Wow.
You seem fully conversant with scripture. Considering my multiple posts to this thread attempting to answer a person who appears to be struggling with Grace, I'm amazed by your post.
I would encourage you to ponder 1 Timothy 6:3-5 (Is the New American Standard translation more to your liking for accuracy?)
3 If anyone advocates a different doctrine and does not agree with sound words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, and with the doctrine conforming to godliness, 4 he is conceited and understands nothing; but he has a morbid interest in controversial questions and disputes about words, out of which arise envy, strife, abusive language, evil suspicions, 5 and constant friction between men of depraved mind and deprived of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain.
I am well aware that this passage is directed at the teaching false doctrine, but the concept of people who focus on generating controversies based on wording is what I'm concerned with.
As is generally the case on these threads, people will divert from the original question and start flaming about some minutiae.
This will be my only response to you as I refuse to engage in that sort of chaos.
Rather than accuse me of trying to 'lead people in to error' perhaps in the future you could post something helpful to the discussion and ask me to clarify what I meant.
I am well aware that this passage is directed at the teaching false doctrine, but the concept of people who focus on generating controversies based on wording is what I'm concerned with.
At least you didn't dismiss the entire argument because of a spelling error, rather you dismiss the entire argument because I am concerned about deconstructing the language.
Regarding your complaint, how about really bad doctrine that leads to death? Can I raise up a complaint about that ? Or can I only do that if lots of words and thoughts are used to convey that error? As a famous past President once fought over: "depends on what meaning the word "is" is. We can go after a president's legacy on a two letter word, but a doctrine that leads to error I must remain silent or be accused of raising "disputes about words"?
As a simple example, lets say that I make a sudtle change to the word "Faith" so that it really only means cognitive assent (rather than the traditional fiduciary trust) to the concept of a God. Can I go around and charge you with raising "controversial questions" because you dare quibble about the meaning of the word "faith"? You should land on me like a ton of bricks, and would be derelict in your duties if you did not.
Furthermore, when defending primary doctrines, is that really coming from "envy, strife, reviling, evil suspicions, useless wranglings"? Is one who cares about the preservation of orthodox soteriology the product of "men of corrupt minds and destitute of the truth"? That is downright nuts to even imply that it does. So why on earth did you press the nuclear button by accusing me of a 1 Timothy 6 violation? Wouldn't that be better reserved for those preaching a social gospel, denying the trinity, promoting Mormon doctrines, gnosticism and antinomianism?
(sigh)
The Doctrines of Grace are summarized in that familiar mneumonic TULIP. So when you speak of Grace, but imply a synergistic salvation, then you have changed the meaning of the simple word "Grace" and have undermined the fundamental doctrines of Redemption. Is it OK to criticize that? If not, where is the line drawn ? It didn't seem to bother Paul, for we read in the epistle to the Galations where Paul observed that they "were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel"(2:14), and so he was compelled to "withstand [Peter] to his face" (v11). When speaking of the fundamental doctrines of Grace and Redemption, is it OK if I question something that has been considered by the Church since Augustine to be a heresy?
Jesus Christ gave specific instances where there would never be forgiveness, yet people call our LORD a liar and impute to Him a false characteristic of universal forgiveness. Then you post a bottle-rocket passage that can very easily be interpreted incorrectly that seems to suggest that God is wringing His hands hoping that people will do the right thing - and God will put off His Son's return because there still might be someone who hasn't made that Free Will Choice.
I remember on Glenn Beck's program a long while back when he had the authors of the "Left Behind" series as guests. In the interview, he asked both LaHaye and Jenkins this question: "Do you expect to see the LORD's return in your lifetime?" Now LaHaye answered negatively because of his age, yet Jenkins response was thoroughally consistent with the Pelagian heresy that predominates Evangelical thought, he answered "I hope he does not return anytime soon so that it affords more time for people to come to Christ." Now this sounds very warm and compassionate, but it also conveys a high level of contempt for the Diety, Holiness and Sovereignty of Jesus Christ. The implied meaning of your post seemed to share the same sentiment - that is, that the world would be much better off if Jesus Christ never returned so that every person of every generation would have a chance to be saved.
This line of thought categorically denies the Doctrine of Election that permeates the Scriptures. If God is unable to save unless man does something, then all the work on the cross is hypothetical as opposed to 100% effectual for those to whom it was intended to save.
How this directly relates to our inquirer here, is that this person is getting very bad advice from those who ignore the amazing grace that is apparent by this person's inquiry.
The Bible teaches that without God's preëmptive intervening Grace, that none would come to Him. We see through doctrine and through the history within the narrative that universally man hates God and loves his sin. We see this in the most powerful and strongest contrasting "but" in all literature of all time:
Gen 6:5-8 Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. So the Lord said, "I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them." But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord.
The natural state of man is to turn his thoughts to evil and evil continually. Now the poster here is dismayed over the evil within their own life. How can that possibly be unless there is a stirring of the soul by the Paraclete? And how can there be this work of the Spirit without Amazing Grace? Now, more importantly, why should anyone lie to this person regarding what one must do to be saved? The answer is: You have done nothing to merit salvation, the work has already began by the True and Faithful One.
A person doesn't need to conjure up from within a sense of remorse and repentance - for that same shame and knowledge of unholiness was first seen in the Garden, and best illustrated in Matthew by the Centurion:
Matt 8:8-9 The centurion answered and said, "Lord, I am not worthy that You should come under my roof. But only speak a word, and my servant will be healed.
The sign of regeneration is already apparent in the poster's recognition of sin and the need for atonement with the Creator.
Is this not all that which is required to come to saving faith? What more did Lazarus need to emerge from the tomb? Did he have to activate something beyond the automatic and irresistable response to "Come Forth"? So why suggest that God forgives all (a lie), and all one has to do is "activate" this "vaccine" (a lie) and experience God is to do: ________ (a lie). Rather, is it consistent with the Gospel to seek forgiveness from the Almighty Judge? And will that forgivness be found here in FR? Anywhere on the web?
As I posted earlier, run, not walk to a confessionary minister of God's Word, where far more than a pithy "sinners prayer" and a pat on the back will be given to the one who recognizes through regeneration that our LORD alone "will save a wretch like me".