Comments:
What does “dead in sin”, or “dead through trespasses and sins” mean? The Confession implies that it means that man has “wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation”, and that man is unable, “by his own strength, to convert himself, or to prepare himself unto conversion.” But Paul connects “dead in sin” with “following the course of this world”, “following the prince of the power of the air”, living in the passions of the flesh, following the desires of body and mind, yielding the members to sin as instruments of wickedness. I don’t see any mention of “inability of will” either in these texts or in their contexts.
But some say, “Dead means dead. A dead man is unable to exercise his will.” As I have posted earlier, the metaphor of deadness is not the only one used in the Scripture in connection with the condition of the unregenerate. The metaphor of slavery is used (Romans 6), and that of weakness (Romans 5:6). Slave means slave, and slaves are not dead. Weak means weak, and the weak are not dead. What do those who give “dead” such force of meaning do with these other metaphors? Do they give them equal force?
In other texts, such as Romans 6:16, 21, 23, the relation that death bears to sin is prospective. In other words, sin leads to or bears fruit for death. And in Ephesians 5:14 and Revelation 3:2, the “dead” are told to arise or awake. It doesn’t seem that "dead" always means "dead" in the way that some assert.
Rather than “inability of will”, which is nowhere in the context of the above verses, I believe “dead in sin” is analogous to living in the passions of the flesh, following the course of this world, etc. Paul speaks of sin "springing to life" and "killing" him. It is in this state of "death" that he presumably is able to "will what is right", although he can't do it.
The metaphor could also refer to being “dead” in a judicial sense—that is, under a sentence of death, or condemnation. I believe this metaphor ought to be interpreted in a manner consistent with other metaphors and analogies pertaining to the unregenerate. And in light of the many texts where a command is given, and ability to obey is assumed, I don’t believe the Confession’s association of “dead in sin” with “inability of will” is warranted.
Total Inability in the WCF (Part 2)
For ease of reference, I cite the pertinent section of the WCF again:
Chapter IX
III. Man, by his fall into a state of sin, hath wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation:(d) so as, a natural man, being altogether averse from that good,(e) and dead in sin,(f) is not able, by his own strength, to convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto.(g)
(d) Rom. 5:6; Rom 8:7; John 15:5.
(e) Rom. 3:10, 12.
(f) Eph. 2:1, 5; Col. 2:13.
(g) John 6:44, 65; Eph. 2:2, 3, 4, 5; I Cor. 2:14; Titus 3:3, 4, 5.
“…so as a natural man, being altogether averse from that good,”
The proof texts cited for this phrase are:
Romans 3:10 as it is written: "None is righteous, no, not one;
Romans 3:12 All have turned aside, together they have gone wrong; no one does good, not even one."
Comments:
Paul is citing from Psalm 14 here to support his statement that all men, both Jews and Greeks, are under the power of sin. I agree that men are generally “altogether averse from the good accompanying salvation” as the Confession states. However, I don’t know why the term “a natural man” is inserted. Are the authors inferring a connection between a “natural man” and “being altogether averse from that good”? I don’t find “natural man” in the Scriptures. But I do find Gentiles doing by nature what the law requires. (Rom. 2:14). Perhaps by “a natural man” the authors of the WCF mean a man whose mind is set on the flesh.
Total Inability in the WCF (Part 1)
In the next couple of posts, I will address the doctrine of total inability, as expressed in the Westminster Confession of Faith (WCF), along with the proof texts used to support this doctrine.
From the WCF:
Chapter IX
III. Man, by his fall into a state of sin, hath wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation:(d) so as, a natural man, being altogether averse from that good,(e) and dead in sin,(f) is not able, by his own strength, to convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto.(g)
(d) Rom. 5:6; Rom 8:7; John 15:5.
(e) Rom. 3:10, 12.
(f) Eph. 2:1, 5; Col. 2:13.
(g) John 6:44, 65; Eph. 2:2, 3, 4, 5; I Cor. 2:14; Titus 3:3, 4, 5.
Let’s consider the language of the Confession here along with the proof texts provided to support such language.
“Man, by his fall into a state of sin, hath wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation.”
The texts cited to support this statement are:
Romans 5:6 While we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly.
Romans 8:7 For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God's law, indeed it cannot;
John 15:5 I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in me, and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing.
Comments:
The “ability of will” is not mentioned in any of these texts. Yet the Confession asserts that man has wholly lost his "ability of will" to any spiritual good accompanying salvation.
Romans 5:6 speaks of being “weak”. Some, in characterizing our condition apart from Christ, emphasize the metaphor of “deadness in sin” to the exclusion of other metaphors such as this one. “Dead means dead”, they say. But the Scriptures also describe our condition as “weak” and as being a “slave”.
Romans 8:7 speaks of the mind set on the flesh being hostile to God. Such a mind cannot submit to God’s law. Again, there is no mention of “ability of will” here. I take this to mean that the mind set on the flesh cannot submit to God’s law as long as it remains hostile and set on the flesh. But, may a man not change his mind? The LORD says through Ezekiel (18:31): “Cast away from you all the transgressions which you have committed against me, and get yourselves a new heart and a new spirit! Why will you die, O house of Israel?”
Also, it seems that the force given to the Greek word translated “cannot” here ought to be given to John’s use of the same Greek word when he writes, “No one born of God commits sin; for God's nature abides in him, and he cannot sin because he is born of God.” (1 John 3:9)
In John 15:5, Jesus is speaking to his disciples who had already been made “clean” by the word he had spoken to them. These “branches” can do nothing, that is, bear no fruit, apart from the "vine". Taking this verse in its context, it seems to bear no relation to the assertion of the
Confession--that man has wholly lost "all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation".
Total Inability, Gracious Ability and Justice
A just law implies ability to obey.
This is a "first truth of reason" or "first principle". As such, its truth cannot be arrived at either by induction or deduction; its truth is simply universally assumed.
Now, if a hearer of the command "Repent and believe the gospel" is unable to do so, as the doctrine of total depravity (or total inability) asserts, then this command, with respect to the hearer who is unable, is unjust. This is true regardless of anything foregoing which caused or contributed to the hearer's inability.
Consider the following analogy, (looking past its ludicrous content.) Assume that God requires a man to approach him hopping on his right leg. This is what God desires, and it is the only way for this man to be reconciled to God. The man has two sound legs, is fully able to hop on his right leg to God, but is unwilling to do so. In fact, he wants nothing to do with God and runs off. As it happens he falls into a piece of industrial machinery which severs both of his legs. At this juncture, the man is unable to be reconciled to God. Although the man may bear guilt for the actions leading to the severing of his legs, which results in his inability, God's requirement that this man hop on his right leg to Him in order to be reconciled is no longer just with respect to this man. It is no longer just because it is impossible for the man to obey.
To complete the analogy, assume that the man is now willing to be reconciled to God, but he hasn't a leg to stand, let alone hop, on. Also, assume that God does not alter His requirement that the man must hop on his right leg to God in order to be reconciled to Him. Under these circumstances, for God's unaltered requirement to be just, God must, as a matter of justice, enable the man to hop.
Thus, if a man is unable to "repent and believe the gospel", regardless of the cause of his inability, and if the command is maintained, God must, as a matter of justice (not grace), enable the man to repent and believe. Put another way, if God is to justly hold accountable any individual for failing to obey the command to repent and believe the gospel, in justice, He must enable such individual to repent and believe.
As an aside - In the above analogy, the legless man did not lose his ability to will. But the doctrine of total depravity or total inability actually goes further than this. The doctrine asserts that man is unable to choose or will to repent or believe. If this be the case, and if moral character is identified in the will, then under this doctrine the totally depraved or unable is no longer a moral agent.
Wisdom Calling
As marinated tenderloin slow sizzles on the grill,
As butter melts on glazed croissants, and crystal goblets fill
With blood red wine; thick seashell cotton cloths are neatly poised
On powdered plates, in time to settle down on laps as noised
Abroad the call to come is echoed from the heights; and all
The simple, honest folk who gladly hear the earnest call
To nobly dine in truth with grace, eschewing silver, gold
And jewel, enter, sit and fill their souls with life untold.
Divine Sovereignty
In a moral universe (like the one in which we live), God's sovereignty does not consist in a meticulous control of all things by an exhaustive decree (as some suppose), but rather in the exercise of justice.
Reconciling friends
Charles Spurgeon, when asked about the seeming contradiction between human freedom and divine sovereignty, replied famously, "I do not try to reconcile friends."
Divine sovereignty and human freedom, rightly understood, are indeed "friends". But if we understand these two in such a way that they involve a definitional contradiction, or in such a way that either one or the other loses its meaning, then they are no longer "friends". And our citing Spurgeon with such an understanding may simply be rhetorical evasion.
Bloody Resolve
"Fight on, my men," says Sir Andrew Barton,
"I am hurt, but I am not slain;
I'll lay me down and bleed a while,
And then I'll rise and fight again.
- From the Ballad of Andrew Barton
Total Depravity
The Coalbiters Club, of which I am a founding member, is a men's discussion group which meets at my home each Thursday evening beginning at about 8 p.m. We are currently examining the "petals" of the TULIP: total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace and perseverance of the saints. We discussed the "T" this past Thursday. Following is a brief discussion of my opinion of this doctrine.
From Wikipedia:
Total depravity (also called total inability and total corruption) is a theological doctrine that derives from the Augustinian doctrine of original sin and is advocated in many Protestant confessions of faith and catechisms, including those of Lutheranism,[1] , Anglicanism and Methodism,[2] , and especially Calvinism.[3] The doctrine interprets the Bible as teaching that, as a consequence of the Fall of man, every person born into the world is enslaved to the service of sin and, apart from the grace of God, is utterly unable to choose to follow God or choose to accept salvation as it is freely offered.
Summary of the doctrine
The doctrine of total inability teaches that people are not by nature inclined to love God with their whole heart, mind, or strength, as he requires, but rather all are inclined to serve their own interests over those of their neighbor and to reject the rule of God. Even religion and philanthropy are destructive to the extent that these originate from a human imagination, passions, and will. Total depravity does not mean, however, that people are as bad as possible. Rather, it means that even the good which a person may intend is faulty in its premise, false in its motive, and weak in its implementation; and there is no mere refinement of natural capacities that can correct this condition. Although total depravity is easily confused with philosophical cynicism, the doctrine teaches optimism concerning God's love for what he has made and God's ability to accomplish the ultimate good that he intends for his creation. In particular, in the process of salvation, it is argued that God overcomes man's inability with his divine grace and enables men and women to choose to follow him, though the precise means of this overcoming varies between the theological systems.
From the canons of Dort:
Article 3: Total Inability
Therefore, all people are conceived in sin and are born children of wrath, unfit for any saving good, inclined to evil, dead in their sins, and slaves to sin; without the grace of the regenerating Holy Spirit they are neither willing nor able to return to God, to reform their distorted nature, or even to dispose themselves to such reform.
Some proof texts for the doctrine (from the Wikipedia entry):
Genesis 6:5: "The LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually."
Jeremiah 13:23 (NIV): "Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard its spots? Neither can you do good who are accustomed to doing evil."
John 6:44a: "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him."
Romans 3:10-11: "None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God."
Romans 8:7-9: "For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God. You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him."
Ephesians 2:3b: "[We] were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind."
1 Corinthians 2:14: "The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned."
The doctrine of total depravity, or total inability, as it is historically expressed, includes language to the effect that man is naturally unable to seek God, or to obey the commands to "repent" and "believe". I see two fundamental flaws with the inclusion of this language in the expression of the doctrine. First, a just command implies an ability to obey. Second, none of the scriptures relied on as "proof texts" address man's will, or ability to choose.
I readily accept what the Scriptures say about the condition of the unregenerate man's heart or mind, and his failure, generally, to seek after God. But because the doctrine goes beyond Scripture, and is manifestly unreasonable, I am unable (that is, unwilling) to accept it.
From parasite to host
At the request of a friend, I have launched this blog. Rather than simply be a parasite on others' blogs, I am now able to be a host to parasites.
