The rational licentiousness of Reformation theology’s total depravity doctrine is this: those who are totally depraved simply cannot be saved. That is the metaphysical conclusion of this idea. There is no man beyond his depravity, and implicit in this is the notion that the very core of man is wicked. Calvinists will be the first to holler to their high “undeserved” heavens that there is not one sole molecule within man himself that is not hell-bound, and rejoicing in it. There is NOTHING within man that is “good”. Nothing. The root of him is evil. Man IS evil. The only rational and logical conclusion of this belief is what I have said since the early days of my break with the rank heresy that is Reformed Theology: Calvinism demands that the singular evil of man is his very existence; his creation. This can be the ONLY conclusion about the nature of man from Calvin’s ideas. IF there is NO good in ANY part of man so that he is totally depraved, then man’s very BEING, yes…even the very IDEA of man in God’s mind must logically be wicked. If God speaks the word in order to create, and the word is “MAN” (“Let man be made in Our image”), then the very word of God by which man is made–man, who IS wholly and resolutely evil, perpetually turning away from God–is also then, logically to be considered the very inception of the evil itself. And what does this say about God? Things that should terrify anyone who accepts the doctrine of total depravity.
Do you see now the evil that is implicit in the thousands upon thousands of church “Statements of Faith” which affirm total depravity? This wicked doctrine is found in almost every American church in the nation, and we wonder why, more and and more, Christians are becoming the pariahs of the world. They have been duped into celebrating a God that created evil personified.
People, we need to run, horrified and reverent, from this dreadfully insane doctrine.
And do not be tempted to say to yourself, as the Calvinists do: “I’m sure, that man was born pure, created good by God, but fell of his own volition.” This bit of logical fantasy cannot hold water. The fact is that if man is wholly and totally depraved then he could NOT have been anything else. Ever. By their own definition the very base and core of man is EVIL; his root existence thus is evil. He could no more have once been good than green could have once been red. If the thing IS red, and that is the utter root essence of it, and it could not ever have been green. Because, for obvious reasons of logic and common sense, the color red cannot become the color green. (I know people fight me on this point; they cannot get their heads around it…they constantly think of a THING which is colored, instead of the color itself…the color being the utter end of the concept; there is NO thing beyond the color, is what I mean.) An object which can be colored can be red and then become green, sure, but the color red itself ceases to exist if it is anything BUT red because the complete truth of this color is: red is red. Likewise, the truth of man who IS evil, according to total depravity is: evil is evil; there is nothing beyond it. But if we say good has now become evil, then the human being we are talking about, who forms the platform for the moral dichotomy, must be a separate thing altogether. That is, there IS something beyond the evil; and thus, man cannot be totally depraved.
So, again…to reiterate, because this MUST be understood: If the root of man is evil, then he could never have been good. For if, as the Calvinists say, man IS evil, it means that he could never have, by definition, been good. If man was once good, but is now evil, then the root of man which can make this moral positional shift must be something else entirely. And the truth is that at his root man is God’s child; his crowning omnipotent achievement. Man’s creation by God is thus “good”, and “very good”. This is the root of man: a child of God Indeed, Jesus is the Son of Man; not because man is evil, but because at his root, man is GOOD. He is redeemed because he is supremely WORTH redeeming. If man was worthLESS, he could not be God’s creation.
Man cannot be totally depraved at all. For the root of man is man himself; his independent consciousness which is the pinnacle of his being; his very REASON for being created. And the ability of man to be self-aware and to know and apprehend and grasp and see cannot be held morally accountable to any standard. Ability is not subject to morality; only volition and desire and action. All of these stem from man’s ability to be self-aware. The ability of creation to do what it does is from God, and thus, the root of all in Creation, especially man, is GOOD. NOT evil. And the fact that man represents the singular object of our existential reality which God can LOVE means that man cannot ever be considered something God cannot love, as the Calvinists declare. And this means that anyone who proclaims total depravity as “sound doctrine” is a liar. If man is totally depraved, the God is the author of evil. There is no way around this logical conclusion. Calvinism is the traditions of men, nullifying the commands and metaphysics of God by their irrational hermeneutics.
So, having said all of the above, we can now understand, following Calvin’s logic to its inexorable conclusion, that there is nothing in the totally depraved human to save, even if the Lord wanted to (which…why would He? because logically He would have had to CREATE man ALREADY totally depraved). Yes, even if He wanted to save man, there is nothing in the human being which can do anything except reject God, hate God, regardless of anything God does, or even, ironically, regardless of whether man “wants” to hate God or not. For not even God can change a totally depraved person into a good person–a worthy person–for the same reason, again, that green cannot become red.
Now, one might suppose that what we mean by a “new creation” in Christ is that God replaces the “elect” man with a “new man”. And what is really meant by this is that the old one, being totally depraved, is destroyed so that the YOU that is elect is no longer really YOU at all; but you are irrelevant, a divine utter redundancy. A cosmic, divine, perfectly determined MISTAKE. And what I mean by this is: God created YOU in order to destroy you to replace you with a new YOU, or a “new man” [and thus we have: contradiction #1].
This “new man” just happens to look like you and have the same thoughts as you and the same consciousness as you. So even though YOU were elect from birth…you, er, really weren’t [contradiction #2]; but the new YOU is really the one who is elect, and he/she then was somehow both predestined and foreknown from before birth and at the same time was not [contradiction #3] because this new YOU both is and is not YOU at all and so he/she both must have and could not have been elect from birth and predestined before time [contradiction #4].
Unfortunately this completely rational and vividly clear answer to the the question of how God saves the totally depraved (yes, that was sarcasm) falls short when we remember that, according to the doctrine, ALL men are equally totally depraved; so new man or old, they are both totally depraved by definition, and thus, new or old, neither can be saved because both are irrelevant. The old IS the new and the new IS the old [contradiction #5].
Therefore the only possibly solution is that whether before you accept Christ or after, you are equally totally depraved. Your salvation does nothing, in fact, to rectify your sinful nature. Not even Christ can make YOU “good” positionally; instead Christ can…well, effect no change in you whatsoever. You see, it’s really quite simple: you need Christ to realize that you don’t really need Christ at all, because you are totally evil at the core, and He cannot change this; and this is why you are elect, because you MUST be, because Christ’s sacrifice really can do nothing for you. And because you are elect, your depravity, which somehow condemns you, doesn’t really condemn you…because you’re elect [contradictions #6, 7, and 8]. And, lo and behold, this is exactly what the neo-Calvinists of our day teach. If you are a Christian, guess what? You are just as horribly wicked, and devoted to and slavishly following evil as you were the day you were shaking your fists at God and declaring that you wanted nothing to do with him. And even if you never really did this, you really did…because you are not you, you see, and your mind doesn’t know what you are doing because your mind is totally depraved, and you then are not you, but only whatever force is compelling you, so whatever good you think you did you must think you didn’t [contradiction #9], and whatever evil you think you did not, you must think you did [contradiction #10]. But then if you agree that you only think you did good but did not really do good, you acknowledge that you did a good thing by reversing your thoughts about the good you could not possibly have done that you thought you did; and this of course is impossible because you cannot think anything good because you are depraved and thus cannot know good and so you must go back to believing that you did good instead of trusting that you did not, which is the good which you cannot do, according to your depravity [contradiction #11]. And so whether you think you are evil or think you are good, and both and neither, it is all irrelevant because whatever you think, you can’t possibly be really thinking [contradiction #12]. If you think that you think, then you are a liar. And if you think that you don’t think, so that you are not really culpable for your evil thoughts, you are a liar [contradiction #13]. Your thinking is a lie. And if you think that, you are a liar [contradiction #14] because you cannot think anything true, which means you cannot think. And this is the obvious (?) and clear(?) and sound(?) doctrinal proof of your depravity. So remember, believe in Jesus, and remember that you cannot really believe in Jesus, because you are depraved [contradiction #16]. And thus you are both you and NOT you, but merely your depravity, which isn’t you at all, because that makes you an abstraction [HUGE CONTRADICTIONS # 17, #18 AND #19…three points for this idiotic Calvinist doozy].
If man is totally depraved then there can be no “new man”, and this is my point. Indeed, in light of the doctrine, we can only draw one conclusion. God must BE man for man. God must elect man for man, and must then sanctify man for man, because man is evil and does not and CANNOT change according to the very description of the doctrine by Calvinists themselves. Okay…fine, you might accept that. But what is so alarmingly common these days is the willingness of people to simply accept that the “logic” stops there. That there is no other link remaining in the metaphysical chain. People…this is just flagrant insanity.
I mean, think about the next step in the doctrinal equation. Just think! I’m not the only one who can see this, believe me! It’s right there, in front of your face! Stop looking at the stupid Calvinist trees and SEE THE FOREST. What does it logically mean if God has to do EVERYTHING for man so that man, who is totally depraved, can be saved (which, he can’t BY DEFINITION because he was created fundamentally depraved).
Do you have it. Yes? Yes! Great.
Okay, let’s see if you are right. What I am saying is this: only God can really be saved. God came as Christ to save Himself, so that He may sanctify Himself, in order that He may dwell eternally with Himself, to make remission for His OWN sins….[contradiction #20].
Ahh…oops. Sounds a littler, er…blasphemous-like, huh?
Yes, it does. Why? Because Calvinism is EVIL, and its acolytes are PHARISEES!
And the more you dig into this insane hole of morbid and putrid doctrine the darker and more incestuous the tunnel becomes. What this crusty bit of reformed doctrine teaches, further, is that God creates wicked, evil man so that He may save Himself through the vehicle of that very same wicked, evil man. Man is thus a created act of divine apostasy, determined according to the doctrine of unconditional election and limited atonement, and thus usurped from himself so that he may be utterly controlled by God, which, as a determined creation, was never really itself at all. This means that depraved man is an extension of God, Himself [contradiction #21], which then somehow IS sin, and thus God sins against Himself, by Himself [massive contradiction #22] and sends Christ so that He may be saved by Himself [contradiction #23]. And thus God somehow, though determined, manages to “fall” away [contradiction #24], so that He might send Himself to die as a sacrifice for Himself; and the part that He is dying for was always elect to salvation, and thus not really in need of Christ at all, thus making the sacrifice pointless, [contradiction #25].
It is “reasonable” to conclude, then, that the “elect” part of God was always then fundamentally good, because God is, of course, good…but the problem is that even the “good” part of God is in man, and thus is also still totally depraved and wicked [contradiction #26]. But this doesn’t really matter because the depravity of the “elect” doesn’t lead to any sort of need to repent or change because they are both elect and totally depraved, both of which utterly preclude the possibility or even option of repentance or change [contradiction #27].
Further, we can “reasonably” conclude from Calvin’s peculiar doctrine that the part of God which is not elect [contradiction #28] is doomed to hell to be eternally separated from Himself [blasphemous contradiction #29]. For Christ, who came to save sinners, cannot really save sinners, but only the elect, because sin is irrelevant: irrelevant for those elect before they were born (whether they repent or not they are still elect, by definition), and irrelevant for those who were already going to hell before they were born (whether they repent or not they are still going to hell, by definition); and so Christ cannot save the part of God which is unelect [contradiction #30], but only the elect part of Himself, which was always elect even before it accepted Himself [contradiction #31]. Thus, the elect part of Himself which He, Himself came to save, and for whom the sacrifice of Himself is alone efficacious, finds Christ, Himself, utterly irrelevant to Himself, because He must, unequivocally be saved by His own election, not His own sacrifice [contradiction #32 and #33].
Now…if that is “paradox”, then religion is for fools.
“Tell me, friend. When did Saruman the Wise abandon reason for madness?”
-Gandalf the Grey
“The Cross does not make election possible, but election makes the Cross pointless.”