Comment: The difference...

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: I agree (see in situ)

The difference...

...would be that I view everyone as called to be saved, that God truly loves everyone as His precious creature whom He wants a relationship with. I see everyone as the 'elect', but that the fullness of this won't be realized until the age to come, when God will truly be all in all, after death itself is destroyed (not hanging out in some cosmic corner with most of fallen Creation stuck in the second death for eternity).

The various texts related to predestination, hardening Pharoah's heart, vessels of wrath, 'hating' Esau, etc. I fully agree with, but view those as being true during the working out of human history, not as the final desired outcome. Even those from Sodom get restored (see Ezekiel 15 (?))

So three points:

1. God's will is to save all and have eternal, personal relationships with all. (see I Tim, I Peter, John etc.)

2. God has the ability to perfectly achieve His will.

3. Some will be never be saved.

One of these three can't be true, if the other two are true. The Calvinists (you?) deny #1. The Arminians deny #2 (stymied by free will). The universalists deny #3, because they affirm 1 and 2. I find this last of the three views to be more in line with the idea of 'where sin abounded, grace abounded all the more'. I see the Gospel as being victorious, not mostly-defeated.