Perhaps I could have worded this more clearly:
If in the discussion the topic of election comes up, I deal with it as I have here often, beginning with all who call upon the name of the Lord will be saved. Those that do—a great multitude no man can number—are the elect. Those that do not are not the elect. In fact, they may never be the elect, if they never do what they are commanded to do.
In other words, to counter the assumption by others that claim the elect can be anyone, my point is that the elect are a specific great multitude. The non-elect will never do what they are commanded to do. The sentence above could have been bettered stated as "In fact, they may never be the elect, since they never do what they are commanded to do."
Herein is the root of much confusion by the anti-Calvinist. You assume that the choosing of God ignores the free will (choosing per one's inclinations) of the person so chosen. You assume God's choosing does violence to the chosen person's free will. No.
God's providence acts within all the free, necessary, and contingent circumstances presented to the person. The person freely chooses according to these circumstances. God's acts set things in motion per the natural order of things. When God acts outside the natural order of the free, necessary, or contingent, this is extraordinary providence, or miracles.
No miracle is taking place when God sets in motion the free, necessary, or contingent circumstances that will result in the choices, good or bad, by any person. Rather it is just God's ordinary providence. The setting of things in motion are but God's necessarily good actions upholding what He has created. The choices made based upon these free, necessary, or contingent circumstances set in motion by God become moral actions, good and evil, when chosen my the moral agent, a human being (or an angel).
Sure, God, the First Cause, set's in motion circumstances that will always be in alignment with what He has volitionally willed, that is, ordained/decreed. But He does so in concurrence with the liberty of spontaneity (Biblical free will) of the moral creature. It is always the second cause which brings in the element of sin. God moves to action; He never moves to sinful action. God never moves men by secondary causes to act in accordance with new inclinations. This would make God the author of sin.
I believe that God has decreed all things that shall come to pass. I also maintain that God offers no violence to the freedom of the will but men act in full accord with their own choices. I don't see a contradiction in those two views because I can distinguish between the decree and its execution. The decree is absolute while the execution takes contingency and conditionality into account as things which God has also decreed. We can speak of ultimate causality so far as the decree of all things is concerned. But in terms of the execution of the decree we only allow active influence by God in relation to grace and redemption; we must deny active influence by God in relation to sin and damnation, because the Bible rejects all thought that God sins or tempts to sin, or damns men for any reason other than their own voluntary choice to sin.
This statement is in contradiction to the heretical hyper-Calvinistic view of eternal justification. They lurk about and I want to draw a line in the sand here. For more, see this:
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...-Faith-Alone&p=4869475&viewfull=1#post4869475
AMR
Perhaps you ought to take a gander at something you're about to post, then you wouldn't have to elaborate and change your original stance. Just a thought. Face it, Calvinists believe humanity has NO discernible 'free-will' of its own when it comes to salvation, eternal life, and forgiveness of ALL their sins. Furthermore, Calvinists believe that God 'chose' His Elect before the foundation of the world according to His Sovereign Will. You certainly have a 'fanciful' way of writing. It sounds elaborate, intelligent, well thought out, and practiced, however, no matter how well written, it still changes the 'Character of God,' and repudiates the 'Gospel of the grace of God' that the Apostle Paul preached. And, that's a shame.
Calvinists tend to be quite articulate and can make things 'appear' logical/reasonable. That's the precise reason why their 'false doctrine' and misinterpretation of Scripture is so 'dangerous' to the 'True Gospel.' and to Christendom itself. Only those who KNOW the true Gospel (Paul's Gospel) can see the falsehoods taught by Calvinism.