The World God so Loved !

[savedbymercy]

I already explained your miss application of that passage. Esau wasn't the only Nation Israel had to deal with there was Ishmael to. And in fact Esau's Nation (big red) was less of a threat than Ishmael, or Philistia, or Greece, or Egypt, or a plenitude of others.

All you have done is explain away the Truth. God did not Love Easu..Rom 9:13

13As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

All you have done is explain away the Truth. God did not Love Easu..Rom 9:13

13As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

This is the core problem I see with Protestants that you have exhibited perfectly.

In faith by hearing, the last word rests with the teacher; in private judgment it rests with the reader,...he believes in himself rather than in any higher authority. Private judgment is fatal to the theological virtue of faith....The "unhappy divisions", not only between sect and sect but within the same sect, have become a byword. They are due to the pride of private intellect, and they can only be healed by humble submission to a Divine authority.

It seems to me "truth" is a relative commodity based on your personal interpretation. There is not several truths but only one. Thus your insistence of God hating most of the world based on this one verse when the bible clearly demonstrates God loves the world and intends that everyone be saved. Shows your slide rule of truth is based upon your perseption and your own intellect rather than actual truth.

 

[Moriah]

I think God loves all sinners but He does not love all sinners in the same sense. Whether you interpret Esau as a person or a nation of people you have to admit that "hate" is at the very minimum a lessor type of "love" than what He had for Jacob whether you consider Jacob either as an individual or a nation of people. If not then you make "hate" and "love" synonyms instead of contrasts and thus make the words "Jacob have I loved but Esau have I hated" to be meaningless.

There was no place found for Esau to repent (Heb. 12:17 ....for he found no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears.). So it is not he that willeth or he that runneth but of God that sheweth mercy, Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Of course as Paul predicts you will have problems with this sovereign arbritrary choice by God but as Paul also replies Hath not the potter power over the same lump of fallen rebellious mankind to do what He wills with it? Who are you that replieth against God? It is really mercy and grace that God would save any God resisting, God hating fallen humanity and He certainly is not obligated by justice to save any but rather justice would call for the complete destruction of all sinners.

Nothing prevents the salvation of the worst of sinners but their own resistance and rejection to God, to Christ and the gospel and nothing saves the worst of sinners but the pure grace of God in spite of themselves.

Please do not make this a case for Calvinistic beliefs. The reason Esau had no place for repentance is because the inheritance was already given to Jacob. It was not as if the inheritance could be taken away from Jacob and given back to Esau.

 

[The Biblicist]

Somewhat. The verse is often taken out of its context, the context of election. He loved or hated them before they were even born, indicating his foreknowledge of the events that were about to happen. The force of meaning is not so much on the person in the present, but rather God looking into the future and seeing what will happen. It is a context of election, what will happen.

In fact Jesus loved Judas Iscariot, and all the time that he was with Jesus, Christ gave him every opportunity to repent.

Paul is denying that the future played any role in election but that election was based strictly upon God's purpose of grace not what either would do (works).

Rom. 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;)

This is unconditional election spelled out in the clearest possible terms. Not conditioned upon forseen actions by either whether good or bad actions.

Judas was "the son of Perdition" according to prophecy and the Lord knew he was a demon and an unbeliever from the beginning (Jn. 6:64-70). Yet, he did love him, that is, he admitted him into his friendship and blessed him with exposure to the truth and poured upon His benevolence.

The problem is not God's benevolence upon the sinners. The goodness of God should lead sinners to repentance (Rom. 2:5) but the problem is the terribleness of sin and the defiant resistance of the fallen human nature (Acts 7:51; Rom. 8:7-8).

Again, nothing prevents the salvation of the worst of sinners but their own depraved and definant resistant will and nothing saves the worst of sinners but the grace of God. God is perfectly just in allowing sinners to freely resist and reject Him while perfectly merciful in delivering whomsoever He wills from their own definant condition as he did Saul on the road to Damascus. Paul does say that he is the example in regard to God's gracious salvation.

1Ti 1:16 Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting.

Gal. 1:15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called me by his grace,
16 To reveal his Son in me,

 

[Moriah]

Paul is denying that the future played any role in election but that election was based strictly upon God's purpose of grace not what either would do (works).

Rom. 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;)

This is unconditional election spelled out in the clearest possible terms. Not conditioned upon forseen actions by either whether good or bad actions.

Judas was "the son of Perdition" according to prophecy and the Lord knew he was a demon and an unbeliever from the beginning (Jn. 6:64-70). Yet, he did love him, that is, he admitted him into his friendship and blessed him with exposure to the truth and poured upon His benevolence.

The problem is not God's benevolence upon the sinners. The goodness of God should lead sinners to repentance (Rom. 2:5) but the problem is the terribleness of sin and the defiant resistance of the fallen human nature (Acts 7:51; Rom. 8:7-8).

Again, nothing prevents the salvation of the worst of sinners but their own depraved and definant resistant will and nothing saves the worst of sinners but the grace of God. God is perfectly just in allowing sinners to freely resist and reject Him while perfectly merciful in delivering whomsoever He wills from their own definant condition as he did Saul on the road to Damascus. Paul does say that he is the example in regard to God's gracious salvation.

1Ti 1:16 Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting.

Gal. 1:15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called me by his grace,
16 To reveal his Son in me,

It is human wisdom that calls the first-born child to have inheritance rights, but God’s ways are not are ways. Esau was first-born yet God chose Jacob. God has many times not chosen the first-born child. It is about our hearts. God knows our hearts before we were even born.
Romans 9:12 not by works but by him who calls--she was told, "The older will serve the younger."
In the Old Testament, a person could sin and then give a sin offering, and then show that he worked at having forgiveness. However, God did not like it when the people would sin, then give a sin offering, but not really be sorry for their sins. God knew Esau would for a single meal sell his inheritance rights as the oldest son.

In addition, none of the scriptures you post proves Calvinism.

 

[The Biblicist]

It is human wisdom that calls the first-born child to have inheritance rights, but God’s ways are not are ways. Esau was first-born yet God chose Jacob. God has many times not chosen the first-born child. It is about our hearts. God knows our hearts before we were even born.
Romans 9:12 not by works but by him who calls--she was told, "The older will serve the younger."
In the Old Testament, a person could sin and then give a sin offering, and then show that he worked at having forgiveness. However, God did not like it when the people would sin, then give a sin offering, but not really be sorry for their sins. God knew Esau would for a single meal sell his inheritance rights as the oldest son.

In addition, none of the scriptures you post proves Calvinism.

As usual you are completely incapable of objectively dealing with the Biblical text. Romans 9:11 repudiates the idea that God chose Jacob due to looking ahead to see what either would do good or bad. This text clearly and decisively teaches unconditional election, or election not based upon foresight of future actions by either but rather according to God's purpose before they were ever born. That is what the text literally and actually says and you can live in denial all you want but it will not change what the text literally says. You can call people names and throw labels all day long but the text still says what it says regardless of how you attempt to deny it, pervert it or change the subject:

11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth

1. God's choice was not based upon what happened at birth -"not yet born"

2. God's choice was not based upon what happened AFTER birth - "neither having done any good or evil....not of works"

3. God's choice was based strictly upon His "purpose...according to election"


Those three facts will never change regardless how much you hate those facts and regardless how much you will deny those facts. And neither will the following facts:

15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.

18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.

If I paraphrased these same verses and did not quote them directly you would call me a Calvinist. Therefore Paul must have been a Calvinist.

Here is a test I doubt you will ever try but nevertheless I will challenge you to do it.

Paul is responding rhetorically to an imaginary objector in Romans 9 and that imaginary objector can be seen in the following verses:

"14 ¶ What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God?"


19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?

Paul responds to this imaginary objector each time.

Here is the test. Does your view of election fit the objections of the imaginary objector OR does it fit the responses by Paul to this imaginary objector?

For example, When Paul says that God chose Jacob over Esau before he was even born and not according to any forseen distinctions that would make Jacob a better choice over Esau but God loved Esau and hated Jacob, would your view of election make you respond that if that is so then "there is unrighteousnes with God"?

Would your view of election cause you to respond as Paul did to that charge that God can have mercy on whom he pleases and harden who He pleases and so it is not him that willeth or him that runneth but it is God's choice to have mercy upon whom He pleases?15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.

18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.


Would your view of election make you respond to the above statment by Paul, - 19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?" If it is not of him that willeth but God's choice then how can God find fault with man because no man can overthrow God's will! Would such a response be characteristic of your view of election???? This is the objector's view to Paul's view of election!!!

Would your view of election cause you to respond to this objection in verse 19 as Paul did in verses 20-24?????

20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: {fitted: or, made up}
23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,
24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

Would your view of election cause you to respond this way? Would you call a person who responded this way a "Calvinist"?

Does your view of election make your respond as the objector did or as Paul did?

If I simply paraphrased Paul's response to this imaginary objector would you call me a "Calvinist"??? Or would you respond like Paul to these objections?????

Are you brave enough to take this simple test?

 

[Moriah]

As usual you are completely incapable of objectively dealing with the Biblical text.

Just because you believe that it does not make it true.

Romans 9:11 repudiates the idea that God chose Jacob due to looking ahead to see what either would do good or bad. This text clearly and decisively teaches unconditional election, or election not based upon foresight of future actions by either but rather according to God's purpose before they were ever born.

It proves that God does not make decision based on human tradition or wisdom. Humans give the inheritance to the first-born child, but God chooses us on according to our hearts.

That is what the text literally and actually says and you can live in denial all you want but it will not change what the text literally says. You can call people names and throw labels all day long but the text still says what it says regardless of how you attempt to deny it, pervert it or change the subject:
11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth

Finish to the next scripture, verse 12. Works were a way to be forgiven, but people could do these works even if they were not really sorry.

1. God's choice was not based upon what happened at birth -"not yet born"

2. God's choice was not based upon what happened AFTER birth - "neither having done any good or evil....not of works"

3. God's choice was based strictly upon His "purpose...according to election"

God looks at our hearts that is what the Bible says. Calvinists say all hearts are the same, and all are only evil, yet the word of God does not say that. What is God looking in our hearts for if all are only all evil anyway? You need to start answering questions directly.

Those three facts will never change regardless how much you hate those facts and regardless how much you will deny those facts. And neither will the following facts:
15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.

Those scriptures are explaining WHY God hardened Jews to allow Gentiles to be grafted in! Just the fact that God has to harden people show that Calvinism is false! Why would God have to harden anyone if they could not believe without receiving the Holy Spirit? Calvinism is nonsense.

If I paraphrased these same verses and did not quote them directly you would call me a Calvinist. Therefore Paul must have been a Calvinist.

No way is what you say true.

Here is a test I doubt you will ever try but nevertheless I will challenge you to do it.
Paul is responding rhetorically to an imaginary objector in Romans 9 and that imaginary objector can be seen in the following verses:
"14 ¶ What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God?"
19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
Paul responds to this imaginary objector each time.
Here is the test. Does your view of election fit the objections of the imaginary objector OR does it fit the responses by Paul to this imaginary objector?

Paul is talking to the JEWS about the JEWS who were hardened and not allowed to come to Jesus! Paul says then why does he find fault? This is about the Jews who were hardened!

For example, When Paul says that God chose Jacob over Esau before he was even born and not according to any forseen distinctions that would make Jacob a better choice over Esau but God loved Esau and hated Jacob, would your view of election make you respond that if that is so then "there is unrighteousnes with God"?

Your false beliefs are beliefs that make God unrighteous. Jacob fought for the inheritance! Esau was ungodly and sold his inheritance for a bowl of soup! God knows our hearts, even before we are born.

Would your view of election cause you to respond as Paul did to that charge that God can have mercy on whom he pleases and harden who He pleases and so it is not him that willeth or him that runneth but it is God's choice to have mercy upon whom He pleases?15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.

God hardened Jews who did not love God. God hardened those Jews for unbelief. God hardening people prove your beliefs are lies. God hardened those Jews, but they were not hardened forever! They could of been grafted back in if they did not continue in disbelief. God left all to disobedience, so that he could have mercy on ALL. Did you hear that? Romans 11:32 For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.
Your Calvinistic beliefs go against the Word of God! YOU start answering the questions I give you.

 

[Moriah]

YOU need to start answering questions directly.



1. Why did God have to harden people if they could not believe any way?
2. Why does God look in our heart if all are evil any way? Refer to Acts 15:8.
3. Why do you say that Jesus did not come for ALL, but God says he bound ALL men over to disobedience so he could have mercy on ALL? Refer to Romans 11:32.

 

[The Biblicist]

It proves that God does not make decision based on human tradition or wisdom. Humans give the inheritance to the first-born child, but God chooses us on according to our hearts.

Please point out in this verse where Paul even mentions the terms "wisdom" or "tradition"? He says "good or evil" and "works" not "wisdom" and "tradition"! Are you revising Paul's langauge to suite yourself? He says that God did it according to His purpose of election not due to their actions.

Finish to the next scripture, verse 12. Works were a way to be forgiven, but people could do these works even if they were not really sorry.

Works are NEVER a means of forgiveness- NEVER! You don't even believe the gospel of Jesus Christ if you believe that!

You need to start answering questions directly.

I have been trying to get you to answer questions directly but you still ignore the questions and go off on some rabbit trail.

Those scriptures are explaining WHY God hardened Jews to allow Gentiles to be grafted in! Just the fact that God has to harden people show that Calvinism is false! Why would God have to harden anyone if they could not believe without receiving the Holy Spirit?

Paul does not use a Jew for this example but a gentile - Pharaoh! So your explanation is simply nonsense! Read the text for a change!

No way is what you say true.

This is about the extent of your ability to deal with scriptures of questions! You simply don't! You just give unsubstantiated hot air opinions.

Paul is talking to the JEWS about the JEWS who were hardened and not allowed to come to Jesus! Paul says then why does he find fault? This is about the Jews who were hardened!

AGain, read the text. He is not talking about Jews but he is using a GENTILE - Pharoah - for the example of hardening.

Your false beliefs are beliefs that make God unrighteous.

Thank you! You just proved my point as that is exactly the response of the heretic Paul was refuting because the heretical response is:

14 ¶ What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God?

God hardened Jews who did not love God. God hardened those Jews for unbelief. God hardening people prove your beliefs are lies.

Obviously you cannot read to good. He is not using JEWS as the example of hardening but GENTILES - Pharoah. Since you cannot read too good I will spell it out for you:

17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. 18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.


You cannot read Romans 11 back into Romans 9 just as you cannot read Romans 11 back into Romans 10. Romans 9 is designed to prove that just because a person is born a Jew, a physical son of Abraham that does not guarantee his salvation. He must be TWICE born to be saved or a SUPERNATURAL birth in addition to physical birth and the supernatural birth is by God's elective purpose as seen in the birth of Isaac and Jacob.

You don't have eyes to see and until God has mercy upon you and opens your eyes you will remain blind.

 

[Moriah]

Please point out in this verse where Paul even mentions the terms "wisdom" or "tradition"? He says "good or evil" and "works" not "wisdom" and "tradition"! Are you revising Paul's langauge to suite yourself? He says that God did it according to His purpose of election not due to their actions.

What do you think WORKS are? You have no understanding, because you have traded the Truth of God for a lie.

Works are NEVER a means of forgiveness- NEVER! You don't even believe the gospel of Jesus Christ if you believe that!

In the Old Testament, the Jews had the law of WORKS, that is what the Bible says!

I have been trying to get you to answer questions directly but you still ignore the questions and go off on some rabbit trail.

Keep your false beliefs, but stop trying to bring others into your false religion.

Paul does not use a Jew for this example but a gentile - Pharaoh! So your explanation is simply nonsense! Read the text for a change!

The JEWS were hardened! How does the explanation of Pharaoh by Paul disprove anything I say?

Thank you! You just proved my point as that is exactly the response of the heretic Paul was refuting because the heretical response is:
14 ¶ What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God?

You are a liar. You believe in heretical beliefs. Your beliefs are insane nonsense. You are too hardened to hear and see the Truth. Repent of following falseness. Repent and be forgiven. Then maybe you will be able to see.

 

[Moriah]

Thank you! You just proved my point as that is exactly the response of the heretic Paul was refuting because the heretical response is:

14 ¶ What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God?

Obviously, there are people here who are ridiculous judges! As anyone should be able to see, Biblicist calls my beliefs heretical. I have even read posts by the moderator DHK call people's beliefs heretical. However, it is wrong when I claim they are guilty of their false judgment!

 

[The Biblicist]

Obviously, there are people here who are ridiculous judges! As anyone should be able to see, Biblicist calls my beliefs heretical. I have even read posts by the moderator DHK call people's beliefs heretical. However, it is wrong when I claim they are guilty of their false judgment!

Look at your own posts! They are filled with charges of accusing others of teaching false doctrine. You have called others fools! Looks like the kettle calling the pot black to me.

However, in response to Romans 9:14 your response is exactly what Paul predicted of the person whose view of election is wrong! The shoe fit so wear it!

 

[Moriah]

However, in response to Romans 9:14 your response is exactly what Paul predicted of the person whose view of election is wrong! The shoe fit so wear it!

You just do not understand what I said, just like you do not understand the scriptures.

There is nothing unrighteous about God hardening unbelieving Jews. God even gives them the chance to be grafted back in, if they do not continue is disbelief. See Romans 11:23.

 

[Moriah]

YOU need to start answering questions directly.



1. Why did God have to harden people if they could not believe any way?
2. Why does God look in our heart if all are evil any way? Refer to Acts 15:8.
3. Why do you say that Jesus did not come for ALL, but God says he bound ALL men over to disobedience so he could have mercy on ALL? Refer to Romans 11:32.

Biblicist,

I am waiting for you to answer these questions. Were you hoping I forgot?

 

[Moriah]

Biblicist,

Could you try to explain how Calvinism interprets this scriture?


Proverbs 8:17 I love those who love me, and those who seek me find me.


If all are totally depraved, then how do they seek God? If only the saved can seek God, then why would they have to seek God if they already have Him?


John 7:37On the last and greatest day of the Feast, Jesus stood and said in a loud voice, "If anyone is thirsty, let him come to me and drink.

How can anyone be thirsty if they are already saved?



Please answer these questions and the questions in the previous post.

 

[savedbymercy]

Its God's Love that moved Him to choose His People in Christ and make them a special people above all others Deut 14:2

2For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God, and the LORD hath chosen thee to be a peculiar people unto himself, above all the nations that are upon the earth.

This is a exclusive Love for His chosen ! The Chosen are all those regardless of race, who were Chosen in Christ before the foundation Eph 1:4


4According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

God Loved His People so much, He ensured that they will be made Holy and Without blame before Him in Love.. Thats what God's Love does, it ensures this outcome..

 

[Moriah]

Its God's Love that moved Him to choose His People in Christ and make them a special people above all others Deut 14:2

2For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God, and the LORD hath chosen thee to be a peculiar people unto himself, above all the nations that are upon the earth.

This is a exclusive Love for His chosen ! The Chosen are all those regardless of race, who were Chosen in Christ before the foundation Eph 1:4


4According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

God Loved His People so much, He ensured that they will be made Holy and Without blame before Him in Love.. Thats what God's Love does, it ensures this outcome..

You did not answer how they could seek God if He already saved them. You did not answer how a person could be thirsty if Jesus already saved them. They were God’s chosen, how do Calvinists explain that God cut off many of His chosen race.
Would you try to explain these questions with Calvinist beliefs?

1. Why did God have to harden people if they could not believe any way?
2. Why does God look in our heart if all are evil any way? Refer to Acts 15:8, it is about God looking in our hearts.
3. Why do you say that Jesus did not come for ALL, but God says he bound ALL men over to disobedience so he could have mercy on ALL? Refer to Romans 11:32.

 

[savedbymercy]

So, we see specifically that God's Love causes Him to choose a people. That would lead us to understand, that the world of Jn 3:16 consist of those so loved and Chosen of God..

Gods Love = Chosen ones to be recipients and benefactors of it.

Those God Loved, also is specifically designated His Church Eph 5:25

25Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;

Now, is the church everyone in the world without exception ? It would be foolish to say yes to that question..

The word church is the greek word

ek klēsia:

It simply means to call out, the called out ones..

1 Pet 2:9

9But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light;

The church has been called out of darkness, and secondly, into His Marvelous light..

Its not a half done process. Its a calling out of and into.

These are the objects of God's Love in the world, the called out ones, the Church of Jesus Christ.

Paul calls them the called as in Rom 1:6

Among whom are ye also the called of Jesus Christ:

Rom 8:28

And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.

Rom 9:24

Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

Now nowhere in scripture can these things apply to all mankind without exception.

The world that God Loved is a called world. Remember one of the definitions for the word world kosmos is:

any aggregate or general collection of particulars of any sort

So the called of Jesus Christ as in Rom 1:6

Among whom are ye also the called of Jesus Christ:

So the collection of the called of Jesus Christ is the world God so Loved !

This just simply cannot be denied !
​

 

[DHK]

So, we see specifically that God's Love causes Him to choose a people. That would lead us to understand, that the world of Jn 3:16 consist of those so loved and Chosen of God..

You alone hold to this position.
Here is what Calvin himself had to say:

Both points are distinctly stated to us: namely, that faith in Christ brings life to all, and that Christ brought life, because the Heavenly Father loves the human race, and wishes that they should not perish.

God's love is to the entire human race and his will is that none should perish--according to Calvin in his commentary on John 3:16. I believe he has it right. Don't you? It is Scriptural, not philosophical.

Gods Love = Chosen ones to be recipients and benefactors of it.

Those God Loved, also is specifically designated His Church Eph 5:25

25Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;​

That includes all who desire and don't desire to become a part of it. He died for all.

Now, is the church everyone in the world without exception ? It would be foolish to say yes to that question..

The word church is the greek word

ek klēsia:

It simply means to call out, the called out ones..

No it does not. That it the etymology of the word, not the definition of the word. Etymologies don't determine definitions. The definition of ekklesia is "assembly." There is no such thing as a universal church, a one world-wide church, as you are describing. There will be some day, when the anti-christ comes, but not now. There are ekklesias, or assemblies--local churches.
If etymologies determined the meaning of words then you would worship the sun on Sun-day--the day to worship the Sun. That is the etymology of the word. Or Saturday--the day to worship Saturn. Or Thursday--the Day to worship the god of Thor. Is this what you do? Do you take the definitions from the etymologies. You would be a real pagan if you did.

1 Pet 2:9

9But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light;

The church has been called out of darkness, and secondly, into His Marvelous light..

Peter was writing to churches composed of scattered Jewish Christians.

Its not a half done process. Its a calling out of and into.

These are the objects of God's Love in the world, the called out ones, the Church of Jesus Christ.

There is no "Church," only "churches," ekklesia, or assemblies. Learn your definitions. It is impossible to have an unassembled assembly.

Paul calls them the called as in Rom 1:6

Among whom are ye also the called of Jesus Christ:

Paul was writing to the believers at Rome. They had been called into God's service.

Rom 8:28

And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.

His purpose is service; not salvation.

Rom 9:24

Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

Now nowhere in scripture can these things apply to all mankind without exception.

Christ died for all mankind. His offer is to all. It is evident in the verses you quoted that election refers to those who already are saved; who have already decided in favor of Christ.

The world that God Loved is a called world. Remember one of the definitions for the word world kosmos is:

any aggregate or general collection of particulars of any sort

So the called of Jesus Christ as in Rom 1:6

Among whom are ye also the called of Jesus Christ:

So the collection of the called of Jesus Christ is the world God so Loved !

This just simply cannot be denied !

John 3:16 has nothing to do with Rom.1:6, the believers that are called to be saints in the church that is in Rome--called into his service, not called for salvation.
God so loved the world, the whole world of all ages. Even Calvin believes that.
​

 

[savedbymercy]

If God Loved all men without exception, whats the Point of Jesus telling His disciples this ? Jn 14:21

He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.

If God already Loved everyone in the world without exception, then this statement by Christ was a waste of time, and not really meaningful, since all who are in the world breaking God's commandments are Loved too.