A lot of you guys want to try and refute Calvinism because of the people who first articulated the Biblical concepts its states. I still feel this a weak, ad hominem attack. We need to address the issues in light of Scripture, not because of the righteousness (and lack thereof) of the men involved. Augustine may have had more impact on theology (not just Calvinism, but ALL theology) than any other person in history. Accusing Calvinism of being catholic is obviously absurd. But, here's my point. Attacks on the men involved is weak and veiled arrogance. It also shows ignorance of the issues. Plus, it can be manipulated in any way. For those that have studied history, you know that the lines of theological history flow in weird ways. People change their minds, people get taught something then rebel. Luther was catholic, then left. Because of that people on this board claim that Luther never could shake his catholic roots. Well, Arminius studied under Theodore Beza. Beza, of course, was John Calvin's right-hand man. So, Arminius' roots go through Calvin. You guys claim Calvin was catholic because of his roots (wrong, but you still claim it), and Arminius' shares those roots because he follows the line of Calvin. Thus, Arminius is catholic as well (using y'alls reasoning). This makes everyones beliefs based in catholic thought. This should come as no surprise considering there was only one church for so long, but those on here who use this weak argument have shown a lack of understanding of history. I think I have shown right here that no matter what side of the discussion you are on, one cannot escape that roots are traced back to catholic teachers. So, we muct focus on what the Scripture says, and discuss that. The ad hominem attacks must stop because they profit nothing. Let's focus on what Scripture says....that's what we should have been doing all along.