Results 1 - 2 of 2
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Why? | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 6723 | ||
Actually, it was the town council of Geneva who voted to burn Servetus at the stake for his incessant heresy. Contrary to your assumptions, John Calvin did not run the entire town, and actually opposed burning Servetus at the stake. Yes, he was in favor of hanging Servetus, but putting Calvin in the context of his times, such a punishment was not considered inappropriate. Consider the fact that in the United States during the 1800s horse thieves were hung on a regular basis. Capital punishment for repeated offenses (such as the case of Serevtus, where his heresies would do a lot more than leave a man without his horse) was par for the course. What SHOULD be appreciated, on the other hand, is that there was only one person executed for heresy during an era when many,MANY more people were killed by the Catholic clergy for their "crime" of Protestantism. In any case, whether Calvin was part of a committee which voted to execute Servetus says nothing about whether his theology was true. My post was an admonishment not to be so quick to paint Calvin as some bloodthirsty, evil overlord. That is simply an unfair characterization, and that is precisely how you were intending to characterize him in your original post. Martin Luther was pretty anti-Semitic himself. We can find all kinds of sins among the Reformers. Does this mean that the Protestant Reformation was not of God, or that their theology is flawed? Perhaps you should take a little more time to study Church history and realize what a radical turn of events it took to get us back our Bible. --Joe! |
||||||
2 | Why? | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 6816 | ||
"We are to rightly divide the word of truth and be discerning toward unscriptural notions". Those are good words, Joe. Do you believe you are not using a few "unscriptural notions" here to try to defend something you took as an attack on your theology? There is nothing wrong with you defending your theology, but it was not under attack. Believe it are not, I believe the reformation of the Church was of God, and I believe Calvin was used by God to help bring it about. We can follow a mans theology, but we need not think all he does is anointed by God. They are flesh and blood as you and I. There is no way around the fact that the killing of Servetus was ugly. There is no way to dress it up as anything else. David’s murder of Uriah was ugly. Paul’s persecution of Christians was ugly. The Bible does not try to paint either as anything else. They both received forgiveness, and God used them in a mighty way. We don’t throw out there writings because of there actions. Did I paint Calvin as some bloodthirsty monster? I sure did not mean to. I say again, what I said, I said as a wisecrack. Not very thought out, I might add. I did not, at the time, think I was out of line. I realize now, I was. I hit a nerve on a subject that was much too touchy for a Calvinist to take as such. What I said was actually a prod. For that, I apologize. I accept your admonishment. I do not go along with ALL Calvin’s teachings, as you, but I would hope you would treat those who disagree with you a little better than Calvin did. retxar |
||||||