Is Arminianism heresy?

[Rebel]

Another of way of putting it is "abusus non tollit usum". Even if Calvin was guilty of everything he is accused of, it does not impugn the Reformed view of predestination and election (i.e. Calvinism).

Both are/were corrupt. It just so happens that the latter sprang from the former.

And there is no "if" involved. Calvin was guilty. Period. His own words prove it. It doesn't matter who cites or quotes those words, the fact is that Calvin himself uttered them. Case closed.

 

[Rippon]

"Some scholars claim that Calvin and other ministers asked that he be beheaded instead of burnt,

Every legitimate Church History scholar affirms the above.

Others argue that Calvin himself ordered Servetus to be burned with green wood so the suffering would be prolonged,

Your source for this codswallop is dangerous Dan Corner. You claim to have majored in Church History yet what you post and the sources you cite belie your actual educational attainments.

 

[Reformed]

My question is, "why even argue with someone who has an intransigent agenda?" There are radical Calvin haters that cannot think of anything else. Let them have their hate. The issue is not Calvin. The issue is biblical truth.

 

[Eliyahu]

Damning evidence, some from the demon's own mouth:

During Servetus' trial, John Calvin wrote, "I hope that the verdict will call for the death penalty". Walter Nigg, The Heretics, (Alfred A Knopf, Inc.), p.328

"Calvin had him (Servetus) arrested as a heretic. Convicted and burned to death." The Wycliffe Biographical Dictionary of the Church, p.366

When Servetus mentioned that he would come to Geneva, "Espeville" (Calvin) wrote a letter to Farel on 13 February 1546 noting that if Servetus were to come, he would not assure him safe conduct: "for if he came, as far as my authority goes, I would not let him leave alive". Cottret 2000, pp. 216–217; Parker 2006, pp. 147–148; Levy, Leonard W. (1995), Blasphemy: Verbal offense Against the Sacred from Moses to Salman Rushdie, p. 65

"Some scholars claim that Calvin and other ministers asked that he be beheaded instead of burnt, knowing that burning at the stake was the only legal recourse. Others argue that Calvin himself ordered Servetus to be burned with green wood so the suffering would be prolonged, and that Servetus was the one who requested a more merciful beheading. This plea was refused and on 27 October, Servetus was burnt alive at the Plateau of Champel at the edge of Geneva."

Thanks for the time spared for me.

Your Info is absolutely true.


Eliyahu

 

[Rippon]

Your Info is absolutely true.

Oh, as if your support lends an air of authority. ;-)

 

[Eliyahu]

Well, you stand on dangerous ground.

In the past you have said you could not make that judgment call.

That is a big fat lie that you got straight from Dave Hunt.

I recommend you to read the book.
< What Love is this, the misrepresentatio of God by Calvinism>
It is indeed useful.

So? About one third of the time he disagreed with the Bishop of Hippo.

Do you trust Augustine, the father of RCC which is the biggest cult which persecuted true Christians?

Christ did not lay down His life for anyone but His elect. And those are also called The Church of God and many other terms in Scripture.

You don’t believe this bible, do you?


1John 2:2
And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

So you deny that the doctrine of predestination is taught in the Bible?

You may think about the Predestination mentioned in Ephesians 1:5, 11. But that Predestination is the Original Destination by God which is different from Calvinistic Predestination that ignore the Unlimited Atonement as in 1 John 2:2. The Predestination by God applies to everyone because it is the original predestination by God.
Anyone who accepts the Gospel can say that he or she is predestined

He pleaded for the more humane way of execution. But his request was denied.

Calvin was not guilty of murder, or intended murder. You should not lie.

Please furnish documentation.

Please flesh that out --unless you think I'm coercing you.

http://www.evangelicaloutreach.org/michael-servetus.htm

http://www.thepathoftruth.com/falseteachers/john-calvin.htm


Simply speaking, Calvin ordered the police to arrest Servetus in his church and he accused him with 39 charges including Trinity and Infant Baptism issues.
Eventually Servetus was burnt. Though there are many excuses for Calvin but it is evident that Calvin claimed the death penalty for Servetus either by Beheading or by Burning.

Do you think it is OK if you should be beheaded just because your belief is different from what the mainstream belief of the country holds? or it is OK if you should be coerced to believe Arminianism?

You're just talking off the top of your head. You just openly display your abject ignoranceof what Calvin taught.

You sound like that you felt I damaged your idol. Let him sleep in the grave until he is judged by God.

Have you read The Institutes of Christian Religion?
There, did you read Calvin said < Baptism by Immersion or Sprinkling is left free> ( Book 4- ch 15- 19)

< No Infant Baptism deprives the infants of the salvation>

Do you think No Infant Baptism deprives the children of the salvation?

Calvin claimed:

Baptism is prior to the faith and repentance ( Book 4- ch 16- 25)
Infants receive forgiveness of sins, therefore they are not to be deprived of the sign( Bok 4- Chapter 16-22)
Children are baptized for future repentance and faith.(( 4-16-20)
If the children of believers, without the help of understanding, are partakers of covenant, there is no reason why they should be denied the sign ( Baptism) ( 4-16-24)
Children are engrafted to the body of the church by baptism( 4-16-9)

Do you agree with Infant Baptism?
Do you agree that the Baptism by sprinkling is biblical?
I didn’t quote the details just because I wanted to save time simply. But I have read all the heresy by Calvin and therefore I could tell you simply.

Now it is your turn to prove you don’t display your Abject Ignorance about Calvin, right?




( to be contiued)

Eliyahu

 

[Eliyahu]

Your heroes of J.N. Darby and George Muller were Calvinists. Do you wish to regard them as heretics?

Your Ignorance is revealed again :

George Mueller
George Mueller at times departed from those whom he judged in error. It would have been good that he had cleaved to the one true gospel and he would not have possessed the doctrine called Calvinism. And then he would not have preached this message of Calvinism. The message of Calvinism as all false doctrine is never a matter not necessary to salvation.
https://habasar.wordpress.com/2009/12/21/conversion-of-another-george-mueller/


J.N. Darby could be a believer in Predestination in a broader sense.


John N. Darby proposed that Christ’s atonement had two aspects—the propitiatory (God-ward) and the substitutionary (Man-ward) and that both Arminians and Calvinists were both guilty of exclusively seeing only one or the other. Drawing upon the work of Christ pictured in the two goats of Leviticus 16, he makes the case that the propitiatory aspect of Christ’s death was for all, while the substitutionary aspect was for the elect only. The fully biblical viewpoint was to understand, embrace, and hold in balance both aspects. See Propitiation and Substitution, The Collected Writings of J. N. Darby, Doctrinal No. 8, pp. 286-288.
http://www.withchrist.org/atonement.htm

He had a harsh argument with Moody who brought < whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely(Rev 22:18)>


Don’t misunderstand that I regard Darby as my hero. My Hero is only Jesus Christ.
I object to the theory of Pre-tribulation Rapture by Darby.
I oppose to his ambiguous stance in the bible texts as well though I like his exegeses of the bible. I and Plymouth Brethren oppose to Infant Baptism brought from COE by Darby.
George Mueller objected to Darby’s Dispensationalism, objected to the theory of Rapture before Tribulation. Such stance was shared by Robert Chapman and Hudson Taylor.
Main contribution to PB by Darby was the strong objection to the Clergy system, though Plymouth Brethren held the same stance before Darby joined them later.
Such problem with Darby caused the schism between Exclusive Brethren and Open Brethren.

You revealed quite a lot of ignorance in this matter as well.
YOu don't know about the details.

You have been consistent in the last decade here on the BB. You have not accepted correction. You do not study and you deal in falsehood regularly.

I would not argue with you about your immature ignorance.
I do know that you advocate NIV and TNIV which are favored by Gay and Lesbians, based on Vatican Texts, and now try to sell Calvinism which is not surprising to me.
I have read the Bible in original languages like Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic, which are my final authority. The reason why I don’t quote the details is because I don’t want to spend much time for the argument.
You may not know the true history of the true believers. Have you ever read the Baptist History or Pilgrim Church by E.H. Broadbent? Can you answer my question about < Did God predestine ISIS to behead Christians?>

Your sources such as Dan Corner, David Cloud, Dave Hunt and Peter Ruckman are poisoned wells. When you draw up the bucket you will drinking impure water.

Don Corner or David Cloud may be quoted by me awhile. I know Dave Hunt even by personal relationship though he passed away. I have nothing to do with Ruckman because I read the Bible in original languages and find many problems with KJV though it is far, far better than NIV, TNIV which are based on the corrupted texts.

You are poisoning the well by libeling the sources without ground.

If you can truly answer the question “ Did your God predestine ISIS to behead the Christians and to insult Himself?” then your water may be potable. Otherwise, your water is contaminated and poisoned.
Try to eloquently answer the question < Has your God predestined every bit of human lives, even the single movement of ISIS to kill Christians and to insult God of Jesus Christ?>


Rippon,

You must know that I can quote many proofs by myself but I just simply summarize the thoughts from my head so that I may save time for reading the Scriptures in original languages.

But if anyone read my post carefully, he or she can find I have made a lot of thoughts on the issues.

Eliyahu

 

[robustheologian]

Another of way of putting it is "abusus non tollit usum". Even if Calvin was guilty of everything he is accused of, it does not impugn the Reformed view of predestination and election (i.e. Calvinism).

I agree. And I never said it did. Further, my opposition to Calvinism is separate from the man Calvin. If Calvinism had been formulated by someone else, I'd be as equally opposed to it as I am now.

But some deny the facts about Calvin, despite all the evidence, and they attack the messenger. And it is disgraceful for any professed Christian, especially one claiming to be Baptist, to defend what Calvin and any other persecutor and murderer did. I contend that those who do so are not Baptists.

So then you Rebel should be done with this whole Servetus thing if we admitted that like Abraham, Jacob, Moses, and David that Calvin was far from perfect. Okay, Calvin (just like Abraham, Jacob, Moses, David, Jonathan Edwards, and whatever human being you can think of) was far from perfect. Fair?

 

[Rebel]

Every legitimate Church History scholar affirms the above.

Your source for this codswallop is dangerous Dan Corner. You claim to have majored in Church History yet what you post and the sources you cite belie your actual educational attainments.

Wrong, as usual. There are multitudes of sources. The evidence is there, and the facts are clear and irrefutable. Only a dishonest person would deny them.

I don't care if you believe I have a doctorate or not. The document is hanging on my wall, and I am looking at it right now. So, go ahead and deny that I have it. That means as much as your denial of the facts about your hero and idol Calvin. :laugh:

Another source:

http://peterlumpkins.typepad.com/pe...ohn-calvin-the-real-evangelical-cover-up.html

 

[Rebel]

My question is, "why even argue with someone who has an intransigent agenda?" There are radical Calvin haters that cannot think of anything else. Let them have their hate. The issue is not Calvin. The issue is biblical truth.

As long as the denial of the facts about Calvin keep coming, so will the evidence keep coming from me.

Anyone who defends this demoniac is no Baptist, no matter what he/she claims.

Yes, I despise murderers.

 

[Rebel]

So then you Rebel should be done with this whole Servetus thing if we admitted that like Abraham, Jacob, Moses, and David that Calvin was far from perfect. Okay, Calvin (just like Abraham, Jacob, Moses, David, Jonathan Edwards, and whatever human being you can think of) was far from perfect. Fair?

Far from perfect? A persecutor, torturer, and murderer merely far from perfect? That's like saying Charles Manson was merely far from perfect.

And Calvin did his deeds in the name of Christ, claiming to be a Christian.

As I have noted, I don't limit my condemnation to Calvin. I include all the Magisterial Reformers. I keep citing evidence against Calvin because what he did is being denied.

 

[robustheologian]

Far from perfect? A persecutor, torturer, and murderer merely far from perfect? That's like saying Charles Manson was merely far from perfect.

And Calvin did his deeds in the name of Christ, claiming to be a Christian.

As I have noted, I don't limit my condemnation to Calvin. I include all the Magisterial Reformers. I keep citing evidence against Calvin because what he did is being denied.

Murderer?? If that's true then he's in good company with David.

 

[Rippon]

There are multitudes of sources.

And you can't seem to find legit ones.

The evidence is there, and the facts are clear and irrefutable.

The facts are indeed there. And you deny them.

I don't care if you believe I have a doctorate or not. The document is hanging on my wall, and I am looking at it right now. So, go ahead and deny that I have it.

I never denied that you have an honorary --not earned, doctorate.

Another source:

You are dredging the bottom of the barrel to come up with the "scholarship" of Lumpy --the man who covers up the serial lying of Ergun Caner.

 

[Rippon]

Yes, I despise murderers.

It seems like you have plenty of murder in your heart. Your vile communications just come like a flood. You've worked up intense hatred of your fcitional John Calvin.

You are fixated. You can't address anything theologically so you make up fake history.

 

[Rippon]

A persecutor, torturer, and murderer merely far from perfect?

I cited documentation of dozens of legit Church Historians and Calvin scholars. None of them have said anything of the kind of filthy lies you have been spewing regarding the man of Geneva.

It is sinfully absurd to call him a murderer and persecutor. Now you come up with torturer too. Will your lies ever cease?

 

[Eliyahu]

As long as the denial of the facts about Calvin keep coming, so will the evidence keep coming from me.

Anyone who defends this demoniac is no Baptist, no matter what he/she claims.

Yes, I despise murderers.

Amen! Amen!

Eliyahu

 

[Rebel]

Murderer?? If that's true then he's in good company with David.

I've rarely seen such twisting and contorting.

 

[Rebel]

And you can't seem to find legit ones.

The facts are indeed there. And you deny them.

I never denied that you have an honorary --not earned, doctorate.


You are dredging the bottom of the barrel to come up with the "scholarship" of Lumpy --the man who covers up the serial lying of Ergun Caner.

You don't know anything about me, so you might as well quit trying to speculate.

I have given evidence from many diverse sources. You have either not read all that I have posted, or you are being disingenuous, as usual.

Geneva was a theocracy, a union of church and state. Calvin was the head of it. That is history. Calvin was responsible for the murder of Servetus and the persecution of many others; that is history. Facts can be denied, but they can't be changed.

You idolize and defend a religious criminal, a state churchist, infant baptizing persecutor of your supposed spiritual ancestors and yet call yourself a Baptist.

 

[Rebel]

It seems like you have plenty of murder in your heart. Your vile communications just come like a flood. You've worked up intense hatred of your fcitional John Calvin.

You are fixated. You can't address anything theologically so you make up fake history.

You are the vile one, the one who constantly calls your challengers liars and hypocrites.

I can read; I don't have to make anything up. It is you who have created a fictional Calvin.

Do you love Satan? Do you love what the Magisterial Protestant and Roman Catholics did to each other and to Anabaptists and Baptists? What does defending murderers say about you and what's in your black heart?

 

[Rebel]

I cited documentation of dozens of legit Church Historians and Calvin scholars. None of them have said anything of the kind of filthy lies you have been spewing regarding the man of Geneva.

It is sinfully absurd to call him a murderer and persecutor. Now you come up with torturer too. Will your lies ever cease?

Hilarious! Quote some more Calvin scholars. Yeah, they're really credible! :laugh:

You are the liar. Calvin's own words are evidence and condemn him. You can't get around that fact, no mater how much you writhe like a worm on a hook.