I have never embraced TULIP of Gomarist Calvinism. I am saved by Christ from my sins and God's wrath since March 22nd, 1970. But I have had well meaning Reformed believer's trying to convert me to TULIP. The problem I had was with the T of TULIP and what I know about biblical soeteriology.

The T-Total Depravity.

This did not confuse me. The Bible clearly teaches this...the problem is when they add to this Total Inability....by redefining "dead" in Ephesians 2:1 to teach that a sinner is a spiritual corpse and if God does not give the "gift of faith" ....redefining Ephesians 2:8 away from the gift being salvation in order to teach that unless God, through the Holy Spirit regenerates the sinner first (resurrection) and makes the sinner receptive for the gift of faith...then they can be saved. Thus God's sovereignty eclipses human responsibility.

To illustrate their "inability" doctrine they go to John 11:38-44 about Lazarus' resurrection.

John MacArthur's sermon The Doctrine of Absolute Inability

https://www.gty.org/library/sermons-library/90-276/the-doctrine-of-absolute-inability

defines the problem with this doctrine in Reformed soeteriology.

God must save us. He must choose us, call us, regenerate us, justify us by his divine power, because we are neither willing nor able to do it for ourselves. And this takes us to what I’m going to call the “doctrine of absolute inability.”

Now to start this discussion, I want you to open your New Testament to John 11 - John 11 - and this will provide for us, I think, a good analogy to kind of launch us into our discussion. John 11 is a notable chapter to all who understand the Bible because it records the resurrection of one of Jesus’ most intimate friends, a man by the name of Lazarus.

Now what interests me here is that Jesus gave a command to a dead man. I’ve done a lot of funerals. I’ve seen a lot of dead people. I’ve never asked any of them to do anything, nor has anybody else. Especially would I never say to a dead man, “Bill, come forth.” I mean, you wouldn’t waste words. You’d look foolish. Dead men can’t hear. Dead men can’t think. Dead men can’t respond cause they’re dead and dead means the absolute inability to do anything in response to any stimulus. There’s no will. There’s no power to think or act. But, look at verse 44. “He who had died came forth.” Lazarus did exactly what Jesus asked him to do. Amazing.

How is it possible for a dead man to do what Jesus told him to do? We all know the answer. Because Christ gave him the ability to do it. If Christ hadn’t given him the life, he couldn’t have obeyed.

Now, from there I want you to go to Ephesians chapter 2 and here we see the depth of this problem. Ephesians chapter 2. This is not a description of Lazarus. This is a description of everybody.

Man’s problem is he is absolutely dead, and he is incapable of relating to God at all - God’s person, God’s truth, or God’s commands.

The sinner is so dead that all that he is involved in can be summed up as being of the world, of the devil, and of the flesh. He can do absolutely nothing outside of that.

You say, “Yeah, but we had to believe.” Of course, verse 8. “For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that - ” that faith “ - not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;” You see, even faith has to be given to the dead.

If God does not make them willing and God does not make them able, where does the power come, and where does the will come from? Those who deny the doctrine of divine election, those who deny the doctrine of divine salvation as an act of God have to believe that there’s something in man left to himself that enables him to become willing and to come to life. Is that what the Bible teaches? The Bible doesn’t describe our condition as a disability. It describes it as death. And everybody knows that death means an inability to respond.

Here is a response from Dan Smedra:

Many Reformed/Calvinists portray humanity's post-Fall, pre-New Birth condition (Total Depravity) as a state of total unconsciousness and passivity rather than separation from God. This erroneous emphasis is reactive in both its nature and origin, and largely a carryover from their century-old battle with Roman Catholic and Arminian heresies. Consequently, it creates serious problems relative to: a) the true condition of lost sinners and the preaching of the Gospel, b) differences between the effectual calling, the New Birth, and the role of faith, and c) the believer's relationship to his indwelling nature of sin (flesh).

a) In Ephesians 2:1, the Apostle Paul tells us, "As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient." How is it that the words "dead," "live," and "disobedient" can be used in the same sentence to simultaneously describe our prior lost condition, if the meaning of dead carries the idea of being unconscious or passive? More to the point, Miles Stanford remarks:

Their [Reformed/Calvinist] illustration of this total inability [depravity] is a man physically dead, who cannot see, hear, speak or move.

However, "Although the sinner is dead in sins, he is not an unresponsive corpse, he is not annihilated; rather, he is separated from God. He is certainly alive enough to adamantly reject the Saviour! [8]

As mentioned above, the reason our Calvinist brothers overstate their case in this theological realm is due to the manipulative way their (and our) humanistic adversaries have argued in favor of "free will" and their loyalty to defend the biblical truth of the "grace of God." However, this emphasis has proven to progressively cause an imbalance, which over time undermines the Scriptural truth of both volition and volitional responsibility. Further, their deficient view of sin opens the door to religious self-righteousness and pride and also closes the door to considering possible error on their part. I have found that to suggest that a Calvinist loosen his grip on his theology is like asking King Edward I ("Longshanks") to relinquish control of Scotland.

In time, preaching the Gospel to unconscious sinners makes less and less logical sense to the consistent Calvinist. If he doesn't pull back, he will assuredly slide into hyper-Calvinism and may decide to give up communicating the Good News altogether. But Romans 1:18-23 and others teach us that those who are "dead in transgressions" have retained a level of both consciousness and conscience about God and His creation. His separation from God (spiritual death) and bondage to sin renders him a rebellious inhabitant in a lonely and silent cosmos, a slave to sin and self, but not a cadaver.

b) All Christians who adhere to sovereign grace affirm the truth that "No one can come to Me [Christ] unless the Father who sent Me draws him." (John 6:44). However, Reformed/Calvinists erroneously view the action(s) of the Father drawing the sinner to the Savior as evidence of regeneration--i.e., the New Birth. No room is made for any human response before regeneration, lest some religious humanist get a meritorious 'toe' in the door. Representative of this emphasis Dr. Bob Wright states:

Since the Fall of Adam and Eve, all are born spiritually dead in their sin nature, and therefore require regeneration to a life they do not naturally possess.

The doctrine of total depravity states that fallen human nature is morally incapable of responding to the gospel without being caused to do so by divine intervention (1 Cor. 2:12-15). [So far, OK] Once the soul is sovereignly regenerated, it willingly responds in saving faith to God's command to repent and believe the gospel, but not before. [Now, not OK]

He regenerates the human heart, infusing divine life into it, thus enabling the wicked to believe, even though they were formerly enslaved to the habit of rebellion. [This is speculative, based upon his theological presumptions.]

God regenerates each elect person so that he or she invariably responds willingly to the gospel. [10]

In spite of the many examples throughout Holy Scripture of God controlling the actions of the unregenerate, the Reformed/Calvinists dogmatically require an "initial infusion of the resurrection life of Christ into the human soul" for John 6:44 to be effective. But think for a moment about the 22nd chapter of Numbers. The false prophet Balaam heard the Lord speak, his ass (donkey) spoke, and both he and his ass saw an angel all without the benefit of Calvinistic regeneration. Supernatural? Yes! New Birth? No. Strangely, while the Calvinist prides himself in being a stalwart defender of God's sovereignty, he limits what God the Father is capable of doing. He erroneously requires that the doctrine of effectual calling be made synonymous with the New Birth. Cannot the Father's enablement of the sinner to "believe the Word in order to accept the Savior" be seen as separate while related, and not confused with the New Birth itself?

c) Given his presuppositions, anemic understanding of SIN, and exaggerated view of spiritual death, the Reformed/Calvinist is nearly guaranteed to misinterpret the Apostle Paul's teachings in the Pauline Epistles. Most often, Paul's words are viewed as speaking exclusively to the subject of the believer's justification, while Paul's teaching regarding identification with Christ is ignored, twisted, or treated as an addendum. To help rectify this serious theological deficiency, the Reformed/Calvinist has invented the doctrines of "the third use of the Law" as well as "Lordship" salvation. The essence of Reformed/Calvinist regeneration is that of change, rather than the biblical view of exchange--the life inherited from the first Adam displaced by the life of the Lord Jesus Christ--the Last Adam. Thus, they claim believers have only one nature (one life changed from old to new) rather than two natures (old and new animating life-forces, co-resident).

http://withchrist.org/covtheo.htm