The Bible NETWork ~ Impacting the World for Christ one post at a time!

A recent post claimed that Calvinism is the most pernicious of all heresies. The absurdity of this claim was followed up by an unreferenced quote, supposedly written by John Calvin stating:
A perfect example of an ad hominem attack.

Several points must be made here:

1. Just as it is unquestionably true that the Penateuch and most of the Psalms were penned by two murderers, as were at least thirteen NT epistles (Paul was at the very least an accomplice, if not an architect in the murder of Stephen), the character of the individual for whom a system of theology is named speaks nothing about the truth or falsity of such system of theology. What does it prove, then? That sinners penned the Scriptures and that every theologian is a sinner.

2. The quotation was posted without citing the source of the quotation. Does the poster actually know anything about the letter or quote, or is he merely passing it on because it is good amunition against a system of theology which he disregards? (Anyone wishing to read the entire letter may find it here: http://anchoredbytruth.com/monster_servetus.asp . I recommend that you refer also to the arguments against its genuineness here: http://books.google.com/books?pg=PA439& ... utput=text

3. Though most frequently referred to as "Calvinism"***, the system of theology known by his name was not invented by him. His thoughts, as were the thoughts of Martin Luther, were laid out very similarly by Augustine about a thousand years earlier. Many today come to their "Calvinistic views" not on the basis of reading John Calvin, but on the basis of reading Paul, as I did as a young believer in 1973 when reading Romans 9 before ever having heard of John Calvin.


4. As to the execution of Michael Servetus, what exactly was Calvin's role? And what were the thoughts of the 16th century culture in which he lived? An interesting perspective may be found here (yeah, yeah, Calvin College probably has its own bias): http://www.calvin.edu/meeter/resources/servetus.htm )

Whatever one thinks about John Calvin or even on Calvinismism itself, it is a slur on vasts numbers of godly Christians to pretend that Calvinism is among the most pernicious of heresies.

Regards.

For those unfamiliar with Servetus, here is the Wiki:

"Calvin revealed the intentions of his offended heart when he stated of Servetus, when writing to his friend William Farel on 13 February 1546:
“ Servetus has just sent me a long volume of his ravings. If I consent he will come here, but I will not give my word for if he comes here, if my authority is worth anything, I will never permit him to depart alive ("Si venerit, modo valeat mea autoritas, vivum exire nunquam patiar").[15] ”

In 1903 latter-day followers of Calvin erected a plaque at the site of Servetus' death 'repudiating his (Calvin's) mistake which was the mistake of his age' (see picture)."

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

_________________
Behold, now is "THE ACCEPTABLE TIME,"
behold, now is "THE DAY OF SALVATION" --
The apostle Paul, NASB

The quote is of John Calvin who callously wrote it in a letter dated 1561 to the Marquis Paet, high chamberlain to the King of Navarre.

One of the links posted by Jim is quite good and thorough.

For instance,


And,


And finally,

Of course I'm sure the anti-calvinistic vitriol shall continue unabated.

After reading much of Calvin's work I truly doubt he wrote any such this as quoted by Voltaire.

Blessings,
Randy

You guys sound like Roman Catholics defending the infallibility of the Pope. . . and more especially so when you declare Calvin commentary as the THEE only Gospel.

No one has proclaimed Calvin or his commentary as "THEE only gospel". Frankly most in the Reformed camp would argue just the opposite.

The issue here is whether or not the quote you've referred to in another thread is valid. A quote used to discredit Calvin and his work. Rather than ad-hominem how about a discussion of the merit of the articles within the links provided by Jim.

Blessings,
Randy

O Contare. Many have.

. . . . AND all one needs do is read Calvin's life to see his ego in front of it all.

Then why are his writings declared by you as infallible?

Crossreferance,
Such specious and false accusations need little reply. You have no proof of any such claim because I've never said any such thing. In fact, I've said consistantly just the opposite on this board. I agree with Calvin on some points and disagree on others.

I do agree with Jim's quote here,



I suspect discussion of the facts are not going to be the issue here. Your m/o is becoming quite clear. One of false claims and attacks.

Blessings,
Randy

Not hardly, either from my MO, for which I purposely reveal little that can be used against me by one wishing to find something to base their presupposition on, nor anything I have posted that could ever speak of me being un-scriptural. I am always objective in my judgments concerning anyone or any doctrine since a little truth can be found in anyones' thinking. It is always the one subjective in his theology that will have an argument with my point of view. That has been my experience for most all my 15-20yrs being on Christian forums. This one is no different apart from one or two who have said so. But the Lord did say there would only ever be a few.

I hope that helps.

Let's see,
What you said above is a lie. It is in opposition to Scripture to speak falsely of another person so I've found at least one place where you are un-Scriptural.


This would be a place where you are opposed to principals taught in Romans 14:4. You have judged a man's character whom you have never known.


Here you offend the Catholic bretheren placing yourself in opposition to the principals laid out by Paul in Philippians 1:9-11. You also bear false witness which is in oopposition to the 9th commandment (Exodus 20:16) Again, no one has said Calvin is "THEE only gospel", Therefore your post is bearing false witness. Again, an unscripturall post.

That's three in one thread (or should I say four?)!

I notice however that we are chasing a red herring and that you have nothing of substance to say about the article. Can't say I'm surprized.

Blessings,
Randy

Neither Randy nor I ever declared Calvin's commentary as "THEE only Gospel", nor did either of us declare Calvin's writings as infallible.
You, however, made this bold claim as to your own infallibility:

I would submit that all three of these claims are lies.

Regards.

_________________
All Scripture quotations are New American Standard Bible, unless otherwise indicated.

You submit a lot of stuff that is a mis-representation of the words of others.

I will soon be off this forum, so relax.

If/when I do, please call me on it. Otherwise, don't make claims that are not supportable.

_________________
All Scripture quotations are New American Standard Bible, unless otherwise indicated.

I have really been thinking about this lately, and have really even began to question my salvation. I've heard John Piper talk about this struggle as how do you really peel back the entire onion of my belief? But that is for another discussion. The point is I have really begun to study predestination in the scriptures. It's kind of funny because one day I find myself falling in the Calvinist camp and another day not so much (never have held the Arminian theory). I really feel like I am being "tossed about like a wave.". But my main issue is that we as humans have to feel like we can sum this issue up in a box. Like the 5 points of Calvinism. This is a man-made system to try and define the mind of God in the Salvation process. I have yet to hear a plausible explanation for 1 Tim. 2:4 or the verse of the same type in 2 Peter. Especially in the point of limited atonement. I really have to do some mental backflips to make these verses mean not "everyone" but the elect. But then you have Romans 9. So I've almost come to te conclusion that I can't know the mind of God in this area.

But about the idea of the importance of Calvin's character pertaining to his theory. I think it does matter. The scripture says you will know a tree by it's fruit, and if true, that's some rotten fruit.

Also, I don't believe you can put The works of Solomon, David, or Paul in the same camp as Calvin because their words were divinely inspired. They were not their own words but the Lord's. Therefore their character is irrelevant because they were just vessels. I don't believe Calvins words are inspired and are therefore subject to error. Which I think is apparent in particularly limited atonement.