The Calvinists and Arminians have been arguing about this one longer than the Latter Day Saints have been around. I don't want to reproduce a debate that has raged among "orthodox" Christians for centuries on this thread. you can read about it on wiki or google it if you want. I'll just say since when has the non-Biblical "total Depravity" been the standard of who is a Christian or not?
Here I'll give you Freebie. This is a parallel example using mormon Scripture. In Sunday School classes once in a while the theolgical discussion will turn to "Free Agency." As Americans especially we like to discuss this topic. However it is not based in the actual text of Mormon Scripture. The term used is "Moral Agency". Every man may act according to the moral agency which I have given unto him, D&C 101: 78. IOW, there is a subtle textual distinction. Now no one really cares too much about it in class but there is a difference between Free agency and moral agency. One implies we can do anything we want. many secualr liberal Americans fall into the "Free to do anything I want with no consequence" trap. The other implies that there is a moral piece attached to what God has "freely" given us, IOW, what we do with our agency has moral consequence. Now the Calvinists have proposed that what the Bible really means is "total depravity". Arminians (and Mormons) reject this interpretation. It is a subtle textual change of what the scriptures really say.
I guess you didn't get the question when I asked you what you thought it did mean. Either that or you can't answer it. I don't want to reproduce the debate either. But there was more than one point. For one, the innerancy of scripture. You avoided discussing that - why?
Another favorite of their is filthy rags they love to wallow in this low level force, feeling it is some form of being humble.
But a child who is born again in the Lord is not deprave or a filthy rage.
A child of God is one who submits to the Lord will.
Thy will be done oh Lord on earth, as it tis in Heaven.