Grace

Yeah, But I knew you had a choice to respond or not respond... and knew that you would... because it was in your nature.

Thanks for lightening this up.

It truly isn't personal with me... except for the part where you accused me of only knowing a tiny piece of God....

 

TexasSky

Would you please show me one scripture verse where the words "God offers His grace to all" can be found. Surely the words, "God offers His grace to all" is found somewhere.

That premise is foundational to your argument, and you keep saying over and over that "the bible says" God offers His grace to all. Since you claim the "bible says" it, then the words "God offers His grace to all" must be found somewhere in scripture.

If you can't find it in scripture, why do you keep saying the "bible says" it?

 

Easy. Because they can.

 

Easy. Because they can. </font>[/QUOTE]You haven't answered the question either.

I don't dispute that they can.

I question why TS, and apparently you, think they do. ALL effects have a cause.

A good decision will have a good cause. Where did the goodness for your decision come from?

I can't make the question any more simple nor direct so I will try to make it personal.

Why did YOU accept Christ as Savior whereas someone that you know personally has heard the gospel did not? What about YOU resulted in your good decision and what about them resulted in their bad decision?

 

Amen Emerald!

JD - "For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men." Titus 2:11

Scott - I answered you AGAIN in this thread, and AGAIN let me say that your refusale to ACCEPT my answer does not mean I have NOT answered.

It is interesting that YOU stated this " One accepts because God in His grace quickens their dead spirit. The person then willfully believes in Christ. The other rejects because he willfully continues in his sin, rebellion, and disbelief." In other words, your OWN WORDS just said that you believe man makes a willful choice to reject Christ.

So what are you arguing about? Are you saying that Titus 2:11 is wrong?

Yes, we were talking about first sin, and speaking of sin, I prefer you NOT use phrases like "for heaven's sake". In my book, that is dishonoring God.

God created man and woman as perfect creatures.
He created Man in His image.
He created them blameless and sinless.

And He allowed them to live in innocence blameless. He even told them how to remain blameless. "Don't eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil."

Then Satan showed up.

YOU claim, apparently, that God sent Satan to them and said, "Make em sin." That's a lie, and a sin against God to claim.

NO WHERE. ABSOLUTELY NO WHERE in God's word does God EVER tell Satan "go make them sin." The only thing CLOSE to that is when God tells Satan, "Look at my servant Job," and Satan claims Job only loves God because God protects Job so God ~PERMITS~ Satan to harrass Job. He doesn't tell Satan "tempt" Job. He allows Satan to send trials and tribulations - but He does NOT encourage Satan to cause Job to sin. God does not cause, encourage or create sin.

God is HOLY. God does not MAKE men sin.

I'll repeat it a thousand times if I have to, but you won't listen to me because you WANT to believe that Holy God ~makes~ men sin.

The bibles says that because of men's wickedness God will sometimes harden their hearts, in order that God may be glorified, but that is NOT the same as making men sin. The bible ALSO says that that happens because these men have already rejected the truth. Get that? They reject God first, THEN their hearts are hardened. Refuse the Holy Spirit's gentle call and the Holy Spirit will do like Christ told us to do, He'll shake the dust off His feet and leave you to the consequences of your choice.

Back to original sin.

Satan told these perfect, blameless, cherished creations of God, "Ignore Him!" He TOLD them that God lied to them. He TOLD them that they could BECOME LIKE GOD, if they would just disobey God.

NO WHERE IN GOD'S WORD DOES IT SAY, "GOD SENT SATAN TO ADAM AND EVE SO THAT THEY WOULD DISOBEY HIM AND HE COULD CAST JUDGMENT ON MANKIND."

NO WHERE.

If you read that in your bible - go buy a new bible because it isn't in the 40,000,000 bibles the rest of the world owns.

Adam and Eve sinned because they had a choice to make. God ALLOWED them to choose between obeying God and following Satan and they made the WRONG choice.

And we make the same stupid mistake in this day and age. God says, "Here is my son. He will bring you to me in Paradise for eternity if you will trust in Him. He's already pay the price for your sins." And Satan says, "Don't listen to God, He just doesn't want you to have any fun." And men STILL choose to follow Satan instead of God.

By the theory that you present, Scott, God doesn't call all men. Applying that to the men of the bible, God never warned Adam not to eat of the forbidden fruit. God never told the people of Noah's age to stop their sinning. By your theory - they couldn't obey because they never got a call from God.

OR - by your theory - man sinned because God made them.

That's just bunk.

STOP BLAMING GOD FOR MAN'S SIN.

STOP IT!

That's sinful.
That's blasphemous.

GOD DOES NOT MAKE MAN SIN.

STOP CLAIMING HE DOES!

 

As to the "mystery."

I gather that you are not a parent, because a parent KNOWS that their children will not be perfect, but it doesn't stop the parent from having children. Do you think God is any less loving toward those created in HIS image, than man is toward those created in man's image?

I have two children. I love them more than I love my own life, but before I ever conceived them I knew that there would be times when they almost hated me, and times when I wasn't going to be sure I really liked them. There would be times when they would ignore my advice and times when they would make mistakes that I would be asked to help them fix.

That's part of being a parent.

I also knew that it wouldn't change my love.

There are times when, simply BECAUSE I love them, I allow them to suffer the consequences of their own actions. Times when I DON'T bail them out, but never a time when I don't love them.

I also know, that if my children ever rejected my love - it wouldn't change MY love.

I have a wonderful adult child now. The college she was looking at was a good 8 hours from where I live. I didn't want to lose her, but I knew that forcing her to stay with me wouldn't work in the end - and I COULD have forced it. I COULD have refused to provide transportation or funding if she didn't do it my way. I could have sweetened the pot so that she felt guilty if she didn't - since I work for a University I could have given her tremdnously large tuition cuts. That wouldn't have changed her heart though, and it wouldn't have been fair to her - OR to me. For the rest of my life I'd have wondered, is she near me because she wants to be or because I made her? You see, you can't force love, and God doesn't want us near Him because we HAVE to be. He has ALWAYS wanted our love. He deserves nothing less.

In the case of my daughter - I found the funding for the other school, took her on the tour, helped her with the appls, and we had her enrolled, her dorm assigned, and we knew who her roomie would be when she said, "Mom, I think God wants me closer to home. I am transferring to a college nearer home." I was thrilled - thrilled that she would near me, and more thrilled that she WANTED to be near me.

She had a CHOICE and she exercised it.

Well, God loves us more than I love my children. God offers us all a chance to be near him. God is heart broken when we refuse Him, but God doesn't deserve or want "forced, fake love." God wants our BEST, and our BEST is CHOOSING to return His love.

 

TexasSky

"Grace has appeared" is not the same as "Grace has been offered".

 

Titus 2:11

"For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men,"

What are the options for interpretation?

1. That salvation has been granted to all men? Meaning no one goes to hell, but all are saved? Such an interpretation has many problems, since Christ Himself said that there will be those at the judgment who say "Lord", "Lord" and He will say, "depart from me, I never knew you". And many times it is mentioned of those who have rejected Christ will not go to heaven.

So we cannot say that this verse means that all will go to heaven, or that all will be saved, can we? We would sure have to ignore a lot of scripture to hold to that interpretation. Is there any other options?

Let's see what the context reveals to us.

First of all, I see no reference to man's "free-will" in this passage. Unlike Romans or other places, Paul is not even talking about the salvation "process", is he? No, he isn't.

I see nothing about "accepting" Christ, or "calling on the name of the Lord" or "repenting and believing".

If he is not talking about the process of salvation,(and he isn't) could it be he is talking about the "who" of salvation? Yes, that is what he is talking about. The "who" that are saved and "how" they should be living. Let's look at the context to see if that is true.

Notice the "for" at the beginning of the verse. The "for" serves as an explaination of what has just been said. What has just been said?

v. 9-10 "urge bondslaves to be subject to their own masters in everything, to be well-pleasing, not argumentative, not pilfering, but showing all good faith, that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Savior in every respect (v.11) for the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men".

There appears to be some connection to "slaves" and "masters" here. Could this be a verse where Paul is saying salvation has been brought to all kinds of people? As in other passages, where he speaks of God not showing partiality as men do, "there is neither Jew nor Greek, bond or free, male of female" and so on.
and it continues...

v.12 "instructing us to deny ungodliness and worldly desires and to live sensibly, righteously and godly in the present age."

What is instructing us? It appears to be God's grace doing the instruction. More likely, he is talking about the "sound doctrine". It could be both, I guess. Who is the "us"? Isn't it believers?

Look at chapter 1:15: "To the pure, all things are pure; but to those who are defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure, but both their mind and their conscience are defiled. (v.16) They profess to know God, but by their deeds they deny Him, being detestable, and disobedient, and worthless for any good deed".

2:1 "But as for you..." Paul makes a distinction here, doesn't he? He is comparing unbelievers and believers. More accurately, he is comparing the conduct of unbelievers with the conduct of believers.

Read the whole of chapter 2. I won't post it all. It is clear that Paul is talking about "how" Christians should conduct their lives, isn't he?

Isn't he saying God's grace is transforming believers? Yes, it must be true. Look how many times the word "purified" is used.

v.14 "who gave Himself for us, that He might redeem us from every lawless deed and purify for Himself a people for His own possession, zealous for good deeds."

Christ is "purifying" for Himself a "people" for His own possession. It is interesting that Christ isn't purifying "all" people, is He? No, He is purifying "us", a people who are zealous for good deeds.

The context of the passage is that God's people should live Holy lives. It is God's grace that is instructing us, with sound doctrine; His people, that is believers.

This is not a passage that is discussing the salvation process. There is no reference to accepting Christ, or calling on His name, or repenting, or asking for forgiveness.

When Paul says that "for the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men", it is in reference to what he had just said about how slaves should obey their masters. God has brought salvation to all kinds of men, even slaves, even masters.

That is the only interpretation that makes sense in light of the full context, and the rest of scripture.

I will respect anyone who disagrees. I just ask that you show me how I am wrong by addressing the context of the whole passage.

 

Your answer was a non-answer and I gave you a direct comparison to relate why.

I do not disagree with you that people make a choice. I am trying to get you to tell me what you think the cause for the choice is.

Stating that you have a choice isn't an answer to the question of why you chose as you did.

I believe that everyone willfully chooses to reject Christ while in bondage to their sin nature just like every other dead person on the day Lazarus was resurrected stayed dead. It wasn't in their nature to rise. It took a direct, miraculous act by God Himself to free Lazarus from the bondage of death and into life.

Lazarus didn't make the choice to live thus allowing Jesus to resurrect him. Jesus resurrected him making the only choice consistent with his nature- to live.

I think other calvinists here would believe something very similar to this.

I never said that it was. However any interpretation you apply to it must be consistent with ALL of scripture.

OK. Will do.

I prefer that you not attribute arguments to me that I have not made and also that you not expand my answers beyond the scope of the immediate context in which they were made, OK?

In the words of America's greatest president, "there you go again."

I never claimed such nor was it apparent in any argument I have made.

Satan is a willful creature who through pride rebelled against God. God allowed him to interact with Adam and Eve or else he could not have. God did this knowing that Eve would listen to him and sin... Do you disagree?

Don't construct straw men. Your evasion of my questions won't be helped by them.

I agree as does every genuine calvinist that I know. Hyper-calvinists go to that level but they shouldn't be confused with the rest of us.

We recognize that God has a perfect and permissive will. We just believe that scripture teaches that the salvation of individuals falls under "perfect".

We agree on why men reject Him to a great degree... What you have yet to address is the prime cause for your acceptance.

Unfortunately, this whole section was actually "back to you putting words in my mouth."

Yes. And in the day that they ate of the fruit... they died. They experienced spiritual separation from God that also led to physical death.

Yes. But actually it doesn't even take the direct involvement of Satan. The Bible declares men spiritually blind, deaf, and dead. It says that the carnal man cannot discern the things of God because they are spiritually discerned. Men are accountable for their own sin and disbelief.

That's laughable. We have a direct account of God telling Adam that... we also have the fact that Jesus had a local ministry while thousands died never knowing that He existed.

I have corrected you before on this also. There is a general call that men ARE responsible to answer. Romans 1 says that nature bears witness to those who never hear it.

Good illustration... for me. God called Noah and his sons... he let the rest of the world continue on in its rebellion.

TS, I am not claiming that. In fact, I have previously refuted your claims that I was. You are behaving dishonestly with these accusations.

 

TS, You have borne false witness against me. You should apologize and retract this statement immediately. I have already rejected this very notion and for you to attribute it to me is dishonest.

 

Yes. I trump your 2 with my 3 children.

Parents don't have children knowing that they will have to condemn them to hell for their rebellion while having it completely within their power to either not create them in the first place or else to "force" them to behave properly.

The direct correlation you have asserted simply doesn't hold water.

I never said God forced us... you tried to say that for me and I refuted you.

God does not force us... He frees us.

Following your analogy, your children didn't choose to love you before you chose to conceive them. They weren't physically alive.

The spiritually dead will not choose to love God... it isn't in their nature. It requires a new, living nature to love God... one that is freed from the bondage of sin.

Back to my analogy, your proposed savior is very much like a man walking through the desert who runs across a man bound and left to die. He says, "You can come to my place for food and water... but I don't want to force you by letting you loose..."

God knows that those He regenerates and frees from sin will believe on Him and love Him. It is according to His perfect, divine plan and purpose that they do... but there is nothing force about it any more than a baby is "forced" to live. It is simply in their nature to do so.

 

You say that ever effect has a cause.

What is the "cause" of man continuing to sin, even after having accepted Christ as Lord and Savior - in YOUR opinion?

Paul says that if you have Christ within you that you cannot continue in sin. Which seems to blow the only possible cause you seem willing to accept out of the water. YOU seem to say, "Well, man sins because God made him."

Well - Paul says man STOPS sinning because Christ is in him.

PAUL says the flesh is weak.

You seem to think it isn't the flesh - its the spirit of God.

Again - STOP BLAMING GOD FOR YOUR SIN.

IF man's sin is God's plan all along - why does man NEED forgiveness?

If man's sin is God's desire - as it would HAVE to be if God is the cause of it - answer me these questions:
1) Why was Christ necessary?
2) Why was Christ sent?
3) Why does God tell us not to sin - if sinning is impossible unless He planned it?

Your arguements make no logical sense Scott.

Your arguments reduce God to less than a Loving OR Holy God.

My God is TOTALLY HOLY.
My God IS Love.
My God created a perfect man in HIS image and like a loving parent, warned that man what the boundaries were, and yet gave man the freedom to cross those boundaries.
My God provided a way to achieve forgiveness for the sins that ~I~ make. NOT sins "God made me do." Sins that ~I~ commit. MY sins.

The bible doesn't say, "God has caused all men to sin," Scott, the bible says, "ALL HAVE SINNED."

It is OUR fault.
OUR mistake.

And God offers love to ALL of us.

The bible says that OVER AND OVER AND OVER in many ways.

God so loved the world
God sent His son unto the world not to condemn the world, but that the world through him might be saved.
"For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men." Titus 2:11
"They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved." 2 Thessalonians 2:10b
"And so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness." 2 Thessalonians 2:12

Men CHOOSE wickedness over salvation.

It wasn't that God didn't ask.

As to your cause and effect theories.
I defy you to show me one man or woman who has not at any time in their life heard the gentle call of the Holy Spirit in regards to something they should do, or something they shouldn't do, or even in regards to accepting Christ, and refused to heed the voice.

We here, but ignore, God all the time.

That is why we need Christ.

 

Paul answers that in Romans 6 and 7. We continue to sin because of the appetites of our flesh.

This same Paul said "O wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me from the body of this death?"

I have been more than patient with you up to this point... PLEASE STOP LYING.

If you cannot debate honestly then perhaps you should consider yourself before attempting to correct the errors you see in others.

Again. STOP LYING BY PUTTING WORDS INTO MY MOUTH THAT I HAVE NEITHER SAID NOR IMPLIED.

Are you saying that God didn't know that man would sin and know that a Savior would be needed?

I never said that man's sin was God's "desire". I said that He allowed it and that it suits His ultimate purpose. This is scriptural TRUTH.

Well.... I agree that the arguments that you presume for me make no sense... none at all. You have yet to consider my arguments. You refuse to listen to them without filtering them through your biased presuppositions. Thus, you have continually, unrepentantly borne false witness against me.

Nope.

Yep.

Yep... and you still have not answered the question: What was it in YOU that caused you to accept while another rejected salvation?

Yes... Yes... Yes!!!!

So why do some choose salvation while others do not? What is the cause? What is different about them within?

I defy you to show me where God intended for someone to do something and did not accomplish it through them in spite of their weakness and resistance.

 

TexasSky

Do you to maintain that Titus 2:11 should be interpreted as "God's grace is offered to all men", meaning that salvific grace through Jesus Christ has been (will be) offered to every single person on the planet? Is that what you believe? Is it unfair, then, if for some reason salvific grace through Jesus Christ is not offered to some people? Or does everyone get that chance to "use their freewill" to accept or reject Christ? Please answer. Do all get a chance to "accept" or "reject"?

What about all the people who never heard of the name of Christ? What about all the people that died in what is now North and South America, and Africa and China and India and all over the world that never heard the gospel or the name of Jesus Christ? Was God unfair for not giving them a chance to hear the gospel? Or do you believe there is some other way to salvation outside of the gospel?

Did God offer His grace to them all, somehow? If so, then how? If He didn't offer His grace to them all (there is no salvation without the Gospel) then doesn't that make Titus 2:11 a lie (If we hold to your interpretation)? If Titus 2:11 means that God offered His grace to all men, but we know for a fact that many, many, many have never heard the Gospel, then Titus 2:11 is a false statement, isn't it?

Please answer this. Do you believe the people of what is now North and South America somehow had a chance to "accept" or "reject" the grace of God? If so, how? If not, why does that not destroy your interpretation of Titus 2:11, and with it, your continued insistence that God's grace is offered to all to accept or reject according to "freewill"?

 

JD,

I believe that God's grace ~WAS AND IS~ offered to every person on earth, and that some people do not accept it.

Every single scripture in the bible says that Christ came for the world. NONE of them say that the cross of Calvary was only meant for a few. Not even the precious scriptures people like you take out of context to say, "See, this is predestination so it means he chose this one to live," says, "Christ only died for a small section of the world," and JD - only a small section of the world has listened to Christ.

As to children.

Which is MORE absurd - that God would create men and women who He loved, and decide, before they ever were born, that they will be sent to hell for eternity because for some unknown reason He doesn't even WANT all of them to be saved?

Or that God would create men and women who He loved, and decide to OFFER His love and grace to all of them, even though He knows that some of them will reject that love and continue in their wicked ways?

See - what you and Scott and others keep refusing to admit is that when you teach that God only OFFERS Grace to all, you ARE teaching that God specifically selected and created some JUST to send them to hell.

You can skip, avoid, deny that all you want, but it doesn't change facts.

The fact is: IF an ALL KNOWING, ALL POWERFUL God pre-selects, before He even gives them life, who will be allowed to be saved - by default He is automatically ALSO pre-selecting who He will send to hell.

So you can't say, "God predestined to me be saved, but He didn't predestine that person to go to hell."

You can't have it both ways JD.


The only thing that FITS the personality of God's nature as the bible has made Him out to be is that He offers grace to all men, and then allows some to refuse that offer of grace.

And yes - Of course He knows which ones will love wickedness too much to listen to Him or to accept His offer. That doesn't mean He likes it. Doesn't mean He caused it. Just means He "lets them go."

By your theory - He doesn't LET them go. He plans their demise.

Would YOU actually, before you and your husband even HAD children, sit down and say, "Okay. I think we'll love the first one and the third one, but we're going to withhold our love from the middle child and if he gets into drugs and prostitution and murder and things that's fine. We don't really care if he kills himself or not?"

Or would you - when you HAD 3 children, realize that someone was wrong and say to all three of them, "We love you, PLEASE listen to us, we do NOT want you to die," but - knowing your 2nd child's personality, and knowing that child will NOT listen to you, - continue to offer your love to that child until the child pushes you away to a point that they don't even hear your words of love anymore?

Which is more like God?

Again - My God is Holy - He does not MAKE men sin. Rejection of Christ ~is~ a sin. Ergo - Calvinism teaches that GOD CAUSES MEN TO SIN.

That's what you are teaching JD.

Not one word a single Calvinist has stated has been able to refute that.

You avoid it. You dodge it.

But in the end - you cannot explain it any other way. Either God hates sin, and offers grace and repentance to all men, and some reject God - OR God ~causes~ you to reject Christ because He doesn't even bother to TRY to lead you to Christ.

So yes.
You understand me correctly.

Now - If you want to retract any of the rubbish you folks teach - be my guest, but don't DENY what you teach because you don't like the wording.

There is NTHER EXPLANATION for what you teach.

Either God offers grace to all men or He doesn't.
IF HE DOESN'T .. He is condemning the majority of the world to hell automatically. He is withdrawing any opportunity to repent from them, and He is CAUSING them to commit the only unpardonable sin in the bible - the sin of rejection of Christ because He has not even given them the opportunity to do otherwise.

OR - God calls all men, and men "refuse the truth."

Its as simple as that.

No amount of whining about "That isn't what I meant," changes what you actually are saying.

And believe me, I KNOW this is hard. If you grew up in a church that taught you election and predestination meant God "Sorted you into savaltion and you into hell," like J. K. Rowling's sorting hat in Harry Potter sorts kids into Gryffindor or Slytherine, this is hard, because it means that you MIGHT have been taught something that was wrong. And people would MUCH rather continue teaching what IS wrong than admit their parents MIGHT have been wrong.

However - honestly - I have never met Christian minsiter who graduated from an accredited Christian seminary who taught that was what predestination was - UNTIL THIS BOARD.

I've seen it taught as, "Because God knows your heart, He knows - before you know, - that you will listen. He knows also that Madelyn O'Hare will NOT listen. He still offers her Grace, but He knows she won't accept it."

I've seen it taught as, "God has PRE-DESTINED those who accept Christ to greatness." I predestine that the kids who graduate from high school in the top 10% of their class, and who make a certain grade on their SAT's will get automatic admittance into the college I work for. I have NOT however, gone out and says, "Okay, Susan, you CAN be in the top 10% and you CAN earn a perfect SAT." God's predestination was not that you BECOME saved, but that when you ARE saved - you will be a child of God.

The elect in Christ are not "people who are allowed to hear grace," the elect in Christ are people who heard the call and responded.

But - I know that nothing - I seriously doubt even an appearance by Michael the Archangel, would change your mind.

For some reason you NEED, despreately, to blame it all on God.

That's the part of it I don't get.

Do you want an excuse not to wittness to the worst side of society? So you can write them off as, "Well, God didn't want them saved anyway?"

Do you want an excuse for your own sin? "I can't help it. Nothing at all ever happens unless God planned for it to happen, so if I kill my neighbor, I shouldn't feel guilty. It was part of God's master plan that I don't understand."

Do you want to feel special? "I'm not saved because I heard the same call the world hears and responded, I'm saved because God WANTED me and he didn't want those people."

I mean seriously - why do you cling so strongly and so hard to "God only wants to save part of the world?" When the scripture says over and over and over that Christ died for the world.

And don't, PLEASE don't, give me that nonsense about "I cling to it because that's what the bible says," because - you taking 2 passages out of context does NOT outweigh an entire bible full of a God that says He loves His creation and desires that His creation repent and that He WANTS to save them.

Without freewill - either man would not even NEED forgiveness - because it would all really be God's fault - OR man would never sin.

Since we DO sin, and since I HOPE you agree God didn't TELL us to sin - I think its safe to assume that God DOES allow us to make our own stupid mistakes. He just loved us enough to provide forgiveness for them.

 

You said, "there is no salvation without the Gospel,".

I say - Don't presume that God lives down to your limits, and don't assume that God needs man to save someone.

Take a good long look at how God reached Saul before you assume that without a modern day missionary Christ could not save others.

 

Do you believe there is salvation without the gospel?

 

The absurd thing is this fallacy of limited alternatives.

Neither of these questions nor their obvious answers are scriptural.

If God WANTS something to happen, do you not believe He is able to make it happen? If something is His perfect will, declared to be predestined from the foundation of the world... I would say that God WANTS whatever that is to happen and will see to it that it does.

All you are doing is bobbing and weaving...

The central question is "What is the prime cause for a person's "free will" decision to accept Christ?"

My answer is that God frees them from the bondage and blindness of spiritual death into new life.

I would love to hear your simple, direct answer to the question.

 

Unless you are a heretical open theist, you cannot escape the same charge.

Whether God created men knowing that He would only save some thus leaving the rest to be condemned or God foreknew the decision that some would make of their own free will to accept Him and thus left the rest to be condemned... you cannot deny that God created people He knew would be sent to hell.

The short answer to this question is that your position resolves the problem no better than ours.

 

Exactly. God chose Saul... and sent a witness to him. Saul wasn't a seeker. If there was ever a case of someone being "forced" by God to get saved, it was Saul.

Your system of belief makes God guilty for not sending a witness to every person since ostensibly anyone can be saved by a decision that comes from some other cause than God's election and regeneration of them.