|TOTAL DEPRAVITY Debunked|
Many Calvinists insists that immediately subsequent to the Adamic fall mortal man no longer had/has personal possession of his ruach (spirit). Thus, from the immediate Adamic fall onwards it is suggested by Calvinists that the nephesh (soul) both then and now absolutely possesses and controls sinful man’s ruach through the instrument and agency of absolutely desired sin. Moreover, Calvinists insists “total depravity” is not absolute in nephesh capabilities (it can grow even more sinful) but rather is absolute as to the component construct and design of the nephesh itself – i.e. absolutely ALL cognitive faculties (mind, will, emotions, etc.) are “partially” infected by moral decay. Hence, total moral depravity.
Depravity occurs in nephesh, or psyche, not in ruach, or pneuma. “Total depravity” does not mean that each man is depraved as much as he is capable of being, it means that each man is depraved in all his faculties (i.e., mind, will, affections, etc.).
However, Calvinists make no attempt to reconcile their notion of “total depravity” of the nephesh (soul) with Gen. 3:22 and YHWH’s pointed declaration regarding the literal moral capabilities of fallen man immediately subsequent to the initial Adamic failure itself, as to now having the moral knowledge and construct capabilities of both moral GOOD and moral EVIL as well - and as such is equally like/as one out of the Elohim (to know good and evil).
This is in sharp contrast to the Calvinist’s insisted claim of “total depravity” of the soul which is declared to, as a consequence thereof, now absolutely possesses the spirit of man. While Calvinists expound upon the negative EVIL depraved moral capabilities of the sinful creature man they never enlighten us as to the equal construct of the positive GOOD moral capabilities of man, nor do they ever reveal just actually where that good moral capability resides - as to whether in the nephesh (soul) or the ruach (spirit).
Nonetheless, according to Gen. 3:22 the moral “GOOD” must indeed equally reside within the mortal man composite construct as well.
Going forwards, when we analytically look at Heb. 4:12 - in this particular Passage we see that the “soul” is distinctive from the “spirit” and that the “joint” is equally distinctive from the “marrow”. As such, in Heb. 4:12 apostle Paul laid down literal penetration markers (soul-spirit separator and joints separator - the marrow) as to what degree the quick and sharp power of the WORD was capable of piercing into.
Moreover, when looking at the soul-spirit relationship they are revealed to be divided by the greek noun “merismos” (separation – i.e. a separator).
However, when we look at the comparative joint-marrow there is no implied “separator” if we suggest that the “marrow” is defined to be the literal “bone morrow”, and as per this suggested analysis the “marrow (bone)” would then be completely enclosed within the stated “joint (bone)” itself.
Therefore, by comparative analysis this would then imply that the “spirit” would be completely enclosed by the “soul” – i.e. the figurative circle within the circle.
However, this suggested construct of Heb. 4:12 seems somewhat problematic in regards to apostle Paul’s 2Cor. 6:16, et. al., where he declared that “Ye are the Temple of the Living God...” Implying that the physical structural Temple of God under the Mosaic Law has now been replaced by the mortal human body as the symbolic Temple of the Living God in respect to the New Covenant of Grace.
As such, seeing then that the Temple of God under the Mosaic Law and the Temple of God under the New Covenant of Grace are both “trichotomous” – then by direct comparative analysis the Mosaic Temple of God consisted of the physical structure itself which enclosed the Holy Place then the Veil of Separation and then the Holy of Holies (most Holy Place).
Moreover, if we look at the actual greek text (TR) of 1 Thess. 5:23 we
find that the spirit – soul – body are each
preceded grammatically by the greek definite article “THE” and separated
by the greek conjunction “kai”. Thus, we have THE spirit
and THE soul and THE body. Therefore, we have a
“trichotomously” designed man.
Therefore, we have a “trichotomously” designed man.
To this end,
To this end,1 Thess. 5:23 and Heb. 4:12 then reveals the literal “markers” that are penetrated by the WORD – hence, Body-Soul-Spirit to the inner most “marker” of the greek “merismos” (separator).
Thus, it is only logical then that there must be some literal entities for the quick and sharp WORD to penetrate. You cannot plunge a figurative sharp knife into nothingness – there must be a marker(s).
As such ,
,1 Thess. 5:23 and Heb. 4:12 then reveals the literal “markers” that are penetrated by the powerful WORD – hence, Body-Soul-Spirit to the inner most “markers” of the greek "merismos" and "myleos" (separators).
However, the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies which were “separated” by the Veil were LINEAR.
Thus, the Holy of Holies was not completely enclosed by the Holy Place – but as stated they were linear...i.e. NOT a figurative circle within a circle.
Meanwhile, please note that apostle Paul in Heb. 4:12 did not say to the “bone and marrow” but rather to the “joints and morrow”, and as we all know a joint is where two objects (bones) are joined together – just as the comparative soul and spirit are suggested to be joined together – but divided by a “separator”.
Therefore, it can be suggested that the “marrow” (equally defined as the innermost part, etc.) is the “SEPARATOR” (i.e. figurative cartilage) between the joints like the separator of the soul and spirit – but they are LINEAR and not a figurative circle within a circle.
I said all of the above to suggest that the mortal human spirit is not completely enclosed and encapsulated by the soul but rather each component of soul and spirit is autonomously independent - one of the other and divided by an innermost “separator”. Hence, they are linear.
Thus, my theological challenge to Calvinists is to present Scriptural evidence, not of circumstantial inferences, but rather of direct factual proof that mortal man immediately subsequent to the Adamic fall no longer personally possesses his Elohim nəthanah (given) ruach (spirit) – but as they suggest, the creature’s spirit is now “absolutely” possessed by his sinfully thirsty nephesh (soul).
For example, with respect to the notion of “total depravity” how can the man of Proverbs 28:13, “CONFESS” his sins resulting in God’s mercy if that man’s soul/spirit is absolutely possessed of total depravity and he has no free-will to do so?
Proverbs 28:13 (KJV)
Likewise, how can the sinner man of Is. 55:6-7 “call up the Lord” and forsake his unrighteous thoughts returning unto the Lord for His subsequent mercy and pardon if his soul/spirit was absolutely possessed of total depravity and has no free-will nor capability to do so? Thus, Adam was once innocent but willfully chose to LEAVE the Lord. Therefore, man must abandon his sinful ways and RETURN unto and call upon the Lord.
Isaiah 55:6-7 (KJV)
Moreover, how could the sinner Gentile Canaanite women of Matt. 15:22-28, having great faith plead for Yeshua’s mercy and “worship” Him if she was a “dog” Gentile and her soul/spirit was absolutely possessed of total depravity and she had no free-will nor capability to do so?
Matthew 15:22-28 (KJV)
Again, how could the sinner Roman centurion of Matt. 8:5-13 have exemplary FAITH in Yeshua if his soul/spirit was absolutely possessed of total depravity and he had no free-will nor capability to do so?
Matthew 8:5-13 (KJV)
Even more, how could the sinner Publican of Lk. 18:9-14 have pleaded for God’s mercy if his soul/spirit was absolutely possessed of total depravity and he had no free-will nor capability to do so?
Luke 18:9-14 (KJV)
Moreover, how can ANY man (a sinner) of Jn. 7:17 will/choose/desire to do God’s will if his soul/spirit is absolutely possessed of total depravity and has no free-will nor capability to do so?
John 7:17 (KJV)
Again, how could the BIDDEN Jews have CHOSEN to refuse the “call” of God in Matt. 22:1-8 (see also Matt. 23:37) if their souls/spirits were absolutely possessed of total depravity and they had no free-will nor capability to do so?
Matthew 22:1-8 (KJV)
How could the sinners of Proverbs 1:29 have CHOSEN not to fear the Lord if their souls/spirits were absolutely possessed of total depravity and they had no free-will nor capability to do so?
Proverbs 1:29 (KJV)
Furthermore, how could YHWH have said unto Cain in Gen. 4:6 regarding his (Cain’s) doing of either well or not well if Cain’s soul/spirit was absolutely possessed of total depravity and he had no free-will nor capability to do so?
Genesis 4:7 (KJV)
Finally, how could the Hebrew children have CHOSEN the God in whom they would serve if their souls/spirits were absolutely possessed of total depravity and they had no free-will nor capability to do so?
Joshua 24:15 (KJV)
Therefore, Calvinists reader PLEASE be so kind as to not ‘infer’ resolutions to the above total depravity concerns but rather show factual Scriptures of how a sinner that is totally depraved could have done these things towards God.
Going forwards, Calvinists declare that Jn. 6:37-40 teaches both “IRRESISTABLE and UNCONDITIONAL GRACE”
In summary, Jesus declared in Jn. 3:16 that God loved “ALL” mankind and therefore provided an avenue of Salvation by FAITH in the shed blood of Jesus to WHOSOEVER (not limited ATONEMENT) would BELIEVE in Jesus.
John 3:16 (KJV)