Do you mean by "agree with it" that the opponents must "believe it to be true" or do you mean that the opponents must accept that it is an accurate "calvinist" definition of total depravity?
The first would be a rather silly position, wouldn't it, given that we disagree on these things. Are you saying that you won't discuss unless we agree with you? That's a strange starting point for any debate, don't you think?
If you mean that you won't go forward until we agree that any particular definition is an acceptable calvinistic definition, then that would be a bit odd, too. But I'll be glad to define your terms for you, if you wish.
So which is this wonderful idea that you have:
1. That you won't debate unless we agree with you first.
2. That you won't debate unless we define your terms for you?
U - condensation:
Unconditional Election: BEFORE CREATION GOD HAS ELECTED FOR HIS OWN REASONS SOME FOR BELIEVING UNTO GLORY AND SOME FOR DAMNATION.
This is my wonderful idea:
Given that the doctrine of Total Depravity is fundamental to all possible continuation of the discussion -- both argumentative and definitional -- we will not proceed until the issue of its Biblical Rectitude is independently addressed.
Here, I will make it simple:
You state that you are formulating these definitions for the purpose of making sure that Arminians "understand" the Calvinist point-of-view.
We will hereby stipulate that we have no interest whatsoever in debating any further Points, unless we are advised in advance that you either agree to the Biblical Rectitude, or reject the Biblical Rectitude, of the First Point.
In other words, we will stipulate that the debate over "TULIP" is really a debate over "T".
Any debate over Abortion is fundamentally decided upon the matter of Human Personhood at the point of Conception. I have no interest whatsoever in debating someone over Economic Abortion, Minor Abortion, Late Term Abortion, Rape-or-Incest Abortion, "Mercy-euthanasia" Abortion, or any other issue of Abortion unless we first establish the matter of Human Personhood at the Point of Conception. Before I even proceed on even a definitional basis, I insist upon the Rectitude of the First Point in that Matter being admitted or denied.
I will debate pro-aborts on the First Point -- the Human Personhood at the point of Conception -- or else I will not proceed further, on even a "definitional" basis.
Likewise, We Calvinists will debate Arminians on the First Point -- Total Depravity means that Natural Man is totally sinful and does not ever WANT in his own spirit to know Christ -- or else we will not proceed further, on even a "definitional" basis.
Total Depravity means that Natural Man is totally sinful and does not ever WANT in his own spirit to know Christ
Here we stand; we will not Recant; and otherwise, we will not Proceed.
We shall be met here, or not at all.
We claim this statement is Biblically Correct.
We further claim any disputation with our view on this is Biblically Incorrect and is Blasphemy, and we cannot even entertain Blasphemy. So we won't.
As with the matter of Abortion, we will not even consider further "points" until the First Point is addressed.
He we stand.