Am I all over the map....Cornelius one minute and Agrippa the next. Cornelius was exposed to the gospel and chose to believe. Agrippa was exposed and chose to "put it off" to a more convenient day.
Those are story pictures of free choice at work. Paul laid out the gospel to Agrippa because Paul believed that Agrippa, like everyone, was a prospect.
I would present the gospel to Agrippa too..and everyone in earshot. That really has no impact on the idea of irrestible grace does it?
None of us Calvinists are arguing that Paul, Cornelius, etc. didn't make a choice for Christ. None of us are arguing that they did not freely make this choice, just as we are not arguing that Agrippa didn't freely reject the Gospel. What we are attempting to stress is the change in nature brought about by the Holy Spirit to enable the positive choice in Paul, Cornelius, etc. that did not occur in Agrippa.
Does this make sense?
And, in my evangelistic zeal, let me consider every man to be a prospect! (Which is something that Calvinists do, knowing that God is in the salvation business, and actually performs salvation when the Gosepl is presented to the elect.)
Did I share the quote from Spurgeon with you? He stated that if God had painted a stripe down the backs of the elect, we would spend all our time lifting shirt tails. However, since God had not chosen to do this, Spurgeon was resolved to preach the Gospel to every man.