So... then you were never really here to discuss the text itself or Paul's theology.
You were only here to shill for Flowers, not make your own arguments.
Look at the verses, the Objectors, and the entirety of Romans 9-11. You are going to impose your theology onto the text instead of letting the text change your theology. It's pointless to discuss this when a person is unwilling to disregard (with their best ability) their presuppositions and biases towards the text.
No, God used men such as Calvin and Luther to be His instruments to go against and confront the false teachings of Rome, and to bring back in and rediscover the true Gospel of Christ!
Here we have:
Legend of the Flood
Long ago, perhaps in the days when Chickasaws still resided in the land of the setting sun, their Great Spirit, Ababinili, sent rain. Soon water covered all the Earth. Some Chickasaws made rafts to save themselves. Then, creatures like large white beavers cut the thongs that bound the rafts. All drowned except one family and a pair of each of all the animals. When the rain stopped and the flood began receding, a raven appeared with part of an ear of corn. The Great Spirit told the Chickasaws to plant it. The Great Spirit also told them that eventually the Earth would be destroyed by fire, its ruin presaged by a rain of flood and oil.
The Chickasaws are not the only North American Indian Tribe who has a legend of the flood. Almost every other ancient people, from the Chinese to the Mayans and Incas, had their own version which told of destruction of the world by water.
Matching the Story of Noah one family survived with all the Animals.
Now given these stories why would they not have stories of a coming promised one?
First, it is not established these anecdotal stories are versions of the Noahic flood. Second, even if they are, they have strayed so far from the actual story to lose all meaning. And since the only truth that matters is biblical truth, you are dragging up some pretty rank pieces from the bottom of the barrel.
They must sink to this depth in order to defend their errant views. The view that Jesus died to make salvation possible to all men (rather than the truth that Jesus saves His elect)
forces them to explain how billions of people who have never even heard the name Jesus have a "fair" shot at salvation through Him.
And this is why they are a hair's breath away from Universalism. According to their view, Jesus is more concerned about the possibility of saving everyone than actually saving some. Their ultimate appeal is to their own man-made construct, not biblical truth. They come up with cockamamie theories like the American Indians and a flood legend to back up their nonsense. I half believe that this is all a joke; a way to punk Monergists and get a cheap laugh. I rather it is that than actually believing this theological fantasy.
If one does not hold to a PST viewpoint, nor to limited atonement viewpoint, the slide towards all sorts of strange theology such as Open theism , Universalism for example will eventually seem to come into play!