I think you need to learn to read more closely!
Chapter 11 is speaking of the hardening of Israel, not the reprobation of the non-elect!
So, it follows that just because you don't understand how and why God has done, is doing, and will do what He Wills, you cannot accuse Him of injustice simply because it doesn't seem right to you. You don't have all the info necessary to make such a judgment! What is revealed shows that it is God who makes the choices, and you should be grateful that He chose you, rather than spending your time ranting about how you think it's unfair that He doesn't choose everyone, or that He doesn't allow them to make a choice which you can't seem to understand that they can't make, by themselves. Your problem is not with Calvin, but with God, and your faulty understanding of Him.
If Calvinism cannot understand why someone is saved (as it cannot explain why God chose one and not another), then it is based on a mystery and not what is revealed.
What is revealed is that God wants all men saved (as you stated) died for all men (which you stated) but all men are not being saved (which means God is not accomplishing what He reveals He wants)
Appealing to the mystery of God as the final answer of your 'Biblical' faith, means you have to reject what God has revealed, that He has provided salvation for all men, but it is man who says 'no' to God. (Rom.1:28, Jn.3:36)
Calvinism then on the one hand claims to know how God is saving men (with unconditional election) but when pressed to ask why some and not others then it holds up its collective hands and cries MYSTERY.
Hey, if its such a mystery then shut up about it!
Unconditional election was never an issue in the first 300 years of the Church.
I think you and I have finished our discussions, don't you?
I think you need to quit trying so hard to avoid admitting what doesn't fit your view. Did I ever apply anything in that passage out of context? NO! I quoted the entire chapter, in context, to indicate the point I was making, that there are things hidden form our understanding concerning God's work, so your rant against "secret counsels" is without merit, seeing how it is clearly shown in the Word that it is so.
I know the chapter is about the hardening of Israel! I'm not that dense! But, in case it slipped your notice, if you're a Gentile (like me), then this chapter does have a lot to say about our own salvation. It does speak of election, so by inferrence, it also touches on reprobation. Maybe you should learn to read more closely!
If Calvinism cannot understand why someone is saved (as it cannot explain why God chose one and not another), then it is based on a mystery and not what is revealed. What is revealed is that God wants all men saved (as you stated) died for all men (which you stated) but all men are not being saved (which means God is not accomplishing what He reveals He wants)
Now you are either deliberately mis-stating things, or you really do not understand what I and many others have tried and tried and tried to help you understand. What is certain is that Some are saved, and others are not. That is fact. Calvinism sees clear evidence in scripture that God elected before the foundation of the world those whom He would save. Calvinism sees that election as residing in the Will and Soveriegnty of God the Father Almighty, and is not dependant on man, his actions, or his desires. Calvinism sees from scripture that man is totally depraved as a result of Adam's sin, and therefore unable to please God, and unable to seek God on his own initiative. Man is rightly and justly condemned for his sins, and deserving of the judgment for sin, which is death. There is no injustice in God's judgment, and it would be completely Righteous, Just, and wholly appropriate if God did not save a single soul but let every man, woman, and child go to judgment for their sins. In fact, God wiped out all but 8 people at the time of the Flood, and if those 8 had not been chosen by Him, ALL of mankind would have perished, and we wouldn't even be sitting here discussing this. There is a lot we do know from scripture about God's purpose and Will, Do we know everything? No! Only a fool would claim that we do.
Now here's where you are out and out lying: You said, "What is revealed is that God wants all men saved (as you stated)
Stop right there! Where did I ever state that? Those are not my words, those are yours. It is you who states that. You are the one who keeps yammering on and on about that. Now you try to turn it around and make it appear that I have agreed with you all along? Bull!
...died for all men (which you stated) but all men are not being saved (which means God is not accomplishing what He reveals He wants).
You are putting words in my mouth and attributing words to me that I have not written. Show me, with clear quotes, in context where I have said these things the way you are staing them here.
Appealing to the mystery of God as the final answer of your 'Biblical' faith, means you have to reject what God has revealed, that He has provided salvation for all men, but it is man who says 'no' to God. (Rom.1:28, Jn.3:36)
Rom 1:28 "And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;"
John 3:36 "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him."
Where in these two verses does it say that man says "no" to God? Romans 1:28 says God gave them over to a reprobate mind. John 3:36 is a simple statement of the way things are. There is no case here for man having any sort of controlling free will that can thwart God's Will (remember, it is you who says God wants all men to be saved).
Calvinism then on the one hand claims to know how God is saving men (with unconditional election) but when pressed to ask why some and not others then it holds up its collective hands and cries MYSTERY. Hey, if its such a mystery then shut up about it! Unconditional election was never an issue in the first 300 years of the Church.
It wasn't an issue because no one ever questioned it! It was the common belief of Christians before the errors of Catholicism started creeping in. You apparently don't understand the the various councils and synods of the Church were not to establish doctrine, but to refute error and codify already held correct doctrine. That some of these doctrines weren't explicitly written of or spoken about before the councils and synods doesn't mean they didn't exist, it only means they were the commonly held belief until heresies and errors arose which required that correct doctrine be clearly codified in order to be able to clearly refute the heresy. The Canons of Dort were just such a statement. They clearly refute Arminianism. Sorry about your luck!
When you stop yammering on about "secret counsels", then it won't be a topic of conversation, now will it?? I'm not the one bringing it up, YOU ARE!!!! So shut up about it, youself!
I think you and I have finished our discussions, don't you?
This is you well-known exit tactic, and we've seen it plenty of times before. When pressed, you twist words, falsely ascribe your words to others, and then declare the discussion over and yourself the winner. Bull**it, Ed!
Funny, I deal with most of what you say, point by point, but you rarely deal with what I say, point by point... could it be because you CAN'T?????