Sproul is making things up. I am not going to read some silly rationalizations. Dictionary tells me that utter=total
utterly: in an utter manner; completely; bsolutely
and is synonimous with: entirely, fully, wholly, totally
There is no such thing as half-dead. Either you are elive or you are dead. The east always taught that we are spiritually sick in need of a physician (scriptural), not dead.
You need to address the issues of being spirritually dead with others who call themselves Calvinists on this Forum. They don't profess anything you do. neither free eill nor "sparks" of life in us.
What good is to quote Calvin? You are not a Calvinist, because being a Calvinist would mean you follow traditions of a man. You can say that you agree with some of his theology. That doesn't make you a Calvinist. I am Orthodox because, no matter ewhat I may think and postulate, I profess that which the Church teaches, and has taught everywhere and always. You can't say that about Calvin or Luther.
Kosta. You're irritating me. "THAT'S NOT CALVINISM" "HOW DARE YOU QUOTE CALVIN OR CALVINISTS"
You seem to have in your head what "Calvinism" is. If a quote from Calvin directly contradicts that, you reject Calvin in favor of that conception in your head. If I quote a Calvinist like Sproul who is explicitly explaining a doctrine, you reject it as well. You aren't really interested in what Calvinists TRULY believe. You're just interested in constructing your straw men with which to try to burn us. As long as this is your attitude, I don't know the conversation persists since you have your mind closed to what our true beliefs are.
Darn it, I'm on your side as a rule. But I should say that when I was at Virginia Theological Seminary it was going through a Karl Barth neo (Protestant) Orthodox phase and that's what we were told about totl depravity -- not that man is completgely one hundred per cent messed up (if he were, how would he know it?) but that no faculty or aspect or activity or whatever is not tainted, hampered, crippled, like that, with or by evil.
Incidentally, I only refer to myself as Calvinist because I do agree with some of his teachings (though not all) and have stated so earlier on the thread (where I don't know, but you are correct in that I do not follow a man but Scripture). But to not be able to quote Calvin in a conversation about what Calvinism teaches is just silly. There is a set of doctrinal principles which several of us on this thread believe are biblically correct. They were articulated by Calvin but have their root in Scripture. Because the debate between Calvin and Arminius was such a big deal, these doctrines have come to be referred to as Calvinism. On the 5 points of "Calvinism" I am in agreement with John Calvin. Happy?