“(1) Cooperation is not about willing or running. It is about about surrendering our will.”
Cooperating is about willing and running, or otherwise it isn’t cooperation:
co·op·er·a·tion [koh-op-uh-rey-shuhn] Show IPA
noun
1.
an act or instance of working or acting together for a common purpose or benefit; joint action.
2.
more or less active assistance from a person, organization, etc.: We sought the cooperation of various civic leaders.
3.
willingness to cooperate: to indicate cooperation.
You can’t just redefine words to support a pet theology that denies the scripture.
“(2) John 15:15 specifically addresses the distinction between being a slave and a friend.”
We are indeed the friends of Christ. And so far, is there any justification in calling those who are saved by Christ “slaves”?
Can you please provide evidence where the terms freedom and slavery are ever used in the scripture in the way that YOU use them? If one is free from sin, is he a slave because God predestinated Him to be free from sin? What about in verse 16, right after 15, wherein it says:
Joh 15:16 Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.
So, did Christ regard them as servants because He chose them, or did He regard them as friends because He chose them?
You have to ask yourself which one is actually consistent with scripture.
In the Gospel cited Jesus specifically says that the apostles were slaves before but are friends now. Friends do not act under compulsion. Slaves act under compulsion - in other words, the Calvinist model.
If any theology is a "pet theology" instead of a Scriptural one, it would be Calvinism. It was unknown among Christians for 1500 years, it was introduced by a small clique and remains the doctrine of a small clique.