Featured The two major shortcomings of Calvinism

It was heretical in the extreme. I don't even want to quote what MS said about the Trinity.

Let me ask you proph --do you think he was a Christian? Notice I am not addressing anything about his State execution. I am asking you about his doctrine --was it Christian or not?

 

I asked why he deserved the deatth penalty, is this your answer?
Did the Man who first correctly identified the function of the heart, in the circulatory system, as well as many other scientific and medical discoveries, deserve to die, in a place he simply visited, for non-Catholic views?

 

Does He "call" those who have never heard the Gospel or the Name of Christ?

Every single person who is regenerated has had their heart opened by God --no exceptions.

 

From our perspective he did not deserve the death penalty. But his heretical beliefs at that time were considered treasonable.

You had said that Servetus was righteous. On what basis can he be considered righteous? Do you think his doctrines were biblical?

I am not asking about his medical advances whatsoever. That has nothing to do with anything.

He didn't simply drop into Geneva for a visit. He was on the lam. He was a dead man walking. The sentence of death was on his head. Geneva was the only place in Europe where he could hide out and not be nabbed by the authorities. Or was he deliberately egging on Calvin? The Libertines were in control. They were enemies of Calvin's. Calvin was not large and in charge. He couldn't even cast a vote. He wasn't even a citizen in 1553. Calvin had no power or authority to put anyone to death. He wasn't an iron-fisted despot of Geneva. Don't fall for historical revisionism.

Servetus thought he had it made because John Calvin was overruled by his enemies at that time.

 

WONDERFUL, WONDERFUL, WONDERFUL!!!! Giddy, giddy, giddy. :jesus: :godisgood: :jesus: :godisgood:

Also, the Disciples rejoiced in being found worthy to be beaten for the name of Jesus(Acts 5:41). When Paul was in prison, his time to die was near, he sent a second letter to Timothy, not to "will you get me out of this place?", but rather, he exhorted him to "PREACH THE WORD".

 

Why then, did he, who had corresponded with Calvin for years, walk into a church service where Calvin was preaching?

Why did Calvin turn him in to the Council?

Why did Calvin turn him in to the Spanish Inquisition years before that?

Why after Meeting Calvin in París, did the University there demand his death?

Have you read the reasons, which Calvin published, for demanding his death?

 

I thought this was informative:

"The anti-Trinitarian campaigner Servetus was burned at Geneva in 1553, and this is often seen as a blot on Calvin’s reputation. But weigh these facts:

1.The belief that denial of the Trinity and/or Incarnation should be viewed as a capital crime in a Christian state was part of Calvin’s and Geneva’s medieval inheritance; Calvin did not invent it.

2.Anti-Trinitarian heretics were burned in other places beside Geneva in Calvin’s time, and indeed later–two in England, for instance, as late as 1612.

3.The Roman Inquisition had already set a price on Servetus’ head.

4.The decision to burn Servetus as a heretic was taken not only by Calvin personally but by Geneva’s Little Council of twenty-five, acting on unanimous advice from the pastors of several neighboring Reformed churches whom they had consulted.

5.Calvin, whose role in Servetus’ trial had been that of expert witness managing the prosecution, wanted Servetus not to die but to recant, and spent hours with him during and after the trial seeking to change his views.

6.When Servetus was sentenced to be burned alive, Calvin asked for beheading as a less painful alternative, but his request was denied.

7.The chief Reformers outside Geneva, including Bucer and the gentle Melanchthon, fully approved the execution.

The burning should thus be seen as the fault of a culture and an age rather than of one particular child of that culture and age. Calvin, for the record, showed more pastoral concern for Servetus than anyone else connected with the episode. As regards the rights and wrongs of what was done, the root question concerns the propriety of political paternalism in Christianity (that is, whether the Christian state, as distinct from the Christian church, should outlaw heresy or tolerate it), and it was Calvin’s insistence that God alone is Lord of the conscience that was to begin displacing the medieval by the modern mind-set on this question soon after Servetus’ death....."

Calvin and Servetus

 

Servetus' BBQ has been debated ad nauseum on this board, the conclusion of which is that those who judge Calvin for it do so in ignorance. If the worst thing you could say of me was that I had burned a heretic, I could enter Heaven on my own merit.

The issue is your assignment of Christ's words on Christian martyrs to heretics. Many blasphemers were justly stoned, but no proclaimer of the Gospel was justly stoned. Many heretics were justly put out of the synagogues, but no Christian was justly excommunicated.

Many pagans have been justly prosecuted for their beliefs, but no Christian ever was.

Many pagans have been murdered for their beliefs, but they are not the ones of which Christ speaks when He uttered the words you applied to Servetus.

You've done worse than blaspheme Christ, you've hallowed a heretic.

 

Servetus was murdered for daring to claim that the Council of Nicea's invention of a defensive doctrine, designed to hush the charges by pagans that the Christians worshipped 3 gods, was ill conceived.

His real crimes were translating the Scriptures into Spanish, and opposing the little godman, Calvin.

 

Even if your assertion here were true, it wouldn't mitigate your offense.

 

:thumbs:

Here endeth the lesson. :type:

 

I'm not convinced he's even read the book. The quote Reformed gave can be found in its entirety online as a review of the book 'Slave'. All of tnd's evidence came from that one quote alone it is readily available online with a simple search. :thumbs:

 

The OP is purely subjective. Hence the quote 'I've decided'. It is also quite apparent the OP has very little understanding of DoG/Calvinism. :type:

 

If true, he has not done a thorough study of Reformed doctrine. If DCONN attempted a complete study of DoG, Reformed theology etc., then he would have a better understanding and be more credible.

In closing...because this thread had becomme tedious, I would remind DCONN that the majority of "Calvinists " are well studied on Arminism and Non - Calvinist theology (and some were even enemies of "Calvinism") way before we ever embraced it as biblical doctrine. I myself consider DoG a ligimate theology extracted from scripture. That be my story and I is sticking wit it. Also done with this thread.

Play nice.

 

Not the first time d-CON has been caught 'pretending':

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=2075118#post2075118

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=2075305#post2075305

 

....lol, and he's always bashing 'the great pretender' over on news & politics forum....

 

Plagiarism too I see eh?

I guess it is THAT important to some to come off as learned and knowledgeable online and will go to any extent come across as such.

#googlegurus

 

Nah, I'd call it trolling for jollies......can't help but wonder how many other aliases he has on how many other boards...lol, how many aliases does he have/has he had on this board?