Following your logic here: man has no responsibility for their actions, everything is the result of God's manipulation?
No, I'm saying that there is a duality to it. God, being who he is, is capable of directing and upholding his purposes, while people still have...volition.
When we're discussing something that involves God...a being of infinite power who exists outside of time and functions in a way that we will never really understand, it makes it difficult to pin terminologies or actual explanations on how these things work. Does God 'elect' people and then bend them to his will, and that's why they end up saved? Or does he know in advance that they will accept him and that's why he chooses him? But what if they only accepted because he elected them, and if he hadn't, they wouldn't have, therefore in the future they wouldn't be saved, and he couldn't have "known" that? It's a circle that we can't really win...although plenty of time paradox movies have been made exploring the causal implications!!
But, consider this: when I said before that I couldn't conceive of anyone rejecting him whom he had called, and you wanted to know if those people had the right to say "no"...I'm not sure we fleshed that out enough, especially in regards to whether or not people would reject him and therefore change the outcome of 'election'. We have to fully look at what happens when God opens the eyes of a sinful person.
What if you were offered billions of dollars, would you say no? What if it came with a title, a crown? What if it came with a direct line to the most powerful person on the planet? What if the option was taking all that or death? What if you were suddenly made fully and heart breakingly aware that you
deserved death? What if you realized that you were being offered all that, and an escape from death because the one offering it had died in your place? Would you say no?
I know, theologically, or even to just to spite a conversational debate, some people would say "I
would say no!" But face to face with pretty much any one of those scenarios, let alone all of them together, and I doubt many would say no.
Are there those would still would...could? Actually...I think so. In scripture, where it says that the only unforgivable sin is to "blaspheme the Holy Spirit"...Here is what one author said about it: "it is a definite act showing a state of sin, and that state a willful, determined opposition to the present power of the Holy Spirit; and this as shown by its fruit, blasphemy"
I think one must have some real understanding of God and Christ to willfully and determinedly oppose the work of the Spirit.
Of course...this IS just my understanding of all this. I could be wrong, I am not a scholar or well read by any means!