My Theological Stance after Searching with All of My Heart

[Steven Yeadon]

About what? John Calvin was never a ruler in Geneva. He never served over the Counsel, and while very influential his authority was limited to the Church. In other words, he is often attributed with sentencing people to death but in reality this was a sentence beyond his authority (all he could do was refer people to the civil government). Sometimes they listened to Calvin, but often times they did not.

I am sorry then, I retract my claim that Calvin ruled as a tyrant in Geneva.

-EDIT-

My history professors were wrong then.

 

[Van]

Thank you, I understand the verse better now. I may be reading way too much into it.

I edited my post some more after you posted.

 

[Yeshua1]

Yes, he did say some dreadful things.

However, I still contend his break from the papists was reluctant. Had the papists not challenged his writing, he possibly would have never have departed from the Roman church.

Politics and political substances had more to do with pushing him and the reformation, than did his desire to separate from the ungodly. I wondered if his legal training was more directive and one reason the items I listed that reflect papist teaching were never been purged, for they had no Scripture support.




I, too, thought the same, but a recent history account, the PBS "Inside the Court of Henry VIII," about Henry and in particular his personality and temperment behind his character revealed that Henry did indeed cluctch the rosary.

The rosary was not "band" at the time. Henry did not have rational coherence the last 24 hours or more, and although the doctors knew possibly a week or more that he was going to die, there is no account that he was told. It would have to be that the account of squeezing the hand of Cranmer be held as more unlikely than him clutching to religious training and tradition that he had set aside for personal gains.

Politics, as in the case of Luther, also was revealed by Henry's death being kept silent, even from servants who would bring meals to the chamber doors for two days.

Political power played more in living and dying of the reformation characters than did the Scriptures.

In reading about Cranmer and his accomplishments, a person just cannot escape that he published alloed on the political will of the times, he had to hide his marriage for some years until political favor allowed the introduction, and eventually re-embraced the papists though admittedly tortured into doing again by the wind of political expediency.

But, then did not politics call for the crucifixion?

Both Calvin and Luther had the big mistake problem of trying to get the RCC to reform internally, but they should have took the truth God revealed to them and made a clean break with Rome, as they , especially calvin, rediscovered true biblical salvation, but they did not reform far enough, as basically kept still a lot of the RCC views on sacraments and E scatology for example.

 

[Yeshua1]

I am sorry then, I retract my claim that Calvin ruled as a tyrant in Geneva.

-EDIT-

My history professors were wrong then.

You were mistaken, but you did not knowingly lie!

 

[JonC]

I am sorry then, I retract my claim that Calvin ruled as a tyrant in Geneva.

-EDIT-

My history professors were wrong then.

Yes. Your history professor (s) should have been aware of the Grand Councel of Geneva and the extent of Calvin's authority and influence.

 

[TCassidy]

Yes. Your history professor (s) should have been aware of the Grand Councel of Geneva and the extent of Calvin's authority and influence.

Agreed. John Calvin not only was not a member of the City Council, he was not even a citizen (he was and remained a French citizen until his death in 1564). After fleeing persecution in France, in 1536 he moved first to Basel then on to Geneva. But after only 18 months, he was banished from the city for disagreeing with the city council. That was in 1538.

Calvin went to Strasbourg, where he pastored for three years and also married Idellete de Bure, the widow of an Anabaptist, and raised her two children as his own.

He returned to Geneva in 1541 and was appointed by the city council as pastor of the Protestant church (labeled as "Lutheran" as many dissenting churches were labeled at that time) in Geneva.

When Michael Servetus said he would go to Geneva, which had become a center of Protestantism in Europe, Calvin wrote him and tried to persuade him to stay away as coming to Geneva would be dangerous for him due to his heterodox views on the Trinity. He ignored Calvin's warning and came, and preached his heresy, anyway. Calvin did denounce his false teaching, but it was the city council that ordered him arrested, tried him, and condemned him to death. Calvin had nothing to do with it. In fact Calvin tried to intervene on Servetus's behalf, first pleading for mercy then, when that failed, asked that he be hanged rather than burned at the stake. Hanging being much quicker and relatively painless when compared to being burned at the stake.

 

[TCassidy]

What a critical study of history will show is that John Calvin did attempt to establish a "Theocracy" in Geneva, much to the chagrin of the city council.

Calvin believed there were four officers who should control both the church and the city. Those four offices were:

Pastors conducted the services, preached, administered the ordinances, and cared for the welfare of parishioners.

The teachers lectured in Latin on the Old and New Testaments. The audience consisted mainly of the older schoolboys and ministers, but anyone could attend.

Elders kept an eye on spiritual affairs of the general population.

Social welfare was the job of the deacons. They governed the local hospital, made sure the poor and widows were fed, and supervised the alms-house which cared for the indigent. The deacons were so effective, Geneva had no beggars.

 

[JonC]

Agreed. John Calvin not only was not a member of the City Council, he was not even a citizen (he was and remained a French citizen until his death in 1564). After fleeing persecution in France in 1536 he moved first to Basel then on to Geneva. But after only 18 months, he was banished from the city for disagreeing with the city council. That was in 1538.

Calvin went to Strasbourg, where he pastored for three years and also married Idellete de Bure, the widow of an Anabaptist, and raised her two children as his own.

He returned to Geneva in 1541 and was appointed by the city council as pastor of the Protestant church (labeled as "Lutheran" as many dissenting churches were labeled at that time) in Geneva.

When Michael Servetus said he would go to Geneva, which had become a center of Protestantism in Europe, Calvin wrote him and tried to persuade him to stay away as coming to Geneva would be dangerous for him due to his heterodox views on the Trinity. He ignored Calvin's warning and came, and preached his heresy, anyway. Calvin did denounce his false teaching, but it was the city council that ordered him arrested, tried him, and condemned him to death. Calvin had nothing to do with it. In fact Calvin tried to intervene on Servetus's behalf, first pleading for mercy then, when that failed, asked that he be hanged rather than burned at the stake. Hanging being much quicker and relatively painless when compared to being burned at the stake.

Ironically Ami Perrin (an opponent of John Calvin) sentenced Servetus to death. Maybe he knew in the future Calvin would catch the blame.

I have read that Calvin's opposition to the council's method of execution was motivated more by politics than by mercy (that burning pointed to a matter of religion while hanging or beheading pointed to a matter of state). But I don't know this to be fact.

 

[Yeshua1]

Agreed. John Calvin not only was not a member of the City Council, he was not even a citizen (he was and remained a French citizen until his death in 1564). After fleeing persecution in France in 1536 he moved first to Basel then on to Geneva. But after only 18 months, he was banished from the city for disagreeing with the city council. That was in 1538.

Calvin went to Strasbourg, where he pastored for three years and also married Idellete de Bure, the widow of an Anabaptist, and raised her two children as his own.

He returned to Geneva in 1541 and was appointed by the city council as pastor of the Protestant church (labeled as "Lutheran" as many dissenting churches were labeled at that time) in Geneva.

When Michael Servetus said he would go to Geneva, which had become a center of Protestantism in Europe, Calvin wrote him and tried to persuade him to stay away as coming to Geneva would be dangerous for him due to his heterodox views on the Trinity. He ignored Calvin's warning and came, and preached his heresy, anyway. Calvin did denounce his false teaching, but it was the city council that ordered him arrested, tried him, and condemned him to death. Calvin had nothing to do with it. In fact Calvin tried to intervene on Servetus's behalf, first pleading for mercy then, when that failed, asked that he be hanged rather than burned at the stake. Hanging being much quicker and relatively painless when compared to being burned at the stake.

NONE of those facts get mentioned in many church history texts!

 

[TCassidy]

I have read that Calvin's opposition to the council's method of execution was motivated more by politics than by mercy (that burning pointed to a matter of religion while hanging or beheading pointed to a matter of state). But I don't know this to be fact.

I have heard that too, usually from those who would attack Calvin on any subject be it true or not. But I have never found any evidence to support the claim. But Calvin stated in his letter to William Farel, "I desired that the severity of the punishment be mitigated." (Letters of John Calvin, Carlisle, Penn: Banner of Truth Trust, 1980, page159. ISBN 0-85151-323-9)

 

[Steven Yeadon]

Ah, thank all of you very much for setting me straight. In doing my own research I am finding that my disagreement with Calvin is much more like my disagreement with Luther. The two men are very similar, which is what I was taught in seminary. Calvin is thoroughly Reformed though compared to Luther.

 

[Rippon]

Correct. Nor can we romanticize the times in which Luther, Calvin, and Whitfield lived in.

That's Whitefield, even though it's pronounced as you spelled it. He was aptly named.

 

[Rippon]

Thank you to my defenders who said I was not a liar.

I am sorry for saying you lied. If what JonC said is a correct distinction between telling falsehoods and lying --then you told falsehoods. But please be careful when making severe charges against someone unless you check it out first.

I am very, very sorry if my historical understanding of Calvin is incorrect in regards to Geneva. I am merely reciting what I was told in history classes. Of course, the professors could have told me wrong, as they seemed biased.

You seem to be a teachable guy, and for that I am thankful.

How long has it been since you had those classes?

Of course we tend to respect our teachers, but if some decent amount of time has gone by we should be able to re-evaluate what we have been taught. We need to check things out for ourselves.

Over the years here on the BB there have been a number of posters who have said wickedly false things about Calvin.
I got trigger-happy to nip it in the bud.

Thank you for your submissive spirit Steven.

 

[Rippon]

Ah, thank all of you very much for setting me straight. In doing my own research I am finding that my disagreement with Calvin is much more like my disagreement with Luther. The two men are very similar, which is what I was taught in seminary. Calvin is thoroughly Reformed though compared to Luther.

The two men were as different as day and night. Luther was like a bull in a China shop. Calvin was much more mild --not a natural fighter as Luther was. But God raised up Luther to go back to the Bible. Calvin was more reserved --a thinker and organizer. And the latter was more pastoral than Luther.

Luther could be like a volcano at times -like his treatment of Zwingli. If nine points could be agreed upon one point of difference tee him off. Calvin believed if he could spend two hours with someone face to face he would be able to persuade them to agree with him. His interactions with Bullinger, for instance.

Calvin admired Luther very much and said he would still love him even if he was called a devil. Now that's saying something.

 

[Rippon]

Agreed. John Calvin not only was not a member of the City Council, he was not even a citizen (he was and remained a French citizen until his death in 1564).

Calvin became a citizen in Geneva in 1559.

After fleeing persecution in France in 1536 he moved first to Basel then on to Geneva.

That was two years earlier in 1534.

Calvin had nothing to do with it.

Actually Calvin was a witness for the prosecution.

In fact Calvin tried to intervene on Servetus's behalf, first pleading for mercy then, when that failed, asked that he be hanged rather than burned at the stake. Hanging being much quicker and relatively painless when compared to being burned at the stake.

It was not hanging, but beheading.

 

[Rippon]

NONE of those facts get mentioned in many church history texts!

On the contrary, most do mention actual historical facts.

 

[TCassidy]

Calvin became a citizen in Geneva in 1559.

Servetus was burned in 1553.

That was two years earlier in 1534.

Nope. He stayed only a few months in Basel and arrived in Geneva the same year, 1536.

Actually Calvin was a witness for the prosecution.

Nope. He never appeared before the council.

It was hanging, but beheading.

The civil penalty for citizens was hanging or beheading. Burning at the stake was reserved for crimes against the church.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Thank you, I understand the verse better now. I may be reading way too much into it.

If you have listened to Van, I'm afraid you do not understand John 6:39-40 at all. He has a theological system that is utterly crazy, but which he is determined to try and push upon the unwary on this board.
There is nothing vague about God the Father giving the Son a people to redeem. It is repeated in John 10:29 and John 17:2, 6. Outside of John's Gospel, the clearest place to see this teaching is probably Ephesians 1:3-14. Here the work in salvation of Father Son and Holy Spirit is explained. In verses 3-6, it is the Father who has chosen His people in eternity past and predestined them to be adopted as sons, 'to the praise of His glorious grace.' In verses 6-12, it is the work of the Son who has redeemed these same people by the shedding of His blood, 'to the praise of His glory.' In verses 13-14, the Holy Spirit seals those same people to the day of redemption-- the Spirit Himself being the seal guaranteeing the redemption of 'those who are God's possession-- to the praise of His glory.'

What astonishing mercy and power:
In accord with his pleasure and will
He created each planet, each flower,
Every galaxy, microbe, and hill.
He suspended the planet in space
To the praise of his glorious grace.

With despicable self-love and rage,
We rebelled and fell under the curse.
Yet God did not rip out the page
And destroy all who love the perverse.
No, he chose us to make a new race,
To the praise of his glorious grace.

Providentially ruling all things
To conform to the end he designed,
He mysteriously governs, and brings
His eternal wise plans into time.
He works out every step, every trace,
To the praise of his glorious grace.

Long before the creation began,
He foreknew those he’d ransom in Christ;
Long before time’s cold hour-glass ran,
He ordained the supreme sacrifice.
In the cross he removed our disgrace,
To the praise of his glorious grace.

We were blessed in the heavenly realms
Long before being included in Christ.
Since we heard the good news, overwhelmed,
We reach forward to seize Paradise.
We shall see him ourselves, face to face,
To the praise of his glorious grace.

Don Carson

 

[Rippon]

Servetus was burned in 1553.

What has that to do with what I said?

You stated that Calvin was not a citizen of Geneva until his death in 1564.

I simply told you that he became a citizen of Geneva in 1559.

Nope. He stayed only a few months in Basel and arrived in Geneva the same year, 1536.

You claimed he fled France in 1536. I said no, it was two years earlier in 1534. Allow me to be even more specific --it was mid-October during the Placard Affair.

Nope. He never appeared before the council

I had told you that Calvin was a witness for the prosecution of Servetus. It's an historical fact.

The civil penalty for citizens was hanging or beheading. Burning at the stake was reserved for crimes against the church.

You claimed that Calvin pled for the hanging of Servetus. I told you that you were mistaken. Calvin pleaded for a more merciful beheading --not hanging.

 

[TCassidy]

What has that to do with what I said?

Everything.

You stated that Calvin was not a citizen of Geneva until his death in 1564.

No, I didn't. Go back and read what I really said rather than what you wish I had said.

I simply told you that he became a citizen of Geneva in 1559.

I know that. It is irrelevant to this discussion.

I had told you that Calvin was a witness for the prosecution of Servetus. It's an historical fact.

Nope. He never appeared before the council. His letters condemning Servetus were entered but he never testified.

You claimed that Calvin pled for the hanging of Servetus. I told you that you were mistaken. Calvin pleaded for a more merciful beheading --not hanging.

He begged for mercy and a less painful execution. His pleas were ignored.