I don't know how to use the quotes either. I'm not all that concerned with who said what, but rather what is being said. Having said that, what follows is probably not in regards to what you've posted so far.
One of the issues that seems to rear it's head almost immediately is that of "once saved always saved" This isn't the immediate point of my question. While it can have some relevance, it usually just serves as a reason for people to respond that my question is impossible. The fact is that Paul points out, albeit not all that clearly; that even if this were the case, it would not make God unjust. This is what people can't seem to see.
The point of my question is dealing with a different aspect of Paul's question, i.e. "what would you do under these circumstances?" Instead of answering the question as presented, the vast majority of people choose to respond to the question as if this isn't the situation at all. They would rather answer the question as if I'd asked what they would do if they were actually the elect and this happened. I'm not asking that question. Yet they seem overwhelmed with a sense of duty to inform me that I don't know the question I actually asked. Go figure.
The insolence of some people is astounding. I presented a given hypothetical situation, e.g. You are damned to hell; a vessel fitted for destruction. What do I get in response? I get the churlish and indignant cry of some infant that has just been told that they need a bath, or to finish their homework, or that they need to go to bed as it is way past their bedtime. I get this: "NO, I'm not damned to hell" Again, evidently it can't be emphasized enough that this is a hypothetical question. Perhaps on second thought what needs to be emphasized is that some people just need to work on their reading comprehension skills a little more...