Replies

The point of this article is the foundations of out Republic were first put forth in Geneva.

Those principles took a few centuries to fully develop.

The fact is that any nastiness conducted by the leaders of Geneva were learned from Rome, who had mastered the art of persecution quite well during the Middle Ages. Can anyone say Inquisition?

The point of this article is the foundations of out Republic were first put forth in Geneva.

Largely. Of course, influences on their thoughts goes back in time from there. William of Ockham questioned Papal infallibility in the 1300's. Though William's influence on science is quite astounding, of course, secular school texts make no mention of the fact that he was a theologian, robbing students of a true picture of his works. All theologians stand on intellectual shoulders who have gone before them. This is what is fascinating about the Reformation, IMHO, it arguably spanned from at least as early as around the 1200's to the 1600-1700's. Also - there were numerous influential contemporaries from around the time of Calvin, of course, and the "Calvinism" label . Certainly, however, Calvin's elucidation of Biblical doctrine was a definitive stepping stone on the progression towards America. The Reformed doctrinal view of Scripture and the Geneva Bible were what was brought to America by the Pilgrims and, for several decades, ships of more Reformed settlers from Holland, France, Scotland, etc. Documentation of these passages is available online if one searches a bit; they did happen and they were mostly filled with Reformed Christians. The unscriptural Christmas and Easter holidays were largely unobserved in those early years in America, since the only holy days observed were the 52 Lord's days every year. Of course, some people today are of the belief that about all the Pilgrims and Puritans did every day was burn witches, but actually most of this "history" comes from the influence of the 1952 Arthur Miller play, "The Crucible", which has done a lot to spread false ideas throughout our secular humanist educational system and culture; it's been made into several films and shows (obviously not the place to go when seeking correct Biblical doctrine). In truth, it has grossly distorted many people's view of that time in history as well as Biblical doctrine.

The fact is that any nastiness conducted by the leaders of Geneva were learned from Rome

Ideas of criminal justice - in general - were much more strict than they are today. This is why, IMHO, we need to put on our 1500's glasses on if we are to think about burning at the stake, torture, etc. Some points in that regard:

The Church would try cases of heresy - which, of course, such cases should be tried. However, the Christian New Testament Church is not given the "power of the sword" to execute heretics. In Galatians 1:8, however, the Christian Church is directed as follows, as the final step in the process of disciplining an unrepentent heretic, to excommunicate them:

8 "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed."

Therefore, any instance of a Church executing a death sentence a sinful overstepping of Church authority by those persons who did so, which resulted in the unlawful killing of the person convicted. Viewed in light of the death penalty as a regular course of civil government justice in that day, however, there simply was no general "anti-death-penalty" "movement" such as we have today. Scripture calls for the death penalty is called for in certain situations, and there was public support of such civil laws conforming to Biblical law in those days. There undoubtedly were individuals, however, who would disagree with individual verdicts, even as many verdicts of well-known murderers were undoubtedly widely seen as justice well served.
The Biblical moral law does provide for civil penalties for certain sins, i.e., in an explicitly Christian nation outright idolatry is a capital offense:
Leviticus 24
"16 And he that blasphemeth the name of the Lord, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name of the Lord, shall be put to death."
We know that the highest reward is to die in the name of Christ. The death of one who dies for Christ's sake, e.g., for not recanting their truthful testimony or truthful doctrine, is something that glorifies God. I leave it as an exercise for the reader to look up the specific verses which support these statements. When one bears in mind that all things happen according to God's purpose, looking back on the difficult parts of the Reformation, one is comforted by that fact.
We must remember that self-defense is Biblical. If true believers are living in a land that persecutes them, they are called upon to defend themselves, which includes overcoming their enemies. Numerous Psalms ask God for help in overcoming one's enemies (very often today people confuse the Sermon on the Mount teachings and wrongly conclude that self-defense is unscriptural). So I take all history of what turned into wars and mob violence with a grain of salt, knowing that most anyone back in those days, being typically at least professing Christians in their own mind, would know that they could fight a battle if necessary to defend themselves. The initial wrong would be belief in wrong doctrine, not trying to defend oneself (I think some might find this confusing); the side which is theologically wrong is then also wrongly physically attacking the other side. If every congregation's elders had simply excommunicated heretics and let it go at that, they would have been doing the "right thing". But I'm "Monday morning quarterbacking" hundreds of years later when I say this. One could also argue that American Churches today are making a similar mistake, but in the opposite direction of being too lenient - and basically not excommunicating heretics. Before I start making a "show" of pointing out the shortcomings of clergy hundreds of years ago, perhaps I should start pointing fingers at what the current generation right here in America is doing to fall woefully short of God's glory. Instead of "railing" against past wrongs, massacres, etc., hopefully our study of history will ultimately yield spiritual fruit.

The point of this article is the foundations of out Republic were first put forth in Geneva. and that premise is wrong. The foundations of the Republic were clearly based on Graeco-Roman republicanism -- hence even the term Senate.

Calvin's police state was not a foundation of the US, neither was Cromwell's dictatorship