Among many interesting articles in the latest edition of the Journal for Baptist Theology and Ministry (JBTM, available free of charge at http://www.baptistcenter.net), Dr. Adam Harwood, Associate Professor of Theology at New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary, reviews John Piper's little volume, Does God Desire All to Be Saved? (John Piper. Wheaton: Crossway, 2013. 56 pages. Paperback, $9.99). After rehearsing the flow of Piper's volume, Professor Harwood concludes:
The strength of this book is that it seeks to address an Achilles heel in Reformed theology, namely the charge that affirming unconditional election requires a denial of God’s desire to save all people. The weakness of the book is that it argues against biblical texts which teach explicitly that God desires to save all people by appealing to a theological framework of two wills in God, which is deduced then imported into one’s reading of the Scripture. The result is that Piper favors the two wills view (not explicitly stated in the Bible) over biblical texts which state clearly that God desires all to be saved. (italics added).
One of the staple hermeneutical principles I've repeatedly asserted on this site is Calvinism's frequent but not universal tendency to trump biblical exegesis with theological presupposition. In short, theology drives exegesis rather than exegesis driving theology.
For my part, just as Harwood named as Reformed theology's Achilles heel affirming unconditional election requires a denial of God’s desire to save all people, Reformed hermeneutics' Achilles heel is allowing presupposed theology to drive exegesis of the biblical text.