On Matthew 22:3. An observation on the Kingdom

Occasionally, I will dive into some theological debate, usually with a sharp stick.  And usually with intent to poke something to see what the response might be.  So, today I have some observations on Matthew 22:3.

As I am reading for my quiet time, I decide to pull out the Greek readers text that I have and read through a parable on the Kingdom.  And as I am reading, I note that Matthew 22 is parable in which Jesus says that the Kingdom of Heaven (God in Mark and Luke's Gospel) is like a King who makes preparation for a wedding for his son.  Now, there are many wonderful aspects to this parable, but here's the one that strikes me today.  In verse 3, Jesus states that the King "sends his servants, calling (aorist participle from "kaleo") to the ones having been called (perfect participle from the root "kaleo") to the wedding.  I suppose this second use of "kaleo" could be interpreted "invited," showing intent on behalf of the king.    The response of those called?  "And they did not want to come."

Realizing that the term "kaleo" is used, and noting that it is the same term used for the word "election," I find it interesting in this context that those who were elected chose not to attend the wedding.

So what does this mean?
1.  Well, we know that the elected in Israel did not receive their Messiah, so clearly Jesus' is predicting his rejection (well underway at this point in his ministry) by the elected ones of Israel.
2.  I think it also points out that election does not mean an automatic acceptance of God's plan.  This is a theological problem for those who believe in unconditional election and irresistible grace.  Yes, I know it is a parable.  And yes, I know it is dangerous to focus to much on a vocabulary term like "kaleo" and not on the overall context.  And yes, I know this parable focuses on Israel's election and not on Gentile Christian election.  However, I don't think any of these questions changes the idea that is assumed in this parable: you can be elected and invited, and still choose individually not to respond to, and even reject, the invitation.
3.  Since this current generation of elected Jews rejected Jesus, many of the "elect" did not personally receive the salvation that he offered.  And those individuals, according to the parable, were bound, thrown out, and suffered outside of the Kingdom of God.  There is no indication of restoration in the parable.
4.  Some of those Jews who were elect did receive Jesus as Messiah.

So, the parable emphasizes the coming judgment on the Jewish people who reject Jesus, as well as the coming opportunity for redemption and faith that will come to the Gentiles.  It is specific in its scope and context.  Yet, the use of "kaleo" or election is interesting to me here.  I would like to here a neo-reformed response or two to these observations.