I have addressed the Reformed/Calvinist abuses of Eph 2:1 and the claim that it teaches total depravity before on this blog (e.g., Review of Can Our Works Save Us? Refuting Sola Fide). Another common “proof-text” is Eph 2:3 which reads as follows:
Among whom also we had our conversation in times past in the lusts of the flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath even as others.
According to some apologists for Reformed theology, before being “saved,” fallen man is totally depraved as they are said to be, “by nature the children of wrath.” Furthermore, this is an idiom.
Children of wrath is a Semitic idiom which may mean either "people characterized by wrath" or "people destined for wrath."
It would be fallacious to base a doctrine (in this case, one's anthropology [theology of man]) on a Semitic idiom.
The Greek term translated as “nature” is φύσις. In reality, it is better to understand Paul's use of this term to denote one's sinful propensities/one's way of life, evidenced by "and were" (καὶ ἤμεθα [imperfect of ειμι]). The repeated use of past tense shows he is speaking of a state which no longer exists, so this has nothing to do with our nature (which obviously has not yet changed). As discussed in the paper linked above, Cornelius, who was not saved engaged in good works; furthermore, the theology of the New Testament assumes unregenerated people can engage in good works in the eyes of God. In Matt 3:8, recording the words of John the Baptist to the Pharisees and Sadducees, the KJV reads:
Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance.
The Greek of this text reads:
ποιήσατε οὖν καρπὸν ἄξιον τῆς μετανοίας.
Literally, John is commanding the people “to do” (ποιεω) works that are “worthy” of repentance. The Greek adjective translated as “worthy” is αξιος. In New Testament soteriological contexts, it is always used to describe the reality of someone or something; it is not a mere legal declaration; in other words, something is counted/considered worthy because they/it are intrinsically worthy. We can see this in the Gospel of Matthew itself:
Nor scrip for your journey, neither shoes, nor yet staves: for the workman is worthy (αξιος) of his meat. And into whateoever city or town ye shall enter, enquire who it is worthy (αξιος); and there abide till ye go thence . . .And if the house be worthy (αξιος), let your peace come upon it: but if it be not worthy, let your peace return to you. (Matt 10:10-11, 13)
He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy (αξιος) of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy (αξιος) of me. (Matt 10:37-38)
Then saith he to his servants, The wedding is ready, but they which were bidden were not worthy (αξιος). (Matt 22:8)
We can also see this in the verb form of this adjective (αξιοω) and its usage in the New Testament. Speaking of Christ and his worthiness, we read the following:
For this man was counted worthy (αξιοω) of more glory than Moses, inasmuch as he who hath builded the house hath more honour than the house. (Heb 3:3)
Not only are there important soteriological implications of this, but also anthropological, as it calls into question the Reformed/Calvinistic belief of Total depravity (the “T” of the TULIP).
