Tom, sorry I missed one of your questions about one of my questions about total depravity. You gave me two links (listed below). One of them dealt with total depravity.

[Actually what Kyle said makes perfect sense. However perhaps your problem is that you haven’t fully grasped what he has said.
I thought you might benefit from reading the following two articles.]

After reading the link, I decided to ask you a question: If I am unable to get to the store, am I still able to accept a ride when offered?

Obviously a way to look at total depravity.

Another question left by the way-side (unless it's hiding somewhere else): The phrase "dead in sin" is taken literally, why not "dead to sin"? So far I've heard the argument that the former is a state of being, while the latter involves a process of sanctification. However, both are meant to describe different states: unregenerated are dead in sin, the regenerated are dead to sin. Sounds like two different states to me.

In the first, the phrase is interpreted to mean that those dead in sin have no way of even responding in a good way to the message of salvation. Dead means dead - totally unable to respond.

But believers are said sin, while being described as "dead to sin." The word is there again, but it's somehow diluted when we're confronted with the realistic idea that we still sin.

As a final question: if election is unrelated to our physical and mental activities, why is it that every Calvinist I encounter, who has mentally assented to Calvinist beliefs, considers themselves elect? Wouldn't there be at least a few Calvinists, who, convinced of the truth of Calvinism, realize that they are reprobate? Does understanding Calvinism save you, or does being regenerated indepent of your mental activities?