Some Basic Info On John Calvin

[HeirofSalvation]

We do know that he was burned, and we do know that it was for heresy. If what we compare with today nullifies what was practiced 400 years ago, then there should be some kind of recognizable transition in history where burning heretics for heresy was always acceptable until society changed its views on it later.

However, there is no practice of this by any of the apostles, nor is it taught in the NT period. Thus there is no link that shows a consistent practice of burning heretics from the time of the foundation of the church, to the time when this became a normal practice for the RCC.

Furthermore, since when did the standards of society dictate that burning someone alive for heresy is acceptable or not? Even if it was not considered an outrageous act in our culture today, that would not make it any less evil and unbiblical.

:thumbs::wavey: Right on again! This is classic "society says" or "society does" relativism. It is a tactic of the Godless and immoral.
We can't derive an "ought" from an "is"....
Attempting to justify Calvin's actions by appealing to the practices of a wicked society is absolutely NO DIFFERENT than when the heathen in our culture justify such sins as homosexuality, effiminacy, immodesty rampant divorce etc... by simply stating that: This would be perfectly acceptable in culture a. b. c. ad nauseum.

Whether it was common or not, fact is as far as Calvin's situation was concerned:
1.) He previously taught against the persecution of heresy until AFTER the Servetus affair
2.) Propositionally speaking....there were numerous reformers and church-men (many who personally knew Calvin) who spoke strongly against his actions and policies, and he was VERY aware of them.
3.) His former friend Castellio (prior to his murder) and Luther (who didn't meet him personally) both decried Calvin's actions for example.

This appeal to moral relativism by claiming (in modern parlance)that "everyone does it" is not only false in that certainly not "everyone" in society was guilty of it but also that even if it were true, it would in no way justify doing that which is expressly against the Scriptures.

 

[Aaron]

We do know that he was burned, and we do know that it was for heresy. If what we compare with today nullifies what was practiced 400 years ago, then there should be some kind of recognizable transition in history where burning heretics for heresy was always acceptable until society changed its views on it later.

However, there is no practice of this by any of the apostles, nor is it taught in the NT period. Thus there is no link that shows a consistent practice of burning heretics from the time of the foundation of the church, to the time when this became a normal practice for the RCC.

Furthermore, since when did the standards of society dictate that burning someone alive for heresy is acceptable or not? Even if it was not considered an outrageous act in our culture today, that would not make it any less evil and unbiblical.

You conveniently ignore the fact that Calvin had nothing to do with the burning of Servetus.

 

[saturneptune]

You conveniently ignore the fact that Calvin had nothing to do with the burning of Servetus.

Not only is that not true, you ignore the fact he had many tortured and executed. You ignore the fact he persecuted local, autonomous churches preserving the NT church. You ignore the fact he wrote on seperation of church and state yet created a theocracy. You ignore the fact he was for infant baptism.

 

[Aaron]

If that were true, I can't imagine a man besides Luther who would be more qualified to do so.