OPTION 1: If I, as a non-Calvinistic believer, am wrong about my soteriology, then I could only be wrong because God so decreed it, right? God must have decided, for His own secret self-glorifying purposes, not to grant me enough grace to see my error and adopt Calvinism. So, if I am in error then I'm in error by God's unchanging divine decree and it ultimately must be a decision God made for his highest glory. Right so far? Or not? If not, then do you affirm the contra-causal free choice of believers? OPTION 2: If, however, I am right and Calvinism is false, then I have judged the Word of God correctly as a 'response-able' free moral agent and I would be defending the truth of God's glory against false Calvinistic teaching. And the Calvinists, also as free moral agents, would be held responsible for their errors. CONCLUSION: So, my conclusion is that non-Calvinism is the best position to hold, because you really can't go wrong either way given that in either option I'm fulfilling the highest purpose of bringing God the greatest amount of Glory. However, if you, as a Calvinist, are wrong; just consider the damage, disunity and potential consequences of your error in distracting from God's glory and His gracious provisions for the entire world. Is that conclusion logically incorrect? If so, how so? Be specific.