My church preaches a form of salvation known generally as "decisional" regeneration. Church leadership believes men have the power and ability in and of themselves to choose, or not, to "accept" Christ as savior.

I have believed for several years now, after much study, this form of belief is flawed in that it does not recognize the Biblical declaration that mankind when born are born "dead in trespasses and sins." To my mind this statement from Scripture is clear, unambiguous, and leaves no wiggle room for the concept of an autonomous free will. My argument is that we choose all kinds of things but those choices are limited by the nature with which we are born and that nature is fallen or spiritually dead. I don't often appeal to science in my arguments but in this case genetics has proven we are what we are as a result of the DNA inherited from our parents regressively back to the first pair of man and woman. Therefore, our natures are derivative of Adam and Eve (if you believe Scripture, as I do) and God said they died spiritually the day they ate of the fruit forbidden to them. Therefore, it is pretty difficult for dead people to choose to something of which they are unaware or even argue coherently from Scripture that they have this capacity.

Scripture teaches than unless and until God "regenerates" our fallen natures we cannot hear, understand or choose to respond to Him.

Because of my beliefs I have found, and am going to begin studying, the writings of Cornelius VanTil. He is the late Westminster Theological Seminary professor who wrote about and taught  Presuppositional Apologetics. VanTil said:

This is, in the last analysis, the question as to what are one's ultimate presuppositions. When man became a sinner he made of himself instead of God the ultimate or final reference point. And it is precisely this presupposition, as it controls without exception all forms of non-Christian philosophy, that must be brought into question. ...In not challenging this basic presupposition with respect to himself as the final reference point in predication the natural man may accept the "theistic proofs" as fully valid. He may construct such proofs. He has constructed such proofs. But the god whose existence he proves to himself in this way is always a god that is always something other than the self-contained ontological trinity of Scripture. (Quote)

 Thinking about the construction of a god who is not God led me to the conclusion that if we are of the belief that we do in fact choose from an autonomous free-will to follow Christ, we have by a faulty world view, subordinated God in our thinking to something that is subject to our whims. It is this world view that asks questions of God such as, in the case of tragedy, "why me?," or in the case of doubt, "how can I know for certain I am born again."

The Sovereign God in whom I believe will not accept, any form of these kinds of questions from me. The only thing I can find in Scripture that even remotely relates to my questioning God are the verses about the Clay's inability to question the Potter. So, I enjoy His presence and rest in the knowledge that there is indeed a life after human death and I am "elected" to be in Heaven with Him and not in Hell when my time here is up.

I don't have to remember anything about "dates of salvation," or "dates of Baptism," all I have to remember while able,  is that even if Alzheimer's eventually eats my brain I am still secure and safe in the Palm of the Saviors hand. If anything should make those who believe a walk down the aisle and a memory jogger written in the front of a Bible is of little comfort if the mind is gone,  it should be that most horrible of brain-eating diseases Alzheimer's.

The good news of the Bible, (the Gospel) is that Christ will care for those the Father has given Him no matter what happens.