History of Calvin

A lot of people who denigrate John Calvin haven't read much of anything by him,know little Church History, and are venting their rage on a man that the Lord raised up to gift the Church.

I made a few threads in the past to counteract the disparagements made upon his character. But some folks like to wallow in their mud.

Calvin was very evangelistic and sponsored missionaries in Brazil as you said as well as in his native France among other places.

If professing Christians would only take the time to read some of his works --commentaries,letters --but especially his sermons, they would come away with a totally different point of view about the man. They would be spiritually refreshed and feel shame.

If Jacob Arminius endorsed Calvin's works --that alone should send a signal that looking over Calvin's work is beneficial.

 

What most of the people who denigrate Calvin for this or that fail to realize is that he was one of the FIRST persons in almost 1000 years of church history who ACTUALLY returned to an exposition of Scripture for his doctrines and theology instead of following "Sacred Tradition" and the teachings of the Pope and the Church Fathers. Calvin OUGHT to be our hero! Instead, those who actually hate a solid exposition of Scripture have taken him to task.

Did he leave a few things yet undone, like infant baptism? Yup. Lots of reasons why. but one would actually have to understand the theological climate of that day to grasp them. Was he involved with a "state church"? Yup. Just the way it was back then. The separatist movement had yet to gain steam, but it was not long after Calvin -- and in part because of his work.

ALL the early Reformers took stands on the Bible ALONE which cost them dearly.

 

Some observations from Church History(not holy see): true Baptists have never baptized their infants nor have they bowed to a state church.

Millions have died standing against infant baptism and state church.

It is a serious error to hold up any man save the Lord Jesus--The Just for the unjust.

True Baptists are not part of the 16th century "Protestant Reformation."

The churches indwelled by the Holy Spirit since the day of Pentecost do not need reformation. Many folks are trying to reform the reformed work of a man made religion. The result is still the same--nothing but reformed usurpation. See Mt. 7:21-23.

Peace,

Bro. James

 

This is not about the false notion of Jesus or Calvin. John Calvin's name has been dragged through the mud on the BB. This thread is an opportunity to speak the truth about the man. He was certainlt raised up by the Lord for the benefit of the Church. Many others in Church History have been used by the Lord to help the Church (Universal,I might add).

The foundation of the Church is our Lord Jesus Christ,of course.

Baptists are Protestants --we are heirs of Protestantism. Spurgeon,among other famous Baptists acknowleged the same.

There are no perfect churches. All true churches are in need of reformation --all should be reforming. If a church isn't reforming,it's dying.

 

Contending for The Faith---once for all delivered...

Book of Jude 1-25; especially vss. 3, 19, and 24.

Peace,

Bro. James

 

Quoting From The NIV

I suppose you are referencing the end of verse 3:"contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints." AMEN.

v.19:"These are the men who divide you,who follow mere natural instincts and do not have the Spirit."

Just why did you feel inclined to cite that particular passage? Are you implying Calvin was guilty of that offence and that he did not have the Holy Spirit -- hence unregenerate?!

v.24: "To him who is able to keep you from falling and to present you before his glorious presence without fault and with great joy --."

Amen also. What is the particular significance you attach to this passage in relation to the OP?

 

That True Baptists died in the millions before the "Protestant Reformation" refusing to baptize their infants and refusing to bow to the state religion is readily verifiable in various church history books.

To say that it is allowable to be off on such doctrines is absurd for want of a better word.

Stating verifiable facts in writing is not slander.

Why does Truth make some people so angry and contentious?

Peace,

Bro. James

 

Where are we going with the Book of Jude:
1. The Faith was delivered to the Saints--probably not St. Scholastica, etal.
2. The Spirit, The Holy(third person of the Trinity) came to indwell the Assembly(aka: church) on the Day of Pentecost, Acts 2. He remains: leading and guiding in All Truth, through The Word.

3. Jesus has never left nor forsaken His bride--through the gates of hell--He has been faithful, many professors have not.

Footnote: True Baptists, and others, have a real problem going back through Rome for authority--she never gave us any. We are the usurpers according to the holy see. Jon Chauvin was a Roman priest who protested, like Martin Luther. Neither one of them ever were friends to True Baptists, in fact, quite the contrary. The bone of contention was infant baptism. Still is.

"We ought to believe God rather than men."

Peace,

Bro. James

 

Some of my ancestors are from Cornwall; some fled to France then to the U. S. of A.--not clear why--some say religious persecution; some say they were avoiding prosecution of the law--some say regarding religion. I have been a Catholic, Methodist, agnostic, athesist, Mormon, Pentacostal and several others. I learned a lot of stuff--most of it false. Then The Lord called me out of darkness. One thing I got out of all the meandering: Satan himself is become an angel of light along with his ministers.

The litmus test is the Scripture only, not the commandments and writings of men.

Peace,

Bro. James

 

Everyone has a different libel, I mean label machine. I like: That Way or The Way--difficult to affix a handy, meaningful denominational label.

BTW, True Baptists are not only not Protestant, they are not a denomination in the standard use of the term.

Have a blessed day.

Over and out.

Bro. James

 

So you are making the claim that John Calvin was not regenerate. How unlovely of you.

John Calvin was not a Roman Catholic priest. Where are you getting your information?

By the way,John Wycliffe and John Huss among many other were godly Roman Catholic priests. The Lord raised them up to minister to His people.

 

Name em'. Your sources sound highly suspect.

 

One more time: Apostle Paul is quite clear about the glorification of other men including himself. See ICor. 3:1-23, especially vs. 21: "Therefore let no man glory in men."

Peace.

Bro. James

 

Errata: Calvin was not ordained by the Holy See. He was a Catholic studying to be a priest. He changed career paths, going into juris prudence.

I am not clear about where Calvin stands with Rome today. Was he ever excommunicated like Luther?

Sorry for the inaccuracy. I stand corrected.

God calls people out from whatever pit they may be in--including the Holy See. That does not add credence to their creed.

This is not about the godliness of anyone--the Lord knows them that are His. This is about giving glory to men. There is only One: Holy, Holy Holy.

Peace,

Bro. James