Socinianized Arminianism

I disagree according to there doctrine of divine appointment to Particular election

 

If we're talking about Baptists, Calvinism came AFTER Arminism.

Early Baptist

General Baptists
This group came to be known as General Baptists because they believed in a “general” atonement.[4] The General Baptists also had a distinct belief that Christians could face the possibility of “falling from grace”. The two primary founders of the General Baptist movement were John Smyth and Thomas Helwys.

The earliest General Baptist Church was thought to be founded about 1608 or 1609. Its chief founder was John Smyth (1570-1612) and it was located in Holland. Smyth’s history begins in England where he was ordained as an Anglican priest in 1594. Soon after his ordination, his zeal landed him in prison for refusal to conform to the teachings and practices of the Church of England. He was an outspoken man who was quick to challenge others about their beliefs but was just as quick to change his own positions as his own personal theology changed. Smyth continually battled the Church of England until it became obvious that he could no longer stay in fellowship with this church. Thus, he finally broke totally from them and became a “Separatist”.

Particular Baptists
It is often said that the Baptists in England divided over the doctrine of the atonement, but this is not a true historical reflection. Yes, it is true that the two groups held differing views on atonement and doctrine in general, but they did not divide. Rather, they emerged as two separate groups. As with the General Baptists, the Particular Baptists came out of the Separatist movement. This group emerged in the 1630's. This group was influenced by the great reformer John Calvin and held strongly to a “particular” atonement.[8] The first church was thought to be founded around 1633 or 1638, according to some. Regardless of this datum, however, it is clear that by 1644 the Particular Baptists numbered at least seven churches. One amazing point about this small and very young group is that in 1644 these churches acted together to issue a confession of faith called the First London Confession of Faith.

 

Intresting history although I too believe what Calvinist call Arminianism existed long before Jacobus Arminius in that man has from the beginning believed that Salvation had something to do with what he did. However Calvinist are correct that Salvation is all of God though it is not particular. Christ said;
Joh 12:32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.
There is nothing particular about "ALL" The whole world was chosen when He died for it. There is only one thing keeping men from being saved and that's rebellion.
MB

 

So you are saying that the Lord had no in particular in mind when He did His cross-work. You are saying that He had no intention of specifically laying down His life for certain ones ?! But the Bible declares that He did die for, in the place of , in the stead of the Church, the sheep . He did not die for an indiscriminate number . He died for certain ones -- the elect alone. He is their High Priest. Non-Cals have to agree that the ones whose names are written in the Lamb's Book of Life are the only ones who shall be saved and are destined for glory.I'm sorry that I am so 'particular' about this.

"The whole world was chosen" ?! No, the "chosen" does not represent everyone past present and future . The chosen are the elect -- they are one and the same. Scripture is quite against your novel view.

John 12:32 has to be reconciled with John 6:37,39,44 and 65. All those who are drawn are the ones given by the Father to the Son.Except by the gift of the Father no one may come to the Lord. The drawing is always toward completion. Everyone thus drawn is savingly united with the Lord. No one drawn is lost.Drawing is not tugging .The 'power' of their will can not thwart the design of the Lord.If by the phrase "I shall draw all to Myself" means universal salvation that is quite wrong. If by drawing you mean less than being savingly united with the Lord you are quite wrong.

 

He had the whole world in mind.

The Bible say's He layed down His life for the world. Jn 3:16 and;
1Jn 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

He did die for the elect and because the whole world's sins can be forgiven because of what He did the whole world has been chosen and the majority of scripture says so. No where does scripture ever say that God chooses to save only some but says he died that the whole world might be saved

This would be another argument because Names will be stricken from the Lamb's book of life.

I don't have a novel view. I have a biblical view one, that you very apparently do not have.

Those scriptures in Jn 6 are not in contradiction of Jn 12:32 only your perception of them are. There is not one scripture in all of the Bible that states a difference between men, unless you happen to be Jewish. Rom 1:16 Rom.10:12 and col 3:11. Election doesn't insure Salvation for us and it didn't for the Jew either. Your Augustinian view is your problem. Why not take God's word for it instead.
MB