John 3:16-18 is not about God's universal love (there is no such thing).

[posthuman]

You add to the book of Jonah to fit your theology. I’m not willing to do that. Overthrow means to destroy. Your attempt was weak to define overthrow. I’m trying to let the Scripture be honest. Too many times man defines who God must be and then places God in our definition. That must not be so.

great! so how about Proverbs 16:33?

Then the sailors said to each other, “Come, let us cast lots to find out who is responsible for this calamity.”
They cast lots and the lot fell on Jonah.
(Jonah 1:7)​

​

are we supposed to read this and think, wow lucky coincidence! that lot could have fallen on anyone?
why did the sailors cast lots? - that is, why did they do it trusting that they would find out the truth by doing so?
seeing that they believed God both could & would control the outcome of seemingly random events like lot-casting, what kind of theism did they believe?
when they cast Jonah into the sea, were they changing God's designs or fulfilling His will? was God's intention to destroy the ship and everyone on it? did God know whether they would all perish or whether Jonah would wind up in the fish He had prepared for him? ((v.17)) - how long had this fish been in preparation? 30 seconds? 5 minutes? half an hour? how old was the fish? how many generations of fishes were influential in this fish being exactly the fish it was in exactly the place it was? what kind of fish is moving about near the surface during a raging storm? is that normal?

 

[posthuman]

God sent Jonah to Nineveh to warn the people of their upcoming destruction. Jonah knew God was a God of mercy and their was a chance that Nineveh might believe the message of destruction, repent and cry out for mercy. And God in turn would change His mind and not destroy them.

Jonah didn't say 'there's a chance . .'

But it displeased Jonah exceedingly, and he was angry. And he prayed to the Lord and said, “O Lord, is not this what I said when I was yet in my country? That is why I made haste to flee to Tarshish; for I knew that you are a gracious God and merciful, slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love, and relenting from disaster. Therefore now, O Lord, please take my life from me, for it is better for me to die than to live.” And the Lord said, “Do you do well to be angry?”
(Jonah 4:1-4)
​

Jonah says that from the moment God first called him to preach against Ninevah, Jonah realized this meant they were going to repent and that God was going to show them mercy. he wasn't trying to flee from God because of a possibility. to Jonah, it was a certainty -- here he is talking back to God, saying 'i knew it! this is what i told you back in my hometown when you commanded me!'

 

[John146]

great! so how about Proverbs 16:33?

Then the sailors said to each other, “Come, let us cast lots to find out who is responsible for this calamity.” ​

They cast lots and the lot fell on Jonah.​

(Jonah 1:7)​

​

are we supposed to read this and think, wow lucky coincidence! that lot could have fallen on anyone?
why did the sailors cast lots? - that is, why did they do it trusting that they would find out the truth by doing so?
seeing that they believed God both could & would control the outcome of seemingly random events like lot-casting, what kind of theism did they believe?
when they cast Jonah into the sea, were they changing God's designs or fulfilling His will? was God's intention to destroy the ship and everyone on it? did God know whether they would all perish or whether Jonah would wind up in the fish He had prepared for him? ((v.17)) - how long had this fish been in preparation? 30 seconds? 5 minutes? half an hour? how old was the fish? how many generations of fishes were influential in this fish being exactly the fish it was in exactly the place it was? what kind of fish is moving about near the surface during a raging storm? is that normal?

Absolutely not. The lot fell on the guilty. God can make that happen. As far as the whale? Scripture doesn’t say. God could have formed it instantly. I don’t want to assert my feelings into the text.

What I do know is God declared destruction in forty days and He changed His mind.

10 And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.

 

[posthuman]

Elect unto salvation? No such thing.

as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.
(Acts 13:48)​

I try to let the Scripture be as honest as I can through the clear reading of the text.

 

[posthuman]

10 And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.

this is one part of a didactic couplet of phrases. it's written in the context of vv. 8-9, where the king of Ninevah is speaking, saying

"Let everyone turn from his evil way and from the violence that is in his hands. Who knows? God may turn and relent and turn from his fierce anger, so that we may not perish."​

​

immediately after this in v. 10 the text tells us that God indeed spared them, showing His mercy to thousands who repent and turn to Him. it relates this to us, using the same language and perspective as the human king. a factual record from the human point of view.

later we see God giving Jonah a didactic set of signs: the vine, the worm, the hot east wind. now God is teaching Jonah the same thing using another mode & perspective:

God said to Jonah, “Do you do well to be angry for the plant?” And he said, “Yes, I do well to be angry, angry enough to die.” And the Lord said, “You pity the plant, for which you did not labor, nor did you make it grow, which came into being in a night and perished in a night. And should not I pity Nineveh, that great city, in which there are more than 120,000 persons who do not know their right hand from their left, and also much cattle?” ​

(Jonah 4:9-11) ​

​

this is the same message as ch. 3. God pitied the people of Ninevah. He sent a prophet to them. He sent the worm to the vine. why does God point out that Jonah didn't labor for the vine, that Jonah didn't cause it to grow, that it came into being in a night and perished in a night?
what's He comparing the plant to?
what are the implications of the syllogism God is giving -- did Ninevah spring up in a night? did no one labor for it? did no one make it grow? or did God build it; did He patiently labor for it and bring it up? "Assyria My handiwork"
why does God point out that there are 'much cattle' there?

 

[posthuman]

He commands all men everywhere to repent, and in this case everyone in Nineveh repented.

if this is, as you say, a picture of salvation going out to the Gentiles,

why wasn't Jonah sent to all the nations, or even to all the land of Assyria?
why weren't ten thousand Jonahs sent all over the earth to evangelize?
why did God specifically choose to send one particular Jew to one particular city?
this the only place on earth with people who need to repent? is Ninevah the only people God has compassion for?

if this is typifying by figure the gospel going out into the whole world, why is it so deliberately targeted to be a message carried by a specific person to a specific people? what's scripture telling us by the fact that Jonah doesn't go to Assur, or Susa, or Thebes; that he isn't sent to wander the whole land putting tracts under the windshield wipers of chariots, but to go to one specific city where one specific king and one specific people whose hearts are ready to believe?

did God prepare Jonah? did God prepare Ninevah? He prepared the fish; He prepared the vine; He prepared the worm; He prepared the wind. was everything else 'random chance' impossible for God to account for or to know? what does Proverbs 16:33 say about 'random events' ?

if Jonah is a figure of evangelism, what does it tell us about how evangelism actually works, from God's perspective?

 

[posthuman]

Could you explain the Galatians passage? Thanks.

no, i probably couldn't.

but it's intimately related to this:

Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, ​

if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus.​

(Philippians 3:12)​

​

and this:

For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: ​

now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.​

(1 Corinthians 3:12) ​

​

as well as 1 Corinthians 2:16 & 8:3, Psalm 91:14 & Romans 8:29. also it contains marriage-language, which introduces about 200 more passages, and it certainly doesn't say omniscient God was ignorant of you before you revealed yourself to Him.

i heard a sermon about Galatians 4:9, relating it to this:

And Joseph was the governor over the land, and he it was that sold to all the people of the land: and Joseph's brethren came, and bowed down themselves before him with their faces to the earth. And Joseph saw his brethren, and he knew them, but made himself strange unto them, and spake roughly unto them; and he said unto them, Whence come ye? And they said, From the land of Canaan to buy food.​

And Joseph knew his brethren, but they knew not him.
(Genesis 42:6-8)​

that's some insight

 

[John146]

as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.
(Acts 13:48)

You should note that the word "ordain” never fixes anything absolutely. (Lk. 7:8; Rom. 13:1; Acts 28:23, Matt. 28:16; 1 Cor. 9:14; 7:17) Paul ordained some things and that no more meant they were absolutely fixed to come to pass than if he hadn't used the word. (Rom. 13:1) The meaning is obviously that as many as were disposed to believe the message, believed.

(Rom. 2:7) - God doesn't ordain any Gentile to eternal life until he has followed his conscience and is willing to hear the Word of God (vs. 42,48) "ordained" something God allows to come to pass.

 

[John146]

immediately after this in v. 10 the text tells us that God indeed spared them, showing His mercy to thousands who repent and turn to Him. it relates this to us, using the same language and perspective as the human king. a factual record from the human point of view.

God said He was going to destroy them in forty days, but He did it not. Why? God repented, He changed His mind. God can do that, you know.

and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.

 

[John146]

if this is, as you say, a picture of salvation going out to the Gentiles,

why wasn't Jonah sent to all the nations, or even to all the land of Assyria?
why weren't ten thousand Jonahs sent all over the earth to evangelize?
why did God specifically choose to send one particular Jew to one particular city?
this the only place on earth with people who need to repent? is Ninevah the only people God has compassion for?

if this is typifying by figure the gospel going out into the whole world, why is it so deliberately targeted to be a message carried by a specific person to a specific people? what's scripture telling us by the fact that Jonah doesn't go to Assur, or Susa, or Thebes; that he isn't sent to wander the whole land putting tracts under the windshield wipers of chariots, but to go to one specific city where one specific king and one specific people whose hearts are ready to believe?

did God prepare Jonah? did God prepare Ninevah? He prepared the fish; He prepared the vine; He prepared the worm; He prepared the wind. was everything else 'random chance' impossible for God to account for or to know? what does Proverbs 16:33 say about 'random events' ?

if Jonah is a figure of evangelism, what does it tell us about how evangelism actually works, from God's perspective?

Jonah didn’t preach a gospel message, but a message of destruction. Nineveh was enemies of Israel. God was protecting the seed line. God didn’t have to destroy them because they repented from the violence that was in their hands.

 

[John146]

this is one part of a didactic couplet of phrases. it's written in the context of vv. 8-9, where the king of Ninevah is speaking, saying

"Let everyone turn from his evil way and from the violence that is in his hands. Who knows? God may turn and relent and turn from his fierce anger, so that we may not perish."immediately after this in v. 10 the text tells us that God indeed spared them, showing His mercy to thousands who repent and turn to Him. it relates this to us, using the same language and perspective as the human king. a factual record from the human point of view.

David also knew God can change His mind.

22 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?

 

[posthuman]

You should note that the word "ordain” never fixes anything absolutely. (Lk. 7:8; Rom. 13:1; Acts 28:23, Matt. 28:16; 1 Cor. 9:14; 7:17) Paul ordained some things and that no more meant they were absolutely fixed to come to pass than if he hadn't used the word. (Rom. 13:1)

• we're talking about God ordaining, not an human ordaining
• Luke 7:8 -- "I tell this one, ‘Go,’ and he goes; and that one, ‘Come,’ and he comes. I say to my servant, ‘Do this,’ and he does it.” -- actually reinforces that things ordained by those having authority are carried out without fail, contrary to the point you wish to make.
• Romans 13:1 -- "there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God" -- this similarly establishes without question that what is ordained by God does not fail to be realized, again contrary to the point you wish to make.
• Acts 28:23 -- "they arranged/appointed a certain day to meet Paul" -- um, this is speaking about humans setting a date on their calendar to have a meeting, which they didn't fail to attend, so i have no idea why you're putting this as though it shows things ordained by God do not come to pass. it's neither relevant to God's ordination nor does it remotely establish the point you wish to make.
• Matthew 28:16 -- "the eleven went to Galilee to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go" -- they did not fail to go to the place He appointed, nor did they go to some wrong mountain, nor did some of them not show up, nor did they do this according to their own will but according to the will of the one who sent them. this doesn't establish that Christ's ordination is subject to failure, at all.
• 1 Corinthians 9:13-14 -- "Don’t you know that those who serve in the temple get their food from the temple, and that those who serve at the altar share in what is offered on the altar? In the same way, the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel." -- Paul is saying that in the same way that it is the prerogative of those who serve in the temple to be fed by what is brought to the temple, that those who serve the gospel have the prerogative to be fed by the fruitfulness of that which is offered to God in the respective similitude of worship. what is ordained by God is the right to this sustenance, and that right is not overthrown by Paul's meekness in refusing to require it of them. so this doesn't show that God's ordination is thwarted nor that it is idly spoken.
• 1 Corinthians 7:17 -- "Nevertheless, each person should live as a believer in whatever situation the Lord has assigned to them, just as God has called them." -- did you even read this John? it says that the situation a person finds themselves in is the situation to which God has ordained them to be in. that blows up completely the notion wherein God has no idea what situation a man may be in tomorrow because man self-determines his own situation in such a marvelous way that the Almighty cannot perceive it before man causes it to come to pass. it's completely contrary to that: it attests that God is the one who has authoritatively ordained your place! does not establish the point you wish to make at all; it refutes it -- it says your present situation was ordained to you by God, and His ordination did not fail to be realized. proof of that? you are where you are, not where you are not. this passage exhibits axiomatic assumption that the Lord has & exercises specific authority over individual human's circumstances.
  • that simple verse is a beautifully concise refutation of open theism. thank you for posting it; it hadn't occurred to me

 

[posthuman]

(Rom. 2:7) - God doesn't ordain any Gentile to eternal life until he has followed his conscience and is willing to hear the Word of God (vs. 42,48) "ordained" something God allows to come to pass.

the context of Romans 2 is salvation by works -- which is explicit in verse 7, saying that God will reward those who persist in "doing" good and "seeking glory." this is clearly part of a contrasting dyad, verse 8, literally the same sentence: contrariwise those who reject truth and do evil will be under His wrath.

for the rest of chapter 2 and a little into chapter 3, Paul continues to explore the facts about what 'wages' are earned by works, whether good or evil. then he firmly establishes that no one by this works-reward paradigm is worthy of life; all are condemned through it, both Jew and Gentile alike.

chapter 1 describes that the wrath of God is being poured out. chapters 2-3 explain why this is: because those who do good are rewarded for good, and those who do evil are rewarded for evil, and - welcome to the world - everyone does evil. every, single, one.

then Paul starts talking about faith.

i hope we all have read Romans enough to realize that it is a logical, systematic argument for the truth of the gospel, being laid out point-by-point-by point? to recognize that cherry-picking verses out of the 1st couple chapters of Romans to try to justify works-righteousness is like, example #1 of ignoring context, because the bulk of Romans in particular is such an obviously structured, accretive thesis. it is a series of statements, like a mathematical or philosophical proof:

1. this is the situation
2. this is why the situation is as it is
3. this is the solution
4. this is how the solution is derived
5. this is the application of the solution
6. these are the details of the solution
7. these are the implications of the solution

you can't with intellectual honesty pull something from part of the proof detailing the problem and call it the solution. the wrath of God is on mankind because the works of man are visited on him in judgement. giving good to those who do good isn't the solution; it's the problem, because no one does good, not one. therefore it is by grace, through faith, not of man that wills or makes effort, but of God who shows mercy. what is the message we have heard of His compassion? He shows it to whom He will show it. that's divine determination, and it is part of a worldview in which man's every purpose is vanity ((e.g. Psalm 94:11)) and no purpose of God fails to be accomplished ((e.g. Isaiah 48:11))

(Rom. 2:7) - God doesn't ordain any Gentile to eternal life until he has followed his conscience and is willing to hear the Word of God (vs. 42,48) "ordained" something God allows to come to pass.

there is no verse 42 or 48 in Romans 2. what are you talking about?

Romans 2:7 doesn't mention 'appointing' or 'electing' or 'ordaining' -- the word in v.6 is "give" -- but you want to talk about the idea of God's ordination in Romans? His purposes being actualized? look at Romans 11:32 -- God has constrained all men under sin in order that He might show mercy to all. there's your chapters 1-2 in context: with chapters 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 taken into account equally, culminating in praise --

"who has ever given to God that He should repay them?"​

put that next to Romans 2:6-11. to whom does He owe repayment?
put that next to Romans 3:19. what repayment does every man actually deserve?

I just go by Scripture.

yes

 

[stillness]

"Man that is borne of woman, has reference to all mankind, both women and men.

Of course brother or sister: both could give such a coment and thats fine because its True. But I was talking about hiden meaning, shoud I say more, to the point. If its not an idol of woman that blocks us, its security in a treasure in this life. A womans need for a home for the family can become a treasure in this life that a man works for to provide for his idol. Now i just left, our own life that can seperate us from a life in God, for another discution. "Unless a man forsakes everyone and everything and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple."

 

[7seasrekeyed]

Hello, fellow brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ, saved objects of eternal just wrath to grace.

Here is what John 3:16-18 is really saying and implying, alot of people have it wrong and its important.

John 3:16-18 (the text itself)
16 “For God so loved the world,[a] that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.


Here is a Paraphrase:

(Paraphrase: express the meaning of (something written or spoken) using different words, especially to achieve greater clarity)

Paraphrase:
GOD + LOVE + WORLD, World being: not just Israel, but also GENTILES.....indeed.... the Jews believed that the world was cursed by God and they were God's people, its quite to shock to Nicodemus the Pharisee........That God loves is to the world and not just Chosen Israel.

So WORLD doesn't mean universalism (false sinful doctrine), its talking about God's LOVE to the WORLD (not just Israel).

Okay, continuing on... God's LOVE is manifested in the cross THAT.. [THE ALL WHO BELIEVE] should not perish but have eternal life, that's correct! AKA the ALL who are believing, there is no WHOSOEVER in the greek...

Its the ONES that BELIEVE, which denotes a group... aka all the believing ones, like i said, there is NO WHOSOEVER in the text, its a bad word to use, so when you read that word you might think....... that MAN can believe and repent outside the elect grace of GOD, which is not true.

Anyway continuing: Verse 17: For God did not send his SON into the world to condemn the world, this is what they believed (the Jews), that God has come to bless them and curse the gentiles, BUT Jesus is saying NO....... I did not come to CONDEMN but to save the World (the world being not just Israel)... then to finish it up he says..... Verse 18: whosoever..... which is not implying that everyone can believe, but that THE EVERYONE WHO IS BELIEVING.... there is a difference.

Everyone who is believing shall be saved and SO this in no way contradicts or destroys election (we know only the elect do believe, believing is the result of the new birth and the new birth is the result of God's election).

So the point is that God doesn't Love the WHOOOOLEE WORLD........Its not implying that!.......WORLD does not mean every individual of the world that has every existed........ something that is a contradiction of much of the bible!....... aka Romans 9:13 As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”

If God loves the whole world, then the whole world would be saved.... duuuuurrrrr....

Anyway enjoy. I hope its a help to you in Christ, i also hope this is an encouragement for Calvinistic-Brothers/Sisters an edification and also a help to Arminians-Brothers/Sisters to see their error in this area and repent.

uh huh

because believing in Christ is not enough

apparently, and according to Calvinists, you must needs also believe in Calvin

Calvin has never saved anyone but he managed to have quite a few put to death for disagreeing with him

thanks but no thanks

I'll just stick with actual scripture and believe according the word of God

 

[posthuman]

David also knew God can change His mind.

22 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?

this doesn't represent God changing His mind.

the child has some state function Ψ(t) which when observed at a given time tk resolves to either 'dead' ((let's call that 0)) or 'alive' ((let's call that 1))
David says at times t0 .. tk-1 David doesn't know whether Ψ(tk) = 1 or Ψ(tk) = 0 so he supplicated himself before God. during those times he says, 'who knows?' -- the fact of Who David prostrated himself before ((vv. 16, 20, etc)) answers the question of v. 22 -- who knows? God knows. and David sought graciousness -- that the Lord would show him mercy. David didn't say 'maybe the Lord will be just to me and let the child live as the proper reward for my humbling myself' -- that would be a 'quid pro quo' function f(x,t):X → grace, which would contradict both the literal definition of and the Biblical description of grace ((see Romans 11:6, and have a handle on Romans 1-10 first lol)). the fact that David sought compassion from God here places David in an undeserving role and establishes the subservience of his own will to God's: because grace is by its very definition an intrinsically unmerited thing dispensed at the will of the One who dispenses it.

the passage you cited proves that God both knows and exercises power & authority over the future according to His own will and for His own purpose.

now that David experiences times tk+1 . . . he no longer mourned, because Ψ(tk) was already resolved. with regard to the linear temporal series of states David experiences, in the face of what was unknowable to mankind, he humbled himself before God, who alone knows. after coming to knowledge of the truth, he gave no more outward expression of grief, asserting that he 'cannot bring him back' ((1 Samuel 12:23)) and remarkably, by faith, the certain knowledge that David will go to him. in an open-theistic paradigm, David could not possibly know such a thing, because 'such knowledge can't exist until sovereign human choices create it' -- the open theist argues that not even God can know what David almost casually states as absolute fact. the open theist regards God as being confined within and ruled by the linear temporal series of states, {t1, t2, t3 . . . } -- God trapped within the brackets; for every k, God oblivious to tk+1 and powerless to aught but guess at it until man creates it by the will of man -- notwithstanding the actual truth, that all things are made by, through and for Christ ((John 1:3, Colossians 1:16, etc)) for His purpose and His own will ((Ephesians 1:1, Romans 8:28, Isaiah 46:10 etc)).

 

[posthuman]

Jonah didn’t preach a gospel message, but a message of destruction. Nineveh was enemies of Israel. God was protecting the seed line. God didn’t have to destroy them because they repented from the violence that was in their hands.

ok, well tell that to @Nehemiah6

if you re-read my post you quoted, you may see that i was granting his premise in writing it.

 

[7seasrekeyed]

Well you have a good point, but yeah just trying to do my best, i think one of the more important points is the word 'WORLD" because if World means universalism then we have major contradictions with other texts in the bible.

Universalism being the idea that God loves everyone savingly, which is a wicked lie!

you are very confused

in no place in scripture do we understand or read that everyone will be saved

Calvinism would like to make it sound as though non Calvinists are universalists

the wicked lie is what you are spouting and you would do yourself a real big favor if you quit using derogatory terms for people you disagree with

you are not the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth

you are being ignorant and abusive, not to mention condescending and arrogant

 

[7seasrekeyed]

For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God Romans 3:23.
and who are the 'All'? that includes you and me. So that the word 'world' means whole not just a part. I am a firm believer of ABC=Always by the Context.

that won't help with this dude

or any other Calvinist

if you can't cherry pick verses, half verses and misquote and rip out of context you do not have Calvinism

those very things are the foundation of Calvinism

 

[7seasrekeyed]

if this is, as you say, a picture of salvation going out to the Gentiles,

why wasn't Jonah sent to all the nations, or even to all the land of Assyria?
why weren't ten thousand Jonahs sent all over the earth to evangelize?
why did God specifically choose to send one particular Jew to one particular city?
this the only place on earth with people who need to repent? is Ninevah the only people God has compassion for?

if this is typifying by figure the gospel going out into the whole world, why is it so deliberately targeted to be a message carried by a specific person to a specific people? what's scripture telling us by the fact that Jonah doesn't go to Assur, or Susa, or Thebes; that he isn't sent to wander the whole land putting tracts under the windshield wipers of chariots, but to go to one specific city where one specific king and one specific people whose hearts are ready to believe?

did God prepare Jonah? did God prepare Ninevah? He prepared the fish; He prepared the vine; He prepared the worm; He prepared the wind. was everything else 'random chance' impossible for God to account for or to know? what does Proverbs 16:33 say about 'random events' ?

if Jonah is a figure of evangelism, what does it tell us about how evangelism actually works, from God's perspective?

I really cannot wrap my mind around this nonsense

in your haste to discount what was said, you miss an opportunity to shed some light on error...the error of world meaning everyone is saved or universalism according to mistaken Calvinists (I am not calling you one)

why did Jesus send out the 70?

why didn't Jesus heal everyone everywhere He walked?

why did only one leper tell Jesus thank you when he was healed?

if I go to my neighbor...the people directly next to me, and I tell them the gospel and they are saved, does that diminish the fact they are saved because I didn't tell the neighbor on the other side?

since Jesus gave the parable of the lost lamb, was He wrong because He didn't go after everyone else's lost lambs in every flock in the countryside?

since Jesus met Paul on the road to Damascus and personally converted him, why didn't the risen Jesus convert the entire religious bodies of His time (reference the incarnation while He was on earth)?

I would say your post is funny, but it isn't

it's rather sad that you diminish the fact that God chooses while not allowing Him to do so in your efforts to support unsupportable beliefs

and the answer to any or all of the questions I asked is not pre-anything

I do have some precognition on defense of this unbiblical doctrine of God creating some for heaven and some for hell

it doesn't fly in the face of the very scriptures the op is trying to shed demonic understanding upon

SMALL PRINT AKA DSCLAIMER: please note I said nothing about what you believe regarding the demonic and I don't think it applies to you