How does that contradict anything i stated ?
Oh, so you do believe in irresistible grace? If you do not, then that is how it contradicts what you have stated. Also perseverance of the saints. Salvation is a gift from God, and, as Romans states, that is irrevocable. Why? Because God put you in that state, and God has stated that He who put you in that state, will keep you in that state. I understand you believe libertarian free will can overrule God, but I don't believe that.
are you making
assumptions about what I hold
Probably, because I am running under the assumption that you aren't a flat out heretic. (Unlike some here.)
You are very confused . No I am not a universalist
Are you ?
And the verse is not about God chosing people unconditionally but about God chosing men based upon being in Christ to be holy and blameless
I notice how you didn't deal with the reality shattering paradox. Perhaps because you know it is true?
The verse itself may not seem to say that God is choosing people unconditionally, but the passage, as a whole, does. I already accused you of isolating verses, and you have yet to disappoint.
The verse does not say God chose men based upon being in Christ. It says "He chose us in Him". That's it. Okay, that isn't it. He said "He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world." That's it. (And it is) This is a very special present tense situation. It means, from His point of view, He chose us...in Christ. What is special about that? Well, Peter says that Jesus was foreordained before the foundation of the world, just like these people were chosen before the foundation of the world. Coincidence? I think not. Why not? This verse is not an isolated context.
These people (individuals) who were chosen before the foundation of the world would only be chosen to live holy and blameless, if everyone were not living holy and blameless. I mean, that isn't too difficult to understand. It all leads to the understanding that this speaks of God choosing us for salvation, and that He does not see us any other way. We, temporally, know that we were totally depraved without hope, until one day, the Great Shepherd came and rounded up us sheep. In God's eyes, we were lost sheep, and then we were found sheep. Sheep from the start, sheep at the end. The only difference is that the beginning we had gone astray, and at the end, we had been rounded up by the Great Shepherd. It goes hand in hand with the parable of the wheat and the tares. Sowed wheat, harvested wheat. Someone else sowed tares, burnt tares to a crisp. You will notice that tares did not become wheat, and wheat did not become tares. There is a spiritual message hidden in there, as all Jesus parables hid spiritual truth. Revelation speaks of two different animal groups in dealing with people. Sheep and goats. Just who are the goats? Can a sheep become a goat, or a goat become a sheep? Aren't there two states spoken of in the Bible for sheep? Lost and found? What does the lost mean, and what does the found mean? Are you beginning to see a little light in why some of us believe that once a sheep, always a sheep, whether lost or found, and that Jesus will not lose a single one, which means all sheep will be found?