Not at all what I said.
I am not saying any nonbelieving sinner can make a noble, righteous, honorable, glorious, holy and worthy choice to choose God. I am saying the sinner can for selfish (unrighteous) reasons be willing to accept from their hated God undeserved charity.
Think of it like with the prodigal son choosing to repent (turn toward home). The father (God) allows the son to get himself into deep trouble, but the trouble he got himself into is fully deserved and the result of his own bad choices (beginning with virtually telling his father: “I wish you were dead so I can have my inheritance.”). The son is not returning home out of Love for the father or for any righteous reason, but to just possible obtain a job he fully does not deserve for the selfish reason of wanting to survive a little longer and not continue under the starving tragic situation he is in. He does have enough faith in his father to believe his father’s Love might be great enough to grant him what he does not deserve.
The decision the sinner makes is not arbitrary like preferring red over blue, but comes at those times a person “comes to their senses”. The choice is really as obvious as “is there a god or is there not a god”, which means you have to be foolish not to make the right choice, a willingness to go on hopelessly fighting, but most refuse God’s help. To refuse you can continue to be macho, self-reliant, maintain a false pride, show your willingness to take the punishment you fully deserve, and not give up. To humbly accept pure charity, means you are a wimp, you gave up and you are a soldier of satan who surrendered to his enemy while God is still your hated enemy.
A soldier in a losing battle against his hated enemy has to make a real thought-out decision to give up and surrender to his hated enemy, since he fully deserves nothing from that enemy other then to be tortured to death for previous war crimes. That is not a simple choice between red and blue.
