Prevenient grace

Brian Abasciano is president of SEA. He's a well-trained NT scholar. So it's instructive to see his positive case for prevenient grace:

As we have noted, because human beings are fallen and sinful, they are not able to think, will, nor do anything good in and of themselves, including believe the gospel of Christ (see the description of Total Depravity above). Therefore, desiring the salvation of all and having provided atonement for all people (see “Atonement for All” above), God continues to take the initiative for the purpose of bringing all people to salvation by calling all people everywhere to repent and believe the gospel (Acts 17:30; cf. Matt 28:18-20), and by enabling those who hear the gospel to respond to it positively in faith. Unaided by grace, man cannot even choose to please God or to believe the promise of salvation held out in the gospel. As Jesus said in John 6:44, “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him.” But thanks be to God, Jesus also promised, “And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself” (John 12:32). Thus, the Father and the Son draw all people to Jesus, enabling them to come to Jesus in faith.  

Continuing Jesus’ mission to save the world, the Holy Spirit has come to “convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment” (John 16:8). Even though unbelievers “are darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, due to their hardness of heart” (Eph 4:18), the Lord opens people’s hearts to respond positively to the gospel message (Acts 16:14). 

All of this is what is known in traditional theological language as God’s prevenient grace. The term “prevenient” simply means “preceding.” Thus, “prevenient grace” refers to God’s grace that precedes salvation, including that part of salvation known as regeneration, which is the beginning of eternal spiritual life granted to all who trust in Christ (John 1:12-13). Prevenient grace is also sometimes called enabling grace or pre-regenerating grace. This is God’s unmerited favor toward totally depraved people, who are unworthy of God’s blessing and unable to seek God or trust in him in and of themselves. Accordingly, Acts 18:27 indicates that we believe through grace, placing grace preveniently (i.e. logically prior) to faith as the means by which we believe. It is the grace that, among other things, frees our wills to believe in Christ and his gospel. As Titus 2:11 says, “For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people.” 

http://evangelicalarminians.org/the-facts-of-salvation-a-summary-of-arminian-theologythe-biblical-doctrines-of-grace/

i) We might starting by asking what motivates the doctrine of prevenient grace. The answer, I believe, is that Arminians wish to avoid Pelagianism or semi-Pelagianism. They wish to stake out a mediating position between Calvinism and Pelagianism. So they assert the priority and necessity of divine grace in relation to faith. God, not man, must take the initiative. 

ii) What's noteworthy about Abasciano's documentation is that not one of his prooftexts suffices to prove his distinctive claim. It's striking that he isn't even aware of the palpable disconnect. 

On the face of it, none of his prooftexts selects for prevenient grace rather than irresistible grace. Yet that contrast is crucial to his position. 

Notice what I'm not saying. In this post I'm not attempting to show that his prooftexts really teach irresistible grace. Rather, I'm commenting on what they don't show. 

None of his prooftexts indicates that the grace in question merely enables the unregenerate to believe. None of his prooftexts indicates that the grace in question frees the will to either believe or disbelieve the Gospel. They don't say or imply that the recipient of this grace is at liberty to respond positively or negatively. 

Even if his prooftexts were consistent with resistible grace, they seem to be equally consistent with irresistible grace. Likewise, none of his prooftexts distinguishes pre-regenerating grace from regenerating grace. 

For some odd reason, Absciano acts as if his prooftexts obviously establish his claim, even though they evidently fall short of what he claims for them. Yet, presumably, these are his best prooftexts for prevenient grace. 

iii) It's also strange to see him quote Tit 2:11 in this context. Given the Arminian interpretation of "all," why isn't this a prooftext for universal salvation rather than prevenient grace? Admittedly, there's more than one way to render the Greek syntax, but given the translation he quoted, how does he avoid universalism? (And if he takes issue with the translation, why quote that version?)

Likewise, given the Arminian interpretation of "all," why doesn't Jn 12:32 teach universal salvation? If I draw water, does the water refuse me? 

iv) Finally, are contemporary Arminians still committed to the historic fall of Adam? Don't many modern Arminians subscribe to human evolution? If so, how do they finesse original sin, which is a presupposition of prevenient grace?