As I noted in my previous post, according to Jesus, far more will be lost than saved (Matt. 7:13, 14). In Calvinism this can only mean that God has reprobated from eternity far more than He has elected to save. According to Calvinism, God’s reprobation of most of humanity is “for His glory”. From this it seems safe to conclude that God’s action in reprobation brings Him far more glory than His action in electing to salvation. The fact that far more will end up in hell than in heaven in accordance with God’s irresistible eternal decree brings God ultimate glory . If that is the case, it seems to me that Calvinists should focus much more on reprobation and God’s act of reprobating the majority of mankind, consigning them to an eternity of unimaginable suffering for the sins and unbelief that God irresistibly decreed for them from eternity, than on God’s electing the few to salvation .
But when Arminians focus on the “horrible decree”, Calvinists typically want to quickly divert our attention to the few who get saved instead of dwelling on the many who have been reprobated to eternal suffering by way of God’s irresistible eternal decree. Why not glory in the reprobation of many, especially since it seems that reprobation must bring God far more glory than election unto salvation?
For all their talk about Arminians supposedly robbing God of His glory, it seems that Arminians are the ones who are trying to give God more glory by focusing on God’s irresistible decree of reprobation in discussing Calvinism.
 This note is an update after receiving feedback on the post from a fellow Arminian. He pointed out that this post could be seen as misrepresenting the Calvinist position since in Calvinism reprobation can be seen to give God more glory “in conjunction” with election so that “the misery of the reprobate serves to highlight and exalt the blessedness of the elect”. I agree that this is the Calvinist view, but I would argue that my post doesn’t misrepresent this position (though I could have made my point clearer), since in Calvinism this really doesn’t explain why God needs to reprobate the vast majority of humanity. If the argument is that the more that are reprobated, the more election looks good, then God would have ultimately glorified Himself by reprobating all but one person, or something like that. So the question remains: Why would God need to reprobate so many? If it is to enhance His glory in election then reprobation of more than are elected gives God more glory, and Calvinists should at least focus on reprobation more, especially on the fact that God gets more glory in election by reprobating far more than he elects. That is something that Calvinists typically want to downplay, even denying the obvious (as some, like James White, seem to almost deny the charge, immediately focusing on the Revelation text of a multitude in heaven to draw attention away from the fact that there are far, far more that are reprobated) in order to take attention away from the disproportion between election and reprobation. If the disproportion brings God greater glory, then it should be a focus of Calvinist preaching, rather than largely ignored, downplayed, or swept under the rug altogether.
 As I mentioned in my last post, I agree with Wesley that whether we view reprobation as passive or active, it amounts to the same thing (see his two sermons, Predestination Calmly Considered and On Predestination). It is also unclear how reprobation can be considered passive in any way that would relieve the difficulty that Calvinists seem to hope to relieve when considered against the backdrop of God’s exhaustive deterministic control (what Calvinists wrongly term “Sovereignty”).