Some Basic Info On John Calvin

[skypair]

==It is not that I don't believe Hunt, it is that I have found his material to be faulty on point after point.

Psa 118:8 -- Nobody should believe unless the Spirit speaks.

=I am not James White and I don't always agree with James White. I believe that those who publish books claiming to be authorities on a matter should use as much primary material as possible. Secondary material should mainly be used to support a view or claim or to compare and contrast.

The whole book so far is a "cat fight." I am surprised either one took on the project! But it is done and what can we glean from it? Both likely -- surely -- have SOME truth.

Thus it came to pass, that I was withdrawn from the study of philosophy, and was put to the study of law. To this pursuit I endeavored faithfully to apply myself in obedience to the will of my father; but God, by the secret guidance of his providence, at length gave a different direction to my course. And first, since I was too obstinately devoted to the superstitions of Popery to be easily extricated from so profound an abyss of mire, God by a sudden conversion subdued and brought my mind to a teachable frame, which was more hardened in such matters than might have been expected from one at my early period of life Having thus received some taste and knowledge of true godliness I was immediately inflamed with so intense a desire to make progress therein, that although I did not altogether leave off other studies, I yet pursued them with less ardor. I was quite surprised to find that before a year had elapsed, all who had any desire after purer doctrine were continually coming to me to learn, although I myself was as yet but a mere novice and tyro." SOURCE

This is PRECISELY the quote Hunt uses. Do you find repentance here? Do you find ANY initiative/commitment that originated in Calvin???

skypair

 

[skypair]

==Considering that we are hundreds of years after the fact, and considering that both men claimed to be Christians, and were and are considered great theologians, I am not sure we can claim with any level of seriousness that we are "unconvinced" of Calvin's "record of his conversion". We can't judge a person's salvation by their testimony even today. A person who is truly saved might not have a testimony about their salvation experience because they don't remember it or because of confusion over false doctrine. Other people don't have powerful testimonies andl others don't word their testimonies the way we would (etc). Point? We can't always "judge" a person's salvation by their testimony. A person's salvation must be "judged" by their confessiong of faith in Christ and their lifestyle. A word of caution: We cannot be the final judge on someone's salvation. No doubt there are many people who sound and look saved but who are not (Matt 7:21-23, 23:25-28). It is true that when we enter heaven we may very well be surprised by who is not there.

Your testimony regarding this matter is true. But it is thus undermines Calvin's teaching. How? If we cannot be sure, there is no reason to believe. The Bible says "faith to faith." Rom 1:17 This is not that.

skypair

 

[skypair]

After what happen? Show me where it happened. BTW...that quote was after Calvin had died.

I'll have to look it up.

BTW...that was Calvins last will i quoted.

Yeah, I know. Pathetic, eh?

Yet you believe Hunt a man that hates Calvin, and lived 500 years later and has lied to you already. Now that's good logic.

Do I believe he researched what he says? Yeah. I am still waiting for the "VALID" rejoinder, BTW.

You have been programmed to hate Calvin and will always no matter if the truth hits you in the face.

Now you are just getting "overwrought," JA. I could as easily say you are programmed to hate me - or free will. Do you know that gays say they are "programmed" that way? Isn't that what the "elect" contend, too?

skypair

 

[skypair]

You get real yourself, I'm not sure ... you can not judge someone's salvation based on the fact you don't think their testimony is good enough.

Try me. raying: Is your salvation "conditional?"

I was younger than Calvin when I believed and received Christ. I know the mental state. To me, he sounds like someone who fell asleep and, in that vulnerable state, he was 'implanted' with one of those "chips" that the "Invaders" used to reprogram earthlings, no? What would be more descriptive of what happens when one it "regenerated" before one has "faith" and serves Christ??

You're welcome to respond. That is merely a comparison -- not an insult.

skypair

 

[Jarthur001]

I'll have to look it up.

maybe its a good idea to know what you are talking about before you post. Just a idea.

Yeah, I know. Pathetic, eh?

What part is pathetic in this statement...

I also testify and declare, that it is my full intention to pass the remainder of my life in the same faith and religion, which he has delivered to me by his gospel; having no other defense or refuge of salvation than his gratuitous adoption, on which alone my safety depends. I also embrace with my whole heart the mercy which he exercises towards me for the sake of Jesus Christ, atoning for my crimes by the merits of his death and passion, that in this way satisfaction may be made for all my transgressions and offenses, and the remembrance of them blotted out.

Do I believe he researched what he says? Yeah. I am still waiting for the "VALID" rejoinder, BTW.

As one that happens to know church history, I can say for sure he did not research it. Trust me on this one.

Now you are just getting "overwrought," JA. I could as easily say you are programmed to hate me - or free will. Do you know that gays say they are "programmed" that way? Isn't that what the "elect" contend, too?

You tell me what gays say...I don't have a clue myself. But I do know this you have no clue about Calvinism. You prove it each time you post. You have shown yourself either unable to remember, or unable to understand. No one claims men are programmed other then those who don’t understand Calvinim. So..write it down this time and place it in a place you can remember. Now say it with me.

Calvinism does not believe men are programmed.

Got it?

Understand this time?

Need I say it again?

Now go write it on the board 100 times....so you will never forget again.

If you forget, just ask me again before you post lies like you keep doing. People are starting to laugh at you Sky. I’m just trying to help you save face. I’m glad I could help you on this.

.

 

[Rippon]

As I recall, Beza and Calvin had a "falling out."

skypair

Your history of absurd comments are witnessed by all who view your posts . There are just too many silly and blasphemous remarks that you glibly continue to post .

But for now I'll get very specific and say that Beza and Calvin did not have a falling out . Furnish proof that they did or admit you are making things up AGAIN .

 

[skypair]

What part is pathetic in this statement...

"Gratuitous adoption." Thinking one is adopted on account of one's 'election' rather than on account of one's belief.

No one claims men are programmed other then those who don’t understand Calvinim.

Can you prove this? Or are you trained to just deny it?

What would you call it if some are predestined to reprobation? Or how about to election since that also entails the elect, following their regeneration, actually believing every time (100%) in Jesus and repenting. Yet these are not things they would naturally do on their own.

Now those are, admittedly, rather simple "programs." Some Calvinists will say, to boot, that God controls every decision, act, etc. and predestined it before ere the earth was created. What do you call these -- "decrees?"

skypair

 

[skypair]

But for now I'll get very specific and say that Beza and Calvin did not have a falling out . Furnish proof that they did or admit you are making things up AGAIN .

You may be right, rip. I'm sorry if that wasn't the case. It was my understanding that Beza was a "flaming Calvinist" taking the theology where Calvin hadn't intended. But such is memory that it is imperfect at times. I never meant to study history anyway -- just theology which I can compare with scripture.

skypair

 

[Jarthur001]

"Gratuitous adoption." Thinking one is adopted on account of one's 'election' rather than on account of one's belief.

Don't be a zero.

If it was "due us" as you claim, it would not be gratuitous.

Can you prove this? Or are you trained to just deny it?

In other words you did not write it down. Shame on you. I told you, that you would forget.

What would you call it if some are predestined to reprobation?
Bible truth.

Or how about to election since that also entails the elect, following their regeneration, actually believing every time (100%) in Jesus and repenting.

Bible truth.

Yet these are not things they would naturally do on their own.

Not in the nature man. You seem to be getting it now. Good job.

Now those are, admittedly, rather simple "programs."

It is not. Once again you show poor understanding. Now please write it down this time. This is getting old to go over it again and again. NNE BUY CALVINIST HATERS CALL IT PROGRAMMING.

You want to know why? They are not able to understand.
If anything it is deprogram from the sin nature.

Some Calvinists will say, to boot, that God controls every decision, act, etc. and predestined it before ere the earth was created

.
You mean they believe the Bible? That's a good thing...right? I mean I think it is.

I can tell now you will never get this. God forces no decisions, but controls all decision. I'll not take the time to help you on this. I'm sure it make no sense to you.

What do you call these -- "decrees?"

Yes....decrees are by God , Sky. Maybe there is hope for you.

 

[skypair]

If it was "due us" as you claim, it would not be gratuitous.

I like that -- "due us." Paul used that, didn't he -- "then is grace of debt and no more grace." Fortunately he was referring "works salvation," not to "belief and obedience salvation" where we take God up on His PROMISE!

What would you call it if some are predestined to reprobation?

Anyone who refuses to believe is "predestined" by his own hand to everything in his life including damnation at the end. But you really do believe that God predestines their lives, don't you.

NNE BUY CALVINIST HATERS CALL IT PROGRAMMING.

"A rose is a rose by..." How would you describe it that God makes sure that a reprobate doesn't change his mind and believe?

You want to know why? They are not able to understand.

See, maybe that is where you got it wrong. They may -- like me -- understand you just fine. But they don't believe God like I don't believe Calvinism and you take both for lack of understanding.

But know what? The Holy Spirit accompanies the gospel and the word and enlightens the mind to truth. Again, they understand -- they just don't believe or, believing, they just don't obey.

God forces no decisions, but controls all decision.

I've ALWAYS said this! We control the decisions -- God controls the outcomes.

skypair

 

[Rippon]

a Golden Oldie

My theological orientation is not derived from what Calvin wrote . I have said before that it was years after coming to the conviction that the doctrine of grace was biblically true that I even bought any of Calvin's writings . I , of course , had seen quotes of his but never owned a single copy of anything of his .

So one can try to dismantle what has been known as Calvinism attempting to tear him down . But that doesn't destroy the biblical truths he was famous for declaring .

He was a man with feet of clay . He is not on the same par as Scripture itself . But he was a much better at explaining it , and giving the sense than most . Many who make a go at discrediting him haven't taken the time to really examine his work .

Many before him wrote on things he is associated with . His mentor at Martin Bucer ( 1491-1551)was strong on election .We might rightly be called Bucerites . Luther 1483-1546) was a stronger predestinarian than Calvin .Did you know that William Tyndale was of the same convictions ? Read his preface to the book of Romans for a sampling . John Wycliffe ( 1324-1384 ) needed no help from Calvin . His mentor Thomas Bradwardine ( 1290 - 13-- ) wrote something called " In Defense of God and Against The Pelagians " . I could go on and on with examples like Zwingli( 1484-1531 ) and Peter Martyr Vermigli ( 1499-1562 ).

Calvin ( 1509-1564) was a Frenchman . He never met Luther but may have written him . We know he corresponded with Melanchthon . He wrote to most of the Reformers . John Knox actually studied at John Calvin's feet .

Calvin wrote the Institutes Of The Christian Religion at just 26 , but he regulary enlarged it over the years . His last edition was finished a couple years before his death .

He did not want to go to Geneva . But William Farel threatened him with God 's curses if he did not go . Both of them were kicked out within 2 years . The next three years in Strassburg were some of Calvin's happiest . He married Idelette de Bure . she was a widow of a prominent Anabaptist .Calvin had supposedly converted them from their errors . Calvin to raise her children who did not live long . They had just one child together -- who died in infancy . After 9 years of marriage his wife died .

Calvin did not even become a citizen of Geneva until 1559 .

Calvin, no matter what his name conjures up for you was known as the theologian of the Holy Spirit .

He was the first , I believe to introduce Christ as Prophet/Priest/King in a 3-fold office .

He was an evangelist for 3 years in France .

He had at least 12 major sicknesses to contend with . Most of them gave him considerable pain .

Did you know that Geneva under his leadership sent out about 160 missionaries in 1561 alone ?

These are just some facts that are useful to know .

[ March 15, 2006, 10:21 PM: Message edited by: Rippon ]

Good stuff can be discovered in the archives!

 

[Robert Snow]

Good stuff can be discovered in the archives!

You do like to toot your own horn don't you. Arrogance!

 

[Thomas Helwys]

You do like to toot your own horn don't you. Arrogance!

I wonder how many threads he's going to start or resurrect to propagandize about and idolize the murderer Calvin.

 

[saturneptune]

I wonder how many threads he's going to start or resurrect to propagandize about and idolize the murderer Calvin.

This makes for fourth in so many days. We disagree about Calvinism, for lack of a better term, but totally agree about the character of Calvin.

I am not going to participate in any more subjects about the man Calvin. It does nothing but harm my inner self to discuss this man. It is beyond me why in a Baptist forum and authored by a Christian, anyone would post praises to someone who is the pure essence of evil. I am done with this subject. Moving on.

 

[Oldtimer]

This makes for fourth in so many days. We disagree about Calvinism, for lack of a better term, but totally agree about the character of Calvin.

I am not going to participate in any more subjects about the man Calvin. It does nothing but harm my inner self to discuss this man. It is beyond me why in a Baptist forum and authored by a Christian, anyone would post praises to someone who is the pure essence of evil. I am done with this subject. Moving on.

Saturneptune one of the reasons I haven't done an indepth study of this subject is because of the division the very mention of him and it causes on this board. How many times threads on other subjects ended up being a fight over this one.

As a tired old layman, keep wondering how much time should be spent devoted to subjects that bring such deep division rather than those that lend to bringing about unity within the membership of HIS Church.

 

[Rippon]

You do like to toot your own horn don't you. Arrogance!

Everything I said was factually true. You are free not to like the content,but you are not free to make up stuff that contradicts the facts.

Please document any falsehoods you believe that I posted. If you can't, then you are not contributing anything of value.

 

[Rippon]

One of the reasons I haven't done an indepth study of this subject is because of the division the very mention of him and it causes on this board.

Yes,to the extent that non-Christlike remarks seem to emanate from many Arminians here on the BB when it comes to the subject of Calvin. The flesh is hard to come under the control of the Spirit.

As a tired old layman, keep wondering how much time should be spent devoted to subjects that bring such deep division rather than those that lend to bringing about unity within the membership of HIS Church.

Just because controversial things are posted on the BB in wide-ranging subject matter;that doesn't mean you need not study the life and writings of John Calvin for yourself.

 

[Oldtimer]

Yes,to the extent that non-Christlike remarks seem to emanate from many Arminians here on the BB when it comes to the subject of Calvin. The flesh is hard to come under the control of the Spirit.

Just because controversial things are posted on the BB in wide-ranging subject matter;that doesn't mean you need not study the life and writings of John Calvin for yourself.

When I begin study of a controversial topic, of which I have little knowledge, it begins by looking at BOTH sides of the debate. With time, study, and thought, patterns (for lack of a better term) begin to emerge. One of those, is the ability to begin to recognize half-truths spoken by each side of the debate.

Doesn't your opening comment apply to both sides of this issue? That to state what Arminians do without acknowledging that supporters of Calvin do the very same thing, is indeed a half-truth.

Do you classify anyone who does not hold to Calvin's opinions, on the issues that cause strife, Arminian?

"The flesh is hard to come under the control of the Spirit."

Almighty God has the ability for total control of everything, including the very thoughs we think whether the Holy Spirit is present within us or not. When the Holy Spirit is within us why doesn't He bring our flesh into total control? Could it be free-will?

In closing, by the same token on "controversial things" that does not mean that I need to "study the life and writings of John Calvin for" myself, either. At least not right now. If/when, the Holy Spirit convicts me to take up this challenge, yes, I'll study his life and writings. And, to the extent this aging heart and mind can handle it, I'll also study the lives and writings of those who stood in opposition to him. BOTH sides of the issue.

From past experience, trying to put myself in the position to both defend and oppose an issue reveals much that is often masked with half-truths. Most recent example was creation vs evolution. One piece of information, carefully "hidden" by evolutionists, was the key that decided this issue for me.

2 Tim 2:15 KJB

 

[Oldtimer]

Yes,to the extent that non-Christlike remarks seem to emanate from many Arminians here on the BB when it comes to the subject of Calvin. The flesh is hard to come under the control of the Spirit.

Just because controversial things are posted on the BB in wide-ranging subject matter;that doesn't mean you need not study the life and writings of John Calvin for yourself.

Would have added this to the post about, but edit time has expired.

Non-Christlike remarks: Please note your own in this thread I just finished reading.

John Calvin :Man Of The Millennium
http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=85915

Brother, there is nothing in your "testimony" in this thread that leads me to study the life of John Calvin. Your frequent charges of lying and multiple charges of blasphemy against members of the body of Christ, because they disagree with your OPINION, taints your witness, in my opinion.

Please, don't respond by quoting others in that thread. The focus of this post is about your own non-Christlike remarks. Bringing in others words will be the equivalent of the pot calling the kettle black. The focus is on why should I do an indepth study of Calvin's life and writings. What actual incentive, other than posting lists of opinions that agree with you, did you give me to spend hours, days, weeks of study of this man and his viewpoints that have driven a deep wedge into His Church?

If I undertake the study, will you also call me a liar and accuse me of blasphemy? That is if, at the end of my studies, I do not agree that "John Calvin :Man Of The Millennium" -- "Dr. Philip Shaff (not a Calvinst) :"He must be reckoned as one of the greatest and best men God raised up in the history of Christianty." (p.137)."

Think about it, Brother. You sure have given me a lot to think about this morning.

 

[saturneptune]

Would have added this to the post about, but edit time has expired.

Non-Christlike remarks: Please note your own in this thread I just finished reading.

John Calvin :Man Of The Millennium
http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=85915

Brother, there is nothing in your "testimony" in this thread that leads me to study the life of John Calvin. Your frequent charges of lying and multiple charges of blasphemy against members of the body of Christ, because they disagree with your OPINION, taints your witness, in my opinion.

Please, don't respond by quoting others in that thread. The focus of this post is about your own non-Christlike remarks. Bringing in others words will be the equivalent of the pot calling the kettle black. The focus is on why should I do an indepth study of Calvin's life and writings. What actual incentive, other than posting lists of opinions that agree with you, did you give me to spend hours, days, weeks of study of this man and his viewpoints that have driven a deep wedge into His Church?

If I undertake the study, will you also call me a liar and accuse me of blasphemy? That is if, at the end of my studies, I do not agree that "John Calvin :Man Of The Millennium" -- "Dr. Philip Shaff (not a Calvinst) :"He must be reckoned as one of the greatest and best men God raised up in the history of Christianty." (p.137)."

Think about it, Brother. You sure have given me a lot to think about this morning.

There seem to be specific areas that really spark debate, like Calvinism, KJVO, and to some extent, end times and covenant theology. Since being a former Presbyterian, and from reading Scripture, doctrines of sovereignty and grace seem to be quite clear to me. So, one could say that someone like Rippon and I on that specific subject agree.

Why the character of Calvin and Calvinism are linked I do not know. For some reason, Rippon links one who thinks Calvin was truly as described in these threads with being an Arminian, and that is just not true, in any shape, form or fashion. I detest the man, and am very strongly a believer in the sovereignty of God. This mindset causes some of the problem.

Another person who was strongly for doctrines of sovereignty and grace and had no use for Calvin is Old Regular, who I miss greatly for common sense reasoning.

I cannot understand why Rippon is fixated on the character of Calvin and how thinking he was the dictator described makes one an Arminian.

OT, I will say this. After all you have read, I would suggest you google Calvin and read some of his Institutes, and records about his life and reign in Geneva, especially the Servetus case and come to your own conclusions.