Of course, I have the sneaking suspicion that types such as 9/11 and Freewiller are not actually interested in truth (or Scripture either, for that matter).

http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/articles/hypercal.htm

http://www.spurgeon.org/calvinis.htm

I forgot to add this. Every OT and NT saint that has died and gone on to glory, as well as every sinner OT or NT that has died, they are all to the man, woman, or child, unrepentant eternal Calvinists. Every saint in Glory can only praise the free grace of God that mercifully elected them unto salvation before the foundation of the world. And every sinner roasting in Hell glorifies God that His wrath and eternal condemnation of vessels fitted only for destruction are fully and eternally satisfied. And even the angels themselves are elect according to God's sovereignty, according to 1 Timothy 5:21, though I still need more study of the issue. Bottom line: God can do whatever He wants, and whatever He does is good by definition, because He is the author and enforcer of goodness.

See? Arius, Pelagius, the Wesley brothers, Jacob Arminius, Charles Finney, et al, have all repented and know the truth now.

And God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, as well as all the writers of the Bible and the Apostles themselves, are all still Calvinists regardless. It's just no one would be calling them such, as the theological label invented to describe it would be different. However, God in His rich sovereignty chose not only to reveal His Calvinism and the beauty and majesty of Sovereign Grace, He also chose "Calvinism" as the official moniker, if you will (or even if you won't).

I personally couldn't have cared less about John Calvin when I first became a Calvinist, and I am developing only historical interest now. I will not be worshipping at the Shrine of Calvin dedicated to a man with moral failures who in some ways may have been weak on the sovereignty of God in the Atonement doctrine of Christ, or at least did not fully express Limited Atonement as fully as I would have preferred. I didn't become a Calvinist because of John Calvin. Most Calvinists don't (in fact, every single fellow Calvinist I've ever spoken to, uses the Bible for his or her defense of Calvinism). In short, we're Calvinists simply because it's Biblical.

DB, simple logic escapes you, I see. I have done no such thing as you accuse here, and though you might be blind to my defense, I will defend my actions here. I in no way attribute the nature and character of John Calvin to God or Jesus Christ by affirming that above. Calvinism is simply a theological nickname for a doctrinal system that itself was neither invented nor depends on John Calvin, though by some ironic twists of fate (GASP! I said, "fate" that must mean I'm a secret fatalist showing my true colors a la Freewillicker...No, it's merely a figure of speech) has had his name loaned to the system historically. If John Calvin had never been born, Calvinism would still exist. We would just be calling it something else.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers%2022%20:25;&version=49;

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Peter%204:16-18;&version=49;

I have no desire to blaspheme God, incorrectly characterize Him, or defame His standards or character. If you properly understood sovereign grace, you would not be leveling this baseless accusation. So allow me to ask you a question, which you need not answer except to yourself: if God is perfectly good, what do you have against His sovereignty?

Hi Peter: I suppose the Texan way of saying thanks is "Much Obliged!" but I've never used it, so I guess I'm not a good Texan. So you'll have to settle for Thank You and a happy face.

As for the sovereign grace of God, I only wish I understood it better so I could adore Christ more and worship Him with the proper reverence, and that will never happen this side of eternity.

http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/topic/fivesolas.html

Because you accuse Biblical doctrine of gnostic antinomianism, you reveal not only your ignorance of soteriology, but evidence of your complete unfamiliarity with the Gospel itself: that the righteousness of Christ alone is sufficient, that salvation is by Grace alone, and that this is accomplished by Faith alone (with no confidence in the flesh, and no expectation that carnal works can ever please a thrice-Holy God). If you cannot understand that Grace of God the Father converts and transforms the sinner in his or her carnality into a saint of Jesus Christ and a life of holiness made possible and certain by divine energy of the Holy Spirit alone, that makes me sorrowfully suspect that you are not a recipient of that Grace and a vessel of that transformation wrought by God. If you are unfamiliar to the Biblical Gospel, you may very well be a complete stranger to it. And I do not mean that unkindly, but soberly.

Of course, this does not rule out gentlemanly disagreements.