I'm sorry, I try hard to let each person state their own positions and not distort them. My apologies.
We still have a difference on what is "secondary." I disagree with that what God "does" is not essential. I think your support of much of Calvin is an essential difference with, say, Orthodox Lutherans.
I think the view of God you describe is closer to pre-Moses than it is to post-Christ, and that is a very essential difference with Christian Orthodoxy.
As for the other questions, they were answered sufficiently. I would that I could ask if you agreed with Luther on the Peasants War or on burning down Jew's houses, etc..
Apologies again for any offense not in the spirit of courteous, yet passionate, discussion and debate.
thanks for your reply...
What I meant about what God "does" specifically regarding Arminian "light" which is what most Arminians are as opposed to Pelagian, was whether one believes that God chose one as opposed to one choosing God doesn't NECESSARILY affect one's salvation. I have many non-Calvinist friends. It's really okay that they don't view Scripture the way I do. They have come to Christ and trust in Him alone for their salvation. The latter is essential. The former is not.
As to agreeing with Luther on the peasant war etc., I agree with him no more on that than you do the Popes. Luther wasn't acting out of sola scriptura there. He was being a product of the Middle Ages which he was on the heels of. Nothing in Scripture says burn the houses of those who disagree with the gospel.
I do appreciate our dialog. You are not discourteous. We are having a discussion. We disagree, but can certainly be civil about it. I do not demand you come to see things my way. I wouldn't. I point you towards Scripture, for that is what I believe. But, if you decide to go with tradition we can still dialog with a spirit of civility. That is impossible for some posters I have run into.