Is total depravity (radical corruption) a biblical teaching?

The Book of Jeremiah chapter 12 refutes Total Depravity. I would suggest if even one book in the Old Testament refutes any part of TULIP , that is proof that TULIP is man made.

It isn't a word.
It's meant to insult people who believe in free will. Free choice.

Non-Reformed

Click to expand...

Facts won't have an impact. I would hope we know this by now.
TD is precisely as you describe a misrepresentation, misinterpretation, of the actual Gospel. That's why some, including myself, refer to TULIP as anti-Christ doctrine. Because it is the antithesis of the truth of the Gospel message Christ died to deliver to all the world.

Scripture tells us those who deem themselves called to preach will answer to a different standard of judgment, a more strict form, for thinking they were led to teach the word.
That does not just apply to those in the pulpit, but to those who promote a false ungodly doctrine in the name of Christ.

They wouldn't be able to do that as they'd be preaching to the choir.
What appears to be happening here is, because now UWC has said they're going to expand on this thread and go through all the points of TULIP, which they have done to a certain degree already, so we're to believe they're going to reiterate threads on Unconditional Election and the like again, UWC has committed now to posting threads that are expressly aimed at telling all non-reformed members here that they're not only wrong, but as we see in their post #18. they think non-reformed Christians beliefs are garbage.

They're trolling for Calvin! As someone said already in one of their other threads.

What more can be said by Christians that proves TULIP and RT doctrine is false, when all these threads UWC has started have been responded to repeating the same truths against his doctrine push as often as he posts new threads to push it?

You'll forgive me if I go so far as to say, if he posts it and we pay it attention he'll just keep going.
He's intending, as post #18 comes out and says, to degrade, insult, mock, and in my view, Troll, Christians who are not reformed!

That is also why he doesn't spend that time as UWC on Reformed Christian forums.
Now, Preacher4Truth? That's a different matter. They do. And if you read P4T they sound oddly familiar at those sites to one UWC.
Christianity Board Preacher4Truth -"I'm a Reformed Baptist"

Preacher4Truth - Baptist Board Posts
*Post #11 especially, (sound like UnitedWithChrist in the TULIP/Calvinism threads? )2014
Some flaws to Calvinism.. Reformed we need to get it together!

Lead by the Holy Spirit , I tell you, what we're witnessing is a dedicated campaign to malign non-Calvinists here. Just read the language of UWC. But see if P4T in that link above doesn't sound just like him.

Look, I personally know @preacher4truth and he is NOT @UnitedWithChrist . You accused me of using my username to advertise a Navajo Indian walling hangings. These baseless and unfounded accusations need to stop. NOW!!!

Making it easier for the link above entitled, "Preacher4Truth-Baptist Boards Posts, which would allow you to enter their name in the search block. I did it for you, here. 413 posts. *Note: There is a board, Calvinism & Arminianism Debate

Here is my question to both theological camps. Do you believe your opposition are saved Christians also? Or do you believe your theology is the only group that is saved?

The reason why they sound so similar is within Reformed theology, we are in lockstep with probably <95% of our beliefs. Were our differences come in is mainly eschatology and ecclesiology. But that is why @preacher4truth and @UnitedWithChrist sound so much alike.

Yes to the first and no to the second.

Okay good so

1. We should be able to work together to spread the Gospel.
2. I do wonder though on a deeper question if both are saved then in Calvinism both are of the elect. And according to the verse. John 10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. So both hear the voice if they are of the elect. How is their contradiction in theology?

I believe Jesus saves, not John Calvin.

I believe that if God were the Father that was actually truly responsible for what has been compiled into the doctrinal acronym of TULIP, that I've been worshiping Satan for more years than I'd like to admit.
In which case, I'd prefer to be an atheist. Because believing in no god would be better than serving the one responsible for the composition of doctrine, belief, that is,TULIP. Namely because TULIP gives the God I love and cherish in my faith a bad name.

It should be said so as to inform my sisters and brothers here that, Protestant (Pro-testant), denominations are not necessarily all under the doctrine of TULIP. Some think that Reformed Theology as is being discussed in many threads here pertains to all Protestant Denominations and as such TULIP pertains to all Protestant Denominations.
Thank God, this is not the case.

This article will help explain the difference. There are others that you may choose to search on your own. This article date is 2013. The host site went off-line early this year and that is why the Cache version is linked, as it is the only way to show you the article. Otherwise the site itself will give you a 404, page not found, error.

TULIP and Protestants


(This is the second part of my series on TULIP. The first part, based on the writings of the Church Fathers, is available here.)
Many of the great historical Protestant leaders have opposed some or all of “T.U.L.I.P.” — an acronym that summarizes the core beliefs of Calvinists. Here are some quotes about their conclusions. This list is not comprehensive. (source and full cached article)

We believe the elect were chosen in eternity past, their sins were given to the Son who lived the perfect life the Law demanded, was imputed their sins, atoned for them on the cross, rose for their(the elect) justification, and is now seated at the right hand of the Father interceding for them.

The free will side believes He died for everybody, the payment for their sins has been paid, and if they believe, they are then elected. They see the atonement in a general sense. He died for no one particular, bur everyone in general. He did His part so they have to do theirs. That's not bible.

We call it the finished work of the cross for a reason. The cross completed all that was needed to procure salvation for His ppl, the elect.

Yes, there is a huge chasm betwixt both theological camps.

Yes but if both are of the elect and both hear then how can there be contradiction if God is the logos or a all logical being?

This only gets more complicated if you deny free will. Then the contradiction gets even more difficult to explain.

But do you believe someone that holds the TULIP view like those posting in this thread are true or false Christians?

Free will is where we definitely get hung up with each other in this discussion. We see the will bound by the nature. The lost person is bound in sin, the whole man was ruined in the fall. As fallen ppl in Adam, even the will is enslaved to Satan, sin, and self. Its only after we have be given new Spiritual life, that our will has been liberated, and not before.

So we do believe we exercise our will, but we exercise it in accordance to our nature. The fallen man has a nature bound in sin, and so is the will. Once God has quickened them to life, the will is then freed from Satan, sin and self and believes and is saved. All this happens simultaneously.

Ppl have can have the right theology and still be lost, my friend. I've heard of some Reformed folks who have done some awful things. And I mean awful. No theological group has 100% saved in them.

There is saved people in both camps, many people that are Calvinist now used to be in the other camp, it takes some people years to see these truths and embrace them, others i believe remain Arminians in this life and on Judgment day find out they were wrong, they find out they were preaching and establishing a corrupted faith, that is filled with holes that was half good, half wicked.

Obviously this means, that alot of there ministry is burned up, this is a serious thing and they also find out that they caused alot of damage to God's people and his Kingdom. This is a serious issue.

In short there is unsaved people on both sides and God's Will is to bring his elect to the fullness of the faith, this process can take a long time, some i believe just dont get there in this life.

This is atleast a better explanation than those who say we are completely guided by God. I believe in total free will while you believe partial. But if both are of the elect and hear the same voice then still why do they contradict?

1. Should we?
   Is that what Total Depravity says of one who is first believed to be Totally Depraved. Totally incapable of understanding the Gospel until God puts that person into his grace through the act of Irresistible Grace?

There are Canon's that apply in Calvinism and that give it its "shape" as a Doctrinal construct.
A reminder of what Total Depravity means in TULIP:
Bible Responses

Ezekiel 18:19-23—“Yet you say, ‘Why should the son not bear the guilt of the father?’ Because the son has done what is lawful and right, and has kept all My statutes and done them, he shall surely live. The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself…. ‘Do I have any pleasure at all that the wicked should die?’ says the Lord GOD, ‘and not that he should turn from his ways and live?’”

Ezekiel 28:15—“You were perfect in your ways from the day you were created, till iniquity was found in you.”

Psalm 106:37-38—“They even sacrificed their sons and their daughters to demons, and shed innocent blood, the blood of their sons and daughters.”

Zechariah 12:1—“Thus says the LORD, who stretches out the heavens, lays the foundation of the earth, and forms the spirit of man within him.”

Matthew 18:2-3—“Then Jesus called a little child to Him, set him in the midst of them, and said, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.’”

Matthew 19:14—“But Jesus said, ‘Let the little children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of heaven.’”

Romans 7:9—“I was once alive apart from the Law; but when the commandment came, sin became alive and I died.”

Jumping ahead a bit to answer your question and to the "I" of TULIP.

Irresistible Grace = God’s saving grace is applied to those whom He has determined to save (the elect), overcoming their resistance to the call of the Gospel, bringing them to a saving faith. This means that when God sovereignly purposes to save someone, that individual certainly will be saved (even against his will if necessary). This purposeful influence of God’s Holy Spirit, Who creates faith within the individual, cannot be resisted.
Bible Responses

Deuteronomy 30:19—“I call heaven and earth as witnesses today against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing; therefore choose life.”


Joshua 24:15—“Choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the River, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you dwell. But as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.”


Luke 7:30—“But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the will of God for themselves, not having been baptized by him.”


John 12:42-43—“Nevertheless even among the rulers many believed in Him, but because of the Pharisees they did not confess Him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue; for they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God.”


Acts 7:51—“You stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears! You always resist the Holy Spirit; as your fathers did, so do you.”


Acts 13:46—“Then Paul and Barnabas grew bold and said, ‘It was necessary that the word of God should be spoken to you first; but since you reject it, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, behold, we turn to the Gentiles.’”



Which is why you don't see Calvinists Proselytizing. But you do see them and those who ascribe to TULIP, openly telling non-Calvinists, and non-Reformed who embrace TULIP's formula, that we are not the elect. Particularly obvious in that message is that which calls the meaning behind free will, free choice, garbage.

If you read the Canon of Dort link you'll see that not even Calvinists or TULIP faithful are able to "know" they are the elect. "Assurance of their eternal and unchangeable election to salvation is given to the chosen in due time, though by various stages and in differing measure."
That is excerpted again from Article 12 of the Canon of Dort.
The rest of Article 12 is omitted so as to point out that a Calvinist does not immediately know they are of the Elect. But the contradiction in Calvinism's Article 12 to that point is this. When you read that first part of Article 12 and then the rest of the article, you may realize that the Article is actually making what is an arbitrary factor something that Dort proclaimed to be a reasoned proof sustaining the Calvinist Doctrine itself.

Calvinism claims a person is Totally Depraved, unable to comprehend the Gospel unless or until God intercedes, through Irresistible Grace due to that person whom He intercedes for is a member of the Unconditional Elect.
However, if someone is lets say desperate to find God and they find an on-line sermon, or go into a local church on Sunday and the message moves them, the Calvinist would say, that's God's Unconditional Election being displayed on that elected one and their response is a sign of God's Irresistible Grace.
It is confirmation bias that is at work there.
TULIP is heresy because it blames Adam for humans being Totally Depraved through original sin that entered the human race after Adam's transgression in the garden.
However, when TULIP's elect are said to have their names written down in God's Book of Life before the world came to exist, that would then tell us that for that list of names to be valid, written by an Omniscient creator, that creator would have had to create the Fall so that the names of those elect to be saved have something to be saved from!


Now, let me ask you this, so you and I can review the "truth" of TULIP.

First, consider how you feel about God, the message Jesus delivered as the Gospel to the world, and your faith as a Christian.
As this is personal, how did you come to Christ. Please , you do not have to respond to any of these questions. I'm asking you to think about them and their answers. Do you feel the Holy Spirit knows you personally? Do you feel you are in Christ? Do you believe, have faith, you are a Christian and are saved?

If you do not accept the tenets of TULIP, and yet you feel positive in response to all my questions above, do you think you need to be a Calvinist or a RT believer who ascribes to TULIP ? When you feeling as you do per those questions and those answers, are not a self-professing Calvinist or TULIP believer?
Are Calvinists and RT's saved? Does TULIP align with the Gospel of Jesus?

(Calvinism Refuted) ...Man Has a Free-Will

Calvinism says man does not have a free-will. Man’s will is bound by sin and Satan so that it does not have the ability to choose God. Calvinism believes man cannot perceive the Truth to be saved; God does it all for us. But if we could not perceive the Truth, then why did Jesus preach It to us? Calvinism also believes that man cannot choose God to be saved; again, God does it all €“ He chooses us but we do not choose Him. But if sinners cannot choose God, then why did God tell them to choose Him?

So I'm guessing you do not believe in the preservation of the saints? Or are you saying the lost is still saved?

I would not presume to say whether or not the Holy Spirit is indwelling them. God believes in us. The whole world whom He loves. God also knows our heart and is a forgiving God.
If someone loves Jesus and accepts the Gospel message as Christ taught it, I do not think I am entitled, nor would I presume, to say anyone of that nature is or is not a Christian.
God sent Jesus so that we would find and believe in that Savior. God did not send a man in the 16th century to lead us to believe in him.

I will say that TULIP conflicts with the Gospel.