His will is that depraved humans get to have free will.
So now it's your turn -- can men resist the Holy Spirit, as you said last week, or are men incapable of resisting God, as you just said today?
They will always chose according to their nature and their unregenerate nature will ALWAYS choose not to repent and believe in the God and savior of the bible.
Your argument is a red herring
Back to free will. Let's see what we mean by that.
If an unregenerate reprobate has not been elected by God, will he want to choose faith in Christ? Is he even capable of choosing faith?
No, his nature is fallen and he is incapable of choosing righteously. He is incapable of repentance and belief.
OTOH, if God has elected a man to be among His children (through nothing good in that man and most especially through no future good choice to believe) then that man will, at a time of God's choosing, definitely come to faith in Christ.
Why? Because God willed that walk of faith from before the foundation of the world; and the man had nothing to do with that decision. Thus, that man will not not believe. He is incapable of not repenting and not believing.
So we all play games with the term, "free will" because it satisfies that need to view life as egalitarian and fair.
But truthfully, God does not elect on fairness or righteousness or future choices or ability to believe; He elects for His own perfect reasons which are in no way dependent on the individual.
The fallacy of this article is the following statement --
"Fallen man could trust in Christ if only he were willing to do so. His inability to believe results from his incalcitrant unwillingness to believe, and is not due to any lack of natural ability to exercise faith."
Of course his disbelief is due to "a lack of natural ability to exercise faith." His "nature" is fallen and totally incapable of exercising faith.
Likewise, the only men capable of exercising faith are those who have been regenerated by God.
It's interesting how our Calvinist/Arminian discussions are going after all this time. You seem to have gotten more reformed, which is great news to us reformers. God's predestination of all things is an acquired taste, IMO. It takes a good long while to sink in because it's the antithesis of what most pulpits preach. But articles like this are more on the order of "Calvinist in the tradition of Arminius." 8~)
TULIP is a handy acronym. This article speaks against "total depravity" and "limited atonement" and most especially "unconditional election."
The only way to clarify what someone really believes is by asking questions. So, do you believe man is 100% incapable of believing in Jesus Christ unless and until God gives him faith?
Do you believe God elects based on His foreknowledge of men's eventual decision to believe, or on nothing in men.
Do you believe Christ died for every man, even those who don't come to Him?
Do you believe if God sends the Holy Spirit to give a man a new heart and eyes and ears, that man can resists the Holy Spirit? Is God's grace "irresistible?"
And finally, can any man fall away from his faith?
I'm happy this website lists Pink as one of its authors. However, some reformed sites actually leave out an entire chapter of Pink's book, "The Sovereignty of God." Imagine that; an entire chapter.
And what chapter do they ignore and try to pass off as Pink's complete work when it's not?
"The Sovereignty of God in Reprobation."
Obviously this is the hardest chapter and the one men resist the most. For that reason, it's probably among the most important because it further defines all the others.
Finally, does God give all men the same opportunity to believe in Him? Why do some men believe and not others? Why are some men only capable of resisting the Holy Spirit while other men are only capable of following the Holy Spirit?
If free will really existed, those questions couldn't be asked and answered.
"For who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive?" -- 1 Corinthians 4:7
Where is that revealed in Scripture? I see no such revelation stated or implied therein.