The Calvin / Servertus controvercy

  • Thread starter Thread starter Locoponydirtman
  • Start date Start date
  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
preacher4truth said:
He denied the triunity of God because he thought he could reach Islam and Jews with this. He denied that Christ was a distinct person of the Godhead.
Click to expand...
That might be true and if so he was a heretic. Still no call for murdering heretics. I don't know how anyone can call themselves a serious Bible scholar and deny what is written in black and white in the first chapter of The Gospel according to John.
 
Locoponydirtman said:
That might be true and if so he was a heretic. Still no call for murdering heretics. I don't know how anyone can call themselves a serious Bible scholar and deny what is written in black and white in the first chapter of The Gospel according to John.
Click to expand...
Servetus could have spared his own life by heeding the warning not to return to Geneva.

I don't see the fact Calvin agreed to his sentence as with all malice. He attempted to prevent it since he gave him fair warning. But those were the laws then, agree with them or not.
 
Locoponydirtman said:
That might be true and if so he was a heretic. Still no call for murdering heretics. I don't know how anyone can call themselves a serious Bible scholar and deny what is written in black and white in the first chapter of The Gospel according to John.
Click to expand...
How can they deny God's words throughout the Bible ? LINK - There is only one

Michael Servetus wrote two treatises concerning the Trinity and his objection or denial it was sound doctrine. (MS Trinity writings LINKED HERE- 47 pages long)

One last thing. Michael Servetus went by many pseudonym's (Michael Servetus, also known as Miguel Servet, Miguel de Villanueva, Michel Servet, Revés, or Michel de Villeneuve, ) during his time as theologian, cartographer, Humanist and physician. MS did not deny the Trinity in order to reach Muslims. Or those in Islam because Islam did not exist during Michael Servetus' lifetime.
Islam was founded in 622 AD. Before Muhammad there was no Islam.
Michael Servetus was executed in 553 AD.
 
calv.gif


BigSmile.gif
 
Lillywolf said:
How can they deny God's words throughout the Bible ? LINK - There is only one

Michael Servetus wrote two treatises concerning the Trinity and his objection or denial it was sound doctrine. (MS Trinity writings LINKED HERE- 47 pages long)

One last thing. Michael Servetus went by many pseudonym's (Michael Servetus, also known as Miguel Servet, Miguel de Villanueva, Michel Servet, Revés, or Michel de Villeneuve, ) during his time as theologian, cartographer, Humanist and physician. MS did not deny the Trinity in order to reach Muslims. Or those in Islam because Islam did not exist during Michael Servetus' lifetime.
Islam was founded in 622 AD. Before Muhammad there was no Islam.
Michael Servetus was executed in 553 AD.
Click to expand...
1553
 
maxwel said:
I don't think anyone who's done any research makes the claim Calvin murdered anyone with his bare hands.

The issue is always about Calvin using, or working with, the civil government in order to bring "heretics" to capital punishment.
And you just verified that he did, indeed, do that very thing.

And I'll also add... I don't care.

Those were different times, and most nations did have a state religion, which made heresy and non-conformity a legal and criminal matter. In a legal sense Calvin doesn't seem to be guilty of anything (that I'm aware of) but we can debate endlessly about the ethics and morals.

Personally, I get tired of this whole argument.
It's a bad argument.
It's a bad argument as a means to debate theological doctrine.
Calvin's personal life has NOTHING to do with whether his theological arguments are correct.
Logically, one has nothing to do with the other.
If we want to debate Calvinism, we need to debate it on doctrine.

I am NOT a Calvinist, but I don't debate Calvinism by attacking Calvin's character...
because it's not a logical argument.



This all makes for very interesting history.
It's fine to talk about it.
But Calvin's character, good or bad, simply has nothing to do with debating theological doctrine.

...
Click to expand...
It is always easier to attack the person than his theology or philosophy. It is known as the fallacious ad hominem attack.
 
Endoscopy said:
It is always easier to attack the person than his theology or philosophy. It is known as the fallacious ad hominem attack.
Click to expand...
Two pots calling anyone else a kettle is just silly.
And they proved they care when they posted even once. And not only that, Max cared enough to make it a sarcastic post.

All the OP is doing is seeking clarification at best. While the "fallacious ad hominem attack" charge would then have to be applied to anyone who insists Calvin was responsible for Servetus execution while ignoring the facts to the contrary.
 
We can debate the Calvinism and Arminianism endlessly but at the end both are Biblical. Since they are outside the creeds defining what a Christian must believe it is agree to disagree.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Locoponydirtman
The Quinquarticular Controversy is an endless debate that will have no single version thought to be the only correct version Biblically.
 
You must understand that there has been much written on the art of bullfighting, but I can sum it up in one sentence. Get out of the way of the bull or he will rip you open like a cheap Velcro wallet.
 
Endoscopy said:
The Quinquarticular Controversy is an endless debate that will have no single version thought to be the only correct version Biblically.
Click to expand...
True. But there are how many threads on this topic already and still active? And after this they shall appear again.
I think what gets really old is when those prone to starting these type threads claim someone is a Calvinist just to get them restarted after the accused denies the charge.
 
Lillywolf said:
Calvin was responsible for Servetus execution while ignoring the facts to the contrary.
Click to expand...

The historical record on this is clear, he was indeed responsible.

It is incomprehensible that anyone believes otherwise.
 
Lillywolf said:
True. But there are how many threads on this topic already and still active? And after this they shall appear again.
I think what gets really old is when those prone to starting these type threads claim someone is a Calvinist just to get them restarted after the accused denies the charge.
Click to expand...
Are you a Calvinist?
 
UnderGrace said:
The historical record on this is clear, he was indeed responsible.

It is incomprehensible that anyone believes otherwise.
Click to expand...
What's incomprehensible is how someone could insist on believing the lie, spread the anti-Calvinist propaganda, and avoid the truth regardless of how much there is linked in the Calvin threads so as to insure anyone interested in the truth gains the education they sorely demonstrate they lack about the subject.

Don't let history change your mind.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back