First, what some Calvinists say and what Calvinism (lets try "reformed theology") teaches may differ somewhat. So where do we get our data on reformed theology? Second, your questions are broad and cannot be addressed unless we set them in their larger theological context.
If you really want to know that this system of doctrine teaches, go to the Canons of Dort in which the five points were framed, explained and defended. The Canons of Dort, Head 2 on Christs death and mans redemption say this in Article 5:
"The promise of the gospel is that whosoever believes in Christ crucified shall not perish, but have eternal life. This promise, together with the command to repent and believe, ought to be declared and published to all nations, and to all persons promiscuously and without distinction, to whom God out of His good pleasure sends the gospel."
We think that promiscuity is a bad thing. Promiscuity is a good thing. We are to declare and publish everywhere this gospel promise and the command to repent and believe promiscuously. Notethe summary statement even includes the "whosoever believes." That should lay to rest what reformed faith actually teaches. Whether individual churches or "Calvinists" live by this is another question. In either case, that is our theology. To those who say that reformed faith denies, "whosoever will" or who that it spurns preaching, I say, "read the Canons."
That brings us to the theological context in which we set the issues of salvation and grace. This may be frustrating for some as it is endemic of our time to divide and segment everything. We need to learn a new way of thinking (or more aptly, to rediscover an older way).
The famed five points (the Canons) were later confessional statements. Earlier documentsthe Belgic Confession, 2nd Helvetic Confession and Scots Confession plus the Genevan and Heidelberg Catechisms and others also addressed the issues of sin and gracesometimes explicitly, sometimes not. It was in response to sin and grace issues in the earlier documents that the remonstrants drafted five areas of disagreement. The Canons of Dort replied point by pointso we have five points.
But what must be seen is that where sin and grace issues occur in the earlier documents, they stand in very substantial agreement with a larger system of theology that includes (but is not limited to) the doctrine that God has one church that has existed since the beginning of the world and will continue to the end of the age, the unity of the covenant from Abraham into the eschaton, the sacraments (including infant baptism) as means of grace, the necessity of thankful obedience as the third use of the law and the amillennial ending of the world.
Although few now see it, these concepts do flow together, and the absence of each makes the confession of the others more difficult. The core issue in all this concerns the administration of grace. To set up this issue, I will use a negative example in the person of John Gill.
This "Calvinistic" Baptist certainly affirmed the five points. He held an intensified version of the third point arguing that Christs work was limited in sufficiency as well as in efficacy: Christs satisfaction was not merely (according to Gill) efficient for the elect only, it was also sufficient for the sins of the elect only. With this radical sense of election, Gill could see the entire order of salvation as taking place in eternity. Justification and adoption were now external acts of God.
Since nothing happened in time (except to enact the decree), Gills system had no need for a temporal order of grace. Sacraments could be seen as mere ordinances; baptism showed that the decree had been enacted. In the logic of such theology, Gods electing grace is an unmediated "bolt from the blue." No one knows where it may strike. No one can find assurance (whether through participating in covenant life or on grounds of faith or conduct) that (s)he is numbered among the elect. Who knows? We may be devoured by Satan or abandon the faith! In that context, ministry really doesnt have much point. Those who follow Gills theology preach about grace more than they offer it. They have tended to ignore instruction to children and Christian missions because no human agency is needed in Gods elective work.
In contrast is the irresistible grace of the five points. Affirming that grace is unmerited, we also locate the primary working of that grace in the covenanting community of believers. There, grace is presented by word and sacrament, by preaching, teaching and disciplinary ministrywhich we call the keys of the kingdom. Since the kingdom of grace has come (a-millennial view), we can preach with an expectation of blessing (God is faithful) and the extension of that kingdom.
Lets review your questions from this perspective. When you say that "if God elects who will be save... why should we share the Gospel," you nail Gills theology. And "it is only a matter of God's will and God's timing," is exactly what I meant by saying that nothing was left but the execution of the decree in time.
As to "what if no one went," I answer that the Scriptures that you cite do not allow this. The command must be obeyed; if it is not obeyed, we cut off ourselves from the true churchwhatever we may believe about grace and election. In reformed faith, the marks by which the church may be known include the pure preaching of Gods word.
There is no "five point" Calvinist who owns these points but refuses the other articles of a genuinely reformed theology. This isnt about confessional loyalty. These points are not arbitrary lists of more or less biblical ideas. Rather, they are carefully embodied patterns of teaching drawn from Scripture. Brought to bear on the life of the church, they together interpret the whole of Christian existence.
The strength of our theology lies in its totality. That is precisely why we dare not separate the so-called doctrines of grace from the broader context. Without the broader theology that one church that has existed since the beginning (with the marks, sacraments [and infant baptism] as means of grace and keys), the necessity of thankful obedience, the unity of the covenant in all ages, the amillennial ending of the world, the "famed five" points are jeopardized and church health put at risk. Blessings!
Covenant Heart
