Ex-Calvinism (Why I am no longer a Calvinist)

[JonC]

There is a confusion I have seen on this board by a very small number of people. The confusion is that those who disagree with Calvinism do so because they do not understand Calvinism. While some do disagree not with Calvinism but a misunderstanding of it, others understand and still disagree.

I was hoping some of the legitimate concerns would become apparent at least so that we could understand such disagreements.

I have explained that Calvinism holds election to be based solely on the will of the Father.

I have explained that Calvinism views Christ's death as effecting salvation (not a potential but Jesus as actually saving the elect).

Calvinism holds the idea that God must punish sins because God is a just God. God will not just forgive men without satisfying the demands of justice. This is where I depart from Calvinism.

 

[Reynolds]

There is a confusion I have seen on this board by a very small number of people. The confusion is that those who disagree with Calvinism do so because they do not understand Calvinism. While some do disagree not with Calvinism but a misunderstanding of it, others understand and still disagree.

I was hoping some of the legitimate concerns would become apparent at least so that we could understand such disagreements.

I have explained that Calvinism holds election to be based solely on the will of the Father.

I have explained that Calvinism views Christ's death as effecting salvation (not a potential but Jesus as actually saving the elect).

Calvinism holds the idea that God must punish sins because God is a just God. God will not just forgive men without satisfying the demands of justice. This is where I depart from Calvinism.

God is sovereign so He does not have to punish sin.

 

[Iconoclast]

God is sovereign so He does not have to punish sin.

A Holy God does not punish sin?

 

[atpollard]

God is sovereign so He does not have to punish sin.

Does “sovereign” include the right to violate God’s word that “the wages of sin is death” and “I will punish ...”?

 

[atpollard]

Calvinism holds the idea that God must punish sins because God is a just God. God will not just forgive men without satisfying the demands of justice. This is where I depart from Calvinism.

How is that not a distinction without a difference?

Are you saying that God can forgive sin by fiat, so Jesus did not really NEED to die? If not, then the sin was punished on the cross (He became sin) so the demands of justice HAVE been satisfied.

 

[Iconoclast]

JonC,

I have explained that Calvinism holds election to be based solely on the will of the Father.

You said that, but here is what a real Calvinist says; JOHN MURRAY;


Union with Christ is the central truth of the whole doctrine of salvation. All to which the people of God have been predestined in the eternal election of God, all that has been secured and procured for them in the once-for-all accomplishment of redemption, all of which they become the actual partakers in the application of redemption, and all that by God’s grace they will become in the state of consummated bliss is embraced within the compass of union and communion with Christ...It is significant that the election in Christ before the foundation of the world is election unto the adoption of sons. When Paul says that the Father chose a people in Christ before the foundation of the world that they should be holy, he also adds that in love He predestinated them unto adoption through Jesus Christ (Eph 1:4-5). Apparently, election to holiness is parallel to predestination to adoption—these are two ways of expressing the same great truth. They disclose to us the different facets that belong to the Father’s election. Hence, union with Christ and adoption are complementary aspects of this amazing grace. Union with Christ reaches its zenith in adoption and adoption has its orbit in union with Christ. The people of God are “heirs of God and joint-heirs with Christ” (Rom 8:17). All things are theirs whether life or death or things present or things to come, all are theirs because they are Christ’s and Christ is God’s (1Co 3:22-23). They are united to Him in Whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge, and they are complete in Him Who is the head of all principality and power (Col 2:3, 10).

It is out of the measureless fullness of grace and truth, of wisdom and power, of goodness and love, of righteousness and faithfulness that resides in Him that God’s people draw for all their needs in this life and for the hope of the life to come. There is no truth, therefore, more suited to impart confidence and strength, comfort and joy in the Lord than this one of union with Christ. It also promotes sanctification, not only because all sanctifying grace is derived from Christ as the crucified and exalted Redeemer, but also because the recognition of fellowship with Christ and of the high privilege it entails incites to gratitude, obedience, and devotion. Union means also communion; and communion constrains a humble, reverent, loving walk with Him Who died and rose again that He might be our Lord. “But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him. He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked” (1Jo 2:5-6). “Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me” (Joh 15:4).

There is another phase of the subject of union with Christ that must not be omitted. If it were overlooked, there would be a serious defect in our understanding and appreciation of the implications of this union. These are the implications that arise from the relations of Christ to the other Persons of the Trinity and from our relations to the other Persons of the Trinity because of our union with Christ. Jesus Himself said, “I and my Father are one” (Joh 10:30). We should expect, therefore, that union with Christ would bring us into similar relation with the Father. This is exactly what our Lord Himself tells us: “If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him” (Joh 14:23). The thought is overwhelming, but it is unmistakable: the Father, as well as Christ, comes and makes His abode with the believer!

Perhaps even more striking is another word of Jesus: “Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me” (Joh 17:20-23). And not only is it the Father Who is united with believers and dwells in them; Jesus tells us likewise of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, “And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you” (Joh 14:16-17).

It is union, therefore, with the Father and with the Son and with the Holy Spirit that union with Christ draws along with it...Believers enter into the holy of holies of communion with the triune God, and they do so because they have been raised up together and made to sit together in the heavenlies in Christ Jesus (Eph 2:6). Their life is hid with Christ in God (Col 3:3). They draw nigh in full assurance of faith having their hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and their bodies washed with pure water because Christ is not entered into holy places made with hands but into heaven itself now to appear in the presence of God for them (Heb 9:24).

 

[Reformed]

JonC,



You said that, but here is what a real Calvinist says; JOHN MURRAY;


Union with Christ is the central truth of the whole doctrine of salvation. All to which the people of God have been predestined in the eternal election of God, all that has been secured and procured for them in the once-for-all accomplishment of redemption, all of which they become the actual partakers in the application of redemption, and all that by God’s grace they will become in the state of consummated bliss is embraced within the compass of union and communion with Christ...It is significant that the election in Christ before the foundation of the world is election unto the adoption of sons. When Paul says that the Father chose a people in Christ before the foundation of the world that they should be holy, he also adds that in love He predestinated them unto adoption through Jesus Christ (Eph 1:4-5). Apparently, election to holiness is parallel to predestination to adoption—these are two ways of expressing the same great truth. They disclose to us the different facets that belong to the Father’s election. Hence, union with Christ and adoption are complementary aspects of this amazing grace. Union with Christ reaches its zenith in adoption and adoption has its orbit in union with Christ. The people of God are “heirs of God and joint-heirs with Christ” (Rom 8:17). All things are theirs whether life or death or things present or things to come, all are theirs because they are Christ’s and Christ is God’s (1Co 3:22-23). They are united to Him in Whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge, and they are complete in Him Who is the head of all principality and power (Col 2:3, 10).

It is out of the measureless fullness of grace and truth, of wisdom and power, of goodness and love, of righteousness and faithfulness that resides in Him that God’s people draw for all their needs in this life and for the hope of the life to come. There is no truth, therefore, more suited to impart confidence and strength, comfort and joy in the Lord than this one of union with Christ. It also promotes sanctification, not only because all sanctifying grace is derived from Christ as the crucified and exalted Redeemer, but also because the recognition of fellowship with Christ and of the high privilege it entails incites to gratitude, obedience, and devotion. Union means also communion; and communion constrains a humble, reverent, loving walk with Him Who died and rose again that He might be our Lord. “But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him. He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked” (1Jo 2:5-6). “Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me” (Joh 15:4).

There is another phase of the subject of union with Christ that must not be omitted. If it were overlooked, there would be a serious defect in our understanding and appreciation of the implications of this union. These are the implications that arise from the relations of Christ to the other Persons of the Trinity and from our relations to the other Persons of the Trinity because of our union with Christ. Jesus Himself said, “I and my Father are one” (Joh 10:30). We should expect, therefore, that union with Christ would bring us into similar relation with the Father. This is exactly what our Lord Himself tells us: “If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him” (Joh 14:23). The thought is overwhelming, but it is unmistakable: the Father, as well as Christ, comes and makes His abode with the believer!

Perhaps even more striking is another word of Jesus: “Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me” (Joh 17:20-23). And not only is it the Father Who is united with believers and dwells in them; Jesus tells us likewise of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, “And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you” (Joh 14:16-17).

It is union, therefore, with the Father and with the Son and with the Holy Spirit that union with Christ draws along with it...Believers enter into the holy of holies of communion with the triune God, and they do so because they have been raised up together and made to sit together in the heavenlies in Christ Jesus (Eph 2:6). Their life is hid with Christ in God (Col 3:3). They draw nigh in full assurance of faith having their hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and their bodies washed with pure water because Christ is not entered into holy places made with hands but into heaven itself now to appear in the presence of God for them (Heb 9:24).

Brother, I do not think the issue is whether Election is union with Christ. That is undeniable. Election is the work of all three members of the Godhead with the Father being the member of the Godhead that gives the Elect to the Son (John 6:37). The Spirit is at work calling the Elect to repentance and faith in-time (the Effectual Call).

 

[Reynolds]

A Holy God does not punish sin?

But does he have to?

 

[Reynolds]

Does “sovereign” include the right to violate God’s word that “the wages of sin is death” and “I will punish ...”?

(For the record, I agree with you .)
For discussion sake, why cant He extend grace without a justice demand being satisfied?

 

[JonC]

A Holy God does not punish sin?

Can sin itself be punished?

This is what I mean when I say I left Calvinism because of the judicial philosophy upon which it was built.

You mistook that to mean I did not understand Calvinism, but by your question here you show that was an error.

I will let you off the hook for your earlier mistake, just be careful not to make sweeping and false claims in the future. We need to be able to back up our statements on these forums not just make wild accusations based on our feelings or emotions.

 

[JonC]

JonC,



You said that, but here is what a real Calvinist says; JOHN MURRAY;


Union with Christ is the central truth of the whole doctrine of salvation. All to which the people of God have been predestined in the eternal election of God, all that has been secured and procured for them in the once-for-all accomplishment of redemption, all of which they become the actual partakers in the application of redemption, and all that by God’s grace they will become in the state of consummated bliss is embraced within the compass of union and communion with Christ...It is significant that the election in Christ before the foundation of the world is election unto the adoption of sons. When Paul says that the Father chose a people in Christ before the foundation of the world that they should be holy, he also adds that in love He predestinated them unto adoption through Jesus Christ (Eph 1:4-5). Apparently, election to holiness is parallel to predestination to adoption—these are two ways of expressing the same great truth. They disclose to us the different facets that belong to the Father’s election. Hence, union with Christ and adoption are complementary aspects of this amazing grace. Union with Christ reaches its zenith in adoption and adoption has its orbit in union with Christ. The people of God are “heirs of God and joint-heirs with Christ” (Rom 8:17). All things are theirs whether life or death or things present or things to come, all are theirs because they are Christ’s and Christ is God’s (1Co 3:22-23). They are united to Him in Whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge, and they are complete in Him Who is the head of all principality and power (Col 2:3, 10).

It is out of the measureless fullness of grace and truth, of wisdom and power, of goodness and love, of righteousness and faithfulness that resides in Him that God’s people draw for all their needs in this life and for the hope of the life to come. There is no truth, therefore, more suited to impart confidence and strength, comfort and joy in the Lord than this one of union with Christ. It also promotes sanctification, not only because all sanctifying grace is derived from Christ as the crucified and exalted Redeemer, but also because the recognition of fellowship with Christ and of the high privilege it entails incites to gratitude, obedience, and devotion. Union means also communion; and communion constrains a humble, reverent, loving walk with Him Who died and rose again that He might be our Lord. “But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him. He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked” (1Jo 2:5-6). “Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me” (Joh 15:4).

There is another phase of the subject of union with Christ that must not be omitted. If it were overlooked, there would be a serious defect in our understanding and appreciation of the implications of this union. These are the implications that arise from the relations of Christ to the other Persons of the Trinity and from our relations to the other Persons of the Trinity because of our union with Christ. Jesus Himself said, “I and my Father are one” (Joh 10:30). We should expect, therefore, that union with Christ would bring us into similar relation with the Father. This is exactly what our Lord Himself tells us: “If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him” (Joh 14:23). The thought is overwhelming, but it is unmistakable: the Father, as well as Christ, comes and makes His abode with the believer!

Perhaps even more striking is another word of Jesus: “Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me” (Joh 17:20-23). And not only is it the Father Who is united with believers and dwells in them; Jesus tells us likewise of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, “And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you” (Joh 14:16-17).

It is union, therefore, with the Father and with the Son and with the Holy Spirit that union with Christ draws along with it...Believers enter into the holy of holies of communion with the triune God, and they do so because they have been raised up together and made to sit together in the heavenlies in Christ Jesus (Eph 2:6). Their life is hid with Christ in God (Col 3:3). They draw nigh in full assurance of faith having their hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and their bodies washed with pure water because Christ is not entered into holy places made with hands but into heaven itself now to appear in the presence of God for them (Heb 9:24).

I did not say that. @Reformed said that. I restated what @Reformed said.

Why do you believe I was not, and @Reformed is not, a "real Calvinist" because we view Calvinistic election to be based solely on the will of the Father? John Calvin stated the same thing.

R. C. Sproul stated the exact same thing - that election rests solely in the sovereign will of the Father(see Chosen by God). Why do you think Sproul misunderstood Calvinism?

Spurgeon stated the same thing (that we were chosen only by the will if the Father to salvation, those who are saved are given to Christ by the Father). Why do you believe Spurgeon was so confused about Calvinism?

Calvinism views election to salvation as resting on the sovereign will of the God alone. Those who are foreknown as being in Christ are in Christ because the Father has elected them and given them to the Son.

@Iconoclast, you do not understand Calvinism. I suspect some of our differences has been this fact. I incorrectly assumed you understood Reformed Theology. Divine election based solely on the sovereign will of God was the dividing point between Calvinism and Arminianism. To reject that as Calvinism is to reject Calvinism. This was where Arminius departed from Beza and how the whole controversy began.



(@Reformed, I did not credit you with the statement, although it has been made by many others, when I posted it here as I thought @Iconoclast would try and show it was a misunderstanding of Calvinism if he thought it came from me. I wanted to show why honest conversation cannot be had with him because of his agenda to catch people in their words rather than honestly discuss belief with the hope he would give it up and move on) .

 

[Iconoclast]

Can sin itself be punished?

This is what I mean when I say I left Calvinism because of the judicial philosophy upon which it was built.

You mistook that to mean I did not understand Calvinism, but by your question here you show that was an error.

I will let you off the hook for your earlier mistake, just be careful not to make sweeping and false claims in the future. We need to be able to back up our statements on these forums not just make wild accusations based on our feelings or emotions.

Guess what? Sin is committed by sinners.
Each and every sin is going to be punished in the sinner or the Divine substitute.
You like to call everything a"theory".
Jesus did not call it a theory when he told those in John 8 if you do not believe in Him you would die in your sins. Sins plural. Every idle word, and deed will be punished no matter how many "theories " you suggest as you deny penal substitutionary atonement.

 

[Iconoclast]

I did not say that. @Reformed said that. I restated what @Reformed said.

Why do you believe I was not, and @Reformed is not, a "real Calvinist" because we view Calvinistic election to be based solely on the will of the Father? John Calvin stated the same thing.

R. C. Sproul stated the exact same thing - that election rests solely in the sovereign will of the Father(see Chosen by God). Why do you think Sproul misunderstood Calvinism?

Spurgeon stated the same thing (that we were chosen only by the will if the Father to salvation, those who are saved are given to Christ by the Father). Why do you believe Spurgeon was so confused about Calvinism?

Calvinism views election to salvation as resting on the sovereign will of the God alone. Those who are foreknown as being in Christ are in Christ because the Father has elected them and given them to the Son.

@Iconoclast, you do not understand Calvinism. I suspect some of our differences has been this fact. I incorrectly assumed you understood Reformed Theology. Divine election based solely on the sovereign will of God was the dividing point between Calvinism and Arminianism. To reject that as Calvinism is to reject Calvinism. This was where Arminius departed from Beza and how the whole controversy began.



(@Reformed, I did not credit you with the statement, although it has been made by many others, when I posted it here as I thought @Iconoclast would try and show it was a misunderstanding of Calvinism if he thought it came from me. I wanted to show why honest conversation cannot be had with him because of his agenda to catch people in their words rather than honestly discuss belief with the hope he would give it up and move on) .

You suggested it was apart from Christ.
You suggested it was of the will of the Father as if it was not in union with Christ.
Those who speak of the Father giving the elect children to Christ always link it to saving union, and the adoption as sons.
You made no mention of it.
Honest conversation cannot be had with you because the very thing you do, you accuse others of.
No where did you mention Union with Christ at all
I did not want to bring it up because now you will engage in a cover up, jump on the bandwagon claiming you believe it, edit and delete posts, continue to conceal your past posts, and all manner of shady conduct.
Your poorly worded posts, full of double speak, and contradictions are not worth the time to work through.
If it comes down to it you use your disclaimer or claim you were "just joking".
That is why interacting with your posts is as enjoyable as listening to Nancy Pelosi.

 

[JonC]

Guess what? Sin is committed by sinners.
Each and every sin is going to be punished in the sinner or the Divine substitute.
You like to call everything a"theory".
Jesus did not call it a theory when he told those in John 8 if you do not believe in Him you would die in your sins. Sins plural. Every idle word, and deed will be punished no matter how many "theories " you suggest as you deny penal substitutionary atonement.

Sins are manifestations of our sinfulness (they are bad fruit pointing to a bad tree).

I disagree with the judicial philosophy presupposed by Calvinism. I understand it, but I believe it is wrong.

My complaint is that you seem to think anyone who left Calvinism did so because they do not understand Calvinism. But between us you have not been able to show even one thing I have misunderstood about Calvinism - in fact you have proved the opposite.

I understand exactly why Calvinism views sins as having to be punished and why they teach that the sins of the elect were transferred to Christ and punished instead of God punishing us. And I believe the judicial philosophy under that idea is wrong.

 

[JonC]

You suggested it was apart from Christ.
You suggested it was of the will of the Father as if it was not in union with Christ.
Those who speak of the Father giving the elect children to Christ always link it to saving union, and the adoption as sons.
You made no mention of it.
Honest conversation cannot be had with you because the very thing you do, you accuse others of.
No where did you mention Union with Christ at all
I did not want to bring it up because now you will engage in a cover up, jump on the bandwagon claiming you believe it, edit and delete posts, continue to conceal your past posts, and all manner of shady conduct.
Your poorly worded posts, full of double speak, and contradictions are not worth the time to work through.
If it comes down to it you use your disclaimer or claim you were "just joking".
That is why interacting with your posts is as enjoyable as listening to Nancy Pelosi.

I stated that election (God's choosing) was not based on those who would be in Christ but based on the will of God (those chosen are given to Christ).

Your idea that God elected people on the basis they are in Christ is Arminianism (Reformation Arminianism). The contemporary Calvinistic view of "foreknowledge" implies a relationship but this is not the basis for election.

You do not understand Calvinism as evidenced by rejecting the Calvinistic basis of election as the sovereign will of God and instead combining this with the relational meaning of foreknowledge. Calvinism does not base election on Christ but on the will of the Father (those elected are in Christ because they have been chosen by the Father and given to the Son) .

You need to study a little more on this topic. You have grasped advanced ideas but have misunderstood the very basic things of Calvinism.

 

[Iconoclast]

Some people know of the trinity and deny it.

If a person actually knows it, and denies it, there is a word for that...an unbeliever.
Anyone can say or parrot the 5 points.
That does not mean they understand it.
There was a man who would go onstage and recite the whole Gospel of Mark, and he was not a Christian.
The natural man cannot receive the things of the Spirit of God...even if he can quote it.

 

[JonC]

Some people know of the trinity and deny it.

If a person actually knows it, and denies it, there is a word for that...an unbeliever.
Anyone can say or parrot the 5 points.
That does not mean they understand it.
There was a man who would go onstage and recite the whole Gospel of Mark, and he was not a Christian.
The natural man cannot receive the things of the Spirit of God...even if he can quote it.

If someone understands the doctrine of the Trinity but denies it, is it honest or dishonest to say he does not understand the doctrine of the Trinity?

What I am rejecting I understand. I affirm Calvinism except for its teachings based on secular judicial philosophy (I believe it incorrect).

By your standard here I am correct in saying you do not understand Calvinism. You can quote it but in dealing with Calvinism you have denied it (by rejecting election is based solely on the will of God - by basing election on foreknowledge).

You should be telling us why you left Calvinism (why you rejected election based solely on the sovereign will of God).

And by your statement you have made unfounded accusations against others - you actually stated many of us do not understand while admitting you cannot point to a reason backing up your false claims.

 

[Iconoclast]

You cannot divide biblical foreknowledge
[Which you deny as mere prescience] as the redeemed being outside of the mediator and surety, and come out correct.
While it is the Father who gives to the Son, by the Spirit, the whole trinity is involved.

There is no such thing as a redemptive election that does not center in Christ and His substitutionary cross work.
The giving is attributed to the Father, as the actual cross atonement is the Son, and the giving of the new heart to the work of the Spirit.
It is never revealed as fragmented.
You are fond of mentioning Jonathan Edward's, in His great work of God in the History of Redemption right in the opening portion he proclaims that creation itself could not have taken place without the Son in place as the Mediator.
The Father in election has Christ front and center as the destination of the elect, with all His offices in view.
Election is not a cruise to nowhere.

 

[Iconoclast]

If someone understands the doctrine of the Trinity but denies it, is it honest or dishonest to say he does not understand the doctrine of the Trinity?

What I am rejecting I understand. I affirm Calvinism except for its teachings based on secular judicial philosophy (I believe it incorrect).

By your standard here I am correct in saying you do not understand Calvinism. You can quote it but in dealing with Calvinism you have denied it (by rejecting election is based solely on the will of God - by basing election on foreknowledge).

And by your statement you have made unfounded accusations against others - you actually stated many of us do not understand while admitting you cannot point to a reason backing up your false claims.

Do not put words in my mouth, even though that is what you delight to do.
My claims stand and my reasons for posting what I do also stand.
Everytime you put words in someone else's mouth I will call attention to it, as it is dishonest .
After reading your posts and accusations I feel the need to shower now.

 

[JonC]

You cannot divide biblical foreknowledge
[Which you deny as mere prescience] as the redeemed being outside of the mediator and surety, and come out correct.
While it is the Father who gives to the Son, by the Spirit, the whole trinity is involved.

There is no such thing as a redemptive election that does not center in Christ and His substitutionary cross work.
The giving is attributed to the Father, as the actual cross atonement is the Son, and the giving of the new heart to the work of the Spirit.
It is never revealed as fragmented.
You are fond of mentioning Jonathan Edward's, in His great work of God in the History of Redemption right in the opening portion he proclaims that creation itself could not have taken place without the Son in place as the Mediator.
The Father in election has Christ front and center as the destination of the elect, with all His offices in view.
Election is not a cruise to nowhere.

You are confusing a few things.

When I spoke about prescience it was quoting John Calvin (in the Institutes Calvin presented foreknowledge as prescience - God knew beforehand because He decreed it to occur).

I never said Christ is not in view. I simply stated a Calvinistic fundamental - election is based solely on the sovereign will of the Father. Election is not based on Christ but people are elected to Christ.

You do not understand Calvinism. You presume anyone who disagrees with you do so out of ignorance because you have been enlightened by God to hold your view.

I am not faulting you for your lack of understanding regarding Calvinism (I also do not hold the position). But I am questioning how you interact and how you hold what you do believe.

If you were not going to engage but instead just wanted to tell me what you think I believe or understand then why did you post here? I started this thread to discuss why people are not Calvinists (both sides could benefit). But you come here with your agenda.