Is it not justified to assume the Roman Catholic Church gave birth to Islam through its neglect at the right time - something it in vain tried to rectify much too late through the crusades?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Was it Calvin who saved the Waldensians?
- Thread starter Gerhard Ebersoehn
- Start date
but I'm deviating from my own 'thread'!
In any case, Calvin cannot be accused of the same neglect. My question therefore remains, did he play a role in the harbouring and virtual saving of the 'Protestant' tribes from northern Italy?
In any case, Calvin cannot be accused of the same neglect. My question therefore remains, did he play a role in the harbouring and virtual saving of the 'Protestant' tribes from northern Italy?
Jarthur001 said:
Calvin is far away from Paul, from Peter, from David.
I am not sure Calvin was saved.
It was not Servetus only, because Calvin burnt a woman because she refused the Infant Baptism. She refused it because she believed that Baptism can be done only after one believes in Jesus and what Jesus has done at the Cross. Then Calvin ordered her to be burnt.
That was Calvin.
Martin Luther was saved in 1515 when he was reading Romans 1:17. Wesley was saved on May 24, 1738 with the same phrase. Harry Ironside was saved when he was 14, Pascal was saved Nov 23, 1654.
When was Calvin saved? He has only the testimony of Infant Baptism.
I don't know what happened to him. But I don't know about Thomas Aquinas's salvation even though he was so famous for his books and exegies, but I doubt about him because he was a Mary worshipper.
Jarthur001
Active Member
Eliyahu said:
Wesley believed in Infant Baptism as well. In fact nearly all "reformers" did.
Could you please give book and page about the lady you talked about.
If you read Calvin, I for one could never say he was not saved. If you have time, pick up a copy History Of The Christian Church by schaff. In volume 8 called the Swiss Reformation 1519-1605 the third book covers Calvin fully. 883 pages and no one talks of a lady being killed by Calvin.
Also. starting on page 270 and going through page 295 you will find "Tributes to Calvin" from people they lived with him and know him best. Bucer, Bucer, Beza, John Sturm, Zanchi, Jewel, Scaliger, de Raemond, Pasquier, De Thou, Drelincount, and 100s of others.
Beza said...
Having been witness of Calvins life for 16 years, I think I am fully entitled to say that in this man there was exhibited to all a most beautiful example of the life and death of the Christian...
All said something like this.
Now...if you have new light to share that those that lived with Calvin did not know, please share with us. Having not the eyes of God, I do not see how anyone can claim another is not saved. But I am ready to read what you have to post for us.
I don't think he had such idea after conversion in 1738, especially after he learned from Moravians. If you have any article, show me. I know he remained in COE until his death, he was not problem-free.Jarthur001 said:
I read about it in a paperbook. It is not a secret that Calvin killed that woman and her mother-in-law( or father-in-law)
Do you know about all 58 people killed by Calvin? I don't trust the history written by the people who has uncertainty of salvation.
Yes, his fellowship with Bucer and Farell make me think positive about Calvin but I am not sure and would leave it to God.
I don't say Calvin is not saved, but would keep the reservation on it.
Beza, as far as I know, was the husband of Calvin's daughter or his disciple ( I cannot recall exactly) , and therefore he would have beautified him. What I can judge is his famous book, so famous for the students of Presbyterian College of Theology, Insititutes of Christian Religion is full of his arrogance and ignorance, full of Roman Catholic theories. That's why Presbyterians will be one of the first groups which will join Roman Catholic before or during the Great Tribulation period. they are quite anti-semitic as well. His books tell me that he is wrong! It was right that Servetus raised the question page by page. The Pope of Geneve spoke out that he would kill Servetus once he comes. In other words, he had the strong appetite of the intentional murder since long time before, which is a grievous sin. If you are truly born again and if you hate someone and try to kill a person, then the Holy spirit convict you strongly and therefore one can hardly do such a thing for a lengthy period of time in public. It is more unlikely than the case of adultery, for the born again Christian.
Last edited:
Someone says this Calvin made all the commentaries onto all the books of Bible, but he couldn't do it for REvelation because he noticed this
Rev 21:8
8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.
REv 22:15
15 For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.
Could you interpret for him? Can he go to the Heaven depite his murder? Then why and how? Why not others?
Rev 21:8
8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.
REv 22:15
15 For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.
Could you interpret for him? Can he go to the Heaven depite his murder? Then why and how? Why not others?
Jarthur001
Active Member
Eliyahu,
YOU SAID....
Calvin moved to Orleans for law school....1528
He finished his studies in...1532
He was saved in ...1533
He fled Paris because of the RCC was after him...in 1533
Insititutes of Christian Religion was in 1536 and is the same year he officially left the RCC.
As it turns out, he did not push the RCC. yes there were a few things he held to, that most baptist/presbyterians do not. But believe you me he was not pushing RCC doctrine of works.
the facts are...some maybe...but all are not.
As said before Calvin was wrong to want this man dead. Yet I would not for one moment side with Servetus on anything other then then he need not be put to death.
Case study....
Servetus was anti-trinitarian saying the Trinity was a three-headed Cerberus, and as you know is the dog of hell.
He also said Christ was not the Son of God until He was Jesus.
He used the Koran in his studies and said it was not a bad book, nor was it full of blasphemies.
Servetus said, to believe Jesus Christ to be the word of God the Father, in a large scheme of redemption is fanciful and is but sorcery!!
He said...those under the Law in the OT never were regenerated.
He said..people do not commit sin up to the age of twenty!!
This is just a short list of some of what he said. He talked about God having sex....strange stuff.
Calvin was wrong...but why in the world would you claim Servetus was right?
Again...book please. I'm sure you know as well as I, more lies have been told about Calvin then truth. If you do not have the name of the book and writer, I will say it is not true. No class I have taken has ever addressed this, having many many books on church history, and no one has ever said this. Please state the name of the book and writer.
Book please. Indeed one must be very careful when it comes to Church history. But if you read enough books you can see through the bias.
Oh but you did say this. Just look a few post back and it is clear as day..
YOU SAID....
How could this be true? If it is, Beza married a baby. Calvin only had one child Jacques, born on the 28th of July 1542, and lived only a few days.
Lets see..
Calvin moved to Orleans for law school....1528
He finished his studies in...1532
He was saved in ...1533
He fled Paris because of the RCC was after him...in 1533
Insititutes of Christian Religion was in 1536 and is the same year he officially left the RCC.
As it turns out, he did not push the RCC. yes there were a few things he held to, that most baptist/presbyterians do not. But believe you me he was not pushing RCC doctrine of works.
this statement only shows nothing but arrogance and ignorance. I'm not a Presby, but you have place yourself as God. At least they do not believe in works based salvation.
and you have just shown to be anti-Presby. You placed yourself in the same boat.
the facts are...some maybe...but all are not.
and others say you are wrong.
This is what I do not understand. Why do haters of Calvin, hold that Servetus was right?? This was not a debate over free will of man. Serveyus was a strange man.
As said before Calvin was wrong to want this man dead. Yet I would not for one moment side with Servetus on anything other then then he need not be put to death.
Case study....
Servetus was anti-trinitarian saying the Trinity was a three-headed Cerberus, and as you know is the dog of hell.
He also said Christ was not the Son of God until He was Jesus.
He used the Koran in his studies and said it was not a bad book, nor was it full of blasphemies.
Servetus said, to believe Jesus Christ to be the word of God the Father, in a large scheme of redemption is fanciful and is but sorcery!!
He said...those under the Law in the OT never were regenerated.
He said..people do not commit sin up to the age of twenty!!
This is just a short list of some of what he said. He talked about God having sex....strange stuff.
Calvin was wrong...but why in the world would you claim Servetus was right?
He never said he himself would kill him. He said that he would make sure he was put to death for crimes of the state...and he did just that. Calvin was wrong to force this. But he never said he would kill him on his own.
That is a foolish statement
It sounds like to me, that you hate Calvin. One thing sure...you don't mind telling a few fibs about him. So...in Gods eyes when you lie, is it just as wrong as hate?
Both are sins. There is no white sins and black sins. Sins are sins
Jarthur001
Active Member
Eliyahu said:
I'll let you answer on your own.
Can one that tells a lie go to heaven?
Did I claim myself to be God?Jarthur001 said:
Foolish comment b you as well.
Maybe you saw I am putting myself God because you have thought yourself is God!
I told you I am not sure whether Calvin was saved, then you convert it as I said Calvin was not saved! A good converter converting words to another!
Sorry to comment you this: Calvin was a murderer, if you are his follower, you are a murder-follower. I don't waste time for the muderer, but concentrate my time for my Lord Jesus only.
I cannot recall all the articles and books that I read, but let me show you this:
[FONT=바]Roger de Barry, again towing the Reformed line, adds further thought to Calvin's rhetoric: [/FONT]
"For this reason they (the Reformers) considered the denial of baptism to the children of believers to be a great sin, worthy of severe punishment by excommunication, as well as active from civil magistrate. TO DENY BAPTISM TO A CHRISTIAN CHILD IS TO DENY IT SALVATION, just as failure to circumcise a Jewish child resulted in its excommunication from the people" (The Journal of the Church of England Continuing, April 2005, pg. 16.)
For the issue of Salvation of Calvin, Read this. I am not the only person raising the question:
[FONT=바탕]However, one contemporary of Calvin's, Pieter Bloccius wondered if Calvin was indeed, regenerate: [/FONT]
[FONT=바탕]"They who recommend that heretics be put to death show that THEY ARE NOT TRULY REGENERATE....THIS YOU HAVE NOT LEARNED FROM CHRIST, WHO REBUKED THE VENGEFUL DISCIPLES" (11, pgs. 51, 52.)[/FONT]
[FONT=바탕]Again, and again John Calvin's critics are from the Reformed camp, as this will be noted throughout this article. [/FONT]
[FONT=바탕]James Billton comments: "So, it would appear that the man whom many today take as their spiritual guide was regarded, and understandably so, by some of his contemporaries, as NOT BEING BORN AGAIN" (11, pg. 52.)[/FONT]
[FONT=바탕]Dr. Ruckman believes that Calvin was either unsaved or 80 percent Roman Catholic, because he held to Baptismal Regeneration from John 3:3-5 and Acts 2:38 (12, pg. 31. ) [/FONT]
8888
Two Anabaptists were banished from the city on account of their theological views.
( Three of above quoted from http://www.excatholicsforchrist.com/index.php?PageURL=Calvinism+Examined.htm)
888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888
As for the death penalties under Calvin, here is the summary:
There were some ugly moments in theocratic Geneva. During these years 58 people were executed and 76 banished in order to preserve morals and discipline. Like most men of his century, the reformer was convinced that believing wrongly about God was so heinous a crime that not even death could expiate it. ( http://www.answers.com/topic/john-calvin)
Capital punishment was applied for many reasons. During the first five years of Calvin’s rule in the small town of Geneva, 13 people were hanged, 10 decapitated, and 35 burned. Seventy-six were cruelly driven from their houses. The prisons were so crowded that the head jailer “informed the magistrates he could not find accommodation for any more prisoners” (The Right to Heresy, p. 227).http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/protestant-persecutions.html
134 people among 13,000 population of Geneve is more than 1%. Imagine 1% of US population is either killed or banished during 4 year's reign.
I am not talking about any bias. The reason why I oppose to Calvin-followers is because I wonder why they follow him, leaving teh Onlt True Person, Jesus Christ. Was Jesus not enough? Was Bible not enough, and therefore they follow Institutes of Christian Religion?
I don't believe Calvin saved Waldensians who were like Anabaptists or Wiedertaufers who oppose Infant Baptism.
In reality if we read the articles on Calvin we can see that Calvin was Infant Baptism Mania!
The charges against Servetus was 2 : Trinity and Infant Baptism.
Does the denial of Trinity deserve the death penalty according to Bible?
Did the Robber at the Cross believe in Trinity?
Does the denial of Infant Baptism deserve Death Penalty?
ABOSOLUTELY NONSENSE by John Calvin and by his followers, Murderer-Followers !
Last edited:
Jarthur001
Active Member
Eliyahu,
You must be kidding..right? I have asked 3 times before for evidence to support your off the wall attacks on a man you hate. This is all you have? You have shown your self to be nothing other then one that not only hates, but one that will make up false statements in order to make others agree with you. Would it not be better for you to just believe the truth?
Case 1) You said Calvin also killed a lady because of baptism views.
FAILED After 3 times of asking for the book and page number..NOTHING.
You made it up, or got it from a hater that made it up.
Case 2) You said Calvin was unsaved.
FAILED You were given 20 some pages to read of people that know him and watched his life. Your inward hate caused you to reject good reason and hold to your doctrine of attack and more bogus claims. Here I follow with still more proof which came be backed up in many more books. What is yet to be seen is how you will reject the facts of this statement as well.
The top of Calvins last will.
Case 3) You said Calvin killed 58 other people
This is your proof
FAILED a) As I had thought, this is no book, but rather a website. Please note you will not find this in any history book. Please also note you will find many websites with bogus views as this. Being that you seem to believe any thing found on the Net, you may enjoy this link...about mations
http://www.the-martians.co.uk/upgrade/
b) Please notice the wording even in your own link. "58 people killed during these years". You seem to think that Calvin was behind each one of them. Yet if this were the case, then Michael Servetus was nothing but one of many. So why does every text book, and every single book on the histroy of the church only speak of Michael Servetus? Reason...they were shocked!! It was the only time. There may have been 58 people killed, but most of them was by the RCC.
c) As to the David Cloud link...get real. This guy is a 1st class joke. Cloud makes up about half of his stuff. I could write a book on the lies he tells.
Case 4) Did I claim myself to be God?
YES!!! when you said...
You just looked into the future and proclaimed what would take place. Only God knows this. Being that this is not found in the Bible, and the Bible has been finished in its recording of the Words of God, you have set yourself up as God. Here is a hint, so please write it down. Salvation is not by groups, be it a church or other such groups. Salvation is a relationship with God, and each of us must trust on our own. For you to claim your hate for one group as if they will miss the rapture, you have acted as God. Shame on you.
Case 6)
Your statement was foolish and arrogance and ignorance. Calvin murder no one. If Calvin had, you would have been put to death for murder. You fail to understand the law of the land. Calvin did not have the power to put anyone to death. The law was made by others, and Calvin pointed to one that crossed the law. Still, this was not murder now was it? So yes you are both have both arrogance and ignorance in your little view of history.
BTW..you FAILED here too.
It looks as if your did not pass. Please return to your room. This time READ a history book, and maybe you can be tested again.
God is love.
I "a Calvin supporter" was the 1st on this thread to say Calvin was wrong in one case. Most people are like this..not just I. For they look for truth. You can only fool yourself so many times and then you must KNOW for sure, if what you believe is right. Yet it is clear, you look for ways to support your bogus views. If you had found a website that supported calvin, you would not post it....would you?? BTW..you said you can't find your articles...You can find most of your articles in dreamland .com
........:godisgood:
You must be kidding..right? I have asked 3 times before for evidence to support your off the wall attacks on a man you hate. This is all you have? You have shown your self to be nothing other then one that not only hates, but one that will make up false statements in order to make others agree with you. Would it not be better for you to just believe the truth?
Case 1) You said Calvin also killed a lady because of baptism views.
FAILED After 3 times of asking for the book and page number..NOTHING.
You made it up, or got it from a hater that made it up.
Case 2) You said Calvin was unsaved.
FAILED You were given 20 some pages to read of people that know him and watched his life. Your inward hate caused you to reject good reason and hold to your doctrine of attack and more bogus claims. Here I follow with still more proof which came be backed up in many more books. What is yet to be seen is how you will reject the facts of this statement as well.
The top of Calvins last will.
Case 3) You said Calvin killed 58 other people
This is your proof
FAILED a) As I had thought, this is no book, but rather a website. Please note you will not find this in any history book. Please also note you will find many websites with bogus views as this. Being that you seem to believe any thing found on the Net, you may enjoy this link...about mations
http://www.the-martians.co.uk/upgrade/
b) Please notice the wording even in your own link. "58 people killed during these years". You seem to think that Calvin was behind each one of them. Yet if this were the case, then Michael Servetus was nothing but one of many. So why does every text book, and every single book on the histroy of the church only speak of Michael Servetus? Reason...they were shocked!! It was the only time. There may have been 58 people killed, but most of them was by the RCC.
c) As to the David Cloud link...get real. This guy is a 1st class joke. Cloud makes up about half of his stuff. I could write a book on the lies he tells.
Case 4) Did I claim myself to be God?
YES!!! when you said...
You just looked into the future and proclaimed what would take place. Only God knows this. Being that this is not found in the Bible, and the Bible has been finished in its recording of the Words of God, you have set yourself up as God. Here is a hint, so please write it down. Salvation is not by groups, be it a church or other such groups. Salvation is a relationship with God, and each of us must trust on our own. For you to claim your hate for one group as if they will miss the rapture, you have acted as God. Shame on you.
Case 6)
"
Your statement was foolish and arrogance and ignorance. Calvin murder no one. If Calvin had, you would have been put to death for murder. You fail to understand the law of the land. Calvin did not have the power to put anyone to death. The law was made by others, and Calvin pointed to one that crossed the law. Still, this was not murder now was it? So yes you are both have both arrogance and ignorance in your little view of history.
BTW..you FAILED here too.
It looks as if your did not pass. Please return to your room. This time READ a history book, and maybe you can be tested again.
I made no jump of faith as you did. My statements were based on your bogus off the wall claims of fantasy game players and haters of Calvin.
And you were given proof that you were wrong. Did you read the pages given? My guess is no. Have you read his last will? My guess is no. Have you read in books where you talks about his salvation? My guess is no. Yet you stand in a glaring position full of ignorance as if you know the heart of another man. Again, your own words convict you of your hate for another brother of God, only because you hate his doctrine. It may help if you stay off web pages of the make believe world and read his books to know the man, before you produce more hate in your heart.
Thanks for proving my point!!! Your lack of knowing history makes you guilty of ignorance.
God is love.You seem to waste time believe haters of Calvin, and waste your time believing bugus claims not found in any history book. You believe it only because bobby joe had placed it on his website and because bobby joe hates calvin and being that you also hate calvin, bobby joe must be right. Who in the world is bobby joe? Anyone can make bogus claims. Have you ever thought about looking for the truth? Have you evey thought maybe it was a good idea to take the time a READ a history book?? Do you not think this may help you find the truth? Or do you just want to believe bobby joe, for he hates calvin?
I "a Calvin supporter" was the 1st on this thread to say Calvin was wrong in one case. Most people are like this..not just I. For they look for truth. You can only fool yourself so many times and then you must KNOW for sure, if what you believe is right. Yet it is clear, you look for ways to support your bogus views. If you had found a website that supported calvin, you would not post it....would you?? BTW..you said you can't find your articles...You can find most of your articles in dreamland .com
........:godisgood:
Last edited by a moderator:
Jarthur001,
Thanks for standing in for Calvin's character; I admirer him - is the least I could say. I think he was one man who together with Paul could boast in his sharing in the sufferings of Christ. Wish I had the time to learn by heart much of what he wrote it's so precious.
I think Calvin acted right in the case of Servetus, as I've explained before. It might have been treason against his own conscience as well as against the Church and Truth, had he acted differently. In my eyes he stands above reproach or blame.
Thanks for standing in for Calvin's character; I admirer him - is the least I could say. I think he was one man who together with Paul could boast in his sharing in the sufferings of Christ. Wish I had the time to learn by heart much of what he wrote it's so precious.
I think Calvin acted right in the case of Servetus, as I've explained before. It might have been treason against his own conscience as well as against the Church and Truth, had he acted differently. In my eyes he stands above reproach or blame.
Eliyahu, I am what can be called an A-baptist, and have always been against especially infant-baptism. But today you have given me the best argument in favour of infant-baptism I've ever read! It was this: "When was Calvin saved? He has only the testimony of Infant Baptism."
Let me tell you, I saw the word 'bogus' somewhere used on this thread, but I would prefer your 'testimony' for Calvin's salvation to many if not most or all of the 'bogus'-testimonies of many's 'whens'-salvation. That some emotional moment of 'when' someone becomes aware of conversion should serve as evidence of salvation proves but superficial, ego-centric, completely unwarranted complacency. It's baseless arrogance; then I would rather rely on infant-baptism understood as Covenant-sign of God's faithfulness.
Let me tell you, I saw the word 'bogus' somewhere used on this thread, but I would prefer your 'testimony' for Calvin's salvation to many if not most or all of the 'bogus'-testimonies of many's 'whens'-salvation. That some emotional moment of 'when' someone becomes aware of conversion should serve as evidence of salvation proves but superficial, ego-centric, completely unwarranted complacency. It's baseless arrogance; then I would rather rely on infant-baptism understood as Covenant-sign of God's faithfulness.
Jarthur001,
I have waited for your answer to my previous post. I expected you couldn’t because I never said Calvin was not saved, though I justly raised the question about his salvation as many did.
First of all, I would apologize you and the readers on this thread for not providing the evidence for my statement that Geneva under the leadership of Calvin killed 2 women without civil criminal offence except the refusal of the Infant Baptism. I think I read such article either in City Library or at Library of Univ of Toronto. I didn’t try to keep the record of such article thinking that such story can be found elsewhere and many people would know it.
My memory was that during the reign of Calvin in Geneva, 58 were killed, 76 were banished out of Geneva, among the 58 killed, 30 were women, 14 of them were witches, and 2 among the rest were Anabaptists who refused the Infant Baptism ( Let alone Servetus)
These days I hear that the people start to find the records of the Interrogation and the Trials at the court of Geneva around the time of Calvin’s reign and therefore we may be able to get some more detailed information telling us the whole situation and the way and thoughts of the people involved there, including John Calvin.
In the meantime, we can judge whether John Calvin’s persecutions were limited to the case of Michael Servetus or to many others, by reading many articles as follows:
Most savagely of all were punished any offenders whose behaviour challenged Calvin's political and spiritual infallibility. A man who publicly protested against the reformer's doctrine of predestination was mercilessly flogged at all the crossways of the city and then expelled. A book-printer who, in his cups, had railed at Calvin was sentenced to have his tongue perforated with a red-hot iron before being expelled from the city. Jacques Gruet was racked and then executed merely for having called Calvin a hypocrite. Each offence, even the most paltry, was carefully entered in the records of the Consistory so that the private life of every citizen could unfailingly be held up against him in evidence
During the first five years of Calvin's rule, in this town which had a comparatively small population, thirteen persons were hanged, ten decapitated, thirty-five burned, while seventy-six persons were driven from their houses and homes--to say nothing of those who ran away in time to avoid the operations of the terror
http://www.gospeltruth.net/heresy/heresy_chap2.htm
We can read further on Calvin from the followings:
http://www.biblelife.org/calvinism.htm
You can read the article and history by Philip Schaff:
http://www.ccel.org/search?category=fulltext&qu=calvin+infant+baptism
Again, you can find the statements by the people who doubt about the Salvation of Calvin in the following article by Ex-Catholic.
http://www.excatholicsforchrist.com/index.php?PageURL=Calvinism+Examined.htm
I don’t think the followings were the fragrance of the Born-Again believers behaviors:
Prohibited were theatres, amusements, popular festivals, any kind of dancing or playing. Even so innocent a sport as skating stirred Calvin’s bile. The only tolerated attire was sober and almost monkish. The tailors, therefore, were forbidden, unless they had special permission from the town authorities, to cut in accordance with new fashions. Girls were forbidden to wear silk before they reached the age of fifteen years; above that age, they were not allowed to wear velvet. ... Lace was forbidden; gloves were forbidden; frills and slashed shoes were forbidden. Forbidden was the use of litters and of wheeled carriages. Forbidden were family feasts to which more than twenty persons had been invited ... No other wine than the red wine of the region might be drunk, while game, whether four footed or winged, and pastry, were prohibited. Married folk were not allowed to give one another presents at the wedding, or for six months afterwards. ... No book might be printed without a special permit. ... Although for hundreds of years the names of Claude and Amade had been popular, they were not prohibited because they did not occur in the Bible. ... Forbidden as a crime of crimes was any criticism of Calvin’s dictatorship; and the town crier, preceded by drummers, solemnly warned the burghers that ‘there must be no discussion of public affairs except in the presence of the Town Council’” (Zweig, The Right to Heresy, pp. 221-225).
http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/protestant-persecutions.html
We must remember this:
Calvin never repented about his involvement in killing Servetus until he ( Calvin) died.
His theology, his belief system allowed him to conduct the cruel execution of Servetus, Cruel killing of Jacques Gruet, banishing the innocent Sebastian Castellio, The Greek Scholar and Bible translator. Calvin’s Theology allowed him not to repent until his death, about all the atrocities where he was involved.
The accusations against Servetus were mainly two, Servetus’ objection to Trinity and Infant Baptism. Are the charges based on the eternal truth?
Shall we still have to follow Calvin?
After the graduation from the university, I was offered a good scholarship from a Presbyterian University. I wanted to go there but prayed for the guidance and decision, then God clearly opposed to my willingness. I didn’t know why because, in my view, there was no other book, better than Institutes of Christian Religion, to learn about the systematic theology and I believed that Predestination is biblically correct. After the elapse of decades, I settled down among the so-called Plymouth Brethren and have tried to conform to the Bible teachings. Now I find Calvin’s theory are mostly human theory, and have lots of problems such as Clergy system, Infant Baptism, Baptism by Sprinkling, Uniform Church of Catholic Church concept, while I believe that Bible is enough to teach us everything..
I am glad that I don’t live under John Calvin
I am glad that Calvin doesn’t live any longer
I am glad that I am not a Calvinist
I am glad that I am not a follower or advocator of John Calvin who killed many and never repented until his death.
But I read this passage very well:
1 John 3:15
Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know thatno murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.
I have waited for your answer to my previous post. I expected you couldn’t because I never said Calvin was not saved, though I justly raised the question about his salvation as many did.
First of all, I would apologize you and the readers on this thread for not providing the evidence for my statement that Geneva under the leadership of Calvin killed 2 women without civil criminal offence except the refusal of the Infant Baptism. I think I read such article either in City Library or at Library of Univ of Toronto. I didn’t try to keep the record of such article thinking that such story can be found elsewhere and many people would know it.
My memory was that during the reign of Calvin in Geneva, 58 were killed, 76 were banished out of Geneva, among the 58 killed, 30 were women, 14 of them were witches, and 2 among the rest were Anabaptists who refused the Infant Baptism ( Let alone Servetus)
These days I hear that the people start to find the records of the Interrogation and the Trials at the court of Geneva around the time of Calvin’s reign and therefore we may be able to get some more detailed information telling us the whole situation and the way and thoughts of the people involved there, including John Calvin.
In the meantime, we can judge whether John Calvin’s persecutions were limited to the case of Michael Servetus or to many others, by reading many articles as follows:
Most savagely of all were punished any offenders whose behaviour challenged Calvin's political and spiritual infallibility. A man who publicly protested against the reformer's doctrine of predestination was mercilessly flogged at all the crossways of the city and then expelled. A book-printer who, in his cups, had railed at Calvin was sentenced to have his tongue perforated with a red-hot iron before being expelled from the city. Jacques Gruet was racked and then executed merely for having called Calvin a hypocrite. Each offence, even the most paltry, was carefully entered in the records of the Consistory so that the private life of every citizen could unfailingly be held up against him in evidence
During the first five years of Calvin's rule, in this town which had a comparatively small population, thirteen persons were hanged, ten decapitated, thirty-five burned, while seventy-six persons were driven from their houses and homes--to say nothing of those who ran away in time to avoid the operations of the terror
http://www.gospeltruth.net/heresy/heresy_chap2.htm
We can read further on Calvin from the followings:
http://www.biblelife.org/calvinism.htm
You can read the article and history by Philip Schaff:
http://www.ccel.org/search?category=fulltext&qu=calvin+infant+baptism
Again, you can find the statements by the people who doubt about the Salvation of Calvin in the following article by Ex-Catholic.
http://www.excatholicsforchrist.com/index.php?PageURL=Calvinism+Examined.htm
I don’t think the followings were the fragrance of the Born-Again believers behaviors:
Prohibited were theatres, amusements, popular festivals, any kind of dancing or playing. Even so innocent a sport as skating stirred Calvin’s bile. The only tolerated attire was sober and almost monkish. The tailors, therefore, were forbidden, unless they had special permission from the town authorities, to cut in accordance with new fashions. Girls were forbidden to wear silk before they reached the age of fifteen years; above that age, they were not allowed to wear velvet. ... Lace was forbidden; gloves were forbidden; frills and slashed shoes were forbidden. Forbidden was the use of litters and of wheeled carriages. Forbidden were family feasts to which more than twenty persons had been invited ... No other wine than the red wine of the region might be drunk, while game, whether four footed or winged, and pastry, were prohibited. Married folk were not allowed to give one another presents at the wedding, or for six months afterwards. ... No book might be printed without a special permit. ... Although for hundreds of years the names of Claude and Amade had been popular, they were not prohibited because they did not occur in the Bible. ... Forbidden as a crime of crimes was any criticism of Calvin’s dictatorship; and the town crier, preceded by drummers, solemnly warned the burghers that ‘there must be no discussion of public affairs except in the presence of the Town Council’” (Zweig, The Right to Heresy, pp. 221-225).
http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/protestant-persecutions.html
We must remember this:
Calvin never repented about his involvement in killing Servetus until he ( Calvin) died.
His theology, his belief system allowed him to conduct the cruel execution of Servetus, Cruel killing of Jacques Gruet, banishing the innocent Sebastian Castellio, The Greek Scholar and Bible translator. Calvin’s Theology allowed him not to repent until his death, about all the atrocities where he was involved.
The accusations against Servetus were mainly two, Servetus’ objection to Trinity and Infant Baptism. Are the charges based on the eternal truth?
Shall we still have to follow Calvin?
After the graduation from the university, I was offered a good scholarship from a Presbyterian University. I wanted to go there but prayed for the guidance and decision, then God clearly opposed to my willingness. I didn’t know why because, in my view, there was no other book, better than Institutes of Christian Religion, to learn about the systematic theology and I believed that Predestination is biblically correct. After the elapse of decades, I settled down among the so-called Plymouth Brethren and have tried to conform to the Bible teachings. Now I find Calvin’s theory are mostly human theory, and have lots of problems such as Clergy system, Infant Baptism, Baptism by Sprinkling, Uniform Church of Catholic Church concept, while I believe that Bible is enough to teach us everything..
I am glad that I don’t live under John Calvin
I am glad that Calvin doesn’t live any longer
I am glad that I am not a Calvinist
I am glad that I am not a follower or advocator of John Calvin who killed many and never repented until his death.
But I read this passage very well:
1 John 3:15
Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know thatno murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.
GE,
As for Infant Baptism, the method and logic used by Calvin when he defend it was very much ridiculous.
Calvin mentioned that Noah and his children passed thru the Baptism when it started the raining, because it was a kind of a baptism ( according to his theology) and therefore he can find a good example of infant baptism there.
Do you know how old the children of Noah at that time? Shem was 100 year old, and Japhet was older than Shem, only Ham's age is unknown, but I guess Ham was a little younger than Shem who was 100 year of age, and all 3 were married already. There we can find no support for the baby baptism.
Then Calvin illustrate Abrahm and Ismael, Circumcision at the age of 13. The circumcision was totally different from Baptism, and it applies to the baby on the 8th day after birth. Baptism is different from Circumcision.
Then he refer to Acts 16:30-32 where Philippian Jailor and his family were baptized, then refer to Acts 16:15 about Lydia and her household.
His logic is ridiculous because he claim that Jailor had a baby and Lydia had a baby from such reading. Then he derived the theory from Matthew 19:4 where Jesus said Not to prevent the children from coming to Him (Mt 18:4-5). If you read the Calvin's theory about Infant Baptism you will find it horribly riddiculous.
Also, his theory about the Clergy system that only the ordained leaders like Pastors can perform the sacraments is also ridiculous. He never properly interpretted the truth in 1 Peter 2:5-9.
Also, I personally believe that Jesus hates Nicolaitanes ( Rev 2:15) and this Nicolaitanes mean the Clergy system.
If there is any further explanation in the Bible, often the word itself gives the clue. The reason why Bible keep silent about the meaning must have been because the word itself is self-explanatory.
Nico ( Nicao=Conquer, Victory over, Rule Over) Lai ( laymen, laypeople)
Nico-demos, Nike ( victory), Nicolas ( ruling people) .
Nicolaitanes mean the group of people who are ruling over the people, who rule the lay-people, the Clergy system in the church.
Jesus hates Nicolaitanes!
As for Infant Baptism, the method and logic used by Calvin when he defend it was very much ridiculous.
Calvin mentioned that Noah and his children passed thru the Baptism when it started the raining, because it was a kind of a baptism ( according to his theology) and therefore he can find a good example of infant baptism there.
Do you know how old the children of Noah at that time? Shem was 100 year old, and Japhet was older than Shem, only Ham's age is unknown, but I guess Ham was a little younger than Shem who was 100 year of age, and all 3 were married already. There we can find no support for the baby baptism.
Then Calvin illustrate Abrahm and Ismael, Circumcision at the age of 13. The circumcision was totally different from Baptism, and it applies to the baby on the 8th day after birth. Baptism is different from Circumcision.
Then he refer to Acts 16:30-32 where Philippian Jailor and his family were baptized, then refer to Acts 16:15 about Lydia and her household.
His logic is ridiculous because he claim that Jailor had a baby and Lydia had a baby from such reading. Then he derived the theory from Matthew 19:4 where Jesus said Not to prevent the children from coming to Him (Mt 18:4-5). If you read the Calvin's theory about Infant Baptism you will find it horribly riddiculous.
Also, his theory about the Clergy system that only the ordained leaders like Pastors can perform the sacraments is also ridiculous. He never properly interpretted the truth in 1 Peter 2:5-9.
Also, I personally believe that Jesus hates Nicolaitanes ( Rev 2:15) and this Nicolaitanes mean the Clergy system.
If there is any further explanation in the Bible, often the word itself gives the clue. The reason why Bible keep silent about the meaning must have been because the word itself is self-explanatory.
Nico ( Nicao=Conquer, Victory over, Rule Over) Lai ( laymen, laypeople)
Nico-demos, Nike ( victory), Nicolas ( ruling people) .
Nicolaitanes mean the group of people who are ruling over the people, who rule the lay-people, the Clergy system in the church.
Jesus hates Nicolaitanes!
I, for myself, shall admit, that where there is smoke rising, some fire should go on underneath. So maybe there may be some truth in all these accumalated accusations against Calvin. But my great question is, why does one not find the least implication or slightest inuendeo to such attrocities in any of Calvin's writings? Surely is such were the man's character, it would have reflected in his writings?
Now just don't tell me it reflects through his believing the doctrine of election, for that doctrine is of God's grace and love to any worthy of eternal damnation only.
This to me explains the accusations against Calvin, because he was the great champion of the doctrine of election which natural man so hates with his very being; and because they find it impossible to disprove Election from the Scriptures, they aim at its proponent, to tear him to pieces with greater pleasure in their surrealistcruelty than could be imagined possible in practice.
Now just don't tell me it reflects through his believing the doctrine of election, for that doctrine is of God's grace and love to any worthy of eternal damnation only.
This to me explains the accusations against Calvin, because he was the great champion of the doctrine of election which natural man so hates with his very being; and because they find it impossible to disprove Election from the Scriptures, they aim at its proponent, to tear him to pieces with greater pleasure in their surrealistcruelty than could be imagined possible in practice.
I, for myself, shall admit, that where there is smoke rising, some fire should go on underneath. So maybe there may be some truth in all these accumalated accusations against Calvin. But my great question is, why does one not find the least implication or slightest inuendeo to such attrocities in any of Calvin's writings? Surely is such were the man's character, it would have reflected in his writings?
Now just don't tell me it reflects through his believing the doctrine of election, for that doctrine is of God's grace and love to any worthy of eternal damnation only.
This to me explains the accusations against Calvin, because he was the great champion of the doctrine of election which natural man so hates with his very being; and because they find it impossible to disprove Election from the Scriptures, they aim at its proponent, to tear him to pieces with greater delight in their surrealistic cruelty than could imaginably be possible under hard circumstantial judgment.
Now just don't tell me it reflects through his believing the doctrine of election, for that doctrine is of God's grace and love to any worthy of eternal damnation only.
This to me explains the accusations against Calvin, because he was the great champion of the doctrine of election which natural man so hates with his very being; and because they find it impossible to disprove Election from the Scriptures, they aim at its proponent, to tear him to pieces with greater delight in their surrealistic cruelty than could imaginably be possible under hard circumstantial judgment.
Frankly, as I read history, I think I would have felt safer around the Waldensians than around Calvin's sycophants, alhough not necessarily Calvin, himself, where I would not have felt threatened near so much. Still, heavy is the head, that wears the crown.
Just my opinion.
Ed
Just my opinion.
Ed
GE and Ed,
Frankly, in my early days after I was born again, Calvin was a spiritual hero to me because many people recommended me to read his book and I found Election and Predestination correct. Though one may say that we have to exert our best to live godly life, even that effort and life would have been predestined by Omniscient God. However that type of debate doesn't help the believers to live the godly life faithfully, even though we can definitely say after we have finished our life that everything in our life was predestined by God.
When I started to focus my life onto Christ that my life conform to the teachings in the Bible, then I started to focus on the actual lives of the people rather than the theory or doctrine of the person. The people such as Robert Chapman who said " I notice not so many people are born again in Christ, but the people who live like Christ and like his teachings are more scarce and therefore I have decided that I preach Jesus Christ by living the life of Jesus Christ" He lived 100 years ( 1800-1900) helping the poor people, and his hymn songs are still sung at my church.
Also, JN Darby's life attracted me as he lived a bachelor life devoting his entire time preaching the gospel and translating the Bible, travelling poorly in Europe.
If Calvin lived the life of mercy and symparthy, helping the poor people, I would have still remained as his supporter.
When I debated with Catholics, they pointed out Calvin from time to time, then I defended Calvin all the time, ignoring some problems with him. But at the end I started to doubt about his personality, and as Calvin himself admitted, he had a hot temper. But if we read all the exchanges of letters and dialogues thru Philip Schaff or others, we can find the anger and hatred of Calvin against his opponents. At the end, I started to give up supporting him and got out of the delusion of the human theory, and started to notice his Infant Baptism and Clergy System, Catholic Church etc as big problems. Infant Baptism is not a small problem, and his theory deriving it from Bible is really ridiculous.
Jesus said Son of man cam not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for money.( Mt 20:28)
John 3:
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
I don't think Calvin saved Waldensians as we notice he condemned the Anabaptism very much and Waldensians didn't accept Paedobaptism except when they were persecuted and forced to accept it.
Would Calvin have focussed to save the people instead of judging them to death!
Frankly, in my early days after I was born again, Calvin was a spiritual hero to me because many people recommended me to read his book and I found Election and Predestination correct. Though one may say that we have to exert our best to live godly life, even that effort and life would have been predestined by Omniscient God. However that type of debate doesn't help the believers to live the godly life faithfully, even though we can definitely say after we have finished our life that everything in our life was predestined by God.
When I started to focus my life onto Christ that my life conform to the teachings in the Bible, then I started to focus on the actual lives of the people rather than the theory or doctrine of the person. The people such as Robert Chapman who said " I notice not so many people are born again in Christ, but the people who live like Christ and like his teachings are more scarce and therefore I have decided that I preach Jesus Christ by living the life of Jesus Christ" He lived 100 years ( 1800-1900) helping the poor people, and his hymn songs are still sung at my church.
Also, JN Darby's life attracted me as he lived a bachelor life devoting his entire time preaching the gospel and translating the Bible, travelling poorly in Europe.
If Calvin lived the life of mercy and symparthy, helping the poor people, I would have still remained as his supporter.
When I debated with Catholics, they pointed out Calvin from time to time, then I defended Calvin all the time, ignoring some problems with him. But at the end I started to doubt about his personality, and as Calvin himself admitted, he had a hot temper. But if we read all the exchanges of letters and dialogues thru Philip Schaff or others, we can find the anger and hatred of Calvin against his opponents. At the end, I started to give up supporting him and got out of the delusion of the human theory, and started to notice his Infant Baptism and Clergy System, Catholic Church etc as big problems. Infant Baptism is not a small problem, and his theory deriving it from Bible is really ridiculous.
Jesus said Son of man cam not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for money.( Mt 20:28)
John 3:
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
I don't think Calvin saved Waldensians as we notice he condemned the Anabaptism very much and Waldensians didn't accept Paedobaptism except when they were persecuted and forced to accept it.
Would Calvin have focussed to save the people instead of judging them to death!