Featured Lies About John Calvin Refuted

Duct tape would solve your problem.

Do you ever not talk?

 

I do apologize for the late reply. I've been out of town and, tragically, without the internet!

I don't believe Calvin was without sin. I've never claimed as much. I think his "atrocities" are overstated primarily because his theology is such an affront to western individualism and a very American concept of freedom.

I'm comfortable disagreeing with Calvin on theocracy and infant baptism and the nature of the Lord's supper. I will even join you in disagreeing with his handling of heretics (which Servetus was) and those with whom he disagreed with theologically (just as I do with John MacAruthur).

You said earlier that those who follow Calvin make him out to be a saint (I'm guessing you were injecting the RCC understanding of the term). I'm very comfortable calling Calvin a saint...just as I'm comfortable calling you or Arminius a saint...not because I agree with everything you three have said or done, but because you claim to trust Christ alone for your salvation and the forgiveness of your sins.

 

My understanding is that while Servetus was obviously not perfectly theologically sound.......there is no real intimation that he was a "heretic" in any damnable or serious sense.

Servetus accepted the deity of Jesus Christ. He had no appreciation for the Trinitarian doctrine as modernly understood. (he called it worshipping a Cerebus and what-not)...which is kinda funny.

But to say he was a "heretic" probably depends on how serious an error one must posses to be properly defined as a "heretic"..........He was "wrong" but it's not as though he denied Christ's deity or anything else.
If you have more to add by way of information about Servetus' opinion and what you mean by a "heretic"...I would be interested in knowing it...thanks Jon! :thumbs:

 

Yes....we all surrender....You win, and are a genius, and Calvin is the man of the Universe. Now, let people who are interested in history speak. You win...Calvin himself (who is perfect) personally translated the NIV (which is perfectly twice inspired)...and everything you always say is true.

We wave the flag of surrender...you win...Calvin rules, and you are his prodigy. Now, go away.

 

We surrender...you are a god...and so was Calvin...now take your toddy and go to bed.

 

I would call a denial of the trinity heretical...as in a denial of the clear teaching of Scripture in a way that alters or changes the nature of God in an irreconcilable way.

And no, I wouldn't burn him for it, but I think he was a heretic. I confess though, that I have not studied his position in depth.

 

I appreciate the civility of your posts. Yes, anyone redeemed by the blood of Jesus Christ is a saint, we just do not pray to them. We will just have to agree to disagree about the eternal state of Calvin. He public records, apart from the Servetus case, do not lie. I do not have a real problem with Calvin's position on infant baptism, although in error, it is not heresy, like denial of the Trinity. Aside from his murder and torture, there are two points that bother me the most. One is his writings on the seperation on church and state, and turning right around and running a theocracy. The other one is his persecution of local, autonomous churches of the day, which are the ones that were preserving the NT church that Christ promised to preserve.

In all of that, regardless of anyone's position on any spiritual issue, one does not execute people for disagreeing with your position. That is just common sense and basic human decency.

Anyway, welcome to BB. I notice you are from Louisiana. I grew up in Gulfport, MS in the 50s and 60s.

 

I will be sure and tuck him. Oh, I have a bedtime story to read him by Dr. Suess. Here is an example.

See Calvin
See Calvin torture the people
Hear the people scream
Scream! Scream! Scream!



See Calvin sprinkle the baby
Sprinkle, sprinkle, sprinkle
See how the baby is saved
See how the Pope is happy



See Calvin watch the fire
Hear the screams from Michael
See Calvin laugh with glee
Burn Michael burn



See Calvin today
See the pretty lake
See how the lake burns
Burn Calvin burn

 

Even if all John Calvin did was merely BELIEVED that the death penalty was appropriate for heresy and all other sins against the law, he is still a heretic.

So did John Calvin BELIEVE in murder for heresy and sins against the law? From HIS OWN COMMENTARY, YES!

This is just ONE example of TONS of his own writings (and I have already posted the ones he said about Servetus and the letters he wrote demanding that Servetus be burned alive):

Commentary on John 8:11

"Neither do I condemn thee. We are not told that Christ absolutely acquitted the woman, but that he allowed her to go at liberty. Nor is this wonderful, for he did not wish to undertake any thing that did not belong to his office. He bad been sent by the Father to gather the lost sheep, (Matthew 10:6) and, therefore, mindful of his calling, he exhorts the woman to repentance, and comforts her by a promise of grace. They who infer from this that adultery ought not to be punished with death, must, for the same reason, admit that inheritances ought not to be divided, because Christ refused to arbitrate in that matter between two brothers, (Luke 12:13.) Indeed, there will be no crime whatever that shall not be exempted from the penalties of the law,

John Calvin's own writings show that he had a propensity for murdering those who disagreed with him, which fits perfectly with all the documented historical evidence that shows that he consented to and perpetuated the deaths of numerous Christians.

No saved person can carry on life with a belief in such murderous sentiments.

 

An exerpt from "Way of Life Literature."

1. Calvin enforced Christian doctrine and principles at the point of the sword. In October 1563, the Geneva government burned to death Michael Servetus for heresy. Servetus held unitarian views and was definitely a false teacher, but the New Testament nowhere instructs the churches to kill false teachers. Servetus’ death sentence was supported not only by Calvin, but also by Melanchthon in Germany and Bullinger in Geneva and by other Protestant leaders who were consulted about the case.

2. Other men were also put to death under Calvin’s tenure. “So entirely was he in favour of persecuting measures, that he wrote a treatise in defence of them, maintaining the lawfulness of putting heretics to death; and he reduced these rigid theories to practice, in his conduct towards Castellio, Jerom Bolsee, and Servetus, whose fates are too generally known to require being here repeated. At the council of Geneva, 1632, Nicholas Anthoine was condemned to be first hanged and then burned for opposing the doctrine of the Trinity...” (J.J. Stockdale, The History of the Inquisitions, 1810, p. xxviii).

3. In the days of King Edward VI of England, Calvin wrote a letter to Lord Protector Somerset and urged him to put Anabaptists to death: “These altogether deserve to be well punished by the sword, seeing that they do conspire against God, who had set him in his royal seat” (John Christian, A History of the Baptists, Vol. 1, chap. 15).

4. Historian John Christian observes that Calvin “was responsible in a large measure for the demon of hate and fierce hostility which the Baptists of England had to encounter.”

Enough said.

 

Thanks! I grew up here I love it, but my wife and I lived in Louisville when we were first married and we love Kentucky. In fact, if our families were closer, I imagine that's where we would've liked to have stayed!

 

Rippon,
You have been thrashed by numerous other posters besides myself. You are making a spectacle of yourself everytime you post. You are an embarrassment to the Christian faith. Take your toys and go home to Mama.

 

Reading these posts is like taking chemo & waiting for the nausia to begin.