I very definitely have no dog in doctrinal disputes about Calvin's teachings. I'm not even sure what anti-Calvinists are called, beyond "anti-Calvinists." It's never really seemed a necessary part of my life in Christ to research and decide and declare if I'm a Calvinist or an anti-.
The formal theology associated with Calvin's name is doubtless flawed: that's only what we should expect of anyone's theology, including our own. Believing any human mind can substantially encompass the reality of God is a first step toward idolatry...taken in pride. None of us can, and none of us do. So I'm also pretty sure the theology of Calvinism's opponents is just as flawed.
It seems a mistake to follow either to the extent we identify by one "side's" name, or by the other's. Taking "sides" in theology is the same as taking "sides" in politics, football, nationalism, or any of the other human constructs to which men give their allegiance: that is to say, idols.
"Taking sides," or "factions," is not a fruit of Christ's Spirit any more than idolatry is. Galatians 5:20 says "dividings" or "factions" grow from our flesh. The Greek word there for "dividings" is haireseis, from which we get our English word "heresy."
The rhetorical question in I Corinthians 1:13 affirms that Christ is not divided. Since Jesus identified Himself as "the Truth" (John 14:6), Christians, above all other people, must believe that "the Truth" is not divided. There are no "sides" in Truth, no "your Truth" and "my Truth:" and the only "anti-" connected with it is denial of Truth. The latter is what Jesus said is the distinguishing character of "the father of lies" (john 8:44).
Quoting Calvin here has nothing to do with identifying as a Calvinist or an anti-Calvinist. I cite Calvin because I consider he speaks scriptural truth.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"We are not only subject to the authority of princes who perform their office toward us uprightly and faithfully as they ought, but also to the authority of all who, by whatever means, have got control of affairs...that whoever they may be, they have their authority solely from him....they who rule unjustly and incompetently have been raised up by him to punish the wickedness of the people; that all equally have been endowed with that holy majesty with which he has invested lawful power....a wicked king is the Lord’s wrath upon the earth...thus nothing more would be said of a [wicked] king than of a robber who seizes your possessions, of an adulterer who pollutes your marriage bed, or of a murderer who seeks to kill you. For Scripture reckons all such calamities among God’s curses. But...In a very wicked man utterly unworthy of all honor, provided he has the public power in his hands, that noble and divine power resides which the Lord has by his Word given to the ministers of his justice and judgment. Accordingly, he should be held in the same reverence and esteem by his subjects, in so far as public obedience is concerned, in which they would hold the best of kings if he were given to them.”
-- John Calvin, Institutes of the
Christian Religion, Book 4, Chapter 20, Section 25
"He now commends to us obedience to princes...that the Lord has designed in this way to provide for the tranquillity of the good, and to restrain the waywardness of the wicked...for except the fury of the wicked be resisted, and the innocent be protected from their violence, all things would come to an entire confusion...
For since a wicked prince is the Lord’s scourge to punish the sins of the people, let us remember, that it happens through our fault that this excellent blessing of God is turned into a curse.”
-- John Calvin, Commentary on Romans (Chapter 13, vv. 3-4)
