Observation 1

It is important to preserve the exact language – that the elect are promised an inheritance in Christ ie Salvation in Christ. Now it is true, that since God’s promises reflect His immutable counsel, every promise of His is as good as received. So to be promised something by God equals having it with certainty in the future – so much so that it can be said to be predestined. Therefore, ‘the elect are promised salvation’ boils down to ‘the elect have predestined salvation’.

Again, logically, the inverse cannot be inferred as True. ‘The non-elect are not promised salvation’ does not boil down to ‘the non-elect have predestined condemnation’. As seen in the previous paragraph, since the whole concept of predestination comes about only by the immutability of God’s Promise, where there is no promise, there is no predestination at all. So, purely evaluating simply the logic, God makes no comment or decree about the destiny of the non-elect from before the foundation of the world when He’s promising the elect salvation. It is this that amounts to an accurate version of passing over the non-elect at that pre-time moment.

Also, what the non-elect lack that the elect are given is the ‘Promise of Salvation’. It’s important not to conflate this phrase into simply ‘salvation’. There is a world of difference between saying ‘the elect have salvation vs the non-elect do not have salvation’ and saying ‘the elect have the promise of salvation vs the non-elect do not have the promise of salvation’. The former lends itself to saying the non-elect are condemned from before the foundation of the world – whereas the latter only means they do not have the guarantee in the Promise but that there could logically be other conditional means provided for attaining salvation. Theoretically, one still could have salvation without the promise in this logical system. More on this Later..

Observation 2

Heb 6:15 shows how there is a patient waiting before inheriting the promises. So there are 2 distinct time-shots – one, at the time the promise was made and then, at the time the promise was fulfilled.

The parallelism seen in Romans 9 can be argued was made at the second time-shot and not the first. This was not God before the foundation of the world of actions saying Jacob I have loved and Esau I have hated. Of course, God did elect before the foundation of the world which was also when He gave the promise of salvation to the elect. And He made no such promise nor decree of condemnation over the remaining non-elect back then.

Time passes by – and we come to the second time-shot where all the world is continually evil. None does good, no not one – both the elect and the non-elect. God’s Just wrath can be poured out on all mankind but this is where God fulfills His promise to His elect. He continues to love them and has mercy upon them, while He turns in hatred and destroys the rest – at this time-shot where evil has been played out, not before any had been born or done good or evil.

At this time-shot, Esau has done many things worthy of God’s hatred and he’s not spared God’s wrath since he’s been given no guaranteed promise of mercy and salvation. He still is condemned for his own evil – the condemnation was just not predestined before any good or evil. Pharaoh has already done several acts worthy of God’s wrath, and is fitted for destruction. Destroyed, he will be, under Just wrath – simply wasn’t predestined before he had done good or evil.