Close, but not quite. God's intent was that salvation be made possible for everyone.
Once you accept that God made it possible for everyone, then you make a radical statement about the nature of God that he would make it possible but would ALSO deny it as a matter of His choice. It seems a birfurcation of his own will.
Amen. God respected the free will of His creation that He even self-limited Himself in allowing their decisions to go against His own desire for them (Matt.23:37, Rom.10:21)
What the Calvinists refuse to accept is that while God allows mankind to choose for or against Him, He does not allow man to choose what the consquences of those decisions will be.
Reality still remains reality and man cannot change that.
There are two choices, but only one reality, (Jn.3:36)
God's intent was that salvation be made possible for everyone.
The very words "Christ died to save all men" seem to have an air of majesty worthy of God. However, it cannot be said that Christ offered atonement and secured the salvation of all men. This is the heresy of Universalism, vile and disgusting. The entire wording of such a construction then is reduced to this simple contention: God has made a "possible salvation" for all men. Please note though, that the very wording of this construction implies that a "possible salvation" by grace is not in and of itself a salvation by grace, but at best is a salvation in the use of grace by the man.
It must be stated up front that a "possible salvation" by grace is most definitely NOT an actual salvation by grace; the certainty of the salvation of not one human being is provided for. This grace led NONE to salvation. Before a "possible salvation" can become an actual salvation something must be done. Those who defend a mere "possible salvation" must contend then that man must perform that something for a mere "possible salvation" to become an actual salvation. The efficacious act comes from the man who can accept or stifle and kill the grace of God.
The Reformed theologian maintains that the efficacious and irresistible grace of God saves a sinner through the bestowal of the grace of God. Faith itself is a gift from God and is the result of the bestowal of grace.
--ON THE OTHER HAND--
The Arminian maintains that the inefficacious and resistible grace merely makes salvation possible and the final result of salvation comes NOT from the bestowal of saving grace but from the efficacious act of the natural fallen MAN improving the "possible salvation" to an actual salvation. Faith is generated by man using the grace given to him.
In order for the Arminian's construct to be proved there then must be some inequality in the mix that will determine the final outcome of either salvation or damnation. If grace is the inequality, then the Reformed theologians position is correct and Arminianism is overthrown by the concession. If it is in the efficacious act of the natural fallen MAN improving the "possible salvation" to an actual salvation through faith that he supplies, then salvation is not by grace. Salvation is ultimately by the efficacious act of the natural fallen MAN.
Is the inequality:
the GRACE of God?
the efficacious act of the natural fallen MAN?
The Arminian rejects in its entirety the idea that grace is irresistible. Therefore, if the Arminian maintains that "Prevenient Grace" is irresistible then he is a man exalting hypocrite. His argument is not with the Calvinist over the Biblical fact that saving grace is irresistible. His argument is because he cannot exalt the man over God with the Biblical model of grace. He would reject irresistible grace solely over the idea that he cannot choose salvation for himself.
However, as we will grant to the Arminian that he is not a man exalting hypocrite with his "Prevenient Grace" construction, we will assume that this grace is resistible and examine its characteristics.
Now, it must be stated at this point that the man, prior to the offer of "Prevenient Grace" has absolutely nothing but his own natural fallen VIRTUE to use in his decision on whether or not to receive this "Prevenient Grace". Man without the aid of anything from God must decide whether or not to receive the grace that he will then use to create his own salvation from the mere "possible salvation" that Christ wrought on the Cross.
Therefore, the only reasonable conclusion is that the Arminian believes that the natural fallen man is fully capable of creating his own salvation from the tools that he finds conveniently left by God. What a Pelagian man exalting doctrine!