Romans 9, Predestination & Total Depravity

First of all, in relation to what happened in the garden of Eden, the term “the Fall” is nowhere to be found in scripture. Because of this, even though I will continue to use the term, I will bracket it in quotation marks to continually remind the reader of this point. God told Adam in Genesis 2:17 “…but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.” Nothing is said here about a “sin nature” being passed from generation to generation. I would suggest that the only thing being said here is that if man eats then from that day forward his death is a sure thing. He will SURELY die. There is no indication in the text that some kind of “spiritual death” (which is also a commonly used phrase/concept that cannot be found in scripture) or alienation from God is intended. What is meant is physical death.

 

What exactly happened when man “fell”? Genesis 3 tells us. Genesis 3:7 says, “Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked…” I would infer from this that man became self-conscious. We see in verse 10 that man was afraid of God because he realized he was naked, and tried (unsuccessfully) to hide from God. God deduced from this that man had eaten of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten of the tree I commanded you not to eat?” Nothing is said to the effect that man “died” in any way that day. Here are the stated consequences of man’s disobedience.

 

The woman would have greater pain in childbirth, yet will desire her husband and he will rule over her. Because of the man’s disobedience:

 

Cursed is the ground because of you;

In toil you will eat of it all the days of your life. 

Both thorns and thistles it shall grow for you;

And you will eat the plants of the field;

By the sweat of your face you will eat bread, 

Till you return to the ground,

Because from it you were taken;

For you are dust, and to dust you shall return.

 

Is there ANYTHING here that suggests that man loses anything like his ability to respond to God or his power to make the choices that God sets before him? No, there isn’t. The results specified here of man’s disobedience are ALL physical in nature. The ground is cursed, man must toil for his sustenance, life is physically more difficult, and then he will physically die. THAT is what is passed from generation to generation because of Adam’s sin.

 

Now, if man “died spiritually” and fell from some kind of morally perfect and glorious state of being or even a “neutral” condition as some argue, to a totally depraved and helpless state of being in which he is unable to choose what is right and in which he is unable to relate to God in anyway whatsoever unless God monergistically regenerates him first, and this condition is passed automatically from generation to generation (the doctrine of total depravity and original sin) we would expect to see NO relationship or communication between God and man without God regenerating a man first. Is this what we see in the book of Genesis? No, it isn’t. What we see is God and man continuing to interact just as they did before. As a matter of fact, God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever” – therefore the Lord God sent him out of the garden of Eden…So He drove the man out; and at the east of the garden of Eden He stationed the cherubim and the flaming sword which turned every direction to guard the way to the tree of life.” (Gen3:22-24) Man became MORE like God than he was before. It says that his “eyes were opened.” What man lost was:

 

1) Ease of life physically.

2) Access to the tree of life - i.e. the opportunity for physical immortality.

3) His innocence (ignorance?) concerning good and evil.

 

The “tree of life” refers to physical immortality. It is defined in Gen 3:22 as “live forever.” To say that it refers to anything other than physical immortality is eisegeting something into the text that the writer (presumably Moses) was not saying. There is no indication in the text itself that some kind of spiritual life, or contact with God, or anything else other than physical immortality is what is being spoken of. It doesn’t say that man will die spiritually if he eats; it says he will surely die. Man could have lived forever, even after he sinned, if only he had access to the tree of life. This indicates that the tree of life concerns physical life, not spiritual life.

 

Proponents of the Reformed notion of total depravity would never say that Cain was regenerate. Yet, as an illustration of the continuing relationship of God and man after “the Fall” - consider Cain. Cain is generally thought of as a kind of archetypical sinner, the first murderer etc. In Gen 4:6,7 God is talking to Cain about his sacrifice. How could this be if Cain is unregenerate, fallen, and totally depraved? When God did not regard Cain’s offering Cain was angry and his “countenance fell”. This is a Hebraism that means that he was disappointed, he was discouraged or depressed. This indicates that Cain WANTED to please God, which can ONLY happen in regenerate people, according to Calvinism. Calvinists teach that the unregenerate hate God, and are unable to even desire to please Him, yet here are God and Cain, carrying on a two-sided conversation, and Cain is angry and disappointed that his sacrifice was not pleasing to God. God was counseling Cain with regard to Cain’s unacceptable sacrifice. God told Cain, “If you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door; and its desire is for you, but you must master it.” On whom is placed the responsibility for mastering sin? On whom is placed the responsibility for doing well?

 

Furthermore, AFTER the murder of Abel, we STILL find God and Cain carrying on a two-sided conversation. Then in Gen 4:16 it says, “Then Cain went out from the presence of the Lord, and settled in the land of Nod, east of Eden.” So we see that AFTER “the Fall” and AFTER God’s rejection of Cain’s sacrifice and AFTER Cain’s murder of Abel, that Cain was STILL “in the presence of the Lord” otherwise how could he go “out from the presence of the Lord”? In verse 14 Cain says, “You have driven me this day from the face of the ground; and from Your face will I be hidden…” THIS is the first indication we have of a man (not mankind) being alienated or cut off from God in some way, and is long (decades?) after “the Fall” occurred. It was NOT the result of “the Fall” but was the result of the sin of the INDIVIDUAL, i.e. Cain’s murder of Abel.

 

In Gen 3:17 –22 we have Cain’s descendant genealogy. Then in verse 25 we are told of the birth of Seth to Adam and Eve, who replaced Abel, and of the birth of Seth’s son, Enosh. It says that at the time of Enosh’s birth “Then men began to call on the name of the Lord.” The “men” being referred to here are the descendants of Cain that are spoken of in verses 17-24. I say this because the children of Cain, being born in the land of Nod, east of Eden, were born “out of the presence of the Lord” and hidden from His face - but this cannot be said for the children of Seth. By the time of Lamech, who was Cain’s great great great grandson, Enosh had been born to Seth, and “men began to call upon the name of the Lord.” So within 5 generations (a “generation” at this time denotes a much longer period of time than we now mean by use of the term) of Cain’s leaving the presence of the Lord, his descendants began to call upon the name of the Lord, which indicates that they WERE alienated from God. Referring to the descendants of Cain as “men” is significant, as I will show from Gen 6.

 

Secondly, the "men" referred to have to be the descendants of Cain because, with the exception of Adam, Eve, and Seth, we have no record of any other "men". It says that Adam and Eve had other children after Seth - it may be that some were born before Enosh and/or some after Enosh - we are not told. But remember that Cain's descendants had 5 generations to multiply before Enosh - Adam's first grandson by Seth - was even born. So the VAST majority of "men" on the earth at the time of Enosh's birth HAD to be descendants of Cain.

 

The 5th chapter of Genesis details the descendants of Adam through his son Seth. No indication is given that Seth or his descendants were alienated from God in any way. It says of at least two of these descendants (Noah and Enoch) that they “walked with God". There are NO statements to the effect that Seth and his children were “spiritually dead” or alienated from God in any way and EXPLICIT statements that two of them “walked with God.” Therefore, "the men who BEGAN to call on the name of the Lord" have to be the descendants of Cain. The descendants of Seth never ceased from calling upon the name of the Lord.

 

Let’s compare man pre-“Fall” and post-“Fall.”

 

Pre-“Fall” - Man did not have the knowledge of good and evil.

Post-“Fall” - Man did have the knowledge of good and evil.

 

Pre-“Fall” - Man had the choice to obey or disobey. (Gen 2:17)

Post-"Fall" - Man had the choice to obey or disobey.(Gen 4:7)

 

Pre- "Fall" - Access to the tree of life, but man had not yet eaten of the tree of life. (Gen 3:22)

Post- "fall" - Man is denied access to the tree of life. (Gen 3:24)

 

Pre- "fall" - Some pain in childbirth (deduced from Genesis 3:16)

Post- "Fall" - Great pain in childbirth. (Gen 3:16)

 

Pre- "Fall" - Tending the garden was easy (Gen 2:9)

Post- "Fall" - The ground is cursed, tending the soil is hard, sweat of the brow etc. (Gen 3:17ff)

 

On man’s innocence concerning good and evil: In general, I think that we have made pre-“Fall” man more than what he was, and had him “Fall” farther than what he did. Pre-“Fall” man was deceivable. Post-“Fall” man is deceivable. Pre-“Fall” man had the freedom of will to obey or disobey, that is, to make right or wrong moral decisions. He made the wrong choice – consciously. Post-“Fall”, man is freely capable of making right or wrong moral decisions, consciously, i.e. “Sin is crouching at the door…but you must master it.” How is this different from pre–“Fall”? The only difference in this area is that man has the knowledge of good and evil and in this he is MORE LIKE GOD than he was before he “fell” – God Himself says so in Gen 3:22.

 

On access to the tree of life: Man had not yet eaten of the tree of life pre-“Fall”. He has not eaten of the tree of life post- “Fall”. No difference there. What he lost was the access. No change in man himself.

 

The biggest difference (besides the knowledge of good and evil) between pre and post “Fall” is in man’s PHYSICAL circumstances. Before the “Fall” man’s physical circumstances were easy, and he had access to the tree of life, which gave him the opportunity to live forever. After the “Fall”, man’s physical circumstances were difficult, his access to physical immortality was denied, and he will “surely die.”

 

As can be seen, THERE IS NOTHING STATED IN THE ACCOUNT OF MAN’S “FALL” THAT AFFECTS MAN’S ABILITY TO OBEY GOD. With the exception of the knowledge of good and evil, EVERY SINGLE STATED CONSEQUENCE OF MAN’S DISOBEDIENCE IS PHYSICAL. Throughout the Pentateuch, indeed, throughout the rest of the Bible, God continues to deal with man as if man has the power to make choices between the options that God gives him, that is, to obey or to disobey (see Deut 28, Deut 30:19, Isaiah 55: 6,7, Ezekiel 18, Jeremiah 31:30, Isaiah 1:16-20).

 

We do not find the Calvinistic concept of total depravity as a result of “the Fall” anywhere in the text that actually describes “the Fall” – which is where we would expect to see it most plainly. We are not given the idea that, because of man’s disobedience, he has lost his ability to respond to God, that is, his response-ability. What we see is the opposite. God and man continue to communicate, no difficulty in communicating or alienation is implied until Cain “went out from the presence of the Lord” and was hidden from His face. THAT was explicitly the result of Cain’s sin in murdering Abel, not Adam’s disobedience in the garden. Furthermore, God placed the responsibility for mastering sin directly on Cain, as if he actually had the ability to do it. If that were true in Cain’s case, how much more would it be the case for everybody?

 

NEXT: Who are the "sons of God" in Genesis 6?