No J, it presumes nothing because no one knows who the elect are. We are to simply preach the Gospel to all, knowing full well some will receive it (the elect, whoever they are or will be) and some won't receive it (the reprobate, whoever they are or will be).
You just defined who the elect are, and so we do know. Those who will receive it are the elect. And I agree. What's the problem?
We may not be able to pull open the heart and look inside and see, "property of Jesus," but we do know in general terms who the elect are. As I will explain in a moment, this criticism misses my point.
I appreciate what you are saying, but I think you are missing what I am saying. But first let me point out for the umpteenth time. An argument against the Calvin's doctrine of election is NOT, NOT, NOT and argument for Arminianism.
Now, I am not arguing against this.
For the Armenian- they don't know who will believe and thus witness to whoever they are led to witness to or can witness to...etc
For the Calvinist- we don't know who will believe and thus witness to whoever they are led to or can witness to....etc...
That is true, and I am not arguing agaisnt it. I am speaking to the truth of the message. That Christ died for YOUR sins
. If the 5 point Calvin is consistent, then he doesn't really believe that message. It is possible, but not likely, sense narrow is the gate and few will find it.
The person who rejects limited atonement believes that the gospel is true for EVERYONE who hears. That God has contained within this truth that anyone who would hear it, believe it, and receive it, can and will be saved. And that there is no preprogrammed mark on their spririt that precludes them or enduces them to believe it. Thus the gospel of grace is universal to all and effectual to any who would believe. Now maybe you don't see that as a significant difference, but I see it as HUGE.
But you are reading to much into this. For all we know, everyone is elect that we come into contact with, ever. We simply don't know. And for the record, everyone, when we as the reformed present the gospel, we don't go around telling people that we don't know whether they are elect either, since we are not there to save anyone, and it would be presumptuous to even go there...we are not. It simply doesn't come up, and it does not matter either, since that is God's area anyway.
Really? You really think that? I know you don't go around telling people that. But deep down you believe it. Or you are forced to come up with bizarre (pardon the emotionalism) explanations like everyone you come in contact with is elect. It may not be a problem for you, but I've yet to see it refuted. If you are a 5 point Calvin, then you believe that the Gospel isn't universal. You may think it should be presented universal, but you don't believe it is. It is limited, only for the elect. And the reprobate can't, and won't hear it. They are branded for condemnation, and in actuality we should commend them for rejecting it, because that is exactly how they were predestined to respond. And therefore presenting the gospel universally is asking the reprobate to do something they can not do, and thus believe a lie. The lie being that Christ died for them, when He didn't. Now, if you can look at someone and say, Christ died for your sins, when you know in your heart of hearts, you don't really believe it. You believe, He MIGHT have died for their sins, only if they meet the determined view of election within Calvinism.
-“The Bible treated allegorically becomes putty in the hands of the exegete.” John Walvoord
"I'm not saying scientists don't overstate their results. They do. And it's understandable, too...If you spend years working toward a certain goal and make no progress, of course you are going to spin your results in a positive light." Ivellious