Is Calvinism a heresy?

[Derf]

God tempted Abraham?

Genesis 22:1 KJV — And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham: and he said, Behold, here I am.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Genesis 22:1 KJV — And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham: and he said, Behold, here I am.

"Tested" is probably a more accurate translation.

James 1:2 Consider it all joy, my brethren, when you encounter various trials, 3 knowing that the testing of your faith produces endurance. 4 And let endurance have its perfect result, so that you may be perfect and complete, lacking in nothing.

5 But if any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all generously and without reproach, and it will be given to him. 6 But he must ask in faith without any doubting, for the one who doubts is like the surf of the sea, driven and tossed by the wind. 7 For that man ought not to expect that he will receive anything from the Lord, 8 being a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways.

9 But the brother of humble circumstances is to glory in his high position; 10 and the rich man is to glory in his humiliation, because like flowering grass he will pass away. 11 For the sun rises with a scorching wind and withers the grass; and its flower falls off and the beauty of its appearance is destroyed; so too the rich man in the midst of his pursuits will fade away.

12 Blessed is a man who perseveres under trial; for once he has been approved, he will receive the crown of life which the Lord has promised to those who love Him. 13 Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am being tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted by evil, and He Himself does not tempt anyone. 14 But each one is tempted when he is carried away and enticed by his own lust. 15 Then when lust has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and when sin is accomplished, it brings forth death.

 

[Derf]

"Tested" is probably a more accurate translation.

James 1:2 Consider it all joy, my brethren, when you encounter various trials, 3 knowing that the testing of your faith produces endurance. 4 And let endurance have its perfect result, so that you may be perfect and complete, lacking in nothing.

5 But if any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all generously and without reproach, and it will be given to him. 6 But he must ask in faith without any doubting, for the one who doubts is like the surf of the sea, driven and tossed by the wind. 7 For that man ought not to expect that he will receive anything from the Lord, 8 being a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways.

9 But the brother of humble circumstances is to glory in his high position; 10 and the rich man is to glory in his humiliation, because like flowering grass he will pass away. 11 For the sun rises with a scorching wind and withers the grass; and its flower falls off and the beauty of its appearance is destroyed; so too the rich man in the midst of his pursuits will fade away.

12 Blessed is a man who perseveres under trial; for once he has been approved, he will receive the crown of life which the Lord has promised to those who love Him. 13 Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am being tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted by evil, and He Himself does not tempt anyone. 14 But each one is tempted when he is carried away and enticed by his own lust. 15 Then when lust has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and when sin is accomplished, it brings forth death.

Agreed. I didn't use the word in my previous post for that reason. But we can definitely see that God wasn't tempting Abraham to lust, or sin in other ways, was He?

 

[Derf]

EXACTLY!! By definition, "first cause" necessarily means that there can not even be reality apart from his causing it to be what it is.

Sure, but we're discussing whether God's causing something always and only necessitates the subordinate causes do His will. It seems obvious that it doesn't, else Jesus wouldn't have prayed "Not my will, but thine be done," and taught us to pray "Thy will be done here on earth as it always is in heaven."

 

[Derf]

Can even God create a "married Bachelor"?

The concepts "married" and "bachelor" are mutually exclusive ... one can be one or the other, but not both. The CONCEPT (married bachelor) is self-contradictory and, therefore, cannot exist.

Another version of the same question is "Can God create an object that God cannot lift?"

• If YES, then God is not OMNIPOTENT since he cannot "lift the object".
• If NO, then God is not OMNIPOTENT since there is something that God cannot create.
• Either way, it appears to prove that God is not OMNIPOTENT (one of the defining attributes of God).
• What it really proves is that an "object that God cannot lift" is something that cannot exist. God cannot be untrue to His nature by creating what cannot exist. Everything that can and does exist has its origin in God (creator and sustainer of our reality - time and space ... see John 1).

So God cannot "create" an "uncreated creator" ... the act of being created means that the CREATION is not its own FIRST CAUSE.
In simple terms ... Sorry, but no matter how bad people want it, we are not our own Gods.

• We react to God, God does not react to us.
• We are the EFFECT, God is the CAUSE.

Want proof, then create something (anything) from nothing. I will settle for a thought. Create a thought that expresses an idea that comes from no prior inspiration or cause.

Does God create with no prior thought? Doesn't that thought inspire or help determine, if I can use the word here, what God does next? Thus, even though we can say God was influenced or inspired by His thoughts, that doesn't mean that He was irrevocably driven to follow through if He didn't want to. Else God is merely playing a bit part in His own deterministic theater play.

 

[John Mullally]

Sure, but we're discussing whether God's causing something always and only necessitates the subordinate causes do His will. It seems obvious that it doesn't, else Jesus wouldn't have prayed "Not my will, but thine be done," and taught us to pray "Thy will be done here on earth as it always is in heaven."

I agree. In Calvinism, if God really wants something, then proof of what He wants is found in what He gets. If God really wants a certain thing, then He gets a certain thing. Calvinists assume their own premise, as a fact, in order to reach a Calvinistic conclusion. In order to avoid Circular Logic, Calvinists should first attempt to prove that God always gets what He wants, rather than just assuming it. Non-Calvinists argue from Ezekiel 18:23 and Matthew 6:10 that God Himself testifies that His will is not presently being done on earth, as it is in Heaven, though one day it will.

Side note: As a non-Calvinist, I believe that Jesus sincerely desires everyone to come to know Him, but just because I don’t believe that He forces His love on to everyone, doesn’t mean that I question His sincerity. I believe that God wants everyone to be saved freely.

 

[zoidar]

Ok. I've been having a lot of that trouble, too.

What kind of seers are you talking about? If a prophet of God, his visions are given him by God, so it illustrates that if a true seer tells you your child is going to be a truck driver, then someone besides the seer determined your child's vocation.

If the other kind, well, they aren't to be trusted.

Ok, skip the idea of seers. What if I could on my own look into the future to see what you will have for breakfast tomorrow. I think we agree I didn't predetermine it just from seeing it. Then, who did? No one did yet! You will determine it in the future. This is what God sees. You are saying God or someone else than you must have determined it if God saw it. I don't understand why.

You're essentially saying God knows it because He knows it. And maybe that's the only possible answer, but we should be looking to scripture to find out what God knows or doesn't know, and how He knows, if it can be determined from scripture.

I know in Scripture it sometimes looks like God doesn't know everything, but traditional Christianity, all the way back to the first hundred years of Church taught God knowing everything, also the future.

There are several passages talking about God learning something. Here's one:
Genesis 22:12 KJV — And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me.

This seems to be something God learned about Abraham because of his response to the test.

I agree that is how it seems. I'll give you that. Also in the Garden of Eden it doesn't seem God knew Adam and Eve had eaten of the fruit.

They heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God among the trees of the garden. Then the Lord God called to the man, and said to him, “Where are you?” He said, “I heard the sound of You in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid myself.” And He said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?” The man said, “The woman whom You gave to be with me, she gave me from the tree, and I ate.” Then the Lord God said to the woman, “What is this you have done?” And the woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.”
— Genesis 3:8-13

You say that, but do you have a source for it? Or is it merely something you know instinctively?

I don't know. Probably always believed it.

I agree. But the part you leave out is that God MUST have known it, and from all eternity. But if He knew it, then it was already decided that you would have tea from all eternity, and you were not there with God, then someone besides you decided.

Why does it have to "have been" decided and not only "will be" decided?

It sounds eerily similar to the Fates of Greek mythology, which even Zeus was subject to.

I won't comment on that. Don't know much of Greek mythology anyway.

Sure...that's what this forum is all about.

True!

 

[Derf]

Ok, skip the idea of seers. What if I could on my own look into the future to see what you will have for breakfast tomorrow. I think we agree I didn't predetermine it just from seeing it. Then, who did? No one did yet!

Yet, if you can somehow "see" it, and you are seeing something that's truth, then it IS predetermined. You don't predetermine it by seeing it, but you can't see it accurately without it being predetermined (even if we don't know who predetermined it). Breakfast tomorrow is fairly easy for us to predetermine for ourselves by buying only certain products and deciding the day before which ones we'll eat. But predetermining anything before we exist is out of our hands (no hands before we exist ).

You will determine it in the future. This is what God sees. You are saying God or someone else than you must have determined it if God saw it. I don't understand why.

What is God seeing? Is He seeing truth or just possibility? If truth, then it is impossible for you or even God to change it, else God is not seeing truth, and God is believing a falsehood.

I know in Scripture it sometimes looks like God doesn't know everything, but traditional Christianity, all the way back to the first hundred years of Church taught God knowing everything, also the future.

I agree that is how it seems. I'll give you that. Also in the Garden of Eden it doesn't seem God knew Adam and Eve had eaten of the fruit.

It's unclear whether God knew it or didn't know, just going by the questions He asked. I asked my children questions I already knew answers to because I wanted to reach them how to tell the truth.

They heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God among the trees of the garden. Then the Lord God called to the man, and said to him, “Where are you?” He said, “I heard the sound of You in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid myself.” And He said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?” The man said, “The woman whom You gave to be with me, she gave me from the tree, and I ate.” Then the Lord God said to the woman, “What is this you have done?” And the woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.”
— Genesis 3:8-13

I don't know. Probably always believed it.

Then you have to wonder if what you've always believed is true. If our knowledge of God comes from inside, then God could be like even the most unChristian version of God you could think of.

Why does it have to "have been" decided and not only "will be" decided?

If it's true from the foundation of the world, then it was decided back then.

I won't comment on that. Don't know much of Greek mythology anyway.

True!

---

 

[Mark Quayle]

But you are saying that everybody's decisions except for God's are detrmined by God, right? So in effect God makes all the decisions. Can anyone go against a decree of God?

Well, haha, no. I don't say that God's decisions are not determined by God.

You seem to assume that if God makes all the decisions that we don't also make our decisions.

But if you need to see a little distinction between what God decrees and what we choose, consider that notion that God doesn't need to decide between options. He isn't like us.

Yes, that's the correct reference. And yes, it's not based on His ability to see the future, but it doesn't offer any other option than that He knows because He causes, when you take your citation within the greater context.

Why should it offer any other option? It was making a rather obvious point, but no claim was made of exclusivity!

Yes, that was an exclusive "we".

Sure, but He made us to be facts in His reality. But if I were to create something that had its own will, and I commanded it to do something, it NOT doing that something would be the opposite of my decree. If doing the opposite is what I wanted, then my command would be duplicitous, and my creature would learn that to do the opposite of my command is really what I want from it--and my creature would be correct, in at least some instances. But not in others. Therefore my creature would have no idea how to please me, even if it wanted to and had the power to. Duplicity is the same kind of thing as "a kingdom divided against itself" that cannot stand. It's weird to me that Jesus would attribute wisdom to Satan that He wouldn't use Himself.

A minute ago I was thinking you understood the difference between decree and command. Now I see you don't. Even the way you talk smacks of the notion that God accomplishes his plans only by our obedience.

It doesn't matter if God expects man to glorify Him.

Not true...there's no glory in a robot's praising, only a weird creepiness.

What robots?

Context shows clearly that Jesus wasn't talking about everybody and every thing in that statement. He's talking about the things the apostles would be doing for Him, that they needed to abide in Him to "bear much fruit". That obviously eliminates anyone who isn't trusting in Christ, and does not include...wait for it...NOT ABIDING IN HIM. Why do you apply it to everybody and everything, including sin?

Well, good for you! So you don't mind if I use the same reasoning with verses like, "God is not willing that any should perish", and such?

Why?

Nor the last, I expect.

Yes, that's why we introduce subsidiary first causes. In other words, God made us to be able to cause things in our own right. In other words, we have freedom to choose right or wrong, good or bad, life or death, yes or no, travel or stay home, vanilla or chocolate. And doing so alters the following scenarios. But such altering is not outside of God's power to accomplish HIS plans.

Agreed. In fact, it is by use of such choices, and their effects, that God accomplishes every detail of his plans

I guess it depends on your definition of sovereignty.

No, First Cause still works. But it doesn't mean no one else can cause something God doesn't want. Definitions again.

What I say is that no one else can cause something God doesn't cause. Do you really know what it would mean, for God to "want"?

Would you like to quote a verse where He claims it?

Based on which definition of "God"? Is it one from the bible?

Actually it's a much better example.

I could say the same for you.

There are no "ifs" in your view of God.

Who says? There are all sorts of contingencies in my view of God.

But what was the "if" condition for Hezekiah, and how did he know? (The Ninevites knew they were being bad and needed to repent in sackcloth and ashes.) Was it merely to pray for something different than was prophesied? David did that, in sincerity like Hezekiah, and in humility like the Ninevites, but it wasn't good enough. And David wasn't being near as selfish as Hezekiah.

2 Samuel 12:14 KJV — Howbeit, because by this deed thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of the LORD to blaspheme, the child also that is born unto thee shall surely die.
(compare with:
Isaiah 38:1 KJV — In those days was Hezekiah sick unto death. And Isaiah the prophet the son of Amoz came unto him, and said unto him, Thus saith the LORD, Set thine house in order: for thou shalt die, and not live.)


2 Samuel 12:16 KJV — David therefore besought God for the child; and David fasted, and went in, and lay all night upon the earth.
(compare:
Isaiah 38:2 KJV — Then Hezekiah turned his face toward the wall, and prayed unto the LORD,)

2 Samuel 12:22 KJV — And he said, While the child was yet alive, I fasted and wept: for I said, Who can tell whether GOD will be gracious to me, that the child may live?

David was an open theist.
So was Hezekiah.

I don't see any indication there that either David or Hezekiah thought that God didn't know! That is open theism.

The only way you can know which prophecies are warnings vs which are foretelling is how? That the warnings don't come to pass? You realize that's circular, right? Essentially that means that any time there's a prophecy you don't like, you have to assume it's a warning and pray for mercy...in other words, you have to act like an open theist.

Who has to know which is which? And again, open theism claims that GOD doesn't know. Not only that WE don't know

 

[Mark Quayle]

Sure, but we're discussing whether God's causing something always and only necessitates the subordinate causes do His will. It seems obvious that it doesn't, else Jesus wouldn't have prayed "Not my will, but thine be done," and taught us to pray "Thy will be done here on earth as it always is in heaven."

You continue to confuse his decree with his command.

 

[Derf]

You continue to confuse his decree with his command.

I don't think I do. His decree would be His command to Himself. And His commands to others take a back seat to His commands to Himself. In other words, He can decree that someone sin the most horrific sin, because He takes pleasure in the death of the wicked, according to Calvinism. But He can't really write it down in His word that way, or it looks bad.

 

[Derf]

Well, haha, no. I don't say that God's decisions are not determined by God.

You seem to assume that if God makes all the decisions that we don't also make our decisions.

But if you need to see a little distinction between what God decrees and what we choose, consider that notion that God doesn't need to decide between options. He isn't like us.

Why should it offer any other option? It was making a rather obvious point, but no claim was made of exclusivity!

A minute ago I was thinking you understood the difference between decree and command. Now I see you don't. Even the way you talk smacks of the notion that God accomplishes his plans only by our obedience.

What robots?

Well, good for you! So you don't mind if I use the same reasoning with verses like, "God is not willing that any should perish", and such?

Agreed. In fact, it is by use of such choices, and their effects, that God accomplishes every detail of his plans

What I say is that no one else can cause something God doesn't cause. Do you really know what it would mean, for God to "want"?



Who says? There are all sorts of contingencies in my view of God.

I don't see any indication there that either David or Hezekiah thought that God didn't know! That is open theism.

Who has to know which is which? And again, open theism claims that GOD doesn't know. Not only that WE don't know

That God doesn't know what? Whether Hezekiah or David's son would die? In a sense you're right...that when Isaiah told Hezekiah he would die, He didn't know if He would delay His death, though it was a possibility. David's son I can't be too sure about.

But if at any point a wicked nation, and I presume this could be applied to a single wicked person, repents and turns to righteousness, He has the power to stop the calamity He had already decided upon.
Is that a problem?

 

[maxamir]

One of the problems with both certain forms of Arminianism and Calvinism is possessing an assurance of salvation. Both reject OSAS as it can lead to a false security. For the Calvinist assurance of salvation is contingent upon perseverance. If one produces sufficient (?) works, thus persevering, one is seen to be a genuine Christian. However, if the works are missing or, even worse, there is a consistent pattern of sin, then one's salvation is called into question. What does it take to persevere, according to Calvinism? Many Calvinists end up being "fruit inspectors", determining the probable eternal fate of others.

A classic modern example of this thinking is John MacArthur, who, styling himself as a Reformed Baptist, is quite insistent on works as evidence of salvation and quite insistent that salvation apart from works is no salvation at all.

Those who believe in the doctrines of grace look primarily to Christ for assurance and not to their works which would undermine the whole notion of grace. It is the Arminian who has no assurance because he can look only to himself and his perseverance which he constantly fails in.

 

[maxamir]

Which assurance you just admitted that Calvinism doesn't provide.

Again, you're relying on nothing except an assumption that God has accepted you and you're not reprobate. But you can't know for sure, because you might just be a tare. A true work of the spirit for the regenerate would be indistinguishable from a delusion sent by God for the reprobate--you wouldn't know you were of the elect, but you would think you were. You'd be saying Lord, Lord, and He'd say I never knew you.

God gives true saving faith to His elect alone and they know they are His and are granted to simply believe that He is who He is, that He can not change and does not lie.

1Jn 5:13 These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God.

I know that I am elect, not because of who I am or what I do, but because by His grace alone, He has changed me from a person who used to love my sin and hate Him to a person who now hates my sin and loves Him and am willing to lay down my life for Him who died and rose for me.

The doctrine of the Trinity is only consistent within the Doctrines of Grace wherein the Father chose His elect, the Son came to save them and the Holy Spirit seals them.

 

[maxamir]

@maxamir
And besides, haven't you just described a work that you're relying on to assure yourself of your salvation?
You know, the spirit humbling you, which the bible describes as you humbling yourself.
James 4:10 KJV — Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up.

The Bible tells people to humble themselves before God but it is only God that can humble someone and He does so by revealing who He is to that person. Those who are proudful remain judicially blinded.

The Bible also tells people to call upon the Lord but it is only the remnant whom the Lord calls that do so (Joel 2:32).

God's will of command works towards His will of decree. The Gospel commands all people to repent and believe but it is only the elect that are granted this. The outward call goes to all but the inward call goes to the few God has chosen (Matt 20:16, 22:14).

The reprobate have no true care for the Gospel and do not bother making their election and calling sure (2 Pet 1:10), examine themselves to see if they are in the faith (2 Cor 13:5) or work out their salvation with fear and trembling (Php 2:12). Only the elect are made willing to do these things.

 

[maxamir]

 

[John Mullally]

The Bible tells people to humble themselves before God but it is only God that can humble someone and He does so by revealing who He is to that person. Those who are proudful remain judicially blinded.

What is the point? Calvinists believe people are born haters of God, and could never respond to the gospel apart from an Irresistible Grace.

God's will of command works towards His will of decree. The Gospel commands all people to repent and believe but it is only the elect that are granted this. The outward call goes to all but the inward call goes to the few God has chosen (Matt 20:16, 22:14).

Matthew 22:14: Did Jesus explain Matthew 22:14’s quote of “many are called, but few are chosen” in the sense that He has only picked certain people to become believers? That is simply not what the text states. The “many” and “few” seems to echo the broad road to destruction vs. the narrow path to life, in terms of the few that find it. So, a simple meaning to Matthew 22:14 is that God calls everyone to salvation, but only chooses for salvation those who believe in Him, consistent with John 3:16. I find that to be a simple and consistent meaning of the Gospels, without inferring that God only wants certain people to become believers.

The reprobate have no true care for the Gospel and do not bother making their election and calling sure (2 Pet 1:10), examine themselves to see if they are in the faith (2 Cor 13:5) or work out their salvation with fear and trembling (Php 2:12). Only the elect are made willing to do these things.

2 Peter 1:10: Notice the order of the calling and election. No Calvinist would agree that we are first called and then elected, or that being elected is in some way dependent on whether we answer the call. The order makes sense for non-Calvinists as God has elected to save those who believe on Christ (John 5:24).

2 Peter 1:10 Therefore, my brothers and sisters, make every effort to confirm your calling and election. For if you do these things, you will never stumble,​

​

John 5:24 Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life.​

2 Corinthians 13:5: does not support the practice of examining our faithfulness, perseverance, and good works to assure ourselves that we are saved, for how much obedience is enough to know with certainty that we are fully accepted by God? Assurance of salvation never comes from looking at our imperfect walk but at Christ’s finished work and the objective truth of the gospel. Salvation is sure only to those who have looked away from self and toward Jesus Christ by faith, believing He is the Son of God, who died for all our sins, rose from the dead, and promises eternal life to all who receive His salvation solely by grace. Notice in 2 Corinthians 1:21-24, Paul speaks to the Corinthians as though they have faith.

Philippians 2:12: "Working out your salvation by fear and trembling:" indicates that we are (as in Ephesians 6:13) to work out to completion what is begun. This is the function of man, as fellow-worker with God (1 Corinthians 3:9), first in his own soul, and then among his brethren. God is the “beginner and perfecter” of every “good work” (see Philippians 1:6); man’s co-operation is secondary and intermediate.

Ephesians 6:13 Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand.​

 

[bbbbbbb]

Those who believe in the doctrines of grace look primarily to Christ for assurance and not to their works which would undermine the whole notion of grace. It is the Arminian who has no assurance because he can look only to himself and his perseverance which he constantly fails in.

Although this is true for many Reformed Christians, including Lutherans, it is not true for others who firmly believe in the perseverance of the saints. Without perseverance as manifested by a changed outward life displayed in a panoply of good works, one simply cannot claim to be one of the elect. Thus, for example, if a Puritan willfully absented himself from the communal Sabbath service in the meetinghouse he ran the risk of not only losing his membership in the church, but also being branded as a goat. In addition, it is not enough to persevere for a lengthy period of time and then "fall away" later. One must persevere to the end of life, because Christ has promised that His own will, indeed, persevere to the end. If His promise to keep His sheep is true, then any who are not His sheep manifest this by their failure to abide in Him.

 

[zoidar]

Although this is true for many Reformed Christians, including Lutherans, it is not true for others who firmly believe in the perseverance of the saints. Without perseverance as manifested by a changed outward life displayed in a panoply of good works, one simply cannot claim to be one of the elect. Thus, for example, if a Puritan willfully absented himself from the communal Sabbath service in the meetinghouse he ran the risk of not only losing his membership in the church, but also being branded as a goat. In addition, it is not enough to persevere for a lengthy period of time and then "fall away" later. One must persevere to the end of life, because Christ has promised that His own will, indeed, persevere to the end. If His promise to keep His sheep is true, then any who are not His sheep manifest this by their failure to abide in Him.

The whole thing sounds strange to me. I know I'm a sheep, since I got saved 2010. But I don't believe in the perseverance of the sheep, but I trust in Christ and feel secure in him.

 

[Derf]

The Bible tells people to humble themselves before God but it is only God that can humble someone and He does so by revealing who He is to that person. Those who are proudful remain judicially blinded.

So you are saying that we can't humble ourselves, and that God is speaking in a useless fashion? Is it because your systematic has judicially blinded you?

The Bible also tells people to call upon the Lord but it is only the remnant whom the Lord calls that do so (Joel 2:32).

Which is everybody, then
John 12:32 KJV — And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.

Acts 17:30 KJV — And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:

God's will of command works towards His will of decree. The Gospel commands all people to repent and believe but it is only the elect that are granted this. The outward call goes to all but the inward call goes to the few God has chosen (Matt 20:16, 22:14).

The reprobate have no true care for the Gospel and do not bother making their election and calling sure (2 Pet 1:10),

You can do that? I thought you could do nothing toward your salvation?

examine themselves to see if they are in the faith (2 Cor 13:5) or work out their salvation with fear and trembling (Php 2:12). Only the elect are made willing to do these things.

You can't be made willing. Those terms are oxymoronic.