Featured Lies About John Calvin Refuted

You said it a mere 14 months ago.

You are mad.

 

You said Reformeres and church men.

No,I said that Reformers and church men did not criticize him for his persecutions. Those were the words you used in your initial challenge.

See above.

You are in another world. What you are now claiming has nothing to do with your original claims.

 

No,not at all. I specifically made this thread to address lies and slander made against the person of John Calvin.

 

No,I am not aware of that. Please furnish some proof.

You are entitled to call him a 'churchman" if you wish. But by the standard meaning of the term he certainly doesn't qualify. Are Roman Catholics churchmen?

Why yes,I do.
Did you never stop to question why McGrath doesnt' say that it was common IN GENEVA??

Wrong.

Wrong again.

 

From McGrath's book :A Life of John Calvin.

"Calvin was thus denied access to the city's decision-making machinery. He could not vote;he could not stand for office...His influence over Geneva was exercised indirectly,through preaching,consultation and other forms of legitimate suasion.Despite his ability to influence through his moral authority,he had no civic jurisdiction,no right,to coerce others to act as he wished. Calvin would and did urge,cajole and plead;he could not,however,command.
The image of Calvin as the 'dictator of Geneva' bears no relation to the known facts of history...The city council had no intention of surrendering its hard-won rights and privileges to anyone,let alone one of its employees --a foreighner devoid of voting rights,whom they could dismiss and expel from the city as they pleased...Throughout,the city council retained its authority in civic matters. That Calvin's authority in civic matters was purely personal and moral in character was demonstrated by the difficulties his successors faced after his death." (page 109)

 

None of my concerns in the op have been answered by the accusers. Step up to the plate please.

 

Yes,I indeed said so. And you STILL have not produced any evidence whatsoever to support your bogus claim.

Please tell me about Luther in particular. butI am still interested in the "many."

 

In my book :John Calvin:Man of the Millennium are some extracts.

Theodore Beza:"What accusations will not some men bring against him? But no refutation of them is wanting tpo those persons who knew him while he lived,and they will want none among his posterity with men of judgment who shall collect his character from his writings.

Having given with good faith the history of his life and of his death,after sixteen years' observation of him I feel myself warranted to declare that in him was proposed to all men an illustrious example of the life and death of a Christian;so that it will be found as difficult to emulate as it is easy to calumniate him.' (129)

 

"Committed under Calvin"? No, Calvin didn't have the authority to arrest,torture or execute anybody. Those were decisions of the Council and of the Council of 200. Calvin or the church consistory did not have the civil power to do what you and others constantly claim.

The Great Christian Revolution by Otto Scott says :"Calvin never ruled Geneva. The city was not a totalitarian society,but a Rebublic,with elections and dissent. Calvin held no civil office,could neither arrest nor punish any citizen,appoint or dismiss any official. To argure that his eloquence and logic constituted tyranny is to invent a new standard." (p.57)

 

A Life of John Calvin by Alister E. McGrath :"The rigid restrictions on voting rights in sixteenth-century Geneva reflected widespread anxieties within the city over the possible influence of foreigners upon its affairs. By restricting citizenship,with its full rights to vote and hold office,to certain native-born rsidents,the council had effectively forestalled the ambitions of any foreigner to exercise political influence within the city.

Calvin was thus denied access to the city's decision-making machinery. He could not vote;he could not stand for public office. From 1541-1559,his status within the city was that of habitant...His influence over Geneva was exercised indirectly,through preaching,consultation and other forms of legitimate suasion. Despite his ability to influence through his moral authority,he had no civic jurisdiction,no right,to coerce others to act as he wished. Calvin could and did urge,cajole and plead;he could not,however,command." (109)

 

And for all this talk of Calvin being a dictator,monster etc...why did Europeans flock there? Because it was considered a safe haven from religious persecution by Protestant refugees.

In 1550 the popualtion was 13,000 in Geneva. By 1560,it was 21,400 per McGraths research.

And let me add something else. For centuries Calvin has been linked with Servetus' death. Why,if he is somehow responsible for upwards of nearly a hundred or so more was the Spanish madman's state execution so singular? Why hasn't Calvin been painted as evil for the hundred or so you have given him responsibilty for instead of the one?

 

I agree. Commense reading Calvin's works!

 

And the lenghths you have gone to besmirch your fictional Calvin. You express hatred of Calvin and of myself every chance you get even though you contradict yourself at every turn. You said you wern't going to speak of the subject of Calvin's character again. (You said that several times.) You said you would never address Rippon again! With great ease you break your word.

You have yet to support your contention that Calvin was "a liar and a bearer of false witness."

With absolutely no thread of truth you claim that Calvin "never truly broke away from the Catholic church."

With no proof whatsoever you claim that Calvin participated "in the persecution of the local,autonmous [sic]churches of the day."

And there are countless other lies about Calvin as well as your evident hatred pouring out in your posts.

You said that the mere mention of his name makes your blood boil. That's a sin.

You said that the subject harms your inner self. Why not yield to more edifying subjects then instead of letting your flesh rule you?

 

But God. (I like that biblical phrase.)But God put John Calvin to do what he did in his leadership capacity in Geneva. Calvin did not want to be in a position of authority in Geneva the first time and certainly not the second time when he was pleaded with to return.