Skip to main content

Total Depravity and the Imago Dei

While I would agree that the doctrines of grace are axiomatic to biblical interpretation, I am curious as to the best articulation of Total Depravity. Total Depravity expresses the reality that all areas of life are tainted by sin. Since the Fall of Adam, natural man is entirely influenced by sin. This depravity is expressed in different degrees for different individuals. Thus the murderer and the mystic are both totally depraved, yet their depravity may exist in varying degrees of depth.

The question is, Does total depravity posit that no unbeliever will demonstrate a 'seeking' of God? (though never to find him outside of Christ). Does it argue that the works, thoughts, and art of the natural man are worthless in aiding us to know God? For example, can a pagan paint a picture that is 'God-reflecting'? Can an agnostic express philosophical truth clearly enough that it actually helps Christians to better understand God? Can a musician who knows nothing of Christ's atonement produce music that is valuable to the pursuit of knowing God?

Now, of course the typical cautions need to be explicit. The pervasiveness of sin is not the issue. Naturally man is sinful, rebellious, and treacherous towards God. To study any area of human existence without God is to study the ruin of the image of God, and I certainly wouldn't advise a Christian to delve deep into the teachings of Buddha or Bertrand Russell to know God more. That is not the issue. The issue is does this ruin mean 'worthlessness' or 'unworthiness'?

The apostle Paul can quote the OT "There is no one...who seeks God" (Ro 3)and he can say to the pagan Athenians "Now what you worship as something unknown I am going to proclaim to you." (Acts 17) Explain the paradox...


Well said. I think the paradox is a very real one, and a matter of point of view.

I wrote a little tract once called "It's Your Choice" which one of our men questioned me about. He said, "But it isn't really their choice, is it?"

My response was "Yes and no." We, who already know Christ, also know that it was the Holy Spirit drawing us through His Word and his people, that brought us into fellowship with the Father through the Son; but how do you explain that to someone?

Really, from their perspective, they have to make a choice - albeit a choice to accept that the choice is not theirs, that grace is being extended to them without their abilities contributing to it.

From God's perspective (and somewhat from ours), we know man is depraved; and yet from a human perspective, we must somehow choose to accept it.

Paradox indeed.
cmadin said…
first, we're fallen, but we're also made in the image of God - all of us, and I would argue that we all have a spark of the divine somewhere. the NT tells us that no one will have an excuse when they stand before God, because we all have an innate understanding of right and wrong, to some extent.

i completely disagree that nonbelievers are incapable of pointing us to God. if we assume that God is the source of all beauty and truth, and nonbelievers are obviously capable of creating works of beauty and truth, then clearly He can speak through them. think of much classical music, or other art that is "morality-neutral", that can bless people and bring them closer to God regardless of the author.

In Mere Christianity, Lewis says something to the effect that Christians can learn about God from other religions, because even Christians don't know everything about Him.

So you can take your Calvinism and stick it! :)

Popular posts from this blog

Return to Rome?

All right. Here is my first question to throw around to everyone: "Why am I not Roman Catholic?" (of course, if you are, help us understand why you are and why we should be(?)) Sounds like an easy question, but not so easy. Let me ask a few penetrating questions to get us going. These are all questions I've heard in different forms...

Does Christ not have only one church?
Does Rome not have the onlyconsistenthistorical connection to the early church?
Did not Rome determine the new Testament cannon of Scriptures?
Does not Rome have what so many evangelicals lack: mystery, awe, contemplation, etc.?
One more, does our theology go asunder so irreparably?

Consider these Evangelical favorites: J RR Tolkien, G K Chesterton, and Mother Theresa. Are they not a sterling model of Christian imagination, thinking and service?

Hope this gets some discussion going.

The 'Greatest' Theologian/Preacher/Christian Philosopher

Here's a fun little discussion for us. Who is the greatest theologian since the apostle Paul? Sounds too subjective, but here are some criteria to evaluate by:

1) Personal life - Did this person's personal character reflect his convictions effectively?

2) Breadth of Influence - How wide and long has this person's influence effected the church and the world?

3) Depth of thought - How careful, biblical, and articulate were this persons's works?

My vote to come...

Lilly Grant News Release

First Baptist Church of Haverhill has received a grant of $49,980.00 to enable its minister, Pastor Rick Harrington, to participate in the 2019 National Clergy Renewal Program. First Baptist Church of Haverhill is one of 150 congregations across the United States selected to participate in this competitive grant program, which is funded by Lilly Endowment Inc. and administered by Christian Theological Seminary in Indianapolis. Established by the Endowment in 2000, the program’s grants allow Christian congregations to support their pastors with the gift of extended time away from their ministerial duties and responsibilities.  Ministers whose congregations are awarded the grants use their time away from the demands of daily ministry to engage in reflection and renewal. The approach respects the “Sabbath time” concept, offering ministers a carefully considered respite that may include travel, study, rest, …