Is It Fitting for Calvinists to Adopt the Theology of a Man, and One Who Murdered Servetus?

Ligonier Ministries ^ | May 2009 | R.C. Sproul

[CondoleezzaProtege]

As my friend Doug Phillips has pointed out, this year has brought, in the providence of God, a strange confluence of anniversaries. The two men who have had the greatest impact on these United States may well be, on the one hand, Charles Darwin, and on the other John Calvin. Darwin was born two hundred years ago this year, Calvin five hundred years ago. Our perspective on each of these men will serve as a potent bell-weather for our perspectives on a whole host of issues. In the culture wars most of our enemies will celebrate the birth of Darwin and mourn the birth of Calvin. Our side, on the other hand, will have many Calvin fans, and precious few friends of Darwin. Many of us who give thanks to God for the ministry of John Calvin will be gathering together to celebrate his influence and the influence of the Reformation at Vision Forum’s Reformation 500 event this summer in Boston. I will have the opportunity to speak to Calvin’s influence in giving the western world, and especially these United States a truly free economy. You can read up on that event here.

That said, in answer to the question, of course it would be wrong to adopt a theology of a man. Those who accuse Calvinists of doing so, however, expose their own historical ignorance. Calvinists are not followers of Calvin. Neither are they followers of a theology created by Calvin. Instead we are they who embrace a system of thought that has a long and honored history in the church. If our theology derived from any lone man, and it didn’t, that man would be Saint Augustine , whom Calvin quoted more than any other scholar. Our tradition includes the Puritans, and the Pilgrims, the Dutch Reformed church, the Scottish Kirk that blossomed under John Knox. It includes the German Reformed church and the French Huguenots. Calvinism existed before Calvin and it thrives now five hundred years after his birth. Ours is the theology of the Reformation.

Which still is reason enough in some people’s minds to reject it. Some point out the all too painful reality that in some instances the power of the sword was used during the time of the Reformation to “settle” theological disputes. Servetus was indeed put to death in Geneva , the town where Calvin served, and put to death not for what we would today consider crimes, but for propagating heresy. More broadly still the Reformed during the time of the Reformation believed it fitting to wage literal war against theological opponents on both ends of the spectrum. They warred with Rome , and together with Rome warred against the Anabaptists. My spiritual fathers took up carnal weapons in their quest to make known the reign of Christ over all things. I believe they were wrong to do so, horribly, horribly wrong.

The willingness to use the power of the state in this kind of context was, in my judgment, both grievous error, and terribly common error. It was, in fact, evidence of an insufficient Reformation. Our spiritual fathers sadly here followed in the footsteps of their immediate fathers, Rome herself. The Anabaptists, though they erred and continue to err in denying the fittingness of Christians to wage just war, rightly understood that war was not the right means to persuade those either outside the kingdom, or even occupying a different corner of the kingdom. In a similar manner, Calvin erred, in my judgment, in not urging the city fathers of Geneva against the execution of Servetus. (Remember, however, that however muddied their conception of appropriate spheres of authority, it was the civil government, over which Calvin had no authority, that condemned Servetus.) Calvin murdered no one. He did have a deficient understanding of the appropriate limits of state power.

We would be wise to remember that all our heroes save one had feet of clay. As we this year celebrate the 500th birthday of Calvin, let us not fall into a hagiography that he himself would not approve, turning heroes into sinless saints. Let us not, on the other hand, however, succumb to revisionist history that would turn heroes into monsters. Let us give thanks for that Biblical theology that we sometimes call Calvinism, and give thanks for Calvin.

[Elsie]

Yes; Moses was a true prophet; Calvin, et. al. were neither true prophets nor true apostles.

And out of ALL of them; how many thrust into the Leadership position of Catholicism have been TRUE popes?

[af_vet_1981]

So unless you label Calvin an outright “false prophet,” then you agree with me he was used by God as a filter for truth in his generation (and beyond).

False Dichotomy

One could agree
1. Calvin was a Gentile born almost 15 centuries after the Messiah.
2. He was neither a prophet nor an apostle.
3. He did not participate in any apostolic succession through the laying on of hands going back 15 centuries.
4. He developed a prominent strain of Protestant theology, 15 centuries after the Messiah without apostolic authority.

Calvin reminds me of the Protestant founders of the Mormon religion, albeit with less heresy, less land, and less mercy.

[HarleyD]

For me; I'll jus' follow what I'm told during Mass.

Isn't that the truth. Notice the answer and response given in the Catholic Answer Forum that I posted. The person responding couldn't answer the question as to why the Council of Orange doctrines are different then the Council of Trent and stated three different possibilities, one that Councils "get it wrong" and another that well "Orange MIGHT be...". The author clearly doesn't have an answer. The questioner responded with "You rock! Thanks."

I could only roll my eyes.

[Colofornian]

He did not participate in any apostolic succession through the laying on of hands going back 15 centuries.

Argument from silence

How can you prove even these NT-named apostles were such? Where is your evidence hands were laid on all of them? Now I'm not claiming Calvin was an "apostle," just that all of your standards for church leadership are not provable.

”James, the half brother of Jesus and leader of the Jerusalem church—Galatians 1:19

”Barnabas–Acts 14:14

”Paul–Acts 14:14 and many other references

”Apollos– Corinthians 4:6-9 ”Epaphroditus–Philippians 2:25. While the King James Version translates the word as “messenger”, the Greek word (apostolon) is actually “apostle”.

”Two unnamed apostles–Second Corinthians 8:23. A brother of fame among the churches, and a brother tested–‘As for our brethren, they are messengers of the churches, a glory to Christ.’ Again, the Greek word is ‘apostoloi’ but is translated here as ‘messengers.’”

”Andronicus and Junia–Romans 16:7 ‘Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellow prisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.’

How Many Apostles in the New Testament

[Iscool]

A friend of mine who is a Calvinist made a good point that I have yet to give a solid rebuttal to. As Protestants we hold that Christ did it all for our salvation and there is nothing we can do to earn it. If this statement is true then it follow that if we choose Christ we have done something to earn our salvation.

Luk_18:13 And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.

What did this guy do to earn salvation???

Rom 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

Calling on the Lord's name to ask for forgiveness is 'earning it'???

Act 16:30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?
Act 16:31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved

Is believing on Jesus Christ earning salvation???

[LukeL]

For the Calvinist it is not as much earning your salvation as it is that a person choosing God goes against the concept of Total Depravity. If a person is truly in a state of sin, then the Calvinist would say God cannot dwell inside of him or convict his spirit. If a person chooses God it is because of the concept of Unconditional Election. God chooses who are to be saved based on his own reasons and nothing we do.

I myself am neither a Calvinist nor a Arminianist. I have yet to form a solid theology on this idea.

[af_vet_1981]

How can you prove even these NT-named apostles were such? Where is your evidence hands were laid on all of them?

And the Lord said unto Moses, Take thee Joshua the son of Nun, a man in whom is the spirit, and lay thine hand upon him; And set him before Eleazar the priest, and before all the congregation; and give him a charge in their sight. And thou shalt put some of thine honour upon him, that all the congregation of the children of Israel may be obedient.

...

And Joshua the son of Nun was full of the spirit of wisdom; for Moses had laid his hands upon him: and the children of Israel hearkened unto him, and did as the LORD commanded Moses.

...

And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

...

Then returned they unto Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is from Jerusalem a sabbath day's journey. And when they were come in, they went up into an upper room, where abode both Peter, and James, and John, and Andrew, Philip, and Thomas, Bartholomew, and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon Zelotes, and Judas the brother of James. These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren. And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said, (the number of names together were about an hundred and twenty,) Men and brethren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus. For he was numbered with us, and had obtained part of this ministry. Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out. And it was known unto all the dwellers at Jerusalem; insomuch as that field is called in their proper tongue, Aceldama, that is to say, The field of blood. For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick let another take. Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection. And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen, That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place. And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.

...

Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost: (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.) Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost. And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money, Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost.

Numbers, Catholic chapter twenty seven, Protestant verses eighteen to twenty ,
Deuteronomy, Catholic chapter thirty four, Protestant verse thirty four ,
Matthew, Catholic chapter sixteen, Protestant verses seventeen to nineteen ,
Acts, Catholic chapter one, Protestant verses twelve to twenty six ,
Acts, Catholic chapter eight, Protestant verses fourteen to nineteen,
as authorized, but not authored, by King James

[Elsie]

False Dichotomy

 

One could agree
1. Calvin was a Gentile born almost 15 centuries after the Messiah.
2. He was neither a prophet nor an apostle.
3. He did not participate in any apostolic succession through the laying on of hands going back 15 centuries.
4. He developed a prominent strain of Protestant theology, 15 centuries after the Messiah without apostolic authority.

 

Houston; we have a problem

 

1. Mary was a Jew; born about 14-15 years before the Messiah.
2. She was neither a prophet nor an apostle.
3. She did not participate in any apostolic succession through the laying on of hands.
4. She developed a prominent strain of CATHOLIC theology (Mariology), many centuries after the Messiah without apostolic authority.