|
Your quote from Dave Hunt's book is great. I have no problems with
his facts or how he explains the connection between Calvin and the City
Council. What he says below is exactly what I have been saying, and I hope
you can see that what he says is much different than saying that Calvin had
murderous hatred toward Servetus and murdered him.
The only comment I might make to clarify matters stated below is that
Calvin indeed believed in separation between Church and State, but not in the
way that we think of it today. The church, which Calvin was part of
and was a leader of, had only the power to excommunicate. That's it.
This is what Calvin taught. The State, on the other hand, had the
responsibility to wield the sword of God (Romans 13). So he argued that
the State, not the church, was the one who punished evil doers. The
difference comes in when we consider laws against adultery, homosexuality,
abortion, blasphemy, not observing the Sabbath, drunkenness, etc. These
days, separation of Church and State mean to most people that the State should
not be involved in any matters that concern God or the church. From
Calvin's perspective, the State had an obligation to wield the sword of God in
matters that affected the Church and God. So from his view, the State
wielded the sword of God to punish evil doers while the Church
ministered forgiveness, mercy, the love of Christ, etc. This was
Calvin's view of separation of Church and State, and this is what he worked
toward accomplishing in Geneva.
Peace be with you.
David Miller.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2005 7:13
AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] 'Calvin's
beliefs are of Satan-He was an evil man' says Dean Moore
Hi David, thank you for your response.
I am not an expert on Servetus and did not live in
Geneva so like you I am depending on written accounts by others -
and
it appears as though there are other opinions about
the situation in Geneva. In Dave Hunt's book "What Love is This?" P.63
he writes:
"Calvin's defenders turn a blind eye to the facts
when they attempt to exonerate him by blaming events in Geneva on the civil
authorities. In the face of so much evidence to the contrary. Boettner
even insists that "Calvin was the first of the Reformers to demand complete
separation between Church and State." In fact, Calvin not only
established ecclesiastical law but he codified the civil legislation. He
held the civil authorities responsible to "foster and maintain the external
worship of God, to defend sound doctrine and condition of the church" and to
see that "no idolatry, no blasphemy against God's name, no calumnies against
his truth, nor other offenses to religion break out and be disseminated among
the people ... (but) to prevent the true religion ... from being with impunity
openly violated and polluted by public blasphemy"
Calvin used the civil arm to impose his peculiar
doctrines upon the citizens of Geneva and to enforce them. Zweig, who pored
over the official records of the City Council for Calvin's day tells us "There
is hardly a day, in the records of the settings of the Town Council in which
we do not find the remark "Better consult Master Calvin about this" Pike
reminds us that Calvin was given a "consultant's chair" in every meeting of
the city authorities and "when he was sick the authorities would come to his
house for their sessions" Rather than diminishing with time, Calvin's
power only grew. John McNeil, a Calvinist, admits that "in Calvin's
latter years, and under his influence the laws of Geneva became more detailed
and more stringent"
Servetus may have been a rank heretic - but where
there is life there is hope of repentance. His life was taken from
him. judyt
Judy, elders and bishops are the same thing in Scripture. The
passage that Bill quotes is "bishop" in the KJV. I thought that was
the version of your Bible.
You still don't get the situation in Geneva. John Calvin was
brought to Geneva to help them organize a "reformed" church. Calvin
outlined an organization with Doctors, Pastors, Deacons, and Elders.
The powers went only as far as excommunication. This was the only
power that Calvin had, and when he exercised it once to the chagrin of the
city council, he himself was banished from Geneva for 3 years, until a new
city council had invited him back. In regards to Servetus, Calvin had
NO POWER or AUTHORITY to put him to death, as mandated by his own outline of
powers of the church. His involvement was by exhorting the city
council to do something about this man, and then by making the case for how
Servetus had blasphemed the name of God. So your question of, "how
would it have been possible for one of these men living in Geneva to reign
in John Calvin," has already been answered. All they had to do was say
to Calvin, "no." That's it. In fact, Servetus had made the case
that Calvin should be the one on trial and he sought to have Calvin put to
death and all his belongings given to Servetus. The council took no
action on his exhortation. What would history have been like if they
had accepted Servetus's arguments instead of Calvin's? Think about
it.
I'm off to meeting with the saints now. God bless.
Peace be with you.
David Miller.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005
8:00 AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] 'Calvin's
beliefs are of Satan-He was an evil man' says Dean Moore
Are you reading from the Latin Vulgate
Bill? My Bible calls them "elders" - yes they are to be "examples"
to
the flock but Jesus is head of the Church and
they are at best undershepherds. How would it have been
possible for one of these men living in Geneva to
reign in John Calvin?
cd writes: Better read Titus 1:9-13
jt writes: Where in scripture does one find a
"Bishop-led" Church?
Titus 1.7 For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward
of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker,
not given to filthy lucre; 8 But a lover of hospitality, a lover of good
men, sober, just, holy, temperate; 9 Holding fast the faithful word as
he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to
exhort and to convince the gainsayers. 10 For there are many unruly and
vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision . . .
judyt
He that says "I know Him" and doesn't keep His
Commandments
is a liar (1 John 2:4)
judyt
He that says "I know Him" and doesn't keep His
Commandments
is a liar (1 John 2:4)
|
