cd: while I believe there was some "drifting" from
the origional thoughts of Calvin-I find that the "TULIP" is from the teaching of
Calvin.
Calvin nowhere advocates a limited atonement. While
I would agree that such could be construed as a logical outworking of his
theology, the fact remains that Calvin himself never took it to this
conclusion. He was inconsistent, perhaps, but not the author of Limited
Atonement. It was his followers who articulated this doctrine.
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dean Moore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 2:43
PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] 'Calvin's beliefs are of
Satan-He was an evil man' says Dean Moore
>
>
> > [Original Message]
> > From: David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[email protected]>
> > Date: 11/29/2005 2:45:04 PM
> > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] 'Calvin's beliefs are of Satan-He was an evil
> man' says Dean Moore
> >
> > Dean, I have been spending too much time on e-mail and must back off. I
> > just want to make a few comments.
> >
> > I am not a fan of Calvin. Please try to remember that. In the matter of
> > Calvin and Servetus, I am on the side of Servetus in the sense that I do
> not
> > support "thought police." In other words, I do not support the Council
> of
> > Geneva putting Servetus to death. The difficulty I have about being
> > completely on the side of Servetus is that Servetus himself tried to get
> the
> > same council that convicted him to convict and kill Calvin, and to have
> all
> > of Calvin's possessions given to him as compensation for all the trouble
> > Calvin caused him. So I really can't be on either guy's side if all the
> > truth fully be known.
>
> cd: Then maybe we found a middle ground as I don't think much of either one
> myself. Maybe we should stop trying to present them as having good in them
> and focus on which is the meanest:-)
> >
> > In regards to Arminius, you are confusing "Calvinism" with "Calvin."
> > Arminius considered John Calvin a brother in Christ and greatly supported
> > his writings. What he was against was the Calvinists who were twisting
> > Calvin's writings to their own purpose. I recommend you read the Works
> of
> > Jacobus Arminius. It is available for free. If you download the pdf
> > versions, search for Calvin's name, and see how often Arminius quotes him
> > and relies upon the writings of Calvin to defend himself against his
> > Calvinistic opponents. In regards to the Creeds, you will see (if my
> memory
> > serves me correctly), that he fully supported the Westminster Confession.
> > This Creed was the "biggie." The other creeds you mentioned are not that
> > relevant in regards to John Calvin. There is a lot of politics involved
> > here that is sometimes difficult to follow.
>
> cd: I think I have already downloaded Arminius-I find him to be fasinating
> and hope to study more of his works.
> >
> > You should also know that while the modern Calvinists put the order of
> our
> > salvation as regeneration / faith / justification, Calvin himself appears
> to
> > me and many others to have it faith / regeneration / justification.
> > Therefore, while you might be disagreeing with Calvinists about this
> issue
> > of regeneration, you are probably in agreement with John Calvin himself.
> > Calvin can be read about on this in Book 3, Chapter 11 of his Institutes.
>
> cd: Actually Faith/Justification (pardoned)/regenaration makes more sense
> to me. So I have no agreement with J. Calvin.
> >
> > In regards to your comment about Calvin's will. I'm not sure you are
> > interpreting his quote right. When Calvin speaks of his exhortation, he
> is
> > simply accepting responsibility... "yes, I exhorted the council to do
> > something about this man." Part of the law was that the accuser had to
> go
> > to prison too in case the accusations were false. It was Calvin's
> personal
> > secretary who played this role of accuser and went to prison. I have no
> > doubt of Calvin's culpability in the matter. The problem is when we
> > characterize it as Calvin murdering Servetus. That's not what happened.
> > Calvin exhorted the authorities to do something about this man in their
> > city. The city took it from there, judging and executing Servetus.
>
> cd: You know my view on that already.
> >
> > If you read Calvin's writings, he was not at all happy with how Geneva
> was
> > progressing. He despised the lack of liberty, and was himself
> > excommunicated from the city for 3 years with his buddy Farel who Judy
> had
> > quoted. There is no doubt that the Geneva "experiment" was a failure,
> but
> > to lay it all at Calvin's feet is not right because it is not accurate.
> > People talk like Calvin was the mayor, or the pope, or some great
> official.
> > He was not even a citizen. He was a lawyer and preacher in town. His
> power
> > was to excommunication only, and the city even did not allow him to
> exercise
> > that the way he wanted.
>
> cd: I maintain:To make decrees shows power David.
> >
> > You mentioned John Wesley and say that faith must be present for
> > regeneration. Yet, surely you are aware that John Wesley believed in and
> > practiced infant baptism. How does an infant have faith? Wesley
> believed
> > in baptismal regeneration and practiced it. When John Wesley wrote what
> you
> > quoted, he was talking about what happens when an adult believes and
> enters
> > baptism and is only addressing a particular situation, not his
> perspective
> > overall of regeneration / faith / justification. He does not even use
> the
> > word regeneration there.
>
> cd: For me child baptism is a way of bringing children with unholy parents
> into the church-later they can decide on faith as wisdom comes. Job also
> offered sacrifices up to God for his children. 1 Cor.7:14, Acts 2:39,
> >
> > You mentioned that you had a goal of clearly defining the difference
> between
> > Calvin and Arminius. Perhaps what you really should do is contrast
> > Calvinism and Arminianism. I am not resisting your efforts, but only
> trying
> > to help you accurately portray history. I don't think characterizing
> Calvin
> > as being someone with murderous hatred, or as someone who murdered
> Servetus,
> > is a good way of presenting that contrast. Stick with the modern
> > disciplines of Calvinism and Arminianism and perhaps your goal will be
> more
> > readily realized.
>
> cd: while I believe there was some "drifting" from the origional thoughts
> of Calvin-I find that the "TULIP" is from the teaching of Calvin.
> >
> > I really am interested in conversing more, but I have lots of work here
> to
> > do and some research concerning my preaching campaign at the University
> of
> > Florida. I hope you understand.
>
> cd: I understand and hope God is with you in your stand against the U of M.
> >
> > Peace be with you.
> > David Miller.
> >
> > ----------
> > "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may
> know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6)
> http://www.InnGlory.org
> >
> > If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a
> friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
>
>
>
> ----------
> "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org
>
> If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
>
