Is it? Can we act contrary to our nature without the Grace of God acting on us first?
Can God act contrary to His nature?
I think those are two valid questions and I'd be interested to read your answers to them.
BTW, how is your sister doing? It's been quite a while since I've seen her post.
Do you assume "our nature" to be one of total depravity which is capable of no good?
Warning: What follows is largely, if not completely, the thinking of Millard Erickson in his turgid tome "Christian Theology," verbiage and all.
Paul draws the parallel between Adam and Christ quite eloquently. He elucidates that because of Adam's sin, all persons receive a corrupted nature and are guilty in God's sight. So it was not just Adam who sinned. We were involved, even if not personally, and we all bear responsibility for the sin. In some parallel way Christ's act of righteousness leads to life just as Adam's sin lead to death.
If the condemnation of Adam is imputed to us without there being any sort of conscious choice, the same would necessarily hold true of the imputation of Christ's righteousness and redeeming work.
Now the heresy hunters come running. "Aha!" they cry. But does Christ's death justify us simply by virtue of his identification with humanity through the incarnation and independently of whether we make a conscious and personal acceptance of his work? And do all men have the grace of Christ imputed to them, just as all men have Adam's sin imputed to them? Of course not. There is too much evidence of the "sheeps" and "goats." Only the person who receives Christ's gift has the effective workings of grace in his/her life.
But if this is the case, wouldn't the imputation of guilt based upon the action of Adam, albeit Adam as including us, require some sort of volitional choice as well? If there is no "unconscious faith" can there be "unconscious sin"?
Erickson's quite lucid explanation is as follows: We all were involved in Adam's sin, and thus receive both the corrupted nature that was his after the fall, and the guilt and condemnation that attach to his sin. With this matter of guilt, however, just as with the imputation of Christ's righteousness, there must be some participation on our part. Until this is the case, there is only a conditional imputation of guilt. Thus, there is no condemnation until one reaches an "age of responsibility."
So what is the nature of the voluntary decision which ends our childish innocence and constitutes a ratification of the first sin, the fall? A view which preserves the parallelism of Adam and Christ and which retains the individual responsibility in the participation in the first sin is that we become responsible and guilty when we accept or approve of our corrupt nature. There is a time in life of each of us when we become aware of our own tendency toward sin. At that point we may abhor the sinful nature that has been there all along. We would in that case repent of it and might eve, if there is an awareness of the Gospel, ask God for forgiveness and cleansing. At the very least there would be a rejection of our sinful makeup. But if we acquiesce in that sinful nature, we are in effect saying that it is good. In placing our tacit approval upon the corruption, we are also approving or concurring in the action in the Garden of Eden so long ago. We become guilty of that sin without having to commit a sin of our own.
Ok, that ends his thought, but you'll be able to tell that simply by reading. I thought it was a good read. It also points to Wesley's idea of prevenient grace which God has given to all, Aristotle's "spark of the divine" or what Genesis might call "the image of God."
Can God act contrary to His nature?
This question places an anthropomorphic conception of God upon Him and manages to point to our own ability to act contrary to our nature. The very fact that we can conceive this question shows that we can act contrary to our nature. Otherwise we would have no category for this idea. God does not have a nature with which each of His actions must be compared to see how perfectly they conform. Just as simply as God KNOWS over and above the idea that He foreknows, God IS over and above the idea that He is a) just, b) loving.....etc.
She is doing well. She is finishing her MDiv as we speak and will begin her ThM in the fall (good Lord willin and the crick don't rise). If I had half of her persistence and brains, I'd be doing alright.