Chapter One
Total Depravity

Fallen Man's Awareness of Sin

       ...[I]n every age, he who is most forward in extolling the excellence of human nature, is received with the loudest applause. But be this heralding of human excellence what it may, by teaching men to rest in themselves, it does nothing more than fascinate by its sweetness, and, at the same time, so delude as to drown in perdition all who assent to it.⁽¹⁾

       John Calvin was absolutely correct in so stating. The discussion of sin has never been a popular topic, and even less so in our own day. Modern sermons are filled with references to the "good in every man" and exhortations to "think positively" about oneself, while the biblical picture of man as a hell-deserving sinner is downplayed and largely discarded as an outdated relic from the unenlightened past. For example, Dr. Robert Schuller, well-known television minister and pastor of the Crystal Cathedral in Garden Grove, California, said, "I don't think anything has been done in the name of Christ and under the banner of Christianity that has proven more destructive to human personality and, hence, counterproductive to the evangelism enterprise, than the often crude, uncouth, and unchristian strategy of attempting to make people aware of their lost and sinful condition."⁽²⁾ By his own admission, Schuller's approach to evangelism is one "that begins and ends with a recognition of every person's hunger for glory."⁽³⁾ This inherent "hunger," which the Bible simply describes as satanic pride (Isaiah 14:12-15), is the driving force behind the virtual deluge of heretical teachings in the Church today, including "possibility thinking," "positive confession," "guided imagery," etc. The sinful heart of man, even when it has been regenerated by the Holy Spirit, does not easily submit to the notion that it is "undone" and "wretched" (Isaiah 6:5; Romans 7:24) and that it has no hope or life apart from Christ.
       This innate refusal of man to face the truth about himself is also the rotten seed that lies at the very root of Arminianism. Just as "a good tree bringeth forth good fruit" (Matthew 7:17), the churches in which Arminian theology has prevailed have produced thousands of complacent and spiritually lifeless professors of religion, who are more concerned with their physical health, self-esteem, and temporal happiness than they are with obeying the commandments of God. Licentiousness abounds in such congregations for "if sin becomes a trifle, virtue will be a toy."⁽⁴⁾
       W.J. Seaton rightly pointed out, "If we have deficient and light views about sin, then we are liable to have defective views regarding the means necessary for the salvation of the sinner."⁽⁵⁾ By teaching sinners that their salvation depends upon their own choice, Arminian evangelism has spawned entire generations of professing believers who, though resting in their "simple faith," may very well not be saved at all. This problem, however, is not nearly so prevalent where Calvinism is faithfully preached and accepted.

Is Man Totally Depraved Or Just Deprived?

       When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained; what is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him? (Psalm 8:3-4)

       The Scriptures teach us that man was created by God in His image and likeness (Genesis 1:27). This similitude is seen in man's ability to reason (Isaiah 1:18) and to exercise personal volition (Joshua 24:15). Thus, the one thing that man has in common with his Creator is personhood. In his original state, the first man, Adam, enjoyed what is referred to as "unconfirmed creaturely holiness." As such, his will was completely free to choose to obey or to disobey God's command. However, the biblical view of man does not end there:

       In this upright state, man possessed freedom of will, by which, if he chose, he was able to obtain eternal life.... Adam, therefore, might have stood if he chose, since it was only by his own will that he fell; but it was because his will was pliable in either direction, and he had not received constancy to persevere, that he so easily fell. Still he had a free choice of good and evil; and not only so, but in the mind and will there was the highest rectitude, and all the organic parts were duly framed to obedience, until man corrupted its good properties, and destroyed himself.⁽⁶⁾

       In addition to the ruin of his own soul, the disobedience of Adam, acting as the progenitor and representative head of mankind, resulted in the corruption of his posterity as well. Thus, the doctrine of "original sin" declares that, since all men were "seminally present" in Adam, all have not only inherited the pollution of sin through physical generation, but have been imputed with his guilt through the righteous judgment of God:

       Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned; (for until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similtude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come....
       Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous (Romans 5:12-14, 18-19).

       Few churches or denominations claiming to be orthodox would attempt to deny that man's nature is affected to some degree by original sin.⁽⁷⁾ The differences exist, however, in the definition of this fallenness as well as its extent in each man. Is man utterly corrupt, or does he merely have an inclination towards evil? As always, we must let the Scriptures speak for themselves:

       And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually (Genesis 6:5).

       The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it? (Jeremiah 17:9).

       As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: there is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips: whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: their feet are swift to shed blood: destruction and misery are in their ways: and the way of peace have they not known: there is no fear of God before their eyes (Romans 3:10-18).

       This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind, having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart: who being past feeling have given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness (Ephesians 4:17-18).

       In his fallen state, man is separated from God, and is spiritually dead by nature and utterly wicked (Colossians 2:13). Furthermore, men are "alienated and enemies in [their] minds by wicked works" (Colossians 1:21). The horrible effects of sin are seen primarily in the mind, which is the seat of the will and the emotions, and it is there that the root of man's rebellion against God is discovered:

       For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them....
       Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened....
       And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient.... (Romans 1:18-19, 21, 28)

       According to this passage, men willfully suppress the knowledge of God by denying in their minds what the creation itself testifies of the Creator. The Lord Jesus Himself said that ungenerate men are "children of [their] father the devil" (John 8:44), and they will only think and act accordingly. This brings us to what the Reformers called total depravity. According to John Calvin, "...[T]he whole man, from the crown of the head to the sole of his feet, is so deluged, as it were, that no part remains exempt from sin, and, therefore, everything which proceeds from him is imputed as sin."⁽⁸⁾ This, however, is not to say that each man is as evil as he could be or that he will always act in each and every circumstance in the worst way possible, but that the stain of sin has extended to every aspect of his nature. Sin is not merely what man does; sin is what he is. Hence, though fallen man is still capable of temporal good, it is impossible for him to win the approval of an infinitely holy God by anything he may do: "But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away" (Isaiah 64:6-7).

The Myth of Free Will

       One of the main points of contention between Arminians and Calvinists is that of the free will of man. Is the will of man truly autonomous, or is it subject to exterior influences? Does man choose God, or does God choose man? Is salvation ultimately determined by man, or is God at all times in sovereign control?
       Arminian scholar Richard Rice wrote, "Instead of attributing everything that happens to the sovereign will of God, Arminians insist that human beings have a capacity for genuine choice and self-determination. In particular, they are free to accept or reject God's offer of salvation."⁽⁹⁾ Arminians such as Rice categorically deny that man, in and of himself, is incapable of choosing eternal life in Christ Jesus. Arminian evangelism is therefore riddled with phrases such as "make a decision for Chrisit," "Invite Jesus into your heart," "Make Jesus the Lord of your life," etc.⁽¹⁰⁾ For example, well-known evangelist Billy Graham wrote, "Placing your faith in Christ means that first you must make a choice.... In order not to be condemned you must make a choice — you must choose to believe."⁽¹¹⁾
       Before we examine the theological problems with Graham's statement, we must first clear up some of the misconceptions regarding the will of man. As mentioned before, one important characteristic of man is the ability to exercise the will. However, this is not to say that the will is the man, nor does it mean that the man is, in any way, subject to the will. Since the mind or heart of man is the seat of the will, it is therefore the man's nature which determines what he will choose. Jonathan Edwards explained, "In every act... of the will, there is some preponderation of the mind or inclination, one way rather than another.... It is the strongest motive which determines the will."⁽¹²⁾
       Natural abilities also play an important role in what a man chooses. For example, a man standing atop a twenty-story building may wish he could fly. However, if he is in possession of a sound mind, he knows that he is, by nature, incapable of this feat and that he will plunge to his death if he throws himself over the edge. Thus, the desire to preserve his own life overrules his wish to fly, and his choice is made accordingly. Our Lord stated, "For from within, out of the heart of man, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness: all these evil things come from within, and defile the man" (Mark 7:21-23). Elsewhere, Scripture tells us that Jesus would not accept the testimonies of many of those who claimed to believe in Him because "he knew what was in man" (John 2:25). The heart of man is thoroughly wicked, and so, everything which proceeds from it, including the choices it makes, cannot be anything but wicked. Fallen man cannot choose spiritual good any more than he can choose to fly like a bird.
       It may be helpful to use the illustration of a terminal patient confined to a hospital bed. On the nightstand beside him is a bottle of pills which, if taken, will save his life. However, our illustration must not end there. Let us also say that the man is blind, so he cannot see the bottle, he is paralyzed, so he cannot reach for the bottle, and, above all, he hates the doctor who prescribed the medicine. What then will the man do? He will simply lie there until he dies because his desires and his incapacitated condition prevent him from choosing to do anything else.
       In the presentation of the Gospel, the hearer has only two options from which to choose. The first is to reject Christ and to continue in a life of sin and rebellion against God. The second is to fall at the foot of the cross in repentance for leading just such a life. Not at all unlike the man in the hospital bed, the hearer of the evangelical message will make a choice between the two options based upon his predispositions and abilities. Since the Bible declares that the ruling disposition of the unregenerate mind is "only evil continually," it is really quite futile to instruct such people to "choose to believe." Indeed, no man can choose to believe in the One whom his own nature causes him to despise and rebel against, and he is powerless to do anything towards the betterment of his spiritual condition. In the words of Charles Hodge:

       No more soul-destroying doctrine could well be devised than the doctrine that sinners can regenerate themselves, and repent and believe just when they please.... As it is a truth both of Scripture and of experience that the unrenewed man can do nothing of himself to secure his salvation, it is essential that he should be brought to a practical conviction of that truth. When thus convinced, and not before, he seeks help from the only source whence it can be obtained.⁽¹³⁾

       Simply put, fallen man does not seek God's grace because he has no desire to seek God's grace, and is content to remain in sin. Being spiritually dead, he cannot see (John 3:3), hear (John 8:43-44), or understand (1 Corinthians 2:14) the things of God. As pointed out by Loraine Boettner, "Fallen man is so morally blind that he uniformly prefers and chooses evil instead of good."⁽¹⁴⁾ In the very essence of his being, man is, until freed by divine intervention, a slave to sin (Romans 6:16), his desires and thoughts being completely controlled by his sinful nature (Ephesians 2:3). This fact is brought out in the following words of Paul: "For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit. For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God" (Romans 8:5-8).
       It is important to preface any discussion of God's sovereignty and human freedom with the question which lies at the very heart of the Calvinist-Arminian debate: Is fallen man really and completely spiritually dead? If he is, as the Bible clearly teaches, then any argument that is produced in favor of Arminianism, whether it be derived from reason or an isolated biblical text, is necessarily wrong.

The Will of Man is Both Free and Bound

       Free-will has carried many souls to hell, but never a soul to heaven yet.... O Sirs, I dread above all things that throughout eternity, you will be left to your own free wills.⁽¹⁵⁾

       Based on Scripture, it is the conviction of the Calvinist that fallen man's will is indeed free, but at the same time, it is bound. Man remains a free moral agent in that he is still able to make choices, but what he will choose is ultimately determined by his own nature. Reformed theology categorically denies that man may, by the exercise of his own free will, repent of his sins and believe in Christ, and thus be saved. If the biblical description of total depravity is to be maintained, then it must follow that the inherent wickedness of man prevents him from either seeking God, or from submitting himself to His laws. Apart from regeneration, man's will is perpetually bound by his own nature to choose sin which, though detrimental to his eternal soul, is nevertheless pleasing to him. Thus, man does not continue in sin to ultimate damnation by coercion from without, but by the inward exercise of his own agency, which, though free, is nevertheless determined by his fallen spiritual condition:

       Man, since he was corrupted by the fall, sins not forced or unwilling, but voluntarily, by a most forward bias of the mind; not by violent compulsion, or external force, but by the movement of his passion; and yet such is the depravity of his nature, that he cannot move and act except in the direction of evil.⁽¹⁶⁾

       I hold in my hand a book. I release it; what happens? It falls. In which direction? Downwards; always downwards. Why? Because, answering the law of gravity, its own weight sinks it. Suppose I desire that book to occupy a position three feet higher; then what? I must lift it; a power outside of that book must raise it. Such is the relationship which fallen man sustains toward God. Whilst Divine power upholds him, he is preserved from plunging still deeper into sin; let that power be withdrawn, and he falls — his own weight (of sin) drags him down. God does not push him down, anymore than I did that book. Let all Divine restraint be removed, and every man is capable of becoming, would become, a Cain, a Pharoah, a Judas. How then is the sinner to move heavenwards? By an act of his own will? Not so. A power outside of himself must grasp hold of him and lift him every inch of the way. The sinner is free, but free in one direction only — free to fall, free to sin (emphasis in original).⁽¹⁷⁾

       This concept should not seem so strange to the ear of the Christian, for God Himself is an example of one whose will is both free and bound. Because His nature is holy, He can do nothing but that which is holy. Consequently, He cannot do that which is evil — not merely because He chooses not to, but because His own nature renders such action impossible (Hebrews 6:18).⁽¹⁸⁾ And yet, His righteous acts remain worthy of praise because He, of His own good will, has chosen to perform them. Thus, God is bound to freely act in accordance with His own holiness.
       Likewise, the Devil can do nothing but evil, but this he does by his own choice and is thus deserving of God's judgment. To these examples, the Arminian is compelled by Scripture to assent. Why then is the inability of man to choose good so difficult to accept, especially when Scripture is so clear in this regard?

       It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. But there are some of you that believe not.... Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father (John 6:63-65).

       I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing (John 15:5).

       The believer, on the other hand, is referred to as a "new creature" (2 Corinthians 5:17) because, as the object of God's special grace, he has been "renewed in the spirit of [his] mind" (Ephesians 4:23). Again, the mind of man is the primary focus here. In fact, the Greek word for repentance (metanoia) literally means "a change of mind."⁽¹⁹⁾ Consequently, the heart of the converted sinner is "circumcised," and the "foreskin" of the mind's hostility toward God is "cut away" through repentance:

       And the LORD thy God will bring thee into the land which thy fathers possessed, and thou shalt possess it; and he will do thee good, and multiply thee above thy fathers. And the LORD thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live (Deuteronomy 30:5-6).

       For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: but he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God (Romans 2:28-29).

       And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him [Christ], having forgiven you all trespasses (Colossians 2:13).

       In short, the Christian has been given a new heart that no longer continues to take pleasure in sin, but one that delights in pleasing God and glorifying Him alone (Romans 7:22). This inward change is known in theological terms as regeneration, which is that act of God by which "the principle of the new life is implanted in man, and the governing disposition of the soul is made holy."⁽²⁰⁾
       According to the Bible, regeneration is a "good work" which is both begun and carried through to completion by God (Philippians 1:6). Men "become sons of God," therefore, "not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God" (John 1:12-13). To insist, as Arminians do, that man's choice precedes regeneration is to rob God of the glory which is His alone in the salvation of sinners, for only He "can bring a clean thing out of an unclean" (Job 14:4).

The Bible Teaches That Faith is a Gift

       ...[M]an's contribution need not be in the form of actual deeds to his credit. It could be merely that he decides to respond favorably to the moving of the Holy Spirit in his heart. This makes salvation a joint effort.⁽²¹⁾

       So wrote Laurence Vance in his attempted refutation of Calvinism. Such a view is clearly synergistic. In other words, God has devised the plan of redemption, but it is ultimately man's own effort (his exercise of faith) that sets the process of salvation into motion. However, since we know from Hebrews 11:6 that "without faith it is impossible to please [God]," how can it be that an unregenerate man may exercise saving faith when the Apostle so clearly said that such a man "cannot please God"? Obviously, this is an absurd claim, especially since faith itself is described in Scripture as a gift: "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God" (Ephesians 2:8).
       Arminian scholars, of course, would object to this interpretation of faith as a gift primarily on the grounds that the Greek pronoun in Ephesians 2:8 is neuter in gender, while pistis (faith) is feminine. Therefore, according to Terry Miethe, "it" must be in reference to salvation, not faith.⁽²²⁾ However, what is overlooked in this argument is that soteria (salvation) is also feminine, as is charis (grace). The neuter pronoun touto (this or it) must therefore refer to theou to doron (the gift of God). This passage describes faith as the vehicle of saving grace, and since it is clearly stated that this is ouk ek humon (literally "not out of yourselves"), faith must be included in God's gift.
       Arminians also argue that since Christ commanded men in Mark 11:22 to "have faith in God," then either faith must be something that man is capable of producing within himself, or, as William Craig complained, God "would be demanding the impossible and then condemning them for failing to do it."⁽²³⁾ It may be helpful here to point out Jesus' command in John 20:22 to "receive the Holy Ghost." Surely this also would have been impossible for the disciples to do had the Holy Spirit not first been given to them. The Apostle Paul's rhetorical question, "[W]hat has thou that thou didst not receive?" (1 Corinthians 4:7), also serves to effectively silence this argument. Romans 12:3b likewise speaks of "the measure of faith" which God has dealt to believers, and Hebrews 12:2 speaks of Christ as "the author... of our faith." Thus, we must conclude that "all men have not faith" (2 Thessalonians 3:1) because all men have not been granted faith by God.
       In Galatians 5:22, faith is listed as one of the fruits of the indwelling Holy Spirit, and yet elsewhere we have our Lord's testimony that "a good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit" (Matthew 7:18). Moreover, according to Romans 14:23, "whatsoever is not of faith is sin." Not only is the unregenerate sinner, in whom the Holy Spirit does not dwell, incapable of producing faith from within himself, but anything he does produce is accounted by God as sin. The complete bondage of fallen man to sin and his inability to believe the Gospel is therefore not an invention of Calvinism, but is an essential doctrine of Christianity. The Arminian concept of free will is indeed a "worldly maxim,"⁽²⁴⁾ for to declare that, apart from God's intervening grace, man is capable of choosing righteousness over unrighteousness is to deny what the Bible so plainly teaches, and to thus fall outside the pale of orthodoxy:

       ...[T]hose who, while they profess to be the disciples of Christ, still seek for free-will in man, notwithstanding of his being lost and drowned in spiritual destruction, labour under manifold delusion, making a heterogeneous mixture of inspired doctrine and philosophical opinions, and so erring as to both....
       Those who invest us with more than we possess only add sacrilege to our ruin.⁽²⁵⁾

Is the Doctrine of "Prevenient Grace" Biblical?

       Prevenient grace, or moral suasion, as it is sometimes called, was popularized by John Wesley, who attempted to retain a belief in the total depravity of mankind and yet somehow avoid the doctrines of election and particular grace.⁽²⁶⁾ This doctrine is widely held today by Arminians seeking to do the same. For example, Henry Theissen wrote, "Since mankind is hopelessly dead in trespasses and sins and can do nothing to obtain salvation, God graciously restores to all men sufficient ability to make a choice in the matter of submission to Him. This is the salvation-bringing grace of God that has appeared to all men."⁽²⁷⁾ Respected Christian author A.W. Tozer likewise wrote:

       Christian theology teaches the doctrine of prevenient grace, which, briefly stated, means that before a man can seek God, God must first have sought the man.
       Before a sinful man can think a right thought of God, there must have been a work of enlightenment done within him. Imperfect it may be, but a true work nonetheless, and the secret cause of all desiring and seeking and praying which may follow.⁽²⁸⁾

       It is difficult to understand how prevenient grace can be both "imperfect" and "a true work" of God, for surely nothing that a perfect Being accomplishes can fall short of His own perfection. If God's grace is imperfect, what assurance can the believer possibly have that the security of the salvation which it has wrought is not likewise imperfect? Fortunately, there is the rare Arminian writer who will admit that no such doctrine of "prevenient grace" may be found anywhere in the Bible. Clark Pinnock wrote, "...[T]he Bible has no developed doctrine of universal prevenient grace, however convenient it would be for us if it did."⁽²⁹⁾
       The primary passage of Scripture used to support prevenient grace is John 1:9, which testifies of "the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world." Thus, the illumination of God's saving grace is supposedly dispensed indiscriminately to all men without exception. This, however, cannot possibly be a plausible interpretation of this verse when it is read in its proper context. In verse five, we read, "And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not." The "darkness" here is obviously used metaphorically in reference to unbelievers, just as it is in 2 Corinthians 6:14-15. This idea is carried out further in the following verses: "And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved" (John 3:19-20).
       In the final analysis, therefore, prevenient grace does not solve the problem which its proponents claim it does. One may shine a light upon a corpse all he wishes, but to no avail. Dead eyes simply cannot see. A loving whisper in the ear of a dead man will likewise never be heard. Therefore, to claim God touches the heart of the spiritually dead just enough to enable them to respond to His offer of eternal life is to either deny that they were really and truly dead to begin with, or that the life that God imparts is insufficient to generate any true spiritual vitality. Of course, neither of these options is consistent with the Scriptures:

       And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others. But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved); and hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus: that in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus (Ephesians 2:1-7).

Endnotes

1. Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book II, Chapter 1, Section 2.

2. Robert H. Schuller, Christianity Today, 10 August 1984, pages 23-24.

3. Robert H. Schuller, Self Esteem: The New Reformation (Waco, Texas: Word Books, 1982), page 27.

4. Spurgeon, quoted by Murray, Forgotten Spurgeon, page 38.

5. W.J. Seaton, The Five Points of Calvinism (Edinburgh, Scotland: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1970), page 9.

6. Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book I, Chapter 15, Section 8.

7. Dr. Robert Schuller, however, is one example of the extreme to which the ancient Pelagian denial of original sin has invaded the modern pulpit. In his book, Self-Esteem: The New Reformation, he referred to the core of "original sin" as a "lack of trust," claiming that human beings "are fearful, not bad" (pages 63-67).
       It is interesting to note that Dr. Schuller is an ordained minister of the Reformed Church of America and even wrote his doctoral thesis on Calvin's Institutes. Unlike most Arminians, he fully comprehends the Reformed theology that he is rejecting, and thus, in his case, the label of heretic is warranted.

8. Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book II, Chapter II, Section 9.

9. Richard Rice, essay: "Divine Foreknowledge and Free Will Theism," Grace of God/Will of Man, page 123.

10. These expressions are certainly nothing new, and were also prevalent in the days of Charles Spurgeon. Greatly troubled by the unbiblical system of altar calls and "enquiry rooms," Spurgeon wrote:

       The gospel is, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved." If we think we shall do more good by substituting another exhortation for the gospel command, we shall find ourselves landed in serious difficulties. If, for a moment, our improvements seem to produce a larger result than the old gospel, it will be the growth of mushrooms, it may even be the growth of toadstools; but it is not the growth of trees of the Lord (quoted by Murray, Forgotten Spurgeon, page 95).

11. Billy Graham, How To Be Born Again (Waco, Texas: Word Books, 1977), page 193.

12. Jonathan Edwards, Freedom of the Will (New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 1957), Volume I, pages 1-2.

13. Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdman's Publishing Company, 1993), Volume II, page 277.

14. Loraine Boettner, The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination (Nutley, New Jersey: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1932), page 63.

15. Spurgeon, quoted by Murray, Forgotten Spurgeon, page 62 (footnote).

16. Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book II, Chapter III, Section 5.

17. Arthur W. Pink, The Sovereignty of God (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1984), pages 135-136.

18. Some Arminians will argue, however, that to say that God cannot do something is to put unbiblical restrictions on His omnipotence. Consequently, according to Stephen T. Davis, "...[I]t is possible for God to do evil," and "God has the ability to tell a lie" (Logic and the Nature of God [Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdman's Publishing Company, 1983], pages 2, 96). Davis also wrote of his abandonment of "the notion of God's timelessness... and the notion of God's immutability" (ibid., page 2). It is incomprehensible how Davis and others who hold this view still view God as worthy of their worship, for such a corrupt theology cannot guarantee that, though holy today, God may change His mind and become a devil tomorrow.

19. W.E. Vine, Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (McLean, Virginia: MacDonald Publishing Company, n.d.), pages 961-962.

20. Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdman's Publishing Company, 1941), page 468.

21. Vance, Other Side of Calvinism, page 300.

22. Miethe, "Universal Power," page 77.

23. William L. Craig, essay: "Middle Knowledge: A Calvinist/Arminian Rapproachment?", Grace of God/Will of Man, page 160.

24. Spurgeon, quoted by Murray, Forgotten Spurgeon, page 61.

25. Calvin, Institutes, Book I, Chapter XV, Section 8. See also ibid., Book II, Chapter II, Section 1.

26. Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1985), page 914.

27. Henry C. Theissan, Introductory Lectures in Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdman's Publishing Company, 1959), pages 344-345.

28. A.W. Tozer, The Pursuit of God (Camp Hill, Pennsylvania: Christian Publications, Inc., 1982), page 11.

29. Pinnock, "From Augustine to Arminius," page 22.