For one, it all depends on the context. When there is no reason in context to suspect "all" means anything but "all," we shouldn't believe it does mean anything else.
Oh, so we
shouldn't refer to the meaning of the Greek at the time? "all men" pretty rigorously meant in modern terms, "all races".
No. I prefer to read with the First Century in mind.
When Paul says to pray for "all" people, he doesn't mean individually, he means to say all when you pray. I pray for all people around the Earth, that they may come to saving faith in Christ, but that doesn't mean I name them individually. When Paul says I Timothy 2 1-6:
The Greek word translated as "all" does in fact mean whole, and it talks about the whole of humanity. Nowhere does it mention the church as the "all" Paul is talking about.
But as you've already said it, the word does
not mean individually. So your point is kinda moot, there.
Just because creates something doesn't mean that He created, or is responsible for, what that creates. Satan created evil of His own free will.
Two things -- God creates something ... but didn't create what that creates. That would demand quite an interesting result: that you have no argument regarding God's responsibility for sin in man.
Which is interesting, but it shakes a bit of Arminianism's foundation of questioning Calvinism.
But second, I assume you're speaking within some theological qualification. If Satan created evil, then God didn't create evil.
Clearly in your view evil must be made. Yet Scripture says God made everything that's made.
Creation is awaiting redemption from our sins. Creation never sinned, rather the ground is cursed for the sins of Adam. Creation itself never sinned. It will be redeemed at the end of history, along with the faithful.
Is humanity creaturely?
As for your second point, I have no idea what you are saying, so I'm just going to say what I think the Bible says about Jesus's propitiation for our sins. He dies for the sins of the whole world, as the Bible says. Now, He extends out His hand for you to accept this "plea bargain" of sorts, where Christ got the punishment for our sins that we rightfully deserves, and we have to plea his name in order to be saved.
Yeah, I know the drill. The bridge halfway there. The Atonement limited by human will.
If Paul was addressing individuals instead of the election of Israel to saving faith, then he neither made it clear nor did he quote the right scriptures.
Romans 9:19-20. He's brutally clear. Just read it in Greek and you get a chill, he's so clear.
You will say to me then, "Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?" But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, "Why have you made me like this?"
What nation is asking this? Why is it all singular pronouns? Are you saying a nation won't resist God's will, but an individual can?
Paul flatly addresses the individual level right in the text --
"Who are you, o man ..."
Go back to the context of the Old Testament that he quotes from, and stop reading things into the text. It never says "God damned some individuals throughout all time and eternity," it says that God elected Israel (physical and spiritual) to be the deliverer of salvation. It never said that God chose who is a member of Israel.
That
resulted in a national election. But it
began as a highly specific
individual election. "
Before the two were born or had done anything ..." you think this is a
national birth? No, indeed ... no. Paul was also aware that in Jewish theology God didn't choose the
individual Ishmael, nor the
individual Esau to confirm His covenant. And God didn't choose the
individual Pharaoh.
Muse over the fact that Paul isn't writing to people who would go back to the Old Testament -- as Paul didn't include the references. And the Roman church is predominantly a Gentile church.
Put in historical context, Paul is quite clear. No kind of God's election is subject to human will or work. You can't smuggle individual human will or work into God's election by saying "this is all national". Paul didn't leave that door open. He didn't intend to.
And you neglected to quote the rest of Romans 8: 29-30. God predestined those He foreknew to be like the image of the Son of God, and then chose those He foreknew to be faithful to be called to be saved.
That's because you can't deny what the passage actually says, by sending in a red herring argument about another verse to try to overthrow it.
Of course there're answers about this. But if you can't deal with the point of Rom 8:30, you can't deal with the point of Rom 8:29.
It says the same people God predestined, He called, and those He called He justified. Care to ever take a stab at that? If God called more people than He predestined, then Paul made two errors: first saying that those He called were justified, and avoiding the point that more than were predestined, were called.
It never says He doesn't call all to salvation because other places Paul says that He wills all be saved.
I've already pointed out, that's arguable. To base your argument on this assertion would be
begging the question.
If He wills all to be saved, He also calls them. Those He foreknew to be beleivers He also called to be used "for his purpose." He is calling those He foreknew to be used for His purpose. He knew the faithful, and chooses how to use them for His prupose and calls them to it.
Those He called, He justified.
I see you are engaged in classic Calvinist doublethink. God calls all, but He doesn't really call all.
Better than engaging in classic Arminian doublethink -- God wants all to be saved, but does not want to save all.
In truth you're being hamstrung by the verses that separate-out the calls. The summons to God's purpose is specific, and predestines people who are known to God from the foundation of the world (Rom 8:28-29). Those who are called in this way are justified.
If God isn't internally calling all, how can there be a general call to Tibetans? They don't hear the Gospel, and if God didn't extend the "saving grace which appears to all men," how are they called?
Simple. If you're not calling them, they're not called.
Of course He justified those whom He called for His purpose, which is what the verse is talking about. He foreknew your acceptance of saving grace, and then calls you to the greater purpose that you are chosen to do in the Christian community.
It doesn't say anything about your acceptance of saving grace. In fact Romans 9 says quite the opposite, within 25 verses. God's choice of people is not due to our actions or wills.
So God is calling all, but He isn't calling all? He calls all to salvation, but He didn't call all salvation?
Those He called, He justified.
The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent.
Two calls.
