Lawrence O. Richards, writing in the New International Encyclopedia of Bible Words, says:

Each of the five passages where ‘depravity’ occurs in the NIV has a different Greek word from which it was translated. These words mean ‘judged and disapproved,’ ‘evil,’ perversion,’ and ‘corruption.’ In each case, the sense of the passage is well expressed by the English term ‘depravity.’ – p 221

The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology’s treatment of the family of words related to depravity states:

kako/v G2805 (kakos), bad, evil; a)/kakov G179 (akakos), guileless, innocent; kaki/a G2798 (kakia), badness; kako/w G2808 (kakoo), harm, embitter; kakopoie/w G2803 (kakopoieo), do wrong, harm; kakopoio/v G2804 (kakopoios), evil-doer; kakou=rgov G2806 (kakourgos), evil-doer, delinquent; e)gkake/w G1591 (enkakeo), become tired, lose heart; fau=lov G5765 (phaulos), bad, evil.

“NT 1 kakos is used in the NT with the meaning evil, bad, destructive, damaging, unjust. It is found 50 times, 26 of these being in Paul (Rom. 15 times, but only 7 times in the Synoptics). Its derivative akakos means without suspicion, simpleminded (Rom. 16:18), guiltless, untouched by evil (used of Christ in Heb. 7:26).

“The noun kakia is often used synonymously with the neut. adj. kakon as evil, badness, wickedness, and denotes the source of the behaviour of a kakos, an evil person, or kakopoios, evil-doer (cf. Acts 8:22; Rom. 1:29; 1 Cor. 5:8). In Matt. 6:34 it means trouble, hardship, or misfortune.

“The vb. kakoo means do evil, cause damage, handle badly or harm (1 Pet. 3:13, and often in Acts), stir up, embitter (Acts 14:2, RSV poison); and kakopoieo behave badly, do wrong (1 Pet. 3:17; 3 Jn. 11), harm (cf. Mk. 3:4 par.). A change in meaning is observable with enkakeo. It no longer means behave badly, but become tired or careless (in prayer, Lk. 18:1, RSV “lose heart”; 2 Thess. 3:13, be weary in doing good), lose heart (2 Cor. 4:1; Eph. 3:13). Weariness here is not physical but spiritual.

“kakos and its derivations are of less importance in the NT than in the OT. The NT prefers ponhro/v and hamartia (Sin) to express evil and personal guilt.”

Millard J. Erickson, Distinguished Professor of Theology at Western Seminary in Portland, Oregon, writes in his Christian Theology:

We do not mean by total depravity that the unregenerate person is totally insensitive in matters of conscience, of right and wrong . . .

“Further, total depravity does not mean that the sinful person is as sinful as possible . . . There are genuinely altruistic unregenerate person, who show kindness, generosity, and love to others, who are good, devoted spouses and parents . . .

“Finally, the doctrine of total depravity does not mean that the sinner engages in every possible form of sin.” pp 644-645

Continuing, Erickson then turns to a positive treatment of depravity:

First, sin is a matter of the entire person. The seat of sin is not merely one aspect of the person, such as the body or the reason . . .

“Further, total depravity means that even the unregenerate person’s altruism always contains an element of improper motive. The good acts are not done entirely or even primarily out of perfect love for God . . .

“Finally, total depravity means that sinners are completely unable to extricate themselves from their sinful condition . . . The sinner cannot alter his or her life by a process of determination, will power, and reformation. Sin is inescapable. This fact is depicted in Scripture’s frequent references to sinners as ’spiritually dead.’” – pp 645-647

Henry C. Thiessen says in his Lectures in Systematic Theology:

By depravity we mean man’s want of original righteousness and of holy affections toward God, and also the corruption of his moral nature and his bias toward evil . . . The Scriptures speak of human nature as wholly depraved . . .

“It does mean that every sinner is totally destitute of that love to God which is the fundamental requirement of the law (Deut. 6:4-5; Matt. 22:35-38); that he is supremely given to a preference of himself to God (2 Tim. 3:4); that he has an aversion to God which on occasion becomes active enmity to Him (Rom. 8:7); that his every faculty is disordered and corrupted (Eph. 4:18); that he has no thought, feeling, or deed of which God can fully approve (Rom. 7:18); and that he has entered upon a line of constant progress in depravity, from which he can in no wise turn away in his own strength (Rom. 7:18) . . .

“Depravity has produced a total spiritual inability in the sinner in the sense that he cannot by his own volition change his character and life so as to make them conformable to the law of God, nor change his fundamental preference of self and sin to supreme love for God, yet he has a certain amount of freedom left. He can, for instance, choose not to sin against the Holy Spirit, decide to commit the lesser sin rather than the greater, resist certain forms of temptation altogether, do certain outwardly good acts, though with improper and unspiritual motives, and even seek God from entirely selfish motives.” – pp. 267-268, (Second Printing, 1951)

Robert A. Pyne, in Swindoll and Zuck’s Understanding Christian Theology, includes the image of God in humanity in his treatment of depravity:

The image has been defaced but not erased, tarnished but not destroyed, as humanity has exchanged the glory of God for idolatry (Rom 1:22-23). We retain the capacity to demonstrate God’s likeness (even though it is not fully realized), the ability to make moral decisions (even if we make them wrongly), and the potential to reflect the glory of God physically (even if it doesn’t look that way now). We were created to reign over the earth as God’s vice-regents, but through sin we have surrendered our allegiance to another authority, Satan . . .

“Because of the Fall, all human existence is today only a shadow of what it was supposed to be. No one fully manifests the image of God.” – p 741

Charles C. Ryrie, in the Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, summarizes the doctrine:

A proper definition of total depravity should not focus primarily on the questions of sinfulness vs. goodness or ability vs. inability, but on fallen man’s relation to a holy God. Because of the effects of the fall, that original relationship of fellowship with God was broken and man’s entire nature was polluted. As a result no one can do anything, even good things, that can gain soteriological merit in God’s sight. Therefore, we may concisely define total depravity as the unmeritoriousness of man before God because of the corruption of original sin . . .

“The mind is affected (Rom. 1:28; Eph. 4:18), the conscience is unclean (Heb. 9:14), the heart is deceitful (Jer. 17:9), and by nature mankind is subject to wrath (Eph. 2:3) . . .

“Calvinists trace depravity to an inherent corruption of man’s nature which was inherited from Adam. Augustine stressed the idea that all were seminally present in Adam when he sinned and therefore all sinned in him. The semi-Pelagian reaction to Calvinism is found today in Arminian theology, which denies total depravity, the guilt of original sin, and the loss of freedom of the will, and which affirms involvement in the sin of Adam only to the extent of giving mankind a tendency toward sin but not a sinful nature.

“The implications of depravity are especially crucial in relation to salvation. Man has no ability to save Himself. He can do good and make choices, but he cannot regenerate himself (John 1:13). Unless the Holy Spirit enlightens an individual he will remain in darkness (1 Cor. 2:14). Some theologians have labeled this ‘moral inability,’ an unclear term, since it implies that depraved people are devoid of morality.” – pp 312-313



Namárië.