Maybe I should post this somewhere in a forum where those new to Calvinism can post, but, I do not have access on other forums and have decided to post this here.  I must admit, what I am about to write about, I am still working on.  I hope it is ok for me to be a work in progress.  Also, I hope I am not blundering into raising some emotional difference of opinion among Calvinists.  If I am on thin ice here, feel free to remove this post.

I have had a passing interest in the John 3:16 conference of the SBC and Dr. David Allens use of the term "Hyper-Calvinist" as a name calling tactic.  He used the term "hyper-Calvinist" for what is actually one form of standard Calvinism.  To defend his point of view he quoted Phil Johnson's blog.  Of course Phil Johnson responded ( http://teampyro.blogspot.com/2008/11/you-may-be-hyper-calvinist-if.html ) and denied that Allen has correctly read his primer on Hyper-Calvinism ( http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/articles/hypercal.htm ).

Personally, I enjoyed an analogy Phil Johnson made that if high Calvinists are Hypers, then Arminians like David Allen are Open Theists.  Phil Johnson said...
"[color=#4000FF]Critics on all sides would do well to try harder to understand that. I rather suspect Dr. Allen would be somewhat perturbed if his Calvinist critics incessantly argued that his view of a god with eternally unfulfilled longings is really nothing more than the doctrine of Open Theism[/color]."  While that statement makes me smile, I feel some caution about taking that any further.  If Calvinists accused Dr. Allen of Open Theism, that would be to lower ourselves to the same moral and shallow level of rhetoric that Dr. Allen and many Arminians use.

The whole thing, seemed like a divide and conquor strategy by Dr. Allen.  Hopefully the whole issue serves to unify Calvinists of slightly different opinions more then separate them.

I am interested in the statements of other Calvinists on this issue.  As for me, while I am still working on this, I have learned that God "commands all me everywhere to repent" and he "has no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live."  I think this is the issue.  What is the nature of Gods revealed will.  How is his revealed will different from his decree?  Is his revealed will different then his decree?  What is the relationship?

Perhaps you could also post this in a forum for people new to Calvinism, but I think your post fits perfectly here. So far as your being a work in progress, I imagine that if someone here is not a work in progress, they're speaking from the grave ;) .

While I think people use the term 'hyper-Calvinism' as a name-calling tactic, I think their more immediate goal is to alienate a particular brand of Calvinist, likely the most sure of the Calvinists, yet more likely those Calvinists who the accuser dislikes. That is the tactic that Christians, Calvinists and otherwise, need to avoid. The motive therein is to attack a person by thrusting them into an unpopular category rather than dealing with their beliefs and resulting actions.

Regarding your quote from the passage in Ezekiel, it's been the single passage that I have yet to properly understand in regard to Calvinism. But, I should first say that there are numerous such passages in Scripture where the language is a bit confusing to me, leaving me to wonder about the true meaning of the passage. This Ezekiel passage, however, is the only such passage I can find which appears to me to bare on Calvinist doctrine. I'll be interested in seeing what others may have to say in regard to it and in regard to your further questions.

Peace in Christ,
David