True, some scriptures that speak of salvation actually refers to timely matters such as deliverance and healing etc. But there are scriptures that you claim speaks of timely salvation that speaks of eternal salvation. One such example is Mark 16:16. Of course, with your view of eternal justification there are scriptures that do not "harmonise" with your idea, hence you will have to somehow make them say that which fits your idea.
Since you have said:
It is clear to me that you also deny the call to and the duty of the elect to repent and believe (Mark 1:14-15). This is really a kind of hyper-calvinism that you promote. Who taught you this? Where did you catch up these ideas? Where do you, or where did you, go to church?
True, some calvinists have taught eternal justification, some of them prominent men like Gill and Kuyper. However, Calvin did not teach this. Hence it, as well as other antinominan deviations, are called various forms of hyper-calvinism.
Some calvinists will sometimes limit the error of eternal justification to be "doctrinal" antinomianism, however its implications will certainly also always mean "practical" antinomianism, where sin is not viewed as sin. Instead of only the sinner being justified, his sin will also be justified. Which is typical of deadly antinomian heresy.
While eternal justification advocates are saying they are keen not to mix in the slightest trace of "contradiction" in the order of salvation, and that they stand for the immutability of God, it is nothing but a presumptous way of wrongly interpreting (in effect denying) scripture that actually attacks not only related biblical concepts but also the very foundation itself of the reformation, which is justification by faith.
