This is taken from the following Grace Evangelical Society page (faithalone.org) my interspersed responses are in this blue type. Here is the original article:

As Many As Were Devoted to eternal life believed
by Bob Wilkin

There's a verse in Acts which is extremely well known to five-point Calvinists. It reads, "And as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed" (Acts 13:48). It seems to say that only those appointed to eternal life are able to believe in Jesus and gain eternal life. Hence all others are doomed to hell no matter what they do. Some use this verse to prove what is called double predestination. That is the idea that God predestined some to the kingdom and the rest to hell.

My response: The first sentence implies that Calvinists major on a chosen few verses and use them as springboards, yet anyone who give Reformed Theology a fair hearing (and reading) will be pleasantly surprised to discover that we do not need to major on a few hand-picked wrested verses, but that the whole counsel comes together as a wonderfully unified witness. It is the groups like GES, on the other hand, who major on single verses (John 3:16) or single words even ("whosoever", see below.) that seem to support their view.

"Hence all others are doomed to hell no matter what they do" (?). And what is it that a dead person can do? But I am getting ahead of myself. We were/are all doomed to Hell - unless God intervenes. This is the whole point of the Gospel.

"That is the idea that God predestined some to the kingdom and the rest to hell." When God hardened Pharaoh's heart He effectively did this. Pharaoh did not have the "ability" to be saved (none of us have that) because God purposed to make him a demonstration of His wrath and power. If you do not believe this, don't call me a hard-hearted Calvinist, argue instead with the God of Romans 9:22- 23. There are vessels of glory and vessels of wrath. GES (Grace Evangelical Society) may not like this passage, but it is in their Bibles as well - but probably not underlined.

Others use this verse to prove single predestination. In this view all are doomed due to Adam's sin. That God in His mercy chooses to deliver anyone at all from this fate is purely a matter of grace. He was not obligated to save anyone. Thus when He elects some and predestines them to the kingdom, that is grace.

In the words of Mark Twain: "You have the words right, but the tune is wrong". All of the above is true, but is written as if it was a bad thing. True, it is an awesome subject, one that is quite sobering. God is indeed "not obligated to save anyone." Is the author arguing that God is? Are our works so mighty and noble (and choosing God is a work) that God is obligated to reward it? And what of election? Instead of being thankful that God saves some, these critics find fault with this. Have they never read Romans 9:18?

"So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires."

"Desires" appears twice here, once for the elect and once for the reprobate. Admittedly, this is a hard truth to automatically accept at first. Our flesh rebels at verses like this. As if in anticipation of this, we have the caution of Rom. 9:20-21:

First verse 19: "You will say to me then, "Why does He still find fault" For who resists His will?"

"On the contrary, [Paul rebukes] who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, "Why did you make me like this, will it?"

Verse 21: Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?"

Note: We are all from the same lump. Either we all have faith inherently (and the ability to choose God) or none of us have it. Well, according to the Bible, the latter is the case. To argue otherwise is to say that there are two different lumps of humanity.

But this is not the case. We are all the same by nature. There is absolutely no difference, essentially speaking, between the one who will end up in Hell and the one who will be saved. The only difference is that God chose the latter from the beginning - and, at the right point of time, graciously gave that person the faith to believe in the Gospel.

The ones not chosen are said to be passed over. God doesn't actively predestine them to hell, He just passes them over and doesn't elect them. But the net effect is that they go to hell because that is the destiny of all sinners who aren't vessels of God's mercy.

To me that second view is really logically identical to the first. For if those passed over are doomed, then they are logically predestined to hell. Let's consider another interpretation of Acts 13:48 in hopes of better understanding this issue of the capability to believe.

Jesus likewise "passed over" a number of other graves when He said to Lazarus "Come forth!". What does this prove? That Jesus called Lazarus did not obligate Him to call the rest. Likewise, that the Father elected some (the elect) from eternity past (John 6:37; 10:29; Eph. 1:4) does not obligate Him to choose all.

Inability to Believe Is Not Implied

A simple verse like John 5:40 contradicts the idea that any adult with full mental faculties is unable to believe. Jesus said, "And you are not willing to come to Me in order that you might have life." That He is speaking of eternal life is clear in light of the preceding verse where Jesus specifically mentioned eternal life. And that the issue is believing in Jesus is clear from v. 38, "Him you do not believe."

Jesus would never say "You are not willing to come to Me" unless that were possible. If that were impossible, then this statement would make no sense. It would be like talking to a grasshopper and saying that it could have been President of the United States, but it was not willing and so it won't be President. The issue of the will has nothing to do with a grasshopper becoming President.

Well, some might say, you've run from the passage at hand to some other verse to try to divert attention from a verse you can't handle. No, I've shown a clear verse that contradicts an alleged implication. But in addition, the immediate context of Acts 13:48 has something quite similar to the point Jesus made in John 5:40.

The text says that these people "believed." It doesn't say they were regenerated so they could believe. It doesn't say they were given faith. It says they believed. If the extreme Calvinist view were correct we would expect to read, "As many as had been elected were regenerated and then given the gift of faith." But we don't find that or anything close to that. Additionally, as we shall now see, the larger context itself shows that those who didn't believe were capable of doing so.

Wilkin, not willing to accept the clear teaching of Romans 9, tries to counter it by a marginal interpretation of Acts 13:48. Here is the verse:

"When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed."

The key word here ("had been appointed") is "TETAGMENOI", a perfect passive participle of "TASSO". Strong's has this on that root word:

"a prolonged form of a primary verb (which latter appears only in certain tenses); to arrange in an orderly manner, i.e.assign or dispose (to a certain position or lot): - addict, appoint, determine, ordain, set."

It is not surprising that Wilkin uses John 5:40, because - according to his Arminian presupposition - all statements of willingness ("You are not willing to come to Me.") imply ability to will. But, before we jump to this conclusion, we need to put this verse alongside complementary ones, like John 6:44:

"No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him:"

Comparing Scripture with Scripture, always necessary, we see that this last verse states a general truth (No one can come to Christ unless they are first drawn by the Father). We must now reread John 5:40 in the light of that verse. Conclusion: Jesus is just saying that the Jews are unwilling to come to Him, a truth that Paul repeats in Romans 3:11 ("There is no one who seeks after God."). These things should be plain to simple readers of the Bible. The problem arises when we read the Living Word, not for information about God, but for confirmation of what we believe that God must surely be like, and for what we must surely be like. That is a dangerous way to read God's Word, and will surely leave the reader blinder and further from the Living God.

The Willful Unbelief of the Jews Versus The Devotion of the Gentiles

Acts 13-14 chronicles the first missionary journey of Paul and Barnabas. Pisidian Antioch is one of the places they evangelized and made disciples (13:14-51). They preached in the Jewish synagogue there and Paul's sermon is recorded in vv. 15-41. Then, in v. 42, Luke says that "when the Jews went out of the synagogue the Gentiles begged that these words might be preached to them the next Sabbath." There is an implied contrast between the negative response of the Jews and the positive response of the Gentiles to Paul's message. What is implied at this point is explicit one week later.

The Gentiles were hungry for the Word. So, "on the next Sabbath almost the whole city came together to hear the word of God" (v. 44). However, when the Jews saw the crowd "they were filled with envy; and contradicting and blaspheming, they opposed the things spoken by Paul" (v. 45). Paul's words to them are startling: "It was necessary that the word of God should be spoken to you first; but since you reject it, and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we turn to the Gentiles" (v. 46, italics added). Notice that the Jews were culpable for rejecting the gospel. Indeed they judged themselves unworthy of eternal life.

Those who hear the good news and reject it are condemned not because they were unable to believe, but because they rejected the saving message and hence in effect judged themselves unworthy of eternal life!

Both parts are true: They are unable to believe (more on this below) and, by their rejection of the evangel, they judge themselves unworthy of eternal life.

There are two main options in understanding v. 48. We begin with the more common.

Election May Be in View

Most translations read, "And as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed." Many commentators thus see this as an allusion to unconditional election. If that is true, and I don't think it is, then as we have just seen it still in no way indicates that the non-elect are unable to believe. It would simply be a statement that the elect believed.

This is the "more common" view for a good reason: It has appealed to godly men throughout the history of the church. As far as God's election to salvation is concerned, there is no other kind besides unconditional. If He were to elect some because of something in us (call it inherent goodness, willingness to believe, disposition - however you want to deny Romans 3:10-11), it would not - could not - be election at all. It would be ratification. It would be a heavenly rubber stamp.

The Greek verb used here is not the one which means to choose or to elect. If Luke were making a point about election, why didn't he use that verb? Nowhere else in the entire Bible is this word used of election! In fact, not only does the word not refer to election, it is even possible if not probable that it doesn't mean appointed here either.

Personal Devotion May Be in View

This verse uses the verb tasso in the passive voice. According to the leading lexicon of NT Greek in Acts 13:48 it means "to belong to, to be classed among those possessing" (BAGD, p. 806). Additionally it points out that the passive can also mean "to devote oneself to a service."

Tasso is used in Acts 13:48 in a type of Greek construction (perfect periphrastic) which suggests that the verbal action occurred prior to the believing. The question is, what meaning should we assign to tasso here? It could mean, "As many as had belonged to eternal life believed," or "as many as had been classed among those possessing eternal life believed" or "as many as had been devoted to eternal life believed." The context is helpful here.

In v. 42 the Gentiles "begged [Paul and Barnabas] that these words might be preached to them the next Sabbath." Begging suggests devotion. They were devoted to learning about the good news of eternal life. This makes good sense in the context and it also makes a nice parallel. The Jews in Pisidian Antioch rejected the teachings of Paul and Barnabas and judged themselves unworthy of eternal life. The Gentiles, oppositely, accepted the teachings of the apostles. However, instead of saying "they judged themselves worthy of eternal life," Luke chose to say instead that the Gentiles believed, as many as had been devoted to eternal life. (Note: the Greek puts "they believed" before the words "as many as") They first devoted themselves to searching out the way to eternal life and then having discovered the message (Jesus guarantees eternal life to all who simply believe in Him) they believed it.

"Nowhere else in the entire Bible is this word used of election!" Wow! ... Wait a minute. This sounds less impressive as you think about it. "Entire Bible" is a mere flourish of his: The Greek is only in the NT. Besides, the word in question is not that common, so the fact (if it is true) that it is not used elsewhere concerning election is irrelevant.

"If Luke were making a point about election, why didn't he use that verb?" In the same vein, I could also ask, "If Paul believes in the Trinity, why did he not use that word"? That would also be silly. We need to always resist the temptation of telling inspired writers how to present truth.

Notice the recurrence of "iffy" qualifiers: "it may be", "it is possible", "[this] suggests", "could mean". I know that the more conscientious readers, when they are confronted with a number of these hedging qualifiers, should sense a red flag going up. The author, after all, is not reading the plain meaning of the text, but is trying to prepare the reader for his own pre-held prejudiced view. Instead, the writer should have considered how teachers throughout the ages have viewed this passage and this word.

One can also just look up the word in go through the Bible and do his/her own work. The word is found in Acts 22:10, for instance, where God tells Saul (soon to be "Paul") to go to Damascus. There . God says, "you will be told of all that HAS BEEN APPOINTED (TETAKTAI) for you to do."

This is clearly referring to God's definite action, not Paul's disposition. Studies like this can make the passage in question, likewise, clearer. A good book to read concerning this verse (Acts 13:48) is The Potter's Freedom by James R. White (pages 186- 190). He explains this verse thus:

"[T]he most natural way to take the text is to see this as Luke's explanation of why some who heard believed while others did not: the difference was not that some were better or more "disposed" toward the gospel than others (the very idea of someone being disposed toward the gospel is utterly contrary to Paul's teaching in Romans 8:7-8): the difference is that some were appointed to eternal life as part of the eternal decree of God, and others were not.

...

"In reality the only reason people suggest that the term be taken in such an usual manner [as Wilkin and GES do] is because they do not wish to accept the teaching of the passage, for it makes very clear that it is not our presentation, not our skills, not our preaching that brings men to repentance (all can be used by God, but all can likewise come to naught): ...[F]aith is... the divine gift of God given to His elect people."

God Will Remove the Veil for Anyone Willing

If the above is true then we are all truly doomed. Remember Romans 3:10-11? I know, I am repeating myself. But this is one of the most basic oversights of believers in free-will (that is, the ability to choose God and salvation, or to make oneself ready), one of the most basic oversights is that we - none of us ... are ... not ... willing ... or ... able. Got it? Oh, I hope and pray so, because this is a basic foundation to understanding so much about God, man and salvation.

This passage clearly teaches that the unbeliever is not without spiritual sensitivity. Here we have unregenerate people begging the apostles to come preach the Word of God to them. Like Cornelius in Acts 10, they were actively responding to God's drawing by seeking Him.

It is true that certain verses teach that Satan blinds the eyes of unbelievers so that they can't see the gospel clearly and hence believe it (Luke 8:12; 2 Cor 4:4). But remember that in Acts 16:14 we are told that "God opened Lydia's heart that she might heed the things spoken by Paul and Silas."

So what is Wilkin saying here? Satan blinds and God opens? That is true, but so what? What is the point of 2 Cor. 4:4? Read the context and find out. Paul is saying that even if some do not accept our Gospel, and go to Hell, it is because they are blinded by Satan. We preach the Word. Some believe, some don't -- acording to whether the hearers are sheep or goats. Thus Paul says "we are a savour of life unto life" (the elect sheep) "and death unto death" (the unelect goats). The truth here is much more awesome and sobering than Wilkin makes it out to be. We ought not to flit about these verses so lightly without really studying them. It is a wonderful weighty privilege to be granted the ability to believe and to will to please God. This belief should be especially cherished. It is not granted to just everyone (Matt. 16:17; Phil. 1:29; 2 Thess. 3:2). Please study these verses carefully and prayerfully.

Lydia, like the Gentiles of Pisidian Antioch reported in Acts 13, was a God-fearing Gentile. She was at the place of prayer by the riverside outside of Philippi. She was seeking the truth and God rewarded her search (just as He rewards all who seek Him, Acts 17:27; Heb 11:6) by opening her eyes to the truth.

Assertions like the above come from not reading the text carefully. Nowhere does it say that Lydia was "seeking the truth" before her heart was opened, rather, it happened after. This is crucial. Look at the verse (Acts 16:14), noting especially the order of the verbs that describe her coming to believe:

"A woman named Lydia... a worshipper of God, was:
1.LISTENING; and the Lord
2.OPENED HER HEART
3.TO RESPOND TO the things spoken by Paul."

However, if GES is right, then the verse should read "She (1) listened and (3) responded to Paul's message and then (or, because of this) the Lord (2) opened her heart." This is the GES order: first faith, then grace. The Bible's order - and the only one that truly gives glory to God - is first grace (God opening hearts of some), then faith (since faith is a gift of grace).

Wilkin maintains Lydia "was seeking the truth and God rewarded her search". Yet Paul says no one seeks. It is God who seeks. Jesus Christ is the Good Shepherd who calls his sheep. Those who are His respond to Him. This is exactly what Lydia did.

Clearly the Gentiles in Pisidian Antioch were capable of responding positively to the preaching of the apostles. They begged to hear more, and as a result, God opened their eyes and they believed.

Everyone is capable of responding and when they do, God will ultimately open their hearts to believe.

See above. See below. Sigh

Note that the ability to believe was there all along. God doesn't have to create that in a person.

You can believe this. Or you can believe James 1:17, Rom. 10:17 and 2 Thess. 3:2.

Application

This verse doesn't teach Christian fatalism. There is, in fact, no such thing as biblical fatalism. God so loved the entire world that He gave His only begotten Son to die on the cross in our place and rise from the dead so that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. As the old Baptist hymn puts it, "Whosoever surely meaneth me!"

Last comment first: Much of modern Christendom is built on these types of sayings. Obviously it is not scriptural. The mere existence of the words "whoever" or "whosoever" does not mean that every person on earth is meant. This would be grammatically obvious to us were we not so prejudicially innoculated by the constant repetition of these mind-closing mantras. At any rate, the basis of our discussion ought to be Scripture alone. and not pop sentiments that further muddy the issue.

So, how should we apply this verse? If you have not yet believed the saving message-that all who believe in Jesus for eternal life have it-ask God to show you the truth. It is already clear that you are devoted to learning the Word; otherwise you probably wouldn't be taking the time to read this article. So, if you ask God to open your eyes so that you can know what you must do to have eternal life, He will answer that prayer.

If you have already believed in Jesus for eternal life, spread the good news and pay special attention to fertile ground. If you meet people that are interested in eternal life, tell them the saving message! It's great to be God's vehicle in helping someone devoted to eternal life believe in Jesus.

The last comment is a bizarre loaded sentence that tries to sum up the entire article's point in one catchy clincher. But asserting is not proving. The testimony of Scripture is clear: No one - apart from God first opening the heart (like He did for Lydia) - is "devoted to eternal life". They are all "dead in sins", "hateful, and hating one another", "walking according to the course of this world and the prince of the air".

A closing comment about the name "Grace Evangelical Society": "Grace" is foremost in the name, but not in the belief of this group. The biblical teaching of grace is that it is all of God and is unmerited. It is grace that gives us faith, the faith to believe and be saved. This is the whole point of Eph. 2:8. We cannot be saved by the graceless faith of GES, as they put it, "the clear message of eternal life through faith alone in Christ alone". By stressing "faith alone" they leave out grace, a grace that initiates our entire salvation.

Yes, they believe in grace, but in grace - here is the crucial distinction - that is in response to our humanly originated faith, not as the source of it. Yet if, as Jonah 2:9 affirms, "salvation is of the Lord", and, as Paul and the other apostles insist, all good comes from God (Rom. 7:18, 1 Cor. 4:7, Jas. 1:17, etc.), then faith itself is also a gift from God. And it was given by grace, a grace that came first. This faith was not given to all ("Not all have faith" 2 Thess. 3:2), it is given to the elect only.

So, by trying to "balance" grace with faith, this group is in danger of ending up with neither. BTW, in the article here from GES, does not mention "grace" accept as a name ("Grace Evangelical Society", "grace churches") and as words put in the mouth of Calvinists. Interesting.

The grace of God is the energy and power with which He opens eyes and hearts of those whom He sovereignly wills to bless. From this blessing flows saving faith (Eph. 2:8- 10). The "faith" that is so apparent in many of the GES articles is actually a work of the flesh, since all that we have before moves in us is merely flesh.

Grace is not a symbiotic power of a co-pilot God who helps those who help themselves. This is a truth the Galatians needed to learn (Gal. 3:1- 4).

And what about faith? The Bible says that "no one seeks after God" (Rom. 3:11). GES says "faith alone", yet how can we believe without seeking? And how can dead men do either? They can't, of course. That is why it all starts with God. He is the "Author and Finisher of faith" (Heb 12:2). He is the Maintainer and Sustainer of faith (Gal. 3:1- 5; Phil. 2:13; Luke 22:32).