[metmom]

The point of the thread was about the character of the man.

Calvin pales in comparison to Alexander VI.

Besides, as pope, he was allegedly Christ’s representative on earth and so was in charge of the Roman Catholic Church theology, so he would have been ultimately responsible for the teaching of theology so that argument is a bit weak.

For all the visibility that Calvinists have on FR, I’ve met very few in real life. Most Protestant churches hold to doctrine that is more Arminian in nature, which also played a role in the Reformation but is virtually ignored in these debates.

The Reformation and Protestantism are not strictly Calvinistic by any means.

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

[Natural Law]

"Besides, as pope, he was allegedly Christ’s representative on earth and so was in charge of the Roman Catholic Church theology, so he would have been ultimately responsible for the teaching of theology so that argument is a bit weak."

So your argument in defense of Calvin is that the Pope is a greater representative than was Calvin and should therefore be held to a higher standard? Thank you, I think.

[RegulatorCountry]

For all the visibility that Calvinists have on FR, I’ve met very few in real life.

Rare as hens' teeth in my part of the world as well. Not quite as rare as "traditional" Episcopalians or "traditional" Roman Catholics, though. They've all been the classic Obama voters that recent history shows them to be.

FR is quite the soapbox, and it gets used. Some of those doing the using are far fewer in number than the volume level would indicate. Southern Protestants are the bulwark of the Republican base, and have been for half a century, but you'd never know it from some of these Religion Forum threads.