I have just finished reading Dave Hunt's, What Love is This? and have read all of Watchman Nee's writings from Christian Fellowship Publishers. They are what is called osas arminians and uttermost spiritual Christians. I am curious to see what answer a higher learned calvinist gives to these questions, because thus far, I have not seen an adequate answer that makes sense by common calvinists.

1) If Jesus died for just the elect (and does not die for all, e.g. "the world"), then why give the gospel to all, for wouldn't that be misleading to some, misrepresenting and giving them false hope?

2) If God pleads with all, then is this not vain since it is not their choice anyway?

3) God does not regenerate some (in the calvinist context) so why berate or blame others for that which is not their fault?

4) Is it right to save someone who does not want to be saved and force your will upon them as though like robots?

5) Why doesn't the calvinist God save everyone if he can, since it is not about predestinating by foreknowing your free-choice?

6) Why do you take all the verses in the Bible about propensity to sin and turn them into total depravity, for is it not true David was called "perfect" though he still sinned?

7) Do you think the belief of total depravity read into Scripture stems from the predisposition of the human being to believe such a thing or their soteriology is caused by the initial assumption of total depravity and because man can't fathom how God can let man be a sovereign being made in His image with free-will without God causing man's choices?

8) Why don't you think God can have the ability to predestinate by foreknowing your free-choice: a conditional election, unlimited atonement, resistible grace, for preservation of the saints?

9) Do you believe the image of God was destroyed when man fell into sin?

10) Some calvinists believe in free will, others do not. Can it really be free will if some are selected against their will and some are not given the opportunity, for to receive a gift a person must be a willing recipient?

11) Some calvinists have said they believe in unlimited atonement, while others believe in limited atonement, and still others have expressed both views (e.g. Spurgeon). Is this not contradictory?

12) I feel the true calvinist is one who honestly comes right out and says they are a robot and free-will is not really free-will, but just appears to be. The rest are clinging to some aspect of calvinism that is still nonetheless false. Do you see why I could think this way based on Calvin's Institutes, and therefore, all 5 points of calvinism would crumble if total depravity were false?