Was it Calvin who saved the Waldensians?

[Rippon]

Eliyahu , you are a fountain of misinformation . It is impossible to keep up with your nonsense . Just a couple of items to start off with : You are not in the least familiar with Calvin's Institutes . Don't pretend otherwise . We are Baptists here so bad-mouthing Calvin over his baptismal stance will not win you any points . You say his Institutes are filled with unbiblical ideas . I'm with Spurgeon when he said words to the effect that "I agree with him in the main ." Of course Calvin is wrong at times . But on the whole , not only in his Institutes but his commentaries , sermons and letters he is God-centered and very edifying . You do not know what you are talking about on the other hand .

In post #12 you said that "Calvin had no experience of salvation ." Now don't try to deny you said that remark . We as Christians do not all have a John Newton , John Bunyan , Apostle Paul type of conversion . But Calvin does allude to his salvation experience .

In post # 18 you said that you had "no intention to judge Calvin severely." All your posts counter this false claim of yours .

In all the time that Calvin lived in Geneva no one but Servetus was executed . And the City Council rammed the trial and proceedings through . Calvin did not even become a citizen of Geneva until 1559 -- 5 years before his death .

William Farel pushed Calvin to stay and reform Geneva . Calvin wanted no part of that idea . So Farel said that if Calvin was going to follow his own interests rather than God's call -- the Lord 's curse would rest on him . Farel's words scared him and he remained until both were kicked out in a few years time . After Calvin's death Farel admitted that he held him against his will in Geneva . Calvin enjoyed his time away from Geneva . He was urged to come back . He refused , and I believe it was Martin Bucer who did the same Farel routine on Calvin to get him to return to Geneva .

William Farel was sent out by Calvin to nuture the faith of the Waldensians (who were not Anabaptists ) . They were pre-reformers and their ancient creedal statements bear out their Calvinistic beliefs ( long before John Calvin came on the scene ) . Actually Farel was in touch with them before he knew Calvin -- before Calvin became a Christian .

 

[EdSutton]

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!

FTR, I don't consider either John Calvin, Robert Chapman, John Nelson Darby, or any other person living or dead a "hero", myself, per se. I'll reserve that title for an instance by instance usage except for the Lord Jesus Christ. I don't mean to 'preach' here but think a bit more was read into my post than I put in it.

Ed

 

[Jarthur001]

Eliyahu,

I need only wait till you do it again. You just did. You can change the hate in your heart alone. You must have Christ change it for you. You have shown more then once your hate for a man, that died before you were born.

All that are saved by the blood of Christ go to heaven. We both agree.

You claim Calvin murdered at lease one person.

Then you always follow with a verse such as you just did..

But I read this passage very well:
1 John 3:15
Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.

Where is your logic in a nutshell. You hate Calvin. You see Calvin as a Murder. You yourself have never read about Calvins salvation. You post 3 passages in 2 post showing muderers do not go to heaven. This in your logic..means Calvin is in hell.

But notice it all start with you hate of the man. You need to remove that hate.

You also said.."I am glad that Calvin doesn’t live any longer" exposing your hate for the man.

You once again try to pen Calvin to the deaths of 58 others...

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)

Now let it be known....you have been shown that you are wrong about his salvation. I can not read the heart of a person that is alive, let alone of a person that is dead. I have news for you...you can either. We must go by what others that lived with him said...and the words he wrote. I have given you pages to read from others that know him well. Have you read them? You have taken the time to find other ways to hate the man. Are you looking for ways to prove your hate, or looking for the truth?

It just so happens that Calvin wrote a number of books. You can read his own work and know that the man was saved. I gave you his last well...did you read it? If you had you would know he was saved. Yet to this point you have shown your hate for the man rules your world...in not taking the time to read, in order to change your hate found in your heart.

You use this a few times..."during the reign of Calvin in Geneva".

Your use of the words "reign of Calvin" shows you do not know your history

Did you know that Calvin in 1538 himself had to flee for his life from Geneva, from these very magistrates, that had Servetus burn? He was forced to leave Geneva for exile in Strasbourg after these same magistrates looked to kill him.

Calvin did not control the state, yet he did up hold the law of the land.

Calvin was naturally shy, timid, and desirous of living in obscurity. Having studied law, Calvin held high the law of the sate and thought it evil to cross the line. He held Gods law even higher, into that of the gospel. If you had met Calvin, you would highly esteem him as a saint, and as a servant of God, but you would find it difficult to love him as a man or make him a bosom friend. His godly, self-denying life and walk and holy example would often reprove you. Calvin might stir you up to desire for yourself a measure of the grace; but if you were tempted and tried, plagued by sin, assailed by Satan, and sometimes almost at your wits' end, you would feel like a foolish sinner around Calvin.

http://www.gospeltruth.net/heresy/heresy_chap2.htm
http://www.biblelife.org/calvinism.htm
http://www.excatholicsforchrist.com/index.php?PageURL=Calvinism+Examined.htm

What...Yet more "I hate Calvin" sites. You seem to love these sites. Your hate is not kind to you or others. There are many sites like this, but I have yet to find one that did not lie. Please show me proof from someone that tells only the truth.

Now you do have one... Philip Schaff, that I believe. Schaff is non-Calvinist...yet he does not make up lies as your Calvin hater sites do. Philip Schaff is one of the top church history writers of all time. You will not find all these "other" murders in Schaffs work. Yet history...church history ...is what Schaff wrote on. Why would he not cover all these killings? Maybe because Calvin was not behind them.

http://www.ccel.org/search?category=fulltext&qu=calvin+infant+baptism

Look on your own. Schaff has over 800 pages on History of the Christian Church, Volume VIII: Modern Christianity. The Swiss Reformation. Yet only talks about Calvin being behind Servetus death. NONE OTHER!! WHY??? Does billy bob...the calvin hatter know more then Schaff...or is billy bob just another calvin hater you love?

Now would be a good time to repent from your hate. There is no need to hate anyone, let alone a great man of God.

You said this..

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.

This is not true. Calvin defended himself up the the very week he died. I have yet to see proof where Calvin said he was wrong. I say this to show I am trying to be fair about the whole subject. I see calvin as being wrong in this one case, yet I do not hate the man as you do.

 

[Eliyahu]

Eliyahu,

Look on your own. Schaff has over 800 pages on History of the Christian Church, Volume VIII: Modern Christianity. The Swiss Reformation. Yet only talks about Calvin being behind Servetus death. NONE OTHER!! WHY??? Does billy bob...the calvin hatter know more then Schaff...or is billy bob just another calvin hater you love?

Now would be a good time to repent from your hate. There is no need to hate anyone, let alone a great man of God.

You said this..

We must remember this:



This is not true. Calvin defended himself up the the very week he died. I have yet to see proof where Calvin said he was wrong. I say this to show I am trying to be fair about the whole subject. I see calvin as being wrong in this one case, yet I do not hate the man as you do.

Why is Schaff writing this ?


1. Jacques Gruet was the first victim of Calvin’s discipline who suffered death for sedition and blasphemy. His case is the most famous next to that of Servetus. Gruet739739 A son of Humbert Gruet, notary public of Geneva; not to be confounded with Canon Claude Gruet. See Opera , XII. 546, note 9; Bonnet, Letters fr . I. 212, and Henry, II. 440. was a Libertine of the worst type, both politically and religiously, and would have been condemned to death in any other country at that time. He was a Patriot descended from an old and respectable family, and formerly a canon. He lay under suspicion of having attempted to poison Viret in 1535. He wrote verses against Calvin and the refugees which (as Audin says) were "more malignant than poetic." He was a regular frequenter of taverns, and opposed to any rules in Church and State which interfered with personal liberty. When in church, he looked boldly and defiantly into the face of the preacher. He first adopted the Bernese fashion of wearing breeches with plaits at the knees, and openly defied the discipline of the Consistory which forbade it. Calvin called him a scurvy fellow, and gives an unfavorable account of his moral and religious character, which the facts fully justified.


Do you see?

Do you think Jacques Gruet and Servetus are the only victims?
What about Castellio and Bolsec who were banished?
Also, Philip Schaff writes about Perrin and Berthelier.
Why was Calvin not tolerant against his opponents? Could he not persuade and embrace them? Could we read any effort by Calvin to persuade and resolve the problems, instead of insisting on his human theory?


Of course I don't say that Calvin is responsible for all 58 people, but even one murder is a big problem if it happened intentionally and passed by without his repentence. The reason why I linked Calvin with the death penalties is because in many cases, Calvin was directly related to them. For example, Servetus criticised Calvin's book, then Gruet called Calvin a Hypocrite in the memo in the pulpit, Castellio and Bolsec are all related to Calvin,and no one can deny Calvin was the person of great influence to the Council and Consistory then.


Again, I didn't say that Calvin was not saved. But I mentioned those verses( 1 Jn 3:15-) as a legitimate ground for doubting his salvation, especially to the blind worshippers of Calvin. Even the spirit of the man in 1 Corinthians 5 was saved ( v5). So, I don't rule out his salvation but there are sufficient reasons for doubting his salvation, and I would not conclude any way but would leave it to God.
You can see the difference between my reasoning and your logic. You could never find the proof that I said he was not saved. I just opened the extreme possibilities where so many people followed Calvin bout found he would not be in the Heaven or be the least man in the Heaven though many thought he would be esteemed as a great servant.

Philip Schaff covered all the events that are described by your-so-called Calvin haters sites. They are not different from Schaff's record. Maybe God has much more detailed records against Calvin.

Yes, I am still glad that I don't live under the regin of Calvin. Even you may have been killed if you had lived in his reign.

 

[Eliyahu]

Why is Schaff is writing this ?


1. Jacques Gruet was the first victim of Calvin’s discipline who suffered death for sedition and blasphemy. His case is the most famous next to that of Servetus. Gruet739739 A son of Humbert Gruet, notary public of Geneva; not to be confounded with Canon Claude Gruet. See Opera , XII. 546, note 9; Bonnet, Letters fr . I. 212, and Henry, II. 440. was a Libertine of the worst type, both politically and religiously, and would have been condemned to death in any other country at that time. He was a Patriot descended from an old and respectable family, and formerly a canon. He lay under suspicion of having attempted to poison Viret in 1535. He wrote verses against Calvin and the refugees which (as Audin says) were "more malignant than poetic." He was a regular frequenter of taverns, and opposed to any rules in Church and State which interfered with personal liberty. When in church, he looked boldly and defiantly into the face of the preacher. He first adopted the Bernese fashion of wearing breeches with plaits at the knees, and openly defied the discipline of the Consistory which forbade it. Calvin called him a scurvy fellow, and gives an unfavorable account of his moral and religious character, which the facts fully justified.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/hcc8.iv.xiii.xii.html?highlight=calvin,gruet#highlight

Do you see?

Do you think Jacques Gruet and Servetus are the only victims?
What about Castellio and Bolsec who were banished?
Also, Philip Schaff writes about Perrin and Berthelier. Did you read how much vehemently Calvin was seeking the life of Perrin by sending letters to the other churches/ cantons of Swiss?
Why was Calvin not tolerant against his opponents? Could he not persuade and embrace them? Could we read any effort by Calvin to persuade and resolve the problems, instead of insisting on his human theory?


Of course I don't say that Calvin is responsible for all 58 people, but even one murder is a big problem if it happened intentionally and passed by without his repentence. The reason why I linked Calvin with the death penalties is because in many cases, Calvin was directly related to them. For example, Servetus criticised Calvin's book, then Gruet called Calvin a Hypocrite in the memo in the pulpit, Castellio and Bolsec are all related to Calvin,and no one can deny Calvin was the person of great influence to the Council and Consistory then.


Again, I didn't say that Calvin was not saved. But I mentioned those verses( 1 Jn 3:15-) as a legitimate ground for doubting his salvation, especially to the blind worshippers of Calvin. Even the spirit of the man in 1 Corinthians 5 was saved ( v5). So, I don't rule out his salvation but there are sufficient reasons for doubting his salvation, and I would not conclude any way but would leave it to God.
You can see the difference between my reasoning and your logic. You could never find the proof that I said he was not saved. I just opened the extreme possibilities where so many people followed Calvin bout found he would not be in the Heaven or be the least man in the Heaven though many thought he would be esteemed as a great servant.

Philip Schaff covered all the events that are described by your-so-called Calvin haters sites. They are not different from Schaff's record. Maybe God has much more detailed records against Calvin.
God hates the murder and I hate it too. Yes I can tolerate Calvin if he could humble himself now.

Yes, I am still glad that I don't live under the regin of Calvin.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Eliyahu:

"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."

GE:

Paedobaptism is not Anabaptism; infant baptism implies Covenantal and representative relationship, once for all. I don't advocate, accept or defend infant-baptism. I only point out that repeated baptism is the thing that upset the Reforemers, and therein I share their opposition.

 

[Eliyahu]

Eliyahu , you are a fountain of misinformation . It is impossible to keep up with your nonsense . Just a couple of items to start off with : You are not in the least familiar with Calvin's Institutes . Don't pretend otherwise . We are Baptists here so bad-mouthing Calvin over his baptismal stance will not win you any points . You say his Institutes are filled with unbiblical ideas . I'm with Spurgeon when he said words to the effect that "I agree with him in the main ." Of course Calvin is wrong at times . But on the whole , not only in his Institutes but his commentaries , sermons and letters he is God-centered and very edifying . You do not know what you are talking about on the other hand .

In post #12 you said that "Calvin had no experience of salvation ." Now don't try to deny you said that remark . We as Christians do not all have a John Newton , John Bunyan , Apostle Paul type of conversion . But Calvin does allude to his salvation experience .

In post # 18 you said that you had "no intention to judge Calvin severely." All your posts counter this false claim of yours .

In all the time that Calvin lived in Geneva no one but Servetus was executed . And the City Council rammed the trial and proceedings through . Calvin did not even become a citizen of Geneva until 1559 -- 5 years before his death .

William Farel pushed Calvin to stay and reform Geneva . Calvin wanted no part of that idea . So Farel said that if Calvin was going to follow his own interests rather than God's call -- the Lord 's curse would rest on him . Farel's words scared him and he remained until both were kicked out in a few years time . After Calvin's death Farel admitted that he held him against his will in Geneva . Calvin enjoyed his time away from Geneva . He was urged to come back . He refused , and I believe it was Martin Bucer who did the same Farel routine on Calvin to get him to return to Geneva .

William Farel was sent out by Calvin to nuture the faith of the Waldensians (who were not Anabaptists ) . They were pre-reformers and their ancient creedal statements bear out their Calvinistic beliefs ( long before John Calvin came on the scene ) . Actually Farel was in touch with them before he knew Calvin -- before Calvin became a Christian .

You can call me the fountain of the misinformation or wickedness or whatever. Even my Lord was condemned like that.
But you must realize that Infant Baptism is not a small sin, as you can notice so many people were killed because of it.
Clergy system prevents the working of the True believers and therefore Jesus said he hates Nico-laitanes ( Rev 2:15)
As long as there is a blind advocator, I would be sharp against it.
That's it.
How many % of Presbyterians know about the case of Servetus and Calvin, the problem with Calvin's Infant Baptism, then his theory of Clergy system etc?

 

[Eliyahu]

Eliyahu:

"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."

GE:

Paedobaptism is not Anabaptism; infant baptism implies Covenantal and representative relationship, once for all. I don't advocate, accept or defend infant-baptism. I only point out that repeated baptism is the thing that upset the Reforemers, and therein I share their opposition.

Paedobaptism means Infant Baptism, am I wrong?
I think the word Paedo ( or Pedo) came from Greek Paidion ( Infant, Baby)
Waldensians refused the Paedobaptism( Infant Baptism) because they believed that one can be baptized when he confessed the faith as we read Acts 8:37-8. Anabaptists didn't recognize the Infant Baptism as a true baptism, because it is not performed upon the confession of the faith.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Paedobaptism means Infant Baptism, am I wrong?
I think the word Paedo ( or Pedo) came from Greek Paidion ( Infant, Baby)
Waldensians refused the Paedobaptism( Infant Baptism) because they believed that one can be baptized when he confessed the faith as we read Acts 8:37-8. Anabaptists didn't recognize the Infant Baptism as a true baptism, because it is not performed upon the confession of the faith.

GE:

Had the Waldensians 'refused Paedobaptism' doesn't say they accepted repeated baptism ('ana-baptism')

 

[Eliyahu]

GE:

Had the Waldensians 'refused Paedobaptism' doesn't say they accepted repeated baptism ('ana-baptism')

The belief behind it is that once a person is born again, s/he must be baptized, regardless s/he had Infant Baptism before or not, because the infant Baptism is meaningless.
In such case where the person already had the Infant Baptism, the real Baptism becomes Anabaptism as it duplicates the so-called Baptism.
Also, we must remember that Calvin said Immersion or Sprinkling should be left free. ( ch 15-19).

 

[Jarthur001]

Eliyahu,

What...more hate?

Why is Schaff is writing this ?


1. Jacques Gruet was the first victim of Calvin’s discipline who suffered death for sedition and blasphemy. His case is the most famous next to that of Servetus. Gruet739739 A son of Humbert Gruet, notary public of Geneva; not to be confounded with Canon Claude Gruet. See Opera , XII. 546, note 9; Bonnet, Letters fr . I. 212, and Henry, II. 440. was a Libertine of the worst type, both politically and religiously, and would have been condemned to death in any other country at that time. He was a Patriot descended from an old and respectable family, and formerly a canon. He lay under suspicion of having attempted to poison Viret in 1535. He wrote verses against Calvin and the refugees which (as Audin says) were "more malignant than poetic." He was a regular frequenter of taverns, and opposed to any rules in Church and State which interfered with personal liberty. When in church, he looked boldly and defiantly into the face of the preacher. He first adopted the Bernese fashion of wearing breeches with plaits at the knees, and openly defied the discipline of the Consistory which forbade it. Calvin called him a scurvy fellow, and gives an unfavorable account of his moral and religious character, which the facts fully justified.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/hcc8.iv.xiii.xii.html?highlight=calvin,gruet#highlight

Its easy why he said it.


It just so happens I have this whole set of books. Please read the whole chapter.
Gruet was put to death not only because he was an atheist, and blasphemous statements about God and the Bible, but also Gruet was threatening Calvin's life.

Page 502 schaff..Please read it ....it says the council that arrested gruet after he made deadly threats. page 503..."he was condemned for religious moral, AND political offences...(((snip)))..and threating the clergy....and Council itself.

please also read at the bottom of page 503...about the treatise gruet wrote.

I see not problem at all with gruets death. Even in this nation, you cannot threaten to kill one in public office...now can you? Will that person be put to death today? It depends on the STATE!!! This was the same case back then.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Gruet

Do you see?

Yes I saw this. I have read the whole set of books. Did you just read this one page to support your hate, or did you take the time to read the whole chapter??? If you did read the whole chapter...why only post half the story? more hate maybe?

Do you think Jacques Gruet and Servetus are the only victims?
What about Castellio and Bolsec who were banished?

Yes...many were kicked out of the nation.

Of course I don't say that Calvin is responsible for all 58 people, but even one murder is a big problem if it happened intentionally and passed by without his repentence.

Oh but you did say this..more then once.

One murder is bad. But is not hating a person just as bad? Is not looking for ways to hate just as bad? What would you think of me, of I googled your name to see if I could find new ways to base my hate on? I would hope not to much.

Still..You have yet to show a murder by calvin.

Philip Schaff covered all the events that are described by your-so-called Calvin haters sites.

That is not true. If schaff said it...he told more of the full story. You just showed you choose to overlook part of it. why? Is this because you hate the man? You really need to address this hate.

You said last....

They are not different from Schaff's record. Maybe God has much more detailed records against Calvin.
God hates the murder and I hate it too. Yes I can tolerate Calvin if he could humble himself now.

Are you talking about David? David murdered....and God still used him...didn't he? Calvin did not murder...and God used him. And you just hate that..now don't you?

 

[Eliyahu]

Eliyahu,

What...more hate?


Its easy why he said it.


It just so happens I have this whole set of books. Please read the whole chapter.
Gruet was put to death not only because he was an atheist, and blasphemous statements about God and the Bible, but also Gruet was threatening Calvin's life.

Page 502 schaff..Please read it ....it says the council that arrested gruet after he made deadly threats. page 503..."he was condemned for religious moral, AND political offences...(((snip)))..and threating the clergy....and Council itself.

please also read at the bottom of page 503...about the treatise gruet wrote.

I see not problem at all with gruets death. Even in this nation, you cannot threaten to kill one in public office...now can you? Will that person be put to death today? It depends on the STATE!!! This was the same case back then.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Gruet


Yes I saw this. I have read the whole set of books. Did you just read this one page to support your hate, or did you take the time to read the whole chapter??? If you did read the whole chapter...why only post half the story? more hate maybe?


Yes...many were kicked out of the nation.



Oh but you did say this..more then once.

One murder is bad. But is not hating a person just as bad? Is not looking for ways to hate just as bad? What would you think of me, of I googled your name to see if I could find new ways to base my hate on? I would hope not to much.

Still..You have yet to show a murder by calvin.


That is not true. If schaff said it...he told more of the full story. You just showed you choose to overlook part of it. why? Is this because you hate the man? You really need to address this hate.

You said last....

Are you talking about David? David murdered....and God still used him...didn't he? Calvin did not murder...and God used him. And you just hate that..now don't you?

Jarthur, I may have to praise you as a Devout Calvin Worshipper, which I am not.

I know there was a problem with the Gruet, but the whole sequence cannot be judged in one way. Why all the time there were plots against Calvin? Could you not see and read the anger and hatred shown by Calvin? Do you think Gruet would have been still killed even if he hadn't put the letter in the pulpit of Calvin?
In your logic, if anyone had to be beheaded just for the charges of political threats, today in US, more than 10 million have to be beheaded.

I know this: We must distinguish between the State and the Individual. The State has the right for the order and the enforcement of the law, while the individual has the obligation of loving enemies.
But in this case, Calvin is personally involved in the cases too. Even in the case of Bolsec and Castellio, Calvin was related to their cases. That's why we evaluate his personality, illogical logics, human theory, and the hatred and anger that he showed.


You may still indemnify Calvin even about Servetus. It was Calvin who spotted him and asked him to be apprehended, and it ws Calvin who charged him with 39 accounts. Why did Servetus beg Calvin for the release?

Calvin was still proud and impudent about his behavior.

The strongest recorded statement from Calvin on the Servetus affair is a 1561 letter from Calvin to the Marquis Paet, high chamberlain to the King of Navarre, in which he says intolerantly:
"Honour, glory, and riches shall be the reward of your pains; but above all, do not fail to rid the country of those scoundrels, who stir up the people to revolt against us. Such monsters should be exterminated, as I have exterminated Michael Servetus the Spaniard."
( http://www.1timothy4-13.com/files/bible/calvin.html : this article contains some mistakes but I believe this portion is correct)

Can you compare 2 statements, one where Servetus asked God to forgive his accusers and the other where Calvin was proud of his murder?

Don't you read Calvin is proudly saying that he exterminated Servetus?

Yes, I hate the Murder! Is it wrong to you?
Do you love the murder? Oh! Scary ! A Horrible man!

That't why you don't know how to distinguish God's commanded execution and human intentional murder after Jesus and His crucifixion ! You don't know David fulfilled the order of God, except the case of Uriah which he repented vehemently later on.
Did Calvin repent about the extermination?
Ashes of Servetus and much blood shed by Calvin will witness against him on the Day of Great Judgment.
If Calvin repented enough, we could scarcely have found the miserable and blind Calvin worshippers today. How many % of Presbyterians know about Calvin related death penalties today?

 

[Jarthur001]

Eliyahu,

Jarthur, I may have to praise you as a Devout Calvin Worshipper, which I am not.

LIE!! I worship no man!!! You have no problem throwing in words that twist the truth. I worship God only!! I also stand for the truth. It is the truth you do not like with page up on page of misleading statements. WHY?? Do you think if you tell false statements others will believe you? God knows...and you do not my friend.

I know there was a problem with the Gruet, but the whole sequence cannot be judged in one way. Why all the time there were plots against Calvin? Could you not see and read the anger and hatred shown by Calvin?

Indeed there was a problem. If you had taken the time to read schaffs whole book, you would then know the problem. Next time do not look for ways to hate others, and you will see that Calvin was hated greatly by 2 groups. When Farel had arrived in Geneva, the city was a place of debauchery. This is only one reason why he sent for Calvin. The two groups were...the Patriors..and the Libertines or Spirituels. The pats hated evangelical discipline 1st and also did not like Calvin because he was French. They saw it as "the Frenchmen" coming in telling us how to run our affairs....and "saying we must confess our sins, because of this man from another land" The Libertines said there was no Satan, good or bad..no angels. They denied the gospel. They "advocated the unbridled license of the flesh" The wife of Ameaux justified he licentiousness by this verse.."be fruitful and multiply.

On the other hand Calvin wanted holy living. Sex was no longer to be sold. Drunkards were fined. Gamblers were made to wear exposed. Inmoral books were outlawed. Nude plays were no longer protected by the law. Both the Patriors..and the Libertines hated this life. They had tasted a bit of freedom, leaving the RCC, and now Calvin and his gang was telling law makers to stop the sinning.

Page 490..."Free indeed we formerly were to attend mass, but now we are compelled to hear a sermon"

Yes...they hated Calvin alright.

Do you think Gruet would have been still killed even if he hadn't put the letter in the pulpit of Calvin?

Again I say this had nothing to do with a letter. Gruet said he was going to kill Calvin and members of the goverment for taking away his freedom. This can be backed up in about any history book.

In your logic, if anyone had to be beheaded just for the charges of political threats, today in US, more than 10 million have to be beheaded.

As to the facts as they maybe found, I did not say just threats of any kind..now did I? This was threats on the life of political leaders. This still cannot be done in this nation. Can a person disagree? Yes. Yet even if we were to give to your unjust claims, we still have to this day nations that will not let any one speak out. So it is not unheard of to have such a nation with laws as this.

I know this: We must distinguish between the State and the Individual.

Then please start acting as if you believe this.

You may still indemnify Calvin even about Servetus.

Why would you say this? If you had taken the time to read my 1st post, you would know I do not defend Calvin over Servetus. I said from the beginning of this thread, he was wrong. I keep posting to you, for I stand for the truth. You have lied about Calvin. You said he was not saved. You said he murdered. Calvin broke no law...he followed the law. You said calvin killed a lady over baptisim...that is not true. You said Calvin killed 58 others...again not true. You tried to mislead on Gruet. You lied about me worshipping Calvin. where will it stop?

It was Calvin who spotted him and asked him to be apprehended, and it ws Calvin who charged him with 39 accounts.

indeed

Why did Servetus beg Calvin for the release?

So he would not be put to death by law.

Calvin was still proud and impudent about his behavior.

yes..he was

The strongest recorded statement from Calvin on the Servetus affair is a 1561 letter from Calvin to the Marquis Paet, high chamberlain to the King of Navarre, in which he says intolerantly:
"Honour, glory, and riches shall be the reward of your pains; but above all, do not fail to rid the country of those scoundrels, who stir up the people to revolt against us. Such monsters should be exterminated, as I have exterminated Michael Servetus the Spaniard."

I may have one better..but I fail to see your point.

Can you compare 2 statements, one where Servetus asked God to forgive his accusers and the other where Calvin was proud of his murder?

Can you stop telling lies? Do you not understand that murder is, and death penalty?? They had the death penalty in the Bible. They have it in some states here. They had it back then too. The death penalty is not the same as murder..do you not understand this??

Don't you read Calvin is proudly saying that he exterminated Servetus?

as in death penalty? yes...of course I did.

Yes, I hate the Murder! Is it wrong to you?

Yes. I also hate to tell lies. do you?

Do you love the murder? Oh! Scary ! A Horrible man!

Do I love David? yes....David was a great man of God.

That't why you don't know how to distinguish God's commanded execution and human intentional murder after Jesus and His crucifixion ! You don't know David fulfilled the order of God, except the case of Uriah which he repented vehemently later on.

Still...David murdered...Calvin did not. What is so hard to understand?

Did Calvin repent about the extermination?

over the death penalty? no.

Ashes of Servetus and much blood shed by Calvin will witness against him on the Day of Great Judgment.

shedding blood as in murder?? Again you make bold statements with no proof. Now would be a good time to show proof that Calvin with his own hands murdered someone.

[

SIZE=3]If Calvin repented enough, we could scarcely have found the miserable and blind Calvin worshippers today. How many % of Presbyterians know about Calvin related death penalties today?[/SIZE]

as always...we have someone smarter then most joes. I'm not a presby....but it is my guess if one presby was reading this thread, they have not seen any thing new. Why is it that all the bold people think all others are blind? Why is it that when someone will not let another tell lies and mislead, that are told they worship the person they will not let lies be told of?

BTW..welcome to the truth. You got the wording right after many tries....it is death penalty and not murder.

I trust this "murder" part is behind us, as we move on...

 

[Eliyahu]

Eliyahu,


LIE!! I worship no man!!! You have no problem throwing in words that twist the truth. I worship God only!!

You are too humble, not to call yourself a Devout Calvin Worshipper!
Your mouth may be saying you worship God, but your heart is worshipping Calvin over God! You are telling lies and lies, You never brought the evidence that I said Calvin was not saved.

Indeed there was a problem. If you had taken the time to read schaffs whole book, you would then know the problem. Next time do not look for ways to hate others, and you will see that Calvin was hated greatly by 2 groups. When Farel had arrived in Geneva, the city was a place of debauchery. They denied the gospel. They "advocated the unbridled license of the flesh" The wife of Ameaux justified he licentiousness by this verse.."be fruitful and multiply.

You are beating around the bushes continuously, I read enough the history about it, I know the problems of those Pat's and Libertino's But you can see the anger, hatred, revenge from Calvin, different from our Lord and Stephen or any early church leaders. You must notice No difference between the politicians and Calvin and his fellows. I am not saying Calvin was a devil, I am saying no difference, then his anger and hatred as unconverted people.

On the other hand Calvin wanted holy living. Sex was no longer to be sold. Drunkards were fined. Gamblers were made to wear exposed. Inmoral books were outlawed. Nude plays were no longer protected by the law.
Page 490..."Free indeed we formerly were to attend mass, but now we are compelled to hear a sermon"

Yes...they hated Calvin alright.

These are not the main issues. More important was his hatred against the people who opposed Infant Baptism as we see the case of Servetus.
Forcing is not the way of God. If so, God would have forced Adam eat the fruit of life.

Again I say this had nothing to do with a letter. Gruet said he was going to kill Calvin and members of the goverment for taking away his freedom. This can be backed up in about any history book.

Yes, there was a factor where they plotted a Coup, but what kind of Christianity could you see from Calvin? Could he win over the enemy by the cruelty? Is that the teaching that he learned from Jesus who said " Love your enemy" ? Was he in deep agony? then did he resign from the position and leave Geneva?

I keep posting to you, for I stand for the truth. You have lied about Calvin. You said he was not saved. You said he murdered. Calvin broke no law...he followed the law. You said calvin killed a lady over baptisim...that is not true. You said Calvin killed 58 others...again not true. You tried to mislead on Gruet. You lied about me worshipping Calvin. where will it stop?

I asked you many times, show me the evidence that I said Calvin was not saved.
I told you the negative sides of his salvation because only that may be able to explain his behavior. However, in general I assertained that Calvin was not saved. Check thororoughly and show me the evidence.
You said I treat myself as God, and I asked you to show me what insinuated such idea. You never presented any. You are a Liar until you present it!
Calvin was not a violator of Geneva Law but a Violator of God's commandment, because the indemnity under Geneva Law doesn't indemnify Calvin from God's commandment.
I already apologized that I cannot present the evidence for the lady at the moment. It doesn't mean that such event didn't exist, though I do not claim it until the evidence is available.
I am sure there were some Anabaptists who refused Infant baptism. Even one of the important charges of Servetus was Infant Baptism. All the contents of Interrogations and Trials will be translated some day for the proper evaluation.

Can you stop telling lies? Do you not understand that murder is, and death penalty?? They had the death penalty in the Bible. They have it in some states here. They had it back then too. The death penalty is not the same as murder..do you not understand this??

Look at yourself first, why don't you realize the big Beam in your eyes and try to find fault with the dust in my eyes?

Do you know how to distinguish the difference between MURDER and MURDERER? I said " I hate the Murder" You insinuate that I said "I hate the Murderer" Read carefully. You must present the evidence that I said Calvin was unsaved. Show me!

Yes. I also hate to tell lies. do you?

Yes I hate Lies and Liars like you, you are accusing me of false accusations. You are a typical Liar! and I believe it may be because you are a Calvinist, while I am a Christian. You belong to Calvin, and I belong to Christ. Read 1 Cor 1:12 -17
If you say you belong to Paul or Calvin, you are wrong. This is why you have wrong idea. I am sure Calvin didn't die for you. Such superstition is absolutely un-Christian, which you are. That's why you are blinded and cannot realize what is wrong and still defend a Murderer.
You say Calvin was not a murderer, while Calvin himself confessed that he exterminated Servetus. You are defending Calvin more than himself. That's why I call you a devout Calvin Worshipper!

Still...David murdered...Calvin did not. What is so hard to understand?

David murdered Uriah, but vehemently repented and he was punished 4 times by God.
Calvin murdered Servetus, but he was proud of it, and never repented, and is waiting for the Judgment by God.

shedding blood as in murder?? Again you make bold statements with no proof. Now would be a good time to show proof that Calvin with his own hands murdered someone.

In your logic, even the High Priest didn't kill Jesus.
Even David, didn't kill Uriah, Even Saul didn't kill Ahimelech.
You may be a child yet!

Why is it that all the bold people think all others are blind? Why is it that when someone will not let another tell lies and mislead, that are told they worship the person they will not let lies be told of?
BTW..welcome to the truth. You got the wording right after many tries....it is death penalty and not murder.

I trust this "murder" part is behind us, as we move on...

You are cheated by the tricky method of killing.
Murdering by borrowing or using the public power is a tricky method of murder.
Did Hitler kill any Jew with his own hand? In your logic, Hitler is not guilty!

Do you know about Bloody Mary? Do you think she didn't kill the innocent Protestants over 300 because she didn't use her own hands?
Fortunately God smote her quickly and so her murder was stopped by her death, as is the case of Calvin.

As for the Salvation of Calvin, let me tell you overall understanding about him this way:

In the Institutes we notice his understanding that Sins are washed away by the Blood of Christ, or we are forgiven by the Grace of God.
On the other hand he also states that Denial of Infant Baptism means the disallowance of Salvation for the Infant. Then he interpret John 3:5 Being born again by water and Holy Spirit as by Baptism and Gifts of Holy spirit.
Then he said, even after Baptism, when we encounter the problems with Sin, we have to look back to the Baptism. He claims that the lay people should learn from one pastor so that the people may learn from one mouth uniformly, which is quite different from Bible teaching ( 1 Cor 14: 29-32 and many more verses), and he says that Baptism can be done only by the clergies. I don't think he was talking about the deacons, but ACts 8:37-38 shows Philip the deacon baptized the Ethiopian. There is no distinction between Clergy and Laymen in the Bible, but Calvin developed a kind of Catholic priest theory.
Despite such negative aspects, in general, his confession of the truth about the Redemption and Grace is hundred times more than such doubtful statement, his expounding about the Salvation is thousand times more than the doubtful statements.Therefore we may be able to accept the salvation of Calvin in an affirmative direction. Also, we should notice that Martin Luther had serious problems with Anti-Semitism and Marian Worship calling Mother of God, even though nobody doubt about his salvation.
But also, we should realize that even among the Catholics, the Idol worshippers, there are many who cand expound the Bible very well, though they may have learned such theoretically.

Among the born again believers, there are many, many people who carrry their sins unrecognized or unrepented until their deaths.
There is no guarantee that the people with sudden conversion have better testimony or more faithful life, even though there might be some better testimonies among the people with the Sudden conversion.

Therefore there can be much possibility where Calvin may have been saved but carried some grievous sins unrepented, with some heretic doctrines such as Infant Baptism, Baptsimal Regeneration, Clergy System, Holy Catholic Church which includes Mother church, Unity, Believe in Church as Creed, which might have entailed the Theocracy of Geneva, or he had just the Infant Baptism and no more experience of Salvation, and all of his theology was just human theories.

I would just leave the matter to the final judgment by God who says " By their fruits ye shall know them"

What I wanted to express clearly was that we should perform the Funeral Ceremony for the person Calvin as many people misunderstand about him.
How many % Presbyterian know about Servetus ?
As Bible said in 1 Cor 1:12-15, we must not say we are Calvinists or Wesleyan. I am sure neither Calvin nor Wesley died for the Christian believers. Bible is enough for us to learn all the doctrines and teachings, Jesus Christ is enough to follow directly.
We must perform the Funeral of Calvin so that he may sleep well until the Day of Great Judgment.

 

[Eliyahu]

Eliyahu,

It just so happens I have this whole set of books. Please read the whole chapter.
Gruet was put to death not only because he was an atheist, and blasphemous statements about God and the Bible, but also Gruet was threatening Calvin's life.

Page 502 schaff..Please read it ....it says the council that arrested gruet after he made deadly threats. page 503..."he was condemned for religious moral, AND political offences...(((snip)))..and threating the clergy....and Council itself.

please also read at the bottom of page 503...about the treatise gruet wrote.

I see not problem at all with gruets death. Even in this nation, you cannot threaten to kill one in public office...now can you? Will that person be put to death today? It depends on the STATE!!! This was the same case back then.
?

Would you enjoy the cruel death penalty which Gruet suffered from?
Would you enjoy the torture and the pain by burning your tonuge with the red burning iron, then torturing everyday one month, then beheading?

If I were Calvin, I can accuse you of enough charges, telling lies that I exalted myself as God, which I never did, and that I said Calvin was not saved.
You committed enough crimes against me, so that you should be tortured, have your tongues burnt with red burning iron, then beheaded.
If I were Calvin, I can find sufficient charges to accuse you with, you would be beheaded ( at least) with an axe!
( You must be thankful that I am not Calvin!) I can induce you many ways, to increase your crimes. First I torture you severely, then you will plot a Coup, then I can accuse you with the capital punishment so that the public authority may kill you by burning or by beheading with an axe! Would you believe that you deserve it?

Do you think it is the Christian method of penalty?

Would you not find any problem with the cruelty?

Is that what Lord Jesus taught His disciples?

Have you ever read the New Testament?
Does Jesus teach you that you must torture and behead or burn the enemies?
Which god are you worshipping?

Is that the right way for the godly, God-believing people to treat the fellow human beings who have been created in the likeness of God?

You are absolutely in the wrong shoes, which you do not realize, which is a great pity!

I am glad that I am not Calvin, which you must be thankful for as well!

 

[Jarthur001]

Eliyahu,

You are too humble, not to call yourself a Devout Calvin Worshipper!
Your mouth may be saying you worship God, but your heart is worshipping Calvin over God! You are telling lies and lies, You never brought the evidence that I said Calvin was not saved.

I would even defend you, if others told lies about you. It is clear you that your hate for a man, has fogged the truth from your sight. You will now change your attack from Calvin toward me, only because you hate. You hate being being exposed as a hater, of the truth. You hate that you must keep going back to google to find more hate sites, for the ones you have found have been shown to not have the truth. You hate that when you find one site you can count on as the truth, you were exposed as only posting one side, in order to twist the truth to your light. No matter what comes from this, it is clear, you hate.

As been told before, I worship no man. You can say it 1000 times and it still will not be truth. Do you understand what truth is? It is clear that you choose to pass over the truth, or your hate fogs your view of the truth.

post 23 you said..I am not sure Calvin was saved. (this is where it starts. When shown by me and others this is not true from quotes from those that knew Calvin,and from the last will of Calvin, and the very books he wrote...still to this day you will not admit you were wrong. shame shame)

post 25 you said....Do you know about all 58 people killed by Calvin? (you posted this a view times, till you changed your mind after looking for proof on google and not finding it. Another lie)

post 25 you said....It is not a secret that Calvin killed that woman and her mother-in-law( or father-in-law) (after asking 4 times for proof, this was shown to be made up)

post 25 your said....Beza, as far as I know, was the husband of Calvin's daughter (as you try to brush off Beza words about Calvin. Yet Calvins baby was only a view days old. another lie)

post 26 you said...Calvin made all the commentaries onto all the books of Bible, but he couldn't do it for REvelation because he noticed this. (the verse below and your words hint that Calvin was a murder in hell, which means he was unsaved. Yet when shown that the would LIARS was also addressed in the verse...your logic falls apart.)

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.

Post 25 you said..That's why Presbyterians will be one of the first groups which will join Roman Catholic before or during the Great Tribulation period. (As if you were God)

Post 27 you said..In other words, he had the strong appetite of the intentional murder since long time before, which is a grievous sin. ( as you try your best to paint Calvin as a murderer, not understanding law. You want to pull it back to rev21...but will not address LIARS...so the hate remains in your heart)

Post 30...you link 4.."I hate Calvin sites" as proof that you too have a right to hatehate

Post 35..you link 3 more sites as you try your best to prove you have the right to hate.

Post 35 you post 1 John 3:15
Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know tha tno murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.( You highlight murderer to link to Calvin..as if to once again say he is in hell...and overlook the fact that the verse is talking about hate.)

I'll not waste my time going on. There are many other lies or misleading statements by you. You need to deal with your hate.

These are not the main issues. More important was his hatred against the people who opposed Infant Baptism as we see the case of Servetus.

NOT true!! Read Servetus works to know why. You have been shown on this thread some of it.

Forcing is not the way of God. If so, God would have forced Adam eat the fruit of life.

So your saying Paul was not saved after all? But...the idea that man cannot force another..I agree with.

Yes, there was a factor where they plotted a Coup, but what kind of Christianity could you see from Calvin? Could he win over the enemy by the cruelty? Is that the teaching that he learned from Jesus who said " Love your enemy" ? Was he in deep agony? then did he resign from the position and leave Geneva?

Are you saying man should not hate another? humm.

I asked you many times, show me the evidence that I said Calvin was not save.

you have been shown many times. my post 43.

You said I treat myself as God, and I asked you to show me what insinuated such idea. You never presented any. You are a Liar until you present it!

If you remove the 1st 2 times I pointed this out, you are right. When you place other groups before God, as you judge them, you are acting as God. Salvation is a personal relationship.

Look at yourself first, why don't you realize the big Beam in your eyes and try to find fault with the dust in my eyes?

Of course. I have my own sins I must deal with. If you think for one moment that because I stand for the truth and will not allow you to lie about another, that this means I have no sins, you are wrong. I am only a sinner saved by grace. My sins do not allow you to lie.

Do you know how to distinguish the difference between MURDER and MURDERER? I said " I hate the Murder" You insinuate that I said "I hate the Murderer" Read carefully. You must present the evidence that I said Calvin was unsaved. Show me!

:godisgood:

Yes I hate Lies and Liars like you.

See how hate grows? You now hate me. This is good. Now the Bible says you must love me.

 

[Eliyahu]

Jarthur001,

You continue to lie and distort the words, because you worship Calvin as your god.

Which sentence of your post 43 show the evidence that I said Calvin was not saved?
Show me clearly that I said Calvin was not saved.
I showed you many questions raised about his salvation, but never said he was not saved. You are telling lies and accusing me of false accusations. You resembled Calvin very much! You are like Calvin!

Under the reign of Calvin 58 were killed, then should Calvin use his own hands all the time? You would deny the relationship between Calvin and all the death penalties in Geneva during his reign. That's how the liars deny their murders. Don't you realize that Gruet would have not been killed if Calvin had not insisted so much to kill him? He vigorously pursued killing Castellio by sending letters to the other cantons, but failed, then imprisoned him and then banished him.
As for the Anabaptists I already told you that the event was stated very shortly and can hardly be found, but I am still sure that there were some innocent victims of Anabaptists as Calvin hated the people who refused Infant Baptism. On the contrary you cannot disprove it either. ( Don't say that the onus probandi is in me!)

Did Satan kill the people by using his hands? But read John 8:44

Yes I hate the Murder, you may love it! That's why you are beautifying the murder and defend the murderer.
Yes, I hate the murderers too though I wish they repent and be saved.
For the criminal person, God hates them for their behaviors, while He still wants them to repent and wait their return with loving kindness while they are alive.

Read this:

Heb 1:9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.


We must love even the sinners, but it is for the salvation and correctness of the person. After the death, the person is no longer. That's why God doesn't allow the murderers and liars to come to the Heaven. Does God still love the dead sinners and criminals without repentance?
Jesus prayed, Father forgive them for they know not their sins.
Was He praying for the dead people?

Do you love Hitler and Stalin?
Do you love the Murder Act?

Your theology may advocate the Murder Act as Calvin's theology alllowed him the brutal murder and led him no repentance.

Jarthur, Let the dead man sleep until the Great Judgment.
Don't say that you belong to Calvin by saying Calvinist because Bible tells you that Calvin didn't die for you.

You derived the lie that I exalted myself as God, from the comment that Presbyetrians will join the Roman Catholic.
Do you say that all the prophesy exalt someone as God?
I expect all the religion of this world except the true Christians will be united under the leadership of Roman Catholic. Now, therefore do you claim that I exalt myself as God? Read Ephesians 4:11 and 1 Cor 14:31. Are the prophets all God?
That may be the logic of Calvin worshippers, because Calvin developed all the theory like that.
Calvin developed the Infant Baptism from Noah's children, Ismael's circumcision by Abraham, from Acts 16:15 and 16:30-32, etc.
He didn't know how to distinguish between Offices and the Gifts( Talents) in the church, so he derived the offices of Pastors and Teachers from Ephesians 4:7-12. Then he developed the Monopastoral system, saying that the people should learn from one mouth.
You may waste a lot of time following the dead man, but I follow only Jesus who is still alive. Your bible may be Institutes of Heretic Religion, but my Bible is the Word of God which is sufficient and enough for all the teachings. I don't need Calvin's book. As for the details of the past, the more will be exposed as the records of the trials will be translated. The more detail record is kept by God.

Calvin doesn't live any longer, I am glad about that - Is this statement a problem? You don't know how to distinguish between the dead man and a living man who has the opportunity to repent.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Thank you, Jarthur001! Thank you!

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Now Eliyahu has hi-jacked this thread, and my starting question remains unanswered, and unchallenged. I think I can believe the impression I got from reading good literature about the matter, that Calvin in fact did play a great role in the physical rescue and protection of the Waldensians who escaped the persecutions of the Roman Church. I shall not be able though to present a clear cut case for my believing so, but since no one seems able to refute my position, I shall maintain it.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

And I shall keep my stance that I think that Calvin acted responsibly and justified in the part he played in the case of Servetus. I say it in the face of all the Calvin-haters.