Did you never read how Matthew took Hosea 11:1 out of context in Matthew 2:15 and applied it to Jesus when in the original context it applied to Israel?
And are you not aware that if you take 1 Corinthians 9:6 in its immediate context, it substantiates the health/wealth, name-it-and-claim-it doctrine of the word of faith movement in that it tells us that we can reap financial seeds that are sown; but that if you apply the hermeneutic of 1 Corinthians 2:13 (kjv) and compare it to Luke 8:11 (taking it out of its immediate context and applying the topical context) you can find a more orthodox interpretation?
And what about how John applies to the crucifixion of Jesus a verse that in all reality is in reference to His second coming (Zechariah 12:10, John 19:34-37)?
The four verses that I have quoted are all in the same topical context of one another. They all teach that God wants to save all men and that Jesus died for all men.
If He only died for the elect, then if you are non-elect, you cannot be saved even if you do what it takes to receive salvation (such as what is prescribed in Romans 10:8-13, or Acts of the Apostles 2:38-39).
There is no guarantee that you personally are of the elect, are you aware of this?
You might be of the non-elect and therefore even calling on the name of the Lord, if you did that, was not sufficient to save you.
If you have never called on the name of the Lord, you have deeper things to worry about. Because if you have not done that, you are definitely not saved.
But if you have, your doctrine teaches that if you are not of the elect, and you gave your heart to Jesus, that was not sufficient to save you; Jesus cast you out when you came to Him.
This is simply an un-biblical prospect.
Jhn 6:37, All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.