I wasn't arguing FOR the Calvinist position, remember? It would be better for someone who holds to that view to speak about it as I only gave my impression of what I have understood it to be. I don't claim infallibility. :o)
However, whether one comes to saving faith in Jesus Christ because he is moved by the irresistible grace of God or by his own response to that grace, the saving factor is STILL faith. That was my point. Those who are saved become saved when they, by faith, receive God's gift of eternal life through Christ. At that moment, they are sealed with the indwelling Holy Spirit and born again into the family of God. Now, God already knows all those who are going to receive him BEFORE we even existed, right? It does not change the nature of God at all because he is sovereign over all and nothing happens that is outside of his will, otherwise, that WOULD change the nature of God and would make him dependent upon his creation in order to fulfill his perfect will. Again, I do not come down straight on one side or the other in the predestination/free will debate. I accept that it is outside of my ability to fully grasp. It does not change, though, my belief that God is in control, that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose and he is the author and finisher of my faith.
For salvation by election, that's analogous to shooting someone in the chest and saying the dying factor was heart failure.
In Calvinist predestination, whether one will be saved, have faith, is determined, before they are born. If elect, they will have it, if not, not. Faith is a completely dependent cause, completely conditional upon election.
This is *quite* a different God, more akin to the ancient's Fate, than Christ. And quite a different man, with no choice, no decision to love, or to hate; with no ability to choose, no responsibility for choosing. Therefore, there is quite a different relationship between this 'god' and this 'man.'
I accept that it is outside of my ability to fully grasp.
Certainly, I agree we cannot fully grasp it. However, we can recognize when theology has gone to such an extreme as above. We can know that, however one gets there, it is a destination in error.
I've sometimes said: God is omnipotent; He created man with free will; the rest is speculation. Lot's of room for speculation, but not to the point that denies either God's omnipotence or man's free will as in full-blown (or is it bloom?) Calvinism.
The the point of discussion, Calvinism and Arminianism, both sola scriptura, arrive a very different theology and soteriolgy and all the rest.
thanks very much for your reply.
Typo correction:
*To* the point of discussion, Calvinism and Arminianism, both sola scriptura, arrive a very different theology and soteriolgy and all the rest.