The Number Of God’s Elect

[Tea]

We are all slaves to sin prior to our trusting in God. Or do you think your "elect" are excluded from this?

Since we are in Christ through faith and that sets us free from the slavery of sin then indeed He has set us free.

A slave cannot free himself, no matter how hard he tries. It is God who starts that process, not us. Only after they have been liberated can they come to Christ.

Who does God call to Himself?
Mat 11:28 Come to Me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest.

Is everyone in search of rest? Not at all; many individuals are perfectly content living in sin and have no desire for a savior. That invitation is meant solely for those who have been liberated and can approach Jesus at all.

Are your "elect" the only ones in the world Tea?

Is the entire world saved? No, therefore Jesus must be referring to those whom the Father has entrusted to Him from the world.

John 17:6 (ESV)
I have manifested your name to the people whom you gave me out of the world. Yours they were, and you gave them to me, and they have kept your word.

Are your "elect" the only ungodly ones Tea?

They are ungodly until they are not. God has determined that the elect will not always remain in that state.

Tea no man achieves his own freedom. We are only free if God grants us freedom due to our faith in Him.

If I am the one who triggers God's grace by responding with faith, then indeed, I could claim that I have attained my own freedom.

Do you really think the Holy Spirit was not capable of putting in the word "elect "if that is what He meant to say?

Luke 18:7 (ESV)
And will not God give justice to his elect, who cry to him day and night? Will he delay long over them?

Romans 8:33 (ESV)
Who shall bring any charge against God's elect? It is God who justifies.

2 Timothy 2:10 (ESV)
Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.

God does not have to save anyone. He has chose to save those that freely trust in His son.

In other words, we need to select Him before He selects us. Sorry, but that undermines the essence of grace if there is a prerequisite that needs to be fulfilled first.

From what I have seen in your posts I have to say that the way you treat the word of God makes me question who you really believe? It is either the word of God or your calvinist teachers as it cannot be both.

I appreciate the helpful resources you've shared with me. However, I need to evaluate any teaching against Scripture, and if it aligns with the Word of God, it should be embraced as truth.

 

[Van]

Matthew 24:30 (ESV)
Then will appear in heaven the sign of the Son of Man, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

Matthew 24:36 (ESV)
But concerning that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only.

The Scriptures are quite clear on this. The Father does indeed know the precise day and hour of Christ's return. Thus, the specific number of the elect must be completed at the designated time. I find no room for any other interpretation.




That particular flow of thought poses challenges for the corporate election view. The blessings received by those individuals were achieved in the past and are now acknowledged in the present. Blessings cannot be received by an anonymous group of people.

1) No, you are reading into "knowing about the day and hour" more than necessary.

2) Those who had received those blessings in the past, had been in the past chosen and transferred into Christ. The flow of thought completely supports our corporate election of Ephesians 1:4. Recall "he chose us, those born anew at that time, in Him, when He was chosen before the foundation of the world. Also note they could not have been chosen before creation because they existed as not a chosen people who had not yet received mercy. It is a lock.

 

[Van]

Elect based upon the will of God, not His foreknowledge

Yet another strawman construct, did anyone say "Elected based on prescience?"

Here is what I said:
"when God chose His Redeemer, Christ, He also by that choice, chose corporately those who His Redeemer might be redeemed."

When did God formulate His redemption plan and choose His Redeemer, His "Lamb of God?" Before the foundation of the world! Thus when God chooses individuals based on crediting their faith as righteousness and then by means of setting them apart into Christ, He does so according to His knowledge of His plan formulated beforehand and being implemented in the present.

 

[Silverhair]

A slave cannot free himself, no matter how hard he tries. It is God who starts that process, not us. Only after they have been liberated can they come to Christ.

Yes God has started the process via the various means that He has provided for man to know Him. Creation, conviction of sin, the gospel message, etc. That is why we in Rom 1 are told man has no excuse. The slave to sin does not free himself but he can think and respond to the drawing of God.

Is everyone in search of rest? Not at all; many individuals are perfectly content living in sin and have no desire for a savior. That invitation is meant solely for those who have been liberated and can approach Jesus at all.

At one time or another I would say all are. Those that are content living in sin will do so but those that are weary of it can call out to God. Why do you think that is impossible Tea? Do you think God was just making a false claim? That would make God dishonest, would make Him untrustworthy.


You say it is meant only for the saved, the liberated, but the bible does not say that Tea. That is just you reading that into the text to fit your theological view.

Is the entire world saved? No, therefore Jesus must be referring to those whom the Father has entrusted to Him from the world.

John 17:6 (ESV)
I have manifested your name to the people whom you gave me out of the world. Yours they were, and you gave them to me, and they have kept your word.

Your view makes a complete sham of John 3:13-18 let alone 1Jn 2:2.

You have used Joh 17:6 to support your case but context shows that Jesus was speaking of the disciples not your so called "elect" from the foundation of the world.

They are ungodly until they are not. God has determined that the elect will not always remain in that state.

Again you ignore context Tea. Agreed all are ungodly until they are in Christ through faith. But you again read into the text what is not there.

The text is clear that Christ came to save the ungodly Rom 5:6, sinners vs 8, enemies of God vs 10.

Paul made it even clearer here:
1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,
1Ti 2:6 who gave Himself as a ransom for all—the testimony that was given at just the right time.

You have to ignore way to many clear biblical texts to make your man-made theology work Tea.

If I am the one who triggers God's grace by responding with faith, then indeed, I could claim that I have attained my own freedom.

So you disagree with the word of God when it tells us we are saved by grace through faith, or the gospel is the power of God for salvation, or hear and believe then you will be saved.

Luke 18:7 (ESV)
And will not God give justice to his elect, who cry to him day and night? Will he delay long over them?

Romans 8:33 (ESV)
Who shall bring any charge against God's elect? It is God who justifies.

2 Timothy 2:10 (ESV)
Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.

You just proved my case Tea. If the Holy Spirit had intended to say "elect" rather than all He would have said "elect" but what did He say:
1Ti_2:4 "who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth."

Which is in agreement with what Christ said
Luk_5:32 "I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance."

And also what the Father desires
Joh 3:17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through Him.

So we see that the Godhead is in agreement in that the desire of God is that all be saved.

In other words, we need to select Him before He selects us. Sorry, but that undermines the essence of grace if there is a prerequisite that needs to be fulfilled first.

How does that undermine the essence of grace Tea? Grace is shown when God saves those that do not deserve to be saved. That is just what we see in Eph 2:8 "For it is by grace you have been saved through faith, and this not from yourselves; ..."

I know you have these verses in your bible Tea, how do you explain these away according to your view?
Act 16:30 Then he brought them out and asked, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”
Act 16:31 They replied, “Believe in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved, you and your household.”

I appreciate the helpful resources you've shared with me. However, I need to evaluate any teaching against Scripture, and if it aligns with the Word of God, it should be embraced as truth.

That is as we all should do Tea.

The view that you are holding does not align with the word of God as I have shown you via the use of scripture.

 

[Tea]

No, you are reading into "knowing about the day and hour" more than necessary.

Respectfully, I disagree. A straightforward reading of the text tells us that the Father knows the day and the hour, implying a specific moment in time. There is virtually unanimous agreement on this, which includes both those who hold to the deterministic foreknowledge and simple foreknowledge perspectives.

Those who had received those blessings in the past, had been in the past chosen and transferred into Christ.

The recipients of the epistle at that time were identifiable members of the body. Paul goes on to clarify that their transformation into the likeness of His Son was predestined to occur. Additionally, God is aware of each person's identity even before they are born (refer to Jeremiah 1:5). For these reasons, I cannot endorse the "plan of predestination" view either.

 

[Tea]

Yes God has started the process via the various means that He has provided for man to know Him.

The natural man suppresses that truth. Unless they are liberated from the chains of sin, no matter how much revelation you provide, they will only continue to suppress that truth deeper.

Those that are content living in sin will do so but those that are weary of it can call out to God.

Once more, they will never reach out to God unless the Son liberates them first.

You say it is meant only for the saved, the liberated, but the bible does not say that Tea. That is just you reading that into the text to fit your theological view.

They have to be liberated first before they can be saved. Jesus said that, not me, not Calvin, not anyone else.

Your view makes a complete sham of John 3:13-18 let alone 1Jn 2:2.

These verses can stand without conflicting with anything I've said up to this point.

The text is clear that Christ came to save the ungodly Rom 5:6, sinners vs 8, enemies of God vs 10.

Paul made it even clearer here:
1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,
1Ti 2:6 who gave Himself as a ransom for all—the testimony that was given at just the right time.

If Christ's purpose was to save the ungodly, then why aren't all of them saved? Understanding the context is crucial to identify who the "all" refers to.

So you disagree with the word of God when it tells us we are saved by grace through faith, or the gospel is the power of God for salvation, or hear and believe then you will be saved.

Not at all. What I disagree with is the claim that every individual, without exception, possesses the ability to have faith.

1Ti_2:4 "who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth."

Could you kindly point out in the text who is meant by "all men"?

Which is in agreement with what Christ said
Luk_5:32 "I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance."

Of course Christ can't call the righteous when there is no one righteous.

Romans 3:10 (ESV)
As it is written: “None is righteous, no, not one.

The only ones remaining are sinners. Given that not every sinner repents, it follows that Christ did not come for those particular individuals.

So we see that the Godhead is in agreement in that the desire of God is that all be saved.

John 6:38-40 (ESV)
For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”

If the Father's desire is for everyone to be saved, but individuals can thwart that intention by refusing to come to the Son, then I would argue that the Triune Godhead is not in agreement at all.

How does that undermine the essence of grace Tea? Grace is shown when God saves those that do not deserve to be saved.

That's precisely my point. According to you, God can only save them if humanity allows Him to do so.

I know you have these verses in your bible Tea, how do you explain these away according to your view?
Act 16:30 Then he brought them out and asked, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”
Act 16:31 They replied, “Believe in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved, you and your household.”

I explain it by saying the same thing I've been saying all along. What did the jailer have to do to be saved? Believe in Jesus. Of course, it only could have happened after regeneration.

1 Corinthians 6:11 (ESV)
And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

 

[Van]

Respectfully, I disagree. A straightforward reading of the text tells us that the Father knows the day and the hour, implying a specific moment in time. There is virtually unanimous agreement on this, which includes both those who hold to the deterministic foreknowledge and simple foreknowledge perspectives.

The recipients of the epistle at that time were identifiable members of the body. Paul goes on to clarify that their transformation into the likeness of His Son was predestined to occur. Additionally, God is aware of each person's identity even before they are born (refer to Jeremiah 1:5). For these reasons, I cannot endorse the "plan of predestination" view either.

A straight forward reading says the Father knows about or concerning the day and the hour! I already explained why that time has to be flexible, in order that his witnesses might hasten the day.

Yes the intended existing recipients of the letter from Paul, Ephesians had been born anew. But you are saying they were chosen as a people before creation, and ignoring they were once not a people. I can see no way around it, facts are stubborn things.

Scripture does NOT say God knew Jeremiah before he was conceived. Scripture only says God knew before Jeremiah was "formed" which refers to when Jeremiah was being formed in his mother's womb. Not before creation.

Once we accept something as scriptural truth, we become "blinded" to verses that when properly understood, tell us we were wrong.

 

[Silverhair]

The natural man suppresses that truth. Unless they are liberated from the chains of sin, no matter how much revelation you provide, they will only continue to suppress that truth deeper.

That is what you have been told by your calvinist teachers Tea. But that is not what we find in scripture

Once more, they will never reach out to God unless the Son liberates them first.

Again that is your calvinism speaking which is at odds with the bible.

They have to be liberated first before they can be saved. Jesus said that, not me, not Calvin, not anyone else.

Not biblical Tea. Read Eph 2:8 by grace through faith.

These verses can stand without conflicting with anything I've said up to this point.

Actually Joh 3:13-17 stand in direct contrast to all that you have said.

If Christ's purpose was to save the ungodly, then why aren't all of them saved? Understanding the context is crucial to identify who the "all" refers to.

God wants to save all of humanity but will not force them to trust in Him. Forcing people to believe in Him is a calvinist position.

"All" in what verse Tea? It would depend on the context where it is used. Since you did not give me the verse you are looking at than cannot give you an answer.

Not at all. What I disagree with is the claim that every individual, without exception, possesses the ability to have faith.

Well then you are in disagreement with God.

Could you kindly point out in the text who is meant by "all men"?

In context of 1Ti 2:1-4 the all is just as it says in the text, all of humanity. Now I know you calvinists will twist the text trying tyo make it fit your theory.

Of course Christ can't call the righteous when there is no one righteous.

Romans 3:10 (ESV)
As it is written: “None is righteous, no, not one.

The only ones remaining are sinners. Given that not every sinner repents, it follows that Christ did not come for those particular individuals.

All are called but none are forced to come to God.
One being dragged to God is only found in the false theory of calvinism.

If the Father's desire is for everyone to be saved, but individuals can thwart that intention by refusing to come to the Son, then I would argue that the Triune Godhead is not in agreement at all.

That is just your misunderstanding of scripture Tea. God desiring that all come to repentance does not necessitate that all will.

You have got to get past that false teaching if you want to find the truth of God's word.

That's precisely my point. According to you, God can only save them if humanity allows Him to do so.

Where do you come up with those silly ideas Tea.

The more you write the more I think you are just being a troll as no logical person could actually believe the things you say you do. What you are saying contradicts scripture.

I explain it by saying the same thing I've been saying all along. What did the jailer have to do to be saved? Believe in Jesus. Of course, it only could have happened after regeneration.

Regeneration means make new. You have the person saved before they even believe in God.

 

[Tea]

I already explained why that time has to be flexible, in order that his witnesses might hasten the day.

Hastening essentially refers to a strong desire, so I don't think 2 Peter 3:12 can be used to support the idea that God adjusts time based on human actions.

 

[Tea]

The more you write the more I think you are just being a troll as no logical person could actually believe the things you say you do.

If I’m being a troll, then @Zaatar71, @canadyjd, and @kyredneck must be trolls also because they have been telling you these same things over and over again.

Heck, I suppose every Calvinist throughout history must be a troll, teaching the doctrines of grace just to get a good chuckle out of it.

Come on now, I know you don’t really believe that.

 

[Van]

Hastening essentially refers to a strong desire, so I don't think 2 Peter 3:12 can be used to support the idea that God adjusts time based on human actions.

No one said God needs to modify His plan, what was said is God's plan includes the autonomous choices of humans based on hearing and heeding God's revelation of His gospel.

And once again, a Calvinist says a verse does not mean what it says, because it does not fit with Calvinist doctrine. Food for thought...

 

[Silverhair]

If I’m being a troll, then @Zaatar71, @canadyjd, and @kyredneck must be trolls also because they have been telling you these same things over and over again.

Heck, I suppose every Calvinist throughout history must be a troll, teaching the doctrines of grace just to get a good chuckle out of it.

Come on now, I know you don’t really believe that.

I gave you that information so you cannot say you do not know that augustine brought false pagan philosophy into the church. And you know that calvin and those that came after him carried those views forward.

To me a troll is someone that continues to deny clear scripture and the facts of history. Neither should be denied but many of the ones that hold to DoG/TULIP will do just that.

You have to deny history to say that the calvinist view does not contain pagan views brought into the church in the 4th century.

As they say, none are so blind as those that refuse to see.

I have trusted the word of God for over 60 years so I see no reason to trust the johny come lately philosophy of augustine or calvin.

 

[kyredneck]

To me a troll is someone that continues to deny clear scripture

...it never ceases to amaze me at how unself-aware you CDS nuts are...

 

[Silverhair]

...it never ceases to amaze me at how unself-aware you CDS nuts are...

Never ceases to amaze me how you are so self-unaware of how false that philosophy you follow is even in the face of biblical and historical fact.

 

[Tea]

I gave you that information so you cannot say you do not know that augustine brought false pagan philosophy into the church. And you know that calvin and those that came after him carried those views forward.

For the sake of the OP, please set aside thoughts about Augustine. I presented evidence showing that Clement's use of a singular noun in Greek indicated his belief in the truth of unconditional election. That happened near the end of the first century, hundreds of years prior to Augustine's arrival. So far, I haven't encountered a solid counterargument, just claims that I'm reading too much into it.

To me a troll is someone that continues to deny clear scripture and the facts of history.

We are not denying the clear teachings of scripture. Instead, we are embracing the entirety of scripture as a cohesive whole. What you and others seem to be doing is dismissing the meaning of a verse in one place based on your interpretation of another verse somewhere else. If our sincere efforts to interpret God's word accurately make us comparable to trolls, then I suppose that describes half of this board.

I have trusted the word of God for over 60 years so I see no reason to trust the johny come lately philosophy of augustine or calvin.

I have no doubt about your honesty, and I believe you are a saved Christian. However, at some point, you chose not to continue growing. All we want is to help you recognize that.

 

[Silverhair]

For the sake of the OP, please set aside thoughts about Augustine. I presented evidence showing that Clement's use of a singular noun in Greek indicated his belief in the truth of unconditional election. That happened near the end of the first century, hundreds of years prior to Augustine's arrival. So far, I haven't encountered a solid counterargument, just claims that I'm reading too much into it.

Care to explain how "Day and night you were anxious for the whole brotherhood, that the number of God's elect might be saved with mercy and a good conscience." points to unconditional election?

I want the whole number of God's elect to be saved but that does not mean that I support the unconditional view. Were only one of the elect when we are in Christ and that cannot have happened prior to us trusting in Him. And if you remember even Christ said that those that believe will be saved, that is a condition Tea. Faith is the condition of salvation.

Do you not believe Eph 2:8, Rom 10:9-10, Joh 20:31 those are all conditional salvation verses.
Here are a few more for you to think about:
Rom_3:28, Rom_5:1, Gal_2:16, Gal_3:8, Gal_3:24. Tea unconditional salvation is not found in scripture, it is something that man has made up so should be discarded.

We are not denying the clear teachings of scripture. Instead, we are embracing the entirety of scripture as a cohesive whole. What you and others seem to be doing is dismissing the meaning of a verse in one place based on your interpretation of another verse somewhere else. If our sincere efforts to interpret God's word accurately make us comparable to trolls, then I suppose that describes half of this board.

Tea if what you say were true then you would not have to change the meaning of words or twist the word of God to fit your philosophy. I gave you a list of the pagan philosophies that augustine brought into the church and which we still find in the calvinist teachings. As long as you hold to those pagan teachings you are denying the word of God.

I have no doubt about your honesty, and I believe you are a saved Christian. However, at some point, you chose not to continue growing. All we want is to help you recognize that.

I have been growing in my faith from the beginning. Over the years I have dealt with JW's, Mormons, atheists, Muslims etc and even Calvinists that deny the word of God. So I am not surprised at what you say. You really think that what you are supporting is true. The fact is just as the papers I sent you show. The basis of your false theology is pagan philosophy.

I understand that it is hard to let go of something that you think is the truth but facts are facts.

 

[Tea]

Care to explain how "Day and night you were anxious for the whole brotherhood, that the number of God's elect might be saved with mercy and a good conscience." points to unconditional election?

If someone asks you to tell them the number of atoms in hydrogen, there is only one correct answer. It’s the same idea here, a number that can’t be changed.

Do you not believe Eph 2:8, Rom 10:9-10, Joh 20:31 those are all conditional salvation verses.
Here are a few more for you to think about:
Rom_3:28, Rom_5:1, Gal_2:16, Gal_3:8, Gal_3:24. Tea unconditional salvation is not found in scripture, it is something that man has made up so should be discarded.

I can allow all those verses to say exactly what they say, as well as other verses that clearly do teach unconditional election, and allow them to harmonize together.

Tea if what you say were true then you would not have to change the meaning of words or twist the word of God to fit your philosophy.

Which words am I changing? And once more, Clement was not influenced by Augustine.

You really think that what you are supporting is true. The fact is just as the papers I sent you show. The basis of your false theology is pagan philosophy.

I understand that it is hard to let go of something that you think is the truth but facts are facts.

Once someone fully understands the doctrines of grace, it’s virtually impossible to unsee what’s clearly there. That’s why I won’t convert to Catholicism, even though I was open to it at one point.

 

[JesusFan]

If someone were to ask you about the number of atoms in hydrogen, there is only one correct answer. It’s the same idea here, a number that can’t be changed.




I can allow all those verses to say exactly what they say, as well as other verses that clearly do teach unconditional election, and allow them to harmonize together.



Which words am I changing? And once more, Clement was not influenced by Augustine.



Once someone fully understands the doctrines of grace, it’s virtually impossible to unsee what’s clearly there. That’s why I won’t convert to Catholicism, even though I was open to it at one point.

Still just trying to get one clear passage in the NT that states to us that we while lost sinners still had full free will inherit within us

 

[Silverhair]

If someone were to ask you about the number of atoms in hydrogen, there is only one correct answer. It’s the same idea here, a number that can’t be changed.

God being Omniscient knows all those that will freely trust in Him so the total number is known. But that is not what the calvinist view teaches is it?
For the calvinist God has to have picked out all those that will be saved and condemned all the rest for no other reason than He did not pick them.

I can allow all those verses to say exactly what they say, as well as other verses that clearly do teach unconditional election, and allow them to harmonize together.

What verses do you see that teach unconditional salvation?

Which words am I changing? And once more, Clement was not influenced by Augustine.

I did not say Clement was influenced by Augustine, what I asked was how "the number of God's elect might be saved with mercy and a good conscience." points to unconditional election? It does not. What it tells us is that God knows all that will be saved through faith in Him.

Do you not recall telling me that "all" actually means "the elect". You had to change the word so that it would fit your theological view.

Once someone fully understands the doctrines of grace, it’s virtually impossible to unsee what’s clearly there. That’s why I won’t convert to Catholicism, even though I was open to it at one point.

If you actually understood the DoG/TULIP then I do not believe you would continue to support that view.

Calvinist/Reformed theology has made the good faith offer of salvation moot. If, according to C/R, you are not part of this select group then you are doomed form the start. And on top of that God has even decreed just the way you will act out your sinful life and then condemns you for it.

The Gospel call in Calvinism/reformed is not a sincere offer. Only those that are included in the Unconditional Election [chosen before the foundation of the world] that will partake of the Limited Atonement [Christ only covered their sins] will then be drawn to God by His Irresistible Grace. [God does not draw them at all] So all men do not have an equal chance to know or trust in God. The DoG/TULIP theology precludes this.

The heart of the issue is the character of God. Is he truly a God of love who is perfectly good? You cannot claim this with any plausibility if you believe God determines people to damnation, people He could just as easily determine to salvation.

Calvinism attacks the character of God and then claims that it is biblical. Sorry that does not work for me, I will just stick with the bible and not what I see as some logic challenged view.

 

[Tea]

God being Omniscient knows all those that will freely trust in Him so the total number is known.

If God was aware of this before anyone came into existence, then that must be the sole outcome for them. Following that logic, there is no possibility to somehow artificially introduce free will into the equation.

What verses do you see that teach unconditional salvation?

Mark 13:20, Philippians 1:29, Acts 13:48, Romans 8:29, Ephesians 1:4, Revelation 13:8, Ephesians 1:4, John 6:44, 2 Timothy 1:9, Colossians 3:12, 1 Peter 2:9...

...and many many many more that could be listed.

What it tells us is that God knows all that will be saved through faith in Him.

If that's how you see it, then so be it, but I'm completely at ease with allowing Clement to speak for himself.

Do you not recall telling me that "all" actually means "the elect". You had to change the word so that it would fit your theological view.

Actually, I'm just letting the "all" be defined by the group that is contextually in view.

If you actually understood the DoG/TULIP then I do not believe you would continue to support that view.

It is because I understand Dog/TULIP as well as I do that I can see easily identify the flaws in synergism.

Calvinist/Reformed theology has made the good faith offer of salvation moot.

What Calvinist/Reformed theology actually understands is that nobody would ever take God up on the good faith offer of salvation by default.

If, according to C/R, you are not part of this select group then you are doomed form the start.

According to C/R, if you are not part of this select group, then God has chosen to allow you to freely continue in your rebellion.

And on top of that God has even decreed just the way you will act out your sinful life and then condemns you for it.

Individuals who refuse to believe in Christ are already condemned, which gives Him the right to utilize a vessel of wrath for His good intentions, purposes, and glory.

The Gospel call in Calvinism/reformed is not a sincere offer.

Of course it is. Those who are not chosen will naturally react negatively to the Gospel, just as they always have. In contrast, those who are chosen will respond positively to the Gospel because God has empowered them to do so.

So all men do not have an equal chance to know or trust in God.

The natural man will only ever deny the chance to know God. Everyone stands on equal footing, unless God intervenes to transform their nature, instilling a desire for fellowship with Him.

The heart of the issue is the character of God. Is he truly a God of love who is perfectly good? You cannot claim this with any plausibility if you believe God determines people to damnation, people He could just as easily determine to salvation.

After the fall, God had every right to condemn all of humanity for eternity. However, He decided to save a few.

It's quite similar to how a President can grant pardons to offenders. If a pardon is given to a criminal who is equally guilty as others who do not receive pardons, does that mean the President is a bad person?

Calvinism attacks the character of God and then claims that it is biblical. Sorry that does not work for me, I will just stick with the bible and not what I see as some logic challenged view.

Obviously, we see things differently. You do you, and I'll do me.