The Problem of the Inconsistency of John Calvin's Doctrines of Total Depravity and Private Interpretation of the Scriptures.

John Calvin taught two novel doctrines that are incompatible with each other. The two doctrines of total depravity and private interpretation of the scriptures under the guidance of the Holy Spirit lead to the inevitable condemnation of John Calvin and all those who hold to Calvin's two doctrines as unregenerate men who always or nearly always sin. 

Total depravity is a doctrine of John Calvin who taught that every act of the unregenerate man is a sin caused by the bond of the human will as an effect of original sin. Total depravity is summarised in several points in an article entitled - John Calvin On Total Depravity

2.3.2 - Romans, ch. 3, as witness for man's corruption

Now his intention in this passage is not simply to rebuke men that they may repent, but rather to teach them that they have all been overwhelmed by an unavoidable calamity from which only God's mercy can deliver them.

Let this then be agreed: that men are as they are here described not merely by the defect of depraved custom, but also by depravity of nature. The reasoning of the apostle cannot otherwise stand: Except out of the Lord's mercy there is no salvation for man, for in himself he is lost and forsaken [Rom. 3:23 ff.]...it is futile to seek anything good in our nature.

2.3.5 - Man sins of necessity, but without compulsion

Because of the bondage of sin by which the will is held bound, it cannot move toward good, much less apply itself thereto; for a movement of this sort is the beginning of conversion to God, which in Scripture is ascribed entirely to God's grace...Therefore simply to will is of man; to will ill, of a corrupt nature; to will well, of grace.

According to John Calvin, man has a nature that only wills sin prior to the action of Christian grace.

John Calvin also taught the doctrine of private interpretation assisted by the action of the Holy Spirit to understand the sacred text. Calvin's doctrine is stated in an article entitled - The living voice of God: John Calvin on the supreme authority of Holy Scripture.

No amount of argument or testimony, Calvin was convinced, would be sufficient “to prove to unbelievers that Scripture is the Word of God … for only by faith can this be made known.” Even so, “Scripture will ultimately suffice for a saving knowledge of God only when its certainty is founded upon the inward persuasion of the Holy Spirit.” 

The phrase, "inward persuasion of the Holy Spirit" assumes the regeneration of the Christian and the assistance of the Holy Spirit to help the regenerated man understand the truths contained within the sacred text. Yet to have the correct understanding of the text infers the Christian holds to all of the orthodox doctrines as revealed by God. For if one or more heterodox doctrines are held, the man is in serious danger of committing a sin against the faith, such as the sin of heresy. If the sin has been committed then there is no way of correctly understanding the text, for the unregenerate man only ever commits sin without grace.

Yet Calvin's doctrine of private interpretation under the guidance of the Holy Spirit is itself not found in the scriptures and for good reasons. One such reason is private interpretation cannot have any binding power over the believer, for divine revelation is public, and for all men, and not private revelation. Consequently, divine revelation demands a public institution and a public understanding of the truths contained in revelation, in part to guard the sacred deposit against those who reduce revelation down to privately understood truths.

As private interpretation is itself a doctrine not found within divine revelation and is a doctrine against the nature of public revelation, the doctrine is heterodox. As private interpretation is heterodox, it is a sin to hold to the doctrine as being revealed by God. Therefore within John Calvin's method, heterodox doctrines are presupposed to the Christian man who is also considered to be a regenerate man and under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

Furthermore, John Calvin's two doctrines of total depravity and private interpretation are contained within his own novel theological system that exists only from the mind of John Calvin, largely apart from church history, church councils and apart from any divine authority. Calvin's own novel theology is also made with large differences to that of other Reformers such as Martin Luther, Philip Melanchthon, and John Knox. In short, John Calvin's novel theology is made in opposition to most of historical Christendom and in opposition to many of the other Reformed theological systems. In other words, everyone else other than John Calvin thinks John Calvin's theology contains many heresies that are not revealed by God.

So according to John Calvin, a regenerate Christian can interpret the scriptures as long as the understanding is orthodox according to John Calvin's novel theology. But everyone other than John Calvin and the Calvinists thinks John Calvin's theology is a mixture of orthodoxy and heterodoxy, inferring that most of Christendom think John Calvin's method of private interpretation is inconsistent with total depravity.

For all Christians except Calvin and the Calvinists think Calvinism contains heresy and the Calvinists are then sinning by holding to Calvinist errors. Yet Calvin and Calvinists hold they are regenerate and under the guidance of the Holy Spirit by privately interpreting the scriptural texts in accordance with Calvin's novel and false theological system. John Calvin's doctrines then cause Calvinists to fall into sin and become unregenerate and act as though they were totally depraved. Yet Calvinists also hold to Calvinists as being regenerate men as evidenced by holding to Calvin's novel and false doctrines. The Calvinist quandary is apparent because Calvin's two doctrines of total depravity and private interpretation are inconsistent with each other.

Conclusion - Because both of Calvin's doctrines of private interpretation and total depravity are false, the two doctrines are logically and practically incompatible with each other. Such incompatibility between two doctrines is an indication that Calvinism is a false systematic theology that is not reflective of God as the source of Calvinist doctrine.

The inconsistency between the two doctrines is only a small part of the problematic nature of Calvinism. Because private interpretation is a false doctrine, then all of Calvinism is inconsistent with any doctrine within Calvinism that is true, and also may or may not be inconsistent with all of Calvin's false doctrines as well. For example, the doctrine of the Trinity is true, but inconsistent with the false doctrine of private interpretation. Alternatively, the false doctrine of limited atonement is a Calvinist error that is consistent with the false doctrine of private interpretation. For only through private interpretation can one arrive at the falsity of limited atonement as a doctrine that does not, in fact, exist within the sacred text.