Depravity of Man:The difference between Catholics and n-C Christainity?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Church_Militant
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Michael, (that’s what I’ll call you, CM is too harsh), et al.

Today is Saturday, a day that I run errands for my lovely wife, I am sure that you all understand.

Anyway, because of errands, and because I am a slow thinker (though I think about these things all the time) it will probably be later in the day before I get a post up in keeping with the topic of depravity.

Until then,

God Bless,
and be kind to strangers,
Bill
 
40.png
mj330:
Correct. The depravity suggests that man can do no good, thus eliminating a free will to choose right over wrong. If man were totally depraved, how could he ever come to make a right choice to be “saved”? Further, the punishments in the Garden (the very things that Christ restored) never addressed the new spiritual state of man.
Click to expand...
We don’t chose to have faith - it’s a gift from God which is why when Jesus said to Peter, “Who do you say I am?” and Peter responded “You are the Christ” Jesus said, " Blessed are you… for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven."

Also, for the record Bill, I agree with you 100% that when you start chipping away at the validity of the creation account everything else falls - No Adam - no Eve. No Eve - no fall. No fall - no Jesus. Wrong.
 
Hey All!
I would just like to interject a couple of things that may help us move forward and (with the help of the Holy Spirit) stay focused on the topic of the depravity of man.

To help dispose of the underlying discussion of the literal or symbolic accounts of the creation I would offer the following verse from 2nd Peter 3:8. But of this one thing be not ignorant, my beloved, that one day with the Lord is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

So then the issue of whether creation occured in a literal day is clearly brought into some question, and best left as it is…a mystery of faith. Which means that it is not something that cannot be understood; but something that we cannot understand completely.

On the depravity issue: This belief will affect how one sees all aspects of life and creation, so Bill and I think it is a relevent discussion. Please feel free to share what insights, opinions, scriptures, and whatever else will add to all of us coming to a better understanding of this aspect of Christianity.
Pax vobiscum,
 
carol marie:
We don’t chose to have faith - it’s a gift from God which is why when Jesus said to Peter, “Who do you say I am?” and Peter responded “You are the Christ” Jesus said, " Blessed are you… for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven."

Also, for the record Bill, I agree with you 100% that when you start chipping away at the validity of the creation account everything else falls - No Adam - no Eve. No Eve - no fall. No fall - no Jesus. Wrong.
Click to expand...
Perhaps a better phrasing would have been that it would affect whether we could even choose to respond to that gift of faith? We do indeed choose to do right or wrong, since we are all endowed with free will, are we not?
 
Church Militant:
Perhaps a better phrasing would have been that it would affect whether we could even choose to respond to that gift of faith? We do indeed choose to do right or wrong, since we are all endowed with free will, are we not?
Click to expand...
Agreed.
 
Please read post #15 above by Church Militant before reading this, thanks.

The point of this discussion is to examine our differing views of man’s condition since the Fall.

I believe that, because of the Fall, man is totally depraved.

I do not hold this view frivolously, and I am aware of the implications contained within it. I am made uneasy by it at times, but I am comfortable with it, knowing that while there are many things that cannot be fully explained by me, or others of much greater intellect than I possess. I am confident in the God who made us all, that He knows exactly what He is doing, and all of our unanswerable questions are perfectly resolved in His mind.

Also, I notice that most of you who are Catholics, argue from Church doctrine, and from the historical Fathers. I am not familiar with the CCC (for this post, Michael has provided us with the pertinent sections from the CCC), but I am becoming so, because of this discussion. I confess that I am not as familiar with the Church Fathers as are all of you. I have been a believer for a little more than 7 years, and because of work and other time constraints, I have focused my reading primarily in the Scripture, and in other writers from the Reformed Perspective. I agree with their understanding of man’s condition, not because of who they are, but because I find it to be in accord with Scripture. For that reason, I will argue and reason my points from the Scripture, supporting my statements from the Scripture.

Starting with the Fall

#385 Agreed
#386 Agreed
#387 Agreed with Exception: ***sin is an abuse of the freedom that God gives to created persons. ***I believe sin is more than an abuse of freedom. It is “something” (Rom 7:21, 23, 25; 8:2).
#388 Agreed
#389 Agreed with a question: If by the statement, ***The Church, which has the mind of Christ, ***is meant that each believer possesses the mind of Christ agreed.
#390 Agreed with Exception: figurative language
#396 Agreed with Exception stated in my original post.
#397 Agreed.
#398 Agreed a question: what is meant by …man was destined to be fully “divinized.” (not pertinent to topic
#399 Agreed with addition: that the image of God in man has also been “distorted.”
#400 Agreed.
#402 Agreed with 2 Exceptions: 1) ***the universality of salvation in Christ… ***2) ***leads to acquittal and life for all men. ***(different topic.)
#403 Agreed with Exception: **Because of this certainty of faith, the Church baptizes for the remission of sins even tiny infants who have not committed personal sin. **(different topic.)
#404 Agreed: In light of my exceptions to #402, and #403, this may seem curious, so I want to point out the importance of the statement: …all are implicated in Christ’s justice. Probably another topic, but I do believe that ***all men ***are affected positively by Christ’s justice (the Cross). Also within #404 another statement I think is important: ***…and that is why original sin is called “sin” only in an analogical sense: it is a sin “contracted” and not “committed” - a state and not an act. ***A ***state ***of being: the sin nature.
#405 Exception: CCC states: ***…but human nature has not been totally corrupted; it is wounded… ***Man is not simply “wounded” by his sin nature, he is dead in it (Eph 2:1ff). The CCC says: ***“Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle.” ***I do not believe that any external act performed either by a person, or on, upon, or to a person results in removal of sin, or impartation of life, with the exception of the regeneration by the Holy Spirit; God alone possesses the power of the forgiveness of sins, and regeneration of man’s dead spirit.
#406 Agree that this is a statement by the Church concerning Her teachings.

(continued below)
 
(cont. from post #26)

#407 Agreed with Exception: CCC states: “Ignorance of the fact that man has a wounded nature inclined to evil…” See #405
#408 Agreed
#409 Agreed
#410 Agreed with Exception: God has not abandoned man in general, in that He lets him live, though he deserves death; he sends the rain to provide him food, etc., but He does abandon some to their sin (Rom 1:26, 28; Eph 4:19).
#411 Agreed with Exception: CCC states: ***“Mary benefited first of all and uniquely from Christ’s victory over sin: she was preserved from all stain of original sin and by a special grace of God committed no sin of any kind during her whole earthly life.” ***I do not agree with that statement. (Different Topic).

Also, in #411, and other places the term “superabundantly, or superabundant grace,” while I understand them literally, is there any other significance attached to it?
#412 Agreed with addition: I believe that God’s permitting evil is primarily related to the display of His glory.

I have yet to come across any statements in the documents provided by Michael, that address God’s disposition toward man, other than the statement that He has not abandoned man, on which I commented above (#410).

I’ll start to close this post with a statement by the apostle Paul, of God’s disposition toward man since the Fall.

Romans 1:18-20 (NASB95)
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them.
20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.

God is angry continuously with sinful men. One can only suppress something that he has possession of, in this case, that which is known about God. This verse says that everyone knows, and is now and will be at the judgment unable to plead ignorance of God.

The Greek word translated wrath, is orge, from which we get our word orgy. It is translated wrath, and anger in other places in scripture (Mt. 3:7; Mk 3:5; Rom 2:5; Eph 2:3 etc.). I had an opportunity, earlier this year, to hear R.C. Sproul preach on this verse. In his sermon, he further fleshed out the connotation of the word orge. I found it frightening.

He said that within the word is the idea of fury.

In v18 then, God is furious with those who suppress the truth.

He is not just furious.

He is Furious!

God is Love, John tells us. And, today, great emphasis is placed upon this one attribute to the neglect of God’s whole character. In pulpits across the world, a “soft” message is being preached. The emphasis today seems to be upon what God is going to do for you. What hasn’t he done for us? I think an examination of man’s sinfulness is good. We all need to be reminded of it daily, so that we appreciate the cross of Christ daily.

One last thing, I am not “ecumenical” in my belief. I do not believe that there are many ways to get to God. Christ Himself taught that. I am not “inclusive” in my belief, but neither was Christ. A careful and thoughtful reading of the Gospels shows Him to be an exclusionist. There is one name given among men by which we must be saved.That is an imperative, a command. Anyone who is not saved, is disobeying that command.

Thanks to all of you for this opportunity, and special thanks to Michael (Church Militant) for getting this rolling.

Bill
 
carol marie:
We don’t chose to have faith - it’s a gift from God which is why when Jesus said to Peter, “Who do you say I am?” and Peter responded “You are the Christ” Jesus said, " Blessed are you… for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven."

Also, for the record Bill, I agree with you 100% that when you start chipping away at the validity of the creation account everything else falls - No Adam - no Eve. No Eve - no fall. No fall - no Jesus. Wrong.
Click to expand...
Thanks Carol. Faith is a gift.

Bill
 
Y’know Bill, I have trouble with this “sinners in the hands of an angry God” interpretation and I can’t really understand how we get the “FURIOUS” view from the NT, since along with the passages that you quote, I find the parable of the Prodigal Son offering a side of God that doesn’t seem to jive with yours. :hmmm:
drbo.org/chapter/49015.htm (Luke 15)

and also statements like this from Jesus Himself. (also from Luke 15:10) So I say to you, there shall be joy before the angels of God upon one sinner doing penance.

I certainly comprehend the anger of God at those who reject Him and finally find themselves in hell, but I’m not sure that you have a balance…and I feel that that is what is taught in the context of all scripture, y’know?

This is part of what I meant by the difference in the Catholic worldview, because we know of God’s displeasure with sin as you so well presented, but in balance of scripture I really think that I see the world as called by the Love of God…not hanging by a thread of spider’s web over the fires of hell. and it does indeed color my view of all things around me.

Though I get distressed with all the immorality and injustices around me, I still see that the people in this world have great potential for good as they come to Christ, having accepted that gift of faith from Him and then cooperate with His superabundant grace.

In my mind, seeing people as you describe it makes it all too easy for me to hate, and I know that that is not God’s will. I mean, I can certainly find ample reasons to hate all on my own :rolleyes: , but if I feel that God is angry and furious with mankind then I tend to think it’s okay for me to be that way too…and that (IMO) sort of smacks of me wanting to play God.

In my own heart, I have to remember to beg God to be as merciful with others as I know He has been with me. That is the soul of forgiveness in my own heart, and it ain’t always very easy, but I know that it is right.

Just some of my thoughts…
Pax tecum,
 
Who can really believe in the total depravity of man? Do non-Christian parents live in terror of their children? “Lock the bedroom door honey, otherwise the totally depraved toddlers might sneak into our room at night with a can of gas and a book of matches.”

Sheesh!

As with most things Calvinist, total depravity is a weird and inhuman premise that is far removed from what normal human beings experience in reality. Exactly why ordinary, intelligent, human beings can say with a straight face that they believe in the total depravity of man, or that they have no free will, is a mystery that I have never been able to penetrate.
 
Hi Michael,

(reply to post #29)

I know you have trouble with it; and I agree with your view on the Lk 15:10 passage; the point of all three parables in Lk 15 is the joy of God, the heavens, the angels over one sinner who repents.

Look Michael, when I upped the size and boldness of “furious” it was to make a point. I am not some unbalanced raving lunatic who stands on the street corner preaching fire and brimstone. Still, when I preach the gospel, I start with the bad news, what the CCC called “the reverse side,” #389. One cannot grasp the good news, without first understanding of the bad news.

I agree with you completely, you and I have a differing world view. That doesn’t mean I wouldn’t have a hamburger and fries and go to a ballgame with you though.

The problem that I have with your view is, as you put it, “I see the world as called by the Love of God.”

(I use larger type to point out the focus of religion today; I am not yelling).

God has many attributes; love is only one of them.

For the sake of argument: God is loving, kind, slow to anger, longsuffering, compassionate, wrathful, just, holy, etc.

When one views God primarily as LOVE, kind, slow to anger, longsuffering etc. It is my contention that this view of God is distorted (as illustrated by the size of type). Scripture presents God as all of the above in the same amount of fullness, all of the time. He is not just love in the NT, and anger in the OT, but all them to their full extent, always. Christ’s coming in love did not negate God’s anger toward sin and sinners.

We diminish and neglect His other attributes to our own peril.

You say, “I still see that the people in this world have great potential for good as they come to Christ…” I agree. “As they come to Christ” is the key to that. Prior to that, they are “dead” in their sins (Eph 2:1). They simply are not pleasing to God in that state; in fact, they are his enemies (Rom 8:7).

Contrary to making me hate them, I fear for them, and as you say, try to love them. That is what the Lord did. Their state breaks my heart! You and I both agree that not everyone is going to obtain eternity good, but some eternity bad. That is why I take evangelism so seriously.

And you are right, God’s will for us is not to hate, but to plead with them to be reconciled to God (2 Cor 5:20). We are not to hate unbelievers, or anyone else (Rom 12:14ff). I take v18 to heart. That is what the Lord did.

Good to hear from you.

Bill
 
Matt 16-18

You said:
40.png
Matt16_18:
Who can really believe in the total depravity of man? Do non-Christian parents live in terror of their children? “Lock the bedroom door honey, otherwise the totally depraved toddlers might sneak into our room at night with a can of gas and a book of matches.”
Click to expand...
Certainly you know that many people do believe in man’s depravity. Let me first define it.

By man’s depravity is meant, that because of the fall, sin permeates every part of man’s nature. His “flesh.” And man remains in that condition, until he is regenerated by the HS. The primary consequence of man’s sin/depravity is separation from God, and that also has the consequence of wickedness, violence, etc. in the world.

I know that I am in opposition to CCC teaching that man’s nature is “wounded.” See Gen 6:5; 8:21; Rom 10:3ff; also Christ’s words Mt 7:11; cf Lk 11:13, and Mt 12:33-34. Regeneration is the thrust of v 33: make the tree good…

So then, let me say what total depravity is not. Total depravity does not mean that everyone is as bad as they could be. Just as you yourself say, “…what normal human beings experience in realty.” It is a paradox. Though you and I have differing beliefs regarding the nature of man, we both agree that there is an unseen drama at work (Heb 11:1). In that area of the unseen, the HS is at work restraining sin in the world (Jn 16:8). Some He convicts to repentance, others he convicts to restraint; that is also done by conscience, by which Paul says that men who do not have the law, or are as yet unregenerate do “instinctively” what the law says (Rom 2:14ff). Seeing the bad stuff that God allows, imagine what it would be like if the HS stopped restraining.

To use your depraved toddler analogy above, this is what we as parents (I don’t know if you are one), do when we discipline our children. There is that time known as the “terrible two’s.” The kid comes into his own, his sin nature is gearing up, and as a parent you discipline him; you restrain that sin nature in him, teaching him to gain control over it; though he will never control it well until regeneration. (I know that you believe in baptismal regeneration, I do not, but that is not the topic here).

Look Matthew, depravity does not compute with us; we are prideful. We say, “What!, me depraved!” No! Nevertheless, that is what I believe scripture teaches. Depravity/sin is the explanation of hatred, murder etc., that we see in the world.

Good to hear from you, too

Bill
 
40.png
sonseeker:
If we cannot believe God from the beginning, can we believe Him at all? When can we believe Him?
Click to expand...
First, you’ve gotten way off topic. The discussion is about whether or not man is totally depraved.

Secondly, I think you’re reading your own prejudices into what was said.

We can always believe the Scripture. Allegory and symbolism is a perfectly valid method of communicating and is used throughout the Sacred Scriptures. The Catholic Church has decreed and declared infallibly that the Scripture is the inerrant word of God.

Noe, to get back to the Topic of this thread: Man cannot be totally depraved because he is created in the image and likeness of the God who is all good. Additionally God, being all good, would not create something which is totally depraved.
 
Hi Bill,

Well, here we are on another thread.

After reading C.M.’s comments, I think I owe you an apology. I did feel that you were patronizing me, and trying to evangelize me, which I did not appreciate. Please accept my apology and let’s move on in the love of Christ.

I saw your comment on R.C. Sproul and I wanted you to know that he is one of the theologians who helped me find my way back to the Catholic Church! Ha, Ha. I’m not kidding. What do you think his initials stand for?

Seriously, I’ve always been impressed with R.C.’s fairness in presenting the other side’s viewpoint. (I’m building up a collection of his books.) And his very high regard for Augustine and Aquinas led me to conclude that maybe they were right. Bill, these two thinkers, and R.C. calls them the two greatest minds ever produced by Christianity, were thoroughly Catholic. If they were on the planet today, they would be calling R.C. into the Church that our Lord Jesus established.

Anyway, I will post more on your comments on the “wrath” of God in a bit.

Blessings,

Gene
 
Bill,

I decided not to respond to your comments on the wrath of God because it will take the thread off topic.

If you are interested, here is a link to an essay on Catholic apologist Jimmy Akin’s Web site. It deals with the Greek word hilasterion and the meaning of God’s “wrath.” Interesting reading and I think it will stimulate your thinking.

jimmyakin.org/2004/03/and_speaking_of.html

Grace and peace,
Gene
 
40.png
Ignatius:
First, you’ve gotten way off topic. The discussion is about whether or not man is totally depraved.
Secondly, I think you’re reading your own prejudices into what was said…

Now, to get back to the Topic of this thread: Man cannot be totally depraved because he is created in the image and likeness of the God who is all good. Additionally God, being all good, would not create something which is totally depraved.
Click to expand...
Yes, Ignatius, man is made in the image of God, but, because of the fall, that image was distorted, and we inherited Adams image. A major aspect of salvation, is to restore man to that image of God that has been distorted. Listen to the language.

1 Corinthians 15:47-49
47 The first man is from the earth, earthy; the second man is from heaven.
48 As is the earthy, so also are those who are earthy; and as is the heavenly, so also are those who are heavenly.
49 Just as we have borne the image of the earthy, we will also bear the image of the heavenly.

Because of the fall we bear the image of the earthy. The image of the Godly is distorted and must be restored.

Romans 8:29
29 For those whom He foreknew, He also predestinedto become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren;

We are predestined **to become conformed to the image of His son **v29. The image has become that of Adam, and must now be made to become that of His Son, who is God. That also is borne out in the 1 Cor passage above, when we are resurrected and glorified we will also bear the image of the heavenly, the second man (v47) Jesus Himself.

2 Corinthians 3:18
18 But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, ***are being transformed into the same image ***from glory to glory, just as from the Lord, the Spirit.

Which image, the one beholding as in a mirror—the Lord’s

Being regenerated results in many things: justification (declared right with God); redemption (bought by Christ, His possession, which He guards jealously); salvation (saved from the wrath of God in the final judgement); conformity to the image of Christ (restoration of the image of God) etc.

Indeed, God did not make something that was totally depraved. Adam was “good,” then he fell.

I do not see a prejudice, rather a careful reading of scripture.

Bill
 
Gene C.:
Hi Bill,

After reading C.M.’s comments, I think I owe you an apology. I did feel that you were patronizing me, and trying to evangelize me, which I did not appreciate. Please accept my apology and let’s move on in the love of Christ.
Click to expand...
Amen!

Bill
 
Hey Bill!, 👋
Good post my friend! 🙂
First lemme say that I’ll be happy to go for the burger deal…but you’re buyin’ cos I’m broke. 😛

I understand perfectly what you are saying, and as always have to say that there is much that we can agree upon.

The bad news/ good news analogy is quite good, and I think that it adequately assesses the truth of the Gospel. I guess it’s all in one’s presentation…and I am by no means faulting yours. I used to tell people all the time (during my time away from the Church), that I really didn’t have to say much about going to hell because most of the folks I knew who were headed in that direction seemed to be sort of living out the previews. 😦

I wonder if our own message shouldn’t be more like that of Jesus himself. Again and again he told people that their sins were forgiven and that they should go and sin no more.

In thinking about the concept of total depravity, I wonder, from a scriptural point of view if perhaps Romans 1:18 isn’t relevent in that it seems to indicate that the real “total” depravity belongs to those who not only reject the gospel, but supress it with their wickedness.
The wrath of God is indeed being revealed from heaven against every impiety and wickedness of those who suppress the truth by their wickedness.

I don’t think that St. Paul is saying that all of us are so depraved since we have not all done that and I also wonder if (in your opinion) this depravity of which we speak is still inherent in the nature of man after regeneration. Naturally I’m not talkning about people who reject their faith and pursue a life of sin and apostasy, since their souls are in grave danger anyway and the results are generally extreme.
(This may be touching on another issue; eternal security. Something that we Catholics reject. Also, perhaps predestination; also rejected).

I kinda think that the concept of mankind as being totally depraved (since God sees all his creation as “very good”.) is more than the context of the whole Bible (and especially the New Testament) implies.

Note to all concerned: Please know that Bill is not being anti-Catholic and/or seeking to evangelize us. This thread is simply a discussion of the differing views of mankind and how they affect our worldviews. Bill has been very courteous and considerate in our discussions and I’d appreciate it if we all kept our posts on that level. Let us always assume the best about each other unless the post in question shows otherwise. Remember 1st Peter 3:15.
Pax vobiscum,
 
I don’t believe that man cannot respond to God as 5-point Calvinists teach.

And you have not his word abiding in you: for whom he has sent, him you believe not. You search the scriptures; for in them you think you have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. And you will not come to me, that you might have life. (John 5:38-40)

In John 5, Jesus tells the Pharisees that they do not have God’s Word abiding in them. He tells them that they do not believe. So clearly, they are spiritually dead. Yet He says to them, “You will not come to Me that you might have life.” Jesus would not upbraid them for not coming to Him for life, if they already had life. These Pharisees were clearly spiritually dead.

Here’s the question: Why would Jesus upbraid them for NOT coming to Him for life, unless they COULD come to Him for life?
 
40.png
EA_Man:
I don’t believe that man cannot respond to God as 5-point Calvinists teach.

Here’s the question: Why would Jesus upbraid them for NOT coming to Him for life, unless they COULD come to Him for life?
Click to expand...
Hi EA Man, 👋
So then, by this you mean? I just wanna be sure that we understand what you are saying. Is this more a point concerning predestination…which of course ties in with total depravity, but isn’t specific to it?

I reject predestinaition as well as does the Catholic Church since it denies that man has free will. Now your passage & your commentary seems to affirm that free will since as you point out, Jesus upbraids them for failing to use that free will to come to Him in order to obtain eternal life, right?
Pax vobiscum,
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top