Arminianism -- False Doctrines of the "Pope" of Modern Pelagianism

Response to: Calvinism- False Doctrines of the "Pope" of Geneva ^ | August 13, 2003 | OP

[RnMomof7]

Servetus was executed by the civil authorities, and Calvin had zero civil office.
Yeah, and the Pharises had nothing to do with the crucifixtion of Jesus Christ.

To the Romans it was a sedition problem and they wanted to keep order in the Jewish state.

[Wrigley]

Isn't that Cincinatti?

[RnMomof7]

I understand the grace of God to grant us efficacious grace and a common grace, but primarily as a gift for us before we have received salvation. A mechanism to 'kick start' our acceptance of things eternal.

Does every one get the same kick?

BTW I too believe salvation is initiated by Gods grace

[Dr. Eckleburg]

xzins said he was with relatives in New Jersey this morning working to fix their computer.

Hmmm.

[RnMomof7]

Just think, even though the law of the day mandated the accusor would be placed in custody as a check so that if the accusation was found to be false, the false accusor bore risk for his behavior, John Calvin was able to accuse and convince others to bear that risk for him. What an admirable fellow.

Calvin forewarned Serveus not to come to geneva , as it was the practice of that day to burn heretics.However Serevus hopped that he could come to power in Geneva.

Sedition...

[RnMomof7]

Ummmm could be

[Cvengr]

Oh, maybe some get kicked a little differently than others, some a gentle nudge, others drop kicked, but yep,..I tend to think He's acted on us first to allow us to respond.

[RnMomof7]

Well if he was he is still I would think:>)

[RnMomof7]

Agreed that God brings us to Him with His grace

[Calvinist_Dark_Lord]

...Okay, fine; Homey can play dat.

OP, OP, OP, tsk,tsk, can't you ever learn to close your HTML when you Post?

< /EBONICS>

[Bat_Chemist]

You aren't suggesting...FReeper mayhem? Or perhaps miscue?

LOLOL!

[CARepubGal]

Thanks! I have to tackle the Institutes some day but am slowly working up to them. :-) Reading Sproul and Horton in the interim. :-)

[xzins]

I was gonna confess when the east coast went black, but I figured it was just me in the dark again 'bout most everything. :>0 hmmmm!

We're OK. It didn't hit middle NJ. I don't know about Newark and vicinity.

[P-Marlowe]

Just think, even though the law of the day mandated the accusor would be placed in custody as a check so that if the accusation was found to be false, the false accusor bore risk for his behavior, John Calvin was able to accuse and convince others to bear that risk for him.

That was indeed a very good law. Looser pays! It probably stopped a lot of heresy charges and blasphemy charges in Geneva and probably explained why Servetus was the last person to be executed for heresy in Geneva. Only someone who was really sure of himself or someone who was influential enough to convince some poor employee to stand in his place as accuser would be willing to bring such a charge.

Servetus came within a hair of being acquitted on all charges. Had he been given the right to an attorney, he would have been acquitted since the only evidence that convicted Servetus was the statements made by him when he was forced to testify as a witness against himself at his trial. Had he been acquitted it would not have been Calvin (the REAL Accuser) who would have been burned at the stake, but his loyal secretary (Calvin's "surrogate" accuser). Noble indeed.

[connectthedots]

To the Romans it was a sedition problem and they wanted to keep order in the Jewish state.

How naive, blind, or stupid, can you be? Pilate found no fault in Jesus. It was the the Jewish people who demanded Christ's crucifixtion. Pilate was fearful of sedition by the Jews, not the followers of Christ. One of the first lessons in Christian apologetics one ought to learn is that the crucifixtion of Christ required both the demand for it by the Jews and the acquiesence by the Gentiles; i.e. Romans. Without both, Christ would not have been crucified; nor would he have become the Savior of both the Jews and the Gentiles. How could this obvious fact escape any person who has studied even a little bit of scripture? I had this figured out within 30 days of becoming a Christian over 31 years ago.

[connectthedots]

Had he been given the right to an attorney, he would have been acquitted since the only evidence that convicted Servetus was the statements made by him when he was forced to testify as a witness against himself at his trial.

I find thjis interesting and wonder how many of the Calvin apologists realize that in most of the United States a confession without any other evidence or witnesses is insufficient for a conviction.

For those who are unaware, the purose is two fold. First is to prevent the use of forced confessions as the only evidence of guilt and to also prevent an 'innocent'confessor from taking the fall for the real criminal.

[Wrigley]

I find thjis interesting and wonder how many of the Calvin apologists realize that in most of the United States a confession without any other evidence or witnesses is insufficient for a conviction.

Yeah, but we aren't talking about 21st century USofA now are we?

Maybe you can bring a posthumous indictment against Calvin at the International Criminal Court?

[connectthedots]

CTD: I find thjis interesting and wonder how many of the Calvin apologists realize that in most of the United States a confession without any other evidence or witnesses is insufficient for a conviction.

Yeah, but we aren't talking about 21st century USofA now are we?

I supppose if Calvin practiced cannabalism, you would still say, "Yeah, but that was the 16th Century." This legal principle is rooted in the Magna Carta, signed well before Calvin hatched his plan to have Servertus executed.

Maybe you can bring a posthumous indictment against Calvin at the International Criminal Court?

Straw man. Why do you defend the indefensable? The times in which sins are committed are no excuse. Does the truth change with the times? If it does, then one must conclude that Nazi concentration camp guards did not sin/commit crimes when they murdered millions of Jews. Based on your logic, the Nuremburg Trials were unjust to many of those prosecuted. After all, weren't they 'just following orders'?

[Wrigley]

You have your crusade against all things Calvin. The way you're going, you may as well go for the indictment.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

In two paragraphs you manage to compare Calvin to cannabalism and the Nazis.

What's left? Ringworm and cellulite?

Calvin was the greatest of all Protestant reformers. Luther never sought to leave the Church of Rome. Wesley remained an Anglican all his life.

It was Calvin and his followers, like John Knox, who knew the necessity of returning to the church of Christ and reaffirming the sovereignty of God, not man.

ctd, I think your history with some misdirected, cold-hearted people has closed your eyes to what the reformed position really is.

If it's Total Inability/Depravity/Original Sin you challenge, you should know most Protestant faiths, as well as all Catholics, affirm it.

Calvinists are not alone in the belief that man is fallen, and only God saves.

But Calvin stands apart from many when he asserts the human experience and the pleasure that comes with a healthy, robust, productive life is good and should be enjoyed because it is all righteous and it is all of God as He intends.

"The purpose of life is to glorify God and enjoy Him forever."