The doctrine of Total Depravity historical goes along with predestinarianism and the doctrine of election, the irresistibility of God's grace, and the narrow intent of Christ's sacrifice (which occurred only for the elect).
I believe it was Gregory Nazianzen (one of the Greek Fathers) who affirmed that God will's the salvation of all, but that His gift must be accepted. This was, ultimately, the doctrine affirmed at the Council of Trent, against the Calvinists (and, incidentally, in opposition to the Thomistic doctrine of ineluctable grace).
The doctrine of total depravity does not merely assert that grace is required to stand in the presence of God, but that man is mostly a vile creature by nature, that even his good deeds are corrupt in intention, and that the image of God in man has been almost obliterated. Not only is this not obviously Scriptural, it in fact contradicts those instances where God saves someone and his family because of his righteousness, for example, Noah and Lot, or calls someone righteous for his faith, like Abraham. It especially contradicts Job, who was understood to be a righteous gentile, and who refused to abandon God even in the face of undeserved misfortune.
Furthermore, it belies the observed facts, where benevolence and malevolence are both present in force within the childish individual, and where discipline can markedly improve character. It is one thing to say that no man is entirely free of sin, and another to say that all men are almost entirely devoid of goodness. We are characterized as prodigal sons, or lambs that have strayed, creatures still dear to the father or shepherd, in the parables, not as moral horrors barely worth saving. |
