How did I contradict myself? You came out with the 'expensive'
label which is not found in the bible or theology, so I'm
cautioning you on the danger. The danger is expensive gifts are
never free for everyone. In the real world, only a selected people
get the expensive gifts, the rest get 'consolation' prize.
So you appointed yourself the judge on the value of
salvation?
Only those with an incorrect view of salvation have judged
salvation, not me. So how have they judged? By presenting salvation
as a number game - the more the merrier. By
presenting salvation as a marketing ploy - using
cheap tricks to attract people to church. By presenting salvation
as the work of man - pestering people, even
Christians, on the streets or outside their house to convert.
See earlier argument. The choice is ours to accept the gift, not
God's.
How can fallen mankind receive the gift? Is it not our inborn
tendency to turn away from the gift which is contrary to the sense?
It does not make sense to put the gift in the same league as other
'gifts', wordly philosophies and religions. By saying the choice is
yours to accept the gift, how are you different from one who has
accepted the other gifts? How can you tell who is right? Using your
fallen/post-Eden faculty of reason? 
From the way you reply, I don't think you understand what I'm
talking about, neither can you appreciate the richness of this
perspective.
Ad hominen style character assassination? Earlier name-calling
me a gnostic and now a hypercalvinist? You still haven't say why it
does not absolve...when it is clear that it does.
I never call you a hypercalvinist. OMG .. you know what is
hypercalvinism or not? Read my reply (which I acknowledge was
composed badly in the heat of the moment). I said the position you
accused me of IS hypercalvinism and hypercalvinism is something not
accepted by most Christians. Or at least Christians who should have
known better.
It does not absolve. You can read more if you are interested. From
the url I quoted:
The hyper-Calvinist position at this point amounts to a
repudiation of the very gist of 2 Corinthians 5:20: "Now then we
are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we
pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God." The whole
thrust of the gospel, properly presented, is to convey an offer (in
the sense of a tender, a proffer, or a proposal) of divine peace
and mercy to all who come under its hearing. The apostle's language
is even stronger, suggesting the true gospel preacher begs
sinners to be reconciled to Godor rather he stands "in
Christ's stead," pleading thus with the sinner.
Hyper-Calvinism in essence denies the concept of human
responsibility, and so it must eliminate any such
pleading, resulting in a skewed presentation of the gospel.
