Calvinist Evangelism...

Sounds like the Servetus myth, which some derive from this quote from Graves:

(Speaking of Baptist claim to be the first to assert true religious liberty, e.g. no state church)..."Not to Calvin does the world owe the idea or the practice of religious liberty, or even toleration for "he instigated the persecuting laws of Geneva, and he it was who had arrested, condemned, and, roasted, in a slow fire of green wood, the martyr Servetus!"

In response:

If one says that Calvin was in error in agreeing with the execution of heretics then why is there not equal indignation against all the other leaders who did the same thing?" After Servetus was arrested, Calvin pleaded with the members of the council, if he is going to have to be put to death, don't burn him. It is too cruel. At least behead him. But, Servetus was executed on Oct. 26, 1553.

Calvin didn't "have Servetus killed." He risked his own life by going to France to warn Servetus not to come to Geneva, yet Servetus did go there. Furthermore, it was the law of Geneva that heretics be killed. So, it was a lawful execution (Rom. 13:1-2). Also, Calvin was not the prosecutor in Geneva. He was only a witness. If Calvin had Servetus killed, how is that possible if Calvin had been previously banished from Geneva for three years. Therefore, he didn't have the power and authority to have anyone killed. Calvin was only a witness at Servetus' trial. Servetus was anti-Trinitarian, by the way.

If we are to villify Calvin for the execution of any person as a heretic, under the civil law of that time, we must also, on the same basis villify the apostles for not doing more to end slavery, and we must also disassociate ourselves from our own Baptist brethren that owned slaves into the 19th century and even separated to form the Southern Baptist Convention.

It would be rather odd for Calvin to have participated in the execution of Baptists because he did not vehemently oppose the practice of "dipping" as it was called. He did say that "the rivers would not suffice for a repetition of the dipping of so many..." In fact, baptism was a relative nonissue for the Reformers. Calvin also married a Baptist woman who was the widow of a Baptist preacher.

He himself did not institute the persecution laws of Geneva. He was the prinicipal pastor, but not the governor or on the council. Far from ruling as a religious despot, Calvin was continually frustrated by the Genevan city council's unwillingness to implement many of the social reforms he advocated. In fact, he and Farel encountered great resistance from the community and the city council, and the two men were forced to leave town in 1538, after only two years of effort. Upon his return in 1541, he established a church order in Geneva over the next twenty years. not without serious opposition, especially for the first ten years. He never held a government office, but became the most powerful figure in the city. He helped negotiate treaties, was largely responsible for establishing the city's prosperous trade in cloth and velvet, and even proposed sanitary regulations and a sewage system that made Geneva one of the cleanest cities in Europe. Although the legal code, much of it adopted upon Calvin's recommendations, seems strict by modern standards, nonetheless it was impartially applied to small and great alike and was approved by the majority of Geneva's citizens. (B.G. Armstrong).

 

Now that we've had our history lessons, let's get back to why Calvinists make better evangelists than Arminians, OK?

 

Another presumption?

If you ask me neither group has a smidgeon of worth in the evangelism effort!

 

Hello ktn4eg.

No that is not Ok. The attitude you display in your reply shows that you are not yet ready to evangelise. We must work through issues not dismiss them.

You brought a charge against a brother of mine now let us see the evidence. That is a simple request is it not? You must have evidence to support the charge you bring. If not retract the statement. You are duty bound.

It is libel not an opinion.
1 : to hurt the reputation of by malicious or unfair issue of any false or harmful representation :
The last time I looked it was still a crime to take a man's name and attach a lie to it. In this case the charge of murderer. Show us the evidence.

I have no opinion to make about Calvin. Whatever I have read of him I take as opinions of others and do not proclaim him a murderer on the basis of what? What did you base your assessment of Calvin on? Opinions are not evidence. State records are evidence.

This is a good quote to practice your evangelism on. Spot the mistakes. Evangelism is getting alongside people and working through the issues. Love does not depend on sarcasm or irritation. It is not about browbeating but gentleness and a willingness to understand the other. You will do well if you do not bible bash.

What you think of that?

johnp.

 

Obviously some of my friends out there fell for my ploy!

One of the things I enjoy doing is making some outrageous statement(s) and then sit back and see how many people will actually assume that I sincerely believe or practice what I just posted!

I love it!

Sorry if I offended some of my friends out there whose favorite pastime must, I guess, be that of analyzing every minute phrase I post, just seeking to find something whereby you can automatically assert what my motives must of necessity be, then hauling me before your own particular court of justice and demand that I supply you with a vast array of minute documentation subsequent to your publicly pillorying me for the questionable crime of merely seeing which of my lines it is for which you've fallen this time.

At any rate, I must now go and re-stock my inventory of bait and tackle since I seem somehow to have exhausted my limited supply of hooks, lines and sinkers.

On the other hand, it would be less expensive if some of my friends out there would care return them to me along with your next posting(s).

Now, let's see, where did I put that list of buzz prefixes and adjective words and phrases that contains such things as hyper- , ultra- , dyed-in-the-wool, humanistic, diabolical, satanic, anti-scriptural, xxxxx-pointer, etc.?

Praise the Lord, here it is.....

 

Hello ktn4eg.

What a wag! Wasted on me a miserable Calvinist.

That's called lying. I assume we assumed that what you stated, which still requires a retraction, you meant?
Are we meant to believe now that what you stated was a joke? That a man is called a murderer of many for a joke? Funny joke! Which joke still requires a retraction which you have not given.

A nerve is showing. What is it, do you get it in the neck everytime you dangle your hook?
to your publicly pillorying me But you have it wrong. I was warning you that anyone bringing a false charge would suffer the penalty due to that crime. 'publicly pillorying' is sweet in comparison.
then hauling me before your own particular court of justice and demand that I supply you with a vast array of minute documentation
Yes, that is called evidence but why do you defend yourself when you didn't mean it anyway? When has 'prove it' been an offence?

johnp.

 

See what I mean?

Lying....false charges....prove it.

Your assumption that Calvin absolutely, positively never had at any stage of his illustrious career a bit to do with the murder of any of those whose point of view dared to differ with his has yet to be conclusively and incontestibly proven as well.

I've already supplied the documentation on which I base my opinion in an earlier posting, and so have others who oppose me. If you chose not to believe those sources, that is not my problem, nor is it yours if I choose not to believe the sources they have supplied me.

You can pretty much come up with documentation to prove any side of any historical issue you choose. How totally reliable and unimpeachable the source(s) to which you chose to refer need to be examined as well.

I can supply you with probably as many sources that "prove" Calvin was the best gift that France ever gave to Switzerland as there are those who were jubilant over his leaving their area.

It's similar to what you will find today in any diverse society. Who is or has been absolutely, positively, uncontestibly the very best PM that the British ever had or will have? (Of course, you must also in so doing unquestionably prove that this person never lied about anything at any time and under any circumstances too.)

The same, I suppose, could be demanded of you by me to do the same for the US president.

Guess what? You won't be able to do it, will you?

There has only been one perfect ruler to have ever set foot on this earth, and both of us know what happened to that person, don't we?

Thankfully that person is in the process of making a comeback.

My friend and brother, some of those hooks I enjoy casting out have caught me in the neck, and some have caught me in places lower than that.

I guess we also need to repent of our lying to the birds and fish and other creatures our God has made by our deceiving them into thinking that we were about to offer them a choice treat when, in fact, we had other reasons for baiting them into our traps.

And, johnp, please don't continue to be a miserable Calvinist. We happy ones are a lot more enjoyable to have around.

Now, with flak jacket already donned, let's get back to proving that the Arminians have cornered the market on biblically-based evangelism.

 

ktn4eg, I hope you're sitting on that flak jacket! Arminians never got the mailing list naming all the elect. We cornered the market on evangelism by assuming that potentially, everyone could be of the elect except for the ones specifically named like the devil, Esau, Eli & Sons. Did I miss any?

It would be easier if all the elect would wear blue hats or something - but seeing they don't - we just read to all of them from the Good Book and let God sort them out.

I don't know what the weather's doing down there in Antioch but it's cold up here. Why don't you use your flames for more productive uses instead of consuming the time and energies of folks who want sincere discourse.

johnp, see what happens when folks put sugar in their tea!! I still don't agree with a thing you say but I do love you like a brother.

 

I'm not sitting on my flak jacket at all! It does not make a very comfortable cushion!

I'm intending to go out and enjoy the success that God has guaranteed because He took the initiative to choose some that will respond to the Gospel message a long time ago.

What? You mean you didn't get that list that was finalized in the council halls of heaven in eternity past either?

At least God did tell us where these folks are located. You see, you start out at your home area (Jerusalem), continue on throughout your home state (Judea), go into those forsaken areas away from the main thoroughfares (Samaria), and then keep going from there.

When I reflect back at all the things that had to have occurred when and where they did in order for me to have responded to the Gospel--and this only applies to those things that I could physically see and contemplate--I KNOW that there was no way that they could have just been merely coincidental happenings!

I didn't even know why I had to come forward in response to a set of verses that I've since never heard used with regard to evangelising the lost. The Romans Road wasn't what was used by the Holy Spirit to urge ME to go forward (not that there's a thing wrong with that).

Nor was it a Calvinist tract that had the address of the church whose pastor led me to be exposed to the doctrines of salvation by grace through faith either.

That's my story, and I'm sticking with it!

 

Hello! That's right ktn4eg don't sit on your flak jacket man I'm not aiming at your bum!

How long for? How trustworthy is your word? Can we assume this time that you are serious? No of course not. How can we since you admit a lie. It's a good lesson this. Watch your tongue it causes so much strife. With a sentence you took a man's reputation and fatally wounded your own. An evangelist must be beyond reproach and trustworthy.

posted 28 December, 2004 20:24

I made no assumption concerning Calvin. What you writ originated in a fertile mind not in reality. I have already said that I hold no opinions about people I don't know. The last time I witnessed a person calling Calvin a murderer I challenged them and they produced a bloke called Servetus. The evidence they produced was a link to an individuals website to prove that Calvin the Butcher existed. I went to the court transcripts and personal letters written at the time between the parties concerned. That's what I know about Calvin. That he was innocent of that charge and that he was a miserable sod, or so said some of his friends.

I'm afraid your fame did not preceed you. I've had a look back at this thread and find no mention of this documentation you speak of.
There is a jump in reality somewhere in the above quote. How can I choose not to believe that which I have no knowledge of?

Of course but that is all part of judging aright. That is all that is required of us, to judge the weight of the best evidence. What I learnt with Servetus was that Calvin was not a magistrate, not an executioner not the jury or judge but a prosecution witness. A situation Calvin tried to avoid. That was my conclusion with the evidence I had.
Where is the evidence for your charge? You did not even leave a link to your documentation.

The charge was one of the murder of many not who is the prettiest!

Maybe you would like to straighten this quote out.

Happy does not look for people to decieve. Happy comes from loving your neighbour and seeking their good not your own sport. The real happy ones, and few there are, are good to have around. You can rely on the happy ones to watch your back and not stab you in it.

How's that then? One lump or ten?

johnp.

 

Alright, clean it up and get back on topic. Write about the topic at hand, not about each other, and talk all history discussions to the history forum. They do not belong in a theology forum. Calvinism and Arminianism have nothing to do with the men by those names, but rather with the theologies that they represent. Keep it on topic.

 

As long as we're talking about one of my favorite beverages, I'll relate this to all of my friends out there, and to johnp in particular [who, I'm sure, has probably heard it several times before].

One of my favorite British PM's (didn't say he was the best one or the worst one they ever had, although personally he's closer to the former than the latter) was Sir Winston Churchill. He and Lady Astor weren't always, shall we say, in total agreement with every on of his policies.

At an encounter a function to which both were invited, our Lady friend was reported to have said to his face, "Sir Winston, if I were your wife, I'd poison your tea!"

Without batting an eye, he replied, "And, my dear Lady, if you were MY wife, I'd drink it!"

To say that Calvin was not a magistrate and therefore could not possibly have had a thing to do with the death of anyone is quite akin to the Roman Catholic Church insisting that not a soul was ever put to death by any RC church official.

Technically, that was true in many if not all cases. However, in the areas where the RC church predominated, those who dared to disagree with them were merely handed over to whatever governmental authorities there were in those areas to finish the job.

And, God forbid, I'd hate to live in a Baptist theocracy too! Imagine what life would be like if a few of my KJVo friends were in control! Or if some of my GVo [Geneva Version only] friends ran it! And CERTAINLY wouldn't want a couple of my MVo friends to succeed in a coup to replace either one of those other folks! But, that's in a different forum.....

Thankfully, when I sit next to Johnny C, and Jack A, and especially next to my dear friend johnp, in heaven, we'll undoubtedly find out that all of us were wrong about a lot of things we held dear.

My catalog of sins worthy of my banishment from heaven will be a multi-volume set [Thankfully the D volumes (for DECEIT, DEFAMATION of character, etc.) and the L volumes (LACK of brotherly love, LIBEL, LYING, etc.) are all on CD-ROM format!]. And so will that of each of my other friends too.

May God richly bless your evangelistic efforts, mate johnp [Oh, that's right, He already has!]. May you continually "come again rejoicing" bringing your miserable Calvinist "sheaves" with you!

And ALL God's people who were ordained to life eternal (eons before the first Adam enjoyed his first rib), said: "AMEN, y'all" !!!

 

Sorry, Pastor Larry, but you're right!!

Let's all SOS [Stay On Subject] and stop SOS [Straying Off Subject]!

Now, where did all of my Arminian tracts go?

That's right, I've handed them all out.

73 [I'd tell you what that means, but then I'd be guilty of SOS. ]

 

Sorry Pastor Larry.

johnp.