Depravity

What Fell in

, , No Comment

What Fell in “the Fall”?

written by SEA member, Roy Ingle

F. Lagard Smith in his book Troubling Questions for Calvinists (and all the rest of us) asks 15 questions about the Fall in Genesis 3:1-7.

I post his questions here without comment.

[Editor’s note: Smith is not an Arminian, but a Semi-Pelagian. Yet these questions can still be helpful in thinking about the issue of human depravity.]

1. What do you think? Were Adam and Eve free moral beings, fully able to decide between obeying and disobeying God without any predetermined secret eternal will of God preempting their freedom to choose right from wrong?

a) If not, is there any way that God Himself is not responsible for their sin and “the Fall”?
b) If so, were they simply exceptions to an otherwise universal rule of predestination and sovereign causation?

2. Were Adam and Eve either totally or partially depraved before “the Fall”?

3. What about immediately after “the Fall”?

Read Post →

Adam Heard the Voice of God

, , No Comment

Adam Heard the Voice of God written by SEA member, Roy Ingle Some Calvinists such as R.C. Sproul asserts that one must be regenerated before faith because of the nature of total depravity. Since mankind…

Read Post →

Arminius on The Effects of the Sin of Our First Parents

, , No Comment

Arminius on The Effects of the Sin of Our First Parents

provided by SEA member Roy Ingle

DISPUTATION XXXI

ON THE EFFECTS OF THE SIN OF OUR FIRST PARENTS

I. The first and immediate effect of the sin which Adam and Eve committed in eating of the forbidden fruit, was the offending of the Deity, and guilt — Offense, which arose from the prohibition imposed — Guilt, from the sanction added to it, through the denunciation of punishment, if they neglected the prohibition.

II. From the offending of the Deity, arose his wrath on account of the violated commandment. In this violation, occur three causes of just anger:

(1.) The disparagement of his power or right.

(2.) A denial of that towards which God had an inclination.

(3.) A contempt of the divine will intimated by the command.

Read Post →

John Wesley’s Approach to Spiritual Formation

, , Comment Closed

This post was written by Ben Espinoza on the Seedbed.com website Perhaps my greatest research interest as of late is studying how various theologians and church leaders throughout history sought to form and educate believers…

Read Post →

Arminius on Regeneration

, , No Comment

The purpose of this paper is to delineate Arminius’ view on regeneration. The Arminian view on regeneration has frequently been mischaracterized, both by Calvinistic opponents, as well as adherents to his views. His view is…

Read Post →

The Implication of the Calvinistic Hermeneutic of Total Depravity

, , No Comment

The acronym TULIP1, in my opinion, works well as a system and should be taken as a whole and not in parts. If one accepts the doctrine of Unconditional Election — which is a product of the Calvinist’s view of Total Depravity and Total Inability — then I see no reason for rejecting either the doctrines Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace, or of course Perseverance of the Saints. I think the only consistent form of Calvinism is Supralapsarian TULIP Calvinism, and any deviation from such is inconsistent. For the sake of space, I do not care to explain my reasons why; I just want to make those statements and carry on to the main point of the post.

Read Post →