Just
as Martin Luther (1483-1546) was a heretic for teachings the necessity of the sacraments
(including water baptism) for salvation, John Calvin (1509-1564) was also a heretic. Calvin taught infant
baptism, and also that the Sacraments were EQUAL with the Word of God. Calvin
and Luther BOTH taught baptismal regeneration.
Calvin even had people
killed for disagreeing with his heresy on infant baptism. So many people
today are naive of such men. I've been reading Christian books for years
that quote Martin Luther and John Calvin—come to find out they both endorsed
the heretical sacraments and infant baptism. Sacraments are NOT taught in
the Bible.
There is NO way that such men could have been saved because they
ADDED works to faith, which is no faith at all. Calvin taught that
believers must persevere to the end to be saved. This
is works salvation. The reformation was plagued with the remnants of
Catholicism, perverting the simple plan of salvation (2nd Corinthians
11:3-4).
Martin Luther came out of Catholicism, but Catholicism didn't
come out of Martin Luther. Luther simply started his own demonic cult as
a surrogate religion for frustrated Catholics. Mr. Luther was a heretic. The same can definitely be said of John
Calvin. Why is it that so many people feel compelled to join manmade religions rather than
study the Word of God for themselves? Jesus told us in John 5:39 to
SEARCH THE SCRIPTURES!
Calvin Taught Baptismal Regeneration
Listen to the heretic John Calvin
teach baptismal regeneration (i.e., the unbiblical teaching that a person must
be water baptized in order to go to Heaven). John Calvin was very Catholic in
his doctrines...
"Consider Calvin:
“But as baptism is a solemn recognition by which God introduces his children
into the possession of life [e.g., regeneration], a true and effectual
sealing of the promise, a pledge of sacred union with Christ, it is justly
said to be the entrance and reception into the church. And as the
instruments of the Holy Spirit are not dead, God truly performs and
effects by baptism what he figures.” Elsewhere, Calvin wrote, “There
is a union complementary with the thing figured, lest the sign be empty,
because that which the Lord represents in sign he effects at the same time,
and executes in us by the power of the Spirit . . . What indeed do we
abrogate or take away from God when we teach that he acts through his
instruments, indeed, he alone . . . God works . . . through the
sacraments as instruments… The Spirit is the author, the sacrament
is truly the instrument used.” —SOURCE
John Calvin errantly taught that Jesus only died for
the saved. Sadly,
Charles Spurgeon bought into this lie of Calvin. Although I fully understand
the viewpoint,
it is unbiblical. The Bible teaches universal atonement. Like it
or not, the Word of God is our Final Authority, NOT Spurgeon or any other man. 1st
John 2:2 reads, “And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for
ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.” 2nd Corinthians
5:15, “And that he died for all...” We read in 1st Timothy 1:15,
“This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.” The Word of God proclaims that Christ came to save sinners, not just certain
sinners.
Listen to the plain teaching of
2nd peter 3:9, “The Lord is not
slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is
longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all
should come to repentance.” This Scripture clearly reveals that it
is possible for ALL men to repent. God is NOT willing for any to
perish. If Calvinism is correct, then how can you reconcile God's desire
for all
men to repent if He only predestinates certain of them to salvation? Calvinism makes no sense at all.
Calvinism is NOT
Biblical Doctrine
Calvin was a heretic who taught that
God predestines men to salvation. Calvin taught “selective salvation” (or
“unconditional election”) where God selects who will be saved and who will
not. These are Satanic heresies. Calvin also taught “irresistible
grace” (the lie that God forces a person to be saved).
I once heard a New
Evangelical pastor tell me that there is no need to go soulwinning because God
decides who gets saved or not. That pastor is an utter fool. He
was so lazy and far from God that he adopted Calvin's heresies to justify his
carnality and unwillingness to preach the Gospel. Proverb 11:30 tells us
that a wise Christian wins souls to Christ. The unscriptural attitude of
Calvinists is: “If God predestinates
men to salvation, then why should we go soulwinning?”
Why did Paul go
door-to-door soul-winning in Acts 20:20? Why did Jesus give the Great Commission in
Matthew 28:19-20? Why did Jesus try to convert the wicked Scribes and
Pharisees? Why did Stephen continue preaching to the angry mob? Why did the
early Christians continue preaching the gospel, after James was killed by
Herod for preaching the gospel? It is because there is hope for every sinner
to come to Christ. It is because God has given to mankind a free will, and
the choice is ours individually to make. God does NOT choose who will be
saved or lost. The choice is yours alone to make!
Clearly, Calvin was
somewhat of a Catholic. Here's some of
what John Calvin believed...
"God's church and
the sacraments are also given in God's grace for the edification of the
elect and the good of the world. The church, one through all time, can be
known by the preaching and hearing of God's Word and the proper
administration of the sacraments. Although the true church is known only to
God, the visible church is thoroughly related to it on earth. Officers and
leaders in the church should be those individuals who try responsibly to
follow in Christian discipleship, but their authority cannot depend on their
righteousness. The offices should be only those designated in the New
Testament. Sacraments (baptism and the Eucharist) should be celebrated as
mysteries in which Christ is spiritually present; in the Eucharist he
believed that Christ is present both symbolically and by his spiritual
power, which is imparted by his body in heaven to the souls of believers as
they partake of the Eucharist. This position, which has been called "dynamic
presence," occupies a middle ground between the doctrines of Luther and
Zwingli"
SOURCE: 1996 Grolier Multimedia
Encyclopedia, Copyright 1996 Grolier Interactive, Inc. and
Microsoft Encarta 98 Encyclopedia, Copyright 1993-1997 Microsoft
Corporation.
Calvinism is NOT a Bible doctrine,
but a system of human philosophy (humanism) appealing to the proud
mind. Calvinism goes into the realm of human philosophy. Consider first
that
what we are discussing is called "Calvin-ISM." It is only the
opinions of one man.
Dr. Loraine Boettner says, “It was
Calvin who wrought out this system of theological thought with such
logical
clearness and emphasis that it has ever since borne his name.” That's a
big lie. Are you going to tell me that believers were ignorant of the
Word of God for
1,500 years until Calvin arrived? How strange that after 1,500 years
of
Christianity, practically no one had understood the Bible to teach
Calvin's
doctrine of predestination until he introduced the philosophy. What a
strangely hidden doctrine... that New Testament Christians somehow
survived for nearly
for 1500 years since Christ without Calvin's teachings; until the days
of the reformers when Calvin developed the
doctrine fully. That's insane!
Dr. Boettner
idolizes Mr. Calvin; but the Bible calls Calvin a liar and a heretic.
The Bible has always been clear on doctrine. No
one had any problems finding the truth about salvation before Calvin arrived. The Bible
is also clear on Biblical doctrine. God
put the cookies of truth on the bottom shelf for us to reach; we don't need
Calvin's stepladder (or anyone else's).
Heretics always try to convince
us that the truth is way above our heads, out of our reach, and that we need
them to help us obtain the truth. 1st John 2:27 reads, “But the
anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that
any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and
is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in
him.” All we need is the Word of God and the Holy Spirit to teach us.
Calvin was a Tyrant Monster
Let God Be True, But
Every Man a Liar
Romans 3:4 declares, “...let God be
true, but every man a liar...” It is woefully tragic that so many
professed believers are making the same mistake which the Apostle Paul
rebuked the believers at Corinth of making, “Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name
of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be
no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same
mind and in the same judgment. For it hath been declared unto me of you,
my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are
contentions among you. Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am
of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ
divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? I
thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; Lest any
should say that I had baptized in mine own name” (1st Corinthians 1:10-15). I am NOT an Arminian or a Calvinist,
nor a Lutheran, I am a born-again Christian!
Spurgeon and Calvinism Although
Spurgeon claimed to be a Calvinist, it appears that Spurgeon did NOT
fully understand the doctrine of “unconditional election” as taught by John Calvin. I agree with Charles Spurgeon's
words in the preceding paragraph, but Spurgeon is speaking about works verses
grace, and not predestination as Calvin taught. Spurgeon simply believed
that man could NOT save himself, but that Salvation was 100% of God. This is Biblical (Mark 10:25-27, "It
is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man
to enter into the kingdom of God. And they were astonished out of
measure, saying among themselves, Who then can be saved? And Jesus
looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God:
for with God all things are possible).
Yet, Spurgeon clearly also
believed that "whosoever will" (anyone) could get saved, a view that
Calvinists and Hyper-Calvinists do NOT hold. Romans 10:13 plainly
teaches, "For WHOSOEVER shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved."
Spurgeon believed that God absolutely needed
to be involved in man's salvation, and this is Biblical. We read in John
6:44, "No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him:
and I will raise him up at the last day." But for Calvinists and
Hyper-Calvinists to teach that God is "selective" in choosing who will or
won't be saved is certainly NOT Biblical. Titus 2:11 clearly teaches,
"For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men."
Did you read that...ALL men? Spurgeon didn't believe that only
certain sinners of God's choosing would be saved. Romans 10:13 plainly
teaches that "WHOSOEVER" will may come to be saved (and Spurgeon
believed this). John 3:16 proclaims that God loved the WORLD
enough to send His only begotten Son to pay for our sins. Calvinism and
Hyper-Calvinism are wrong to teach that God chooses who will be saved. I
think Spurgeon jumped-the-gun on this issue before fully investigating it
because Spurgeon clearly did NOT believe that anyone is predestined to
salvation. John Calvin taught heresy when he taught that God
chooses people to be saved. There is NOT one Scripture in the entire
Word of God which teaches that God chooses anyone to be saved. The Bible
teaches that all believers were predestined to "be conformed to the image of
His Son," NOT predestined to salvation ("For whom he did foreknow, he also did
predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be
the firstborn among many brethren" -Romans 8:29). This is exactly
what Spurgeon believed.
In contrast, Calvinism DOES teach predestination unto salvation. God
NEVER chooses anyone for salvation, Scriptures such as Acts 17:30 make this
abundantly clear ("...but now commandeth all men every where to repent").
Why would God command ALL men to repent if only certain men have been
chosen for salvation. There really is NO debate concerning Arminianism,
Calvinism, and Hyper-Calvinism if you simply take the Word of God at face
value...they're all messed up! The Bible is so clear on all these
matters. There are problems with all three views. Arminianism is
wrong to teach that a person can lose salvation. Romans 5:15 declares
that eternal life is a "FREE GIFT." A gift CANNOT be taken back if it is
freely given. Salvation is God's gift to man, paid for by the blood of
Jesus (Romans 6:23; Colossians 1:14). Calvinism and Hyper-Calvinism
teach "limited atonement" and "selective salvation," which are both Satanic
lies. 1st John 2:2 couldn't be any clearer, "And he is the propitiation
for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole
world." Calvinism is unbiblical heresy! Salvation is by grace through faith based upon
the redemptive work of our Lord Jesus Christ. Jesus took upon Himself
the sins of all mankind in His death on the cross, and His resurrection from
the dead provides salvation to all who believe. All who receive the Lord
Jesus Christ through faith are born again of the Holy Spirit and thereby
become the children of God. It is apparent that Spurgeon was only a
one-point Calvinist. Spurgeon believed that "whosoever will" can come to
Christ to be saved. This eliminates three points of Calvinism.
Spurgeon also believed in eternal security, which eliminates the last point of
Calvinism. The only Calvinist heresy that Spurgeon bought into, and
horribly so, was the unbiblical heresy of limited atonement. Although I
fully understand Spurgeon's viewpoint, it is unbiblical. The Bible teaches universal atonement.
Clearly, Christ died and shed His blood for ALL humanity. Like it or
not, the Word of God is our Final Authority, NOT Spurgeon, Calvin or any other
man. 1st John 2:2 reads, ""And he is the propitiation for our sins: and
not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world." 2nd
Corinthians 5:15, "And that he died for all..." We read in 1st
Timothy 1:15, "This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
The Word of God proclaims that Christ came to save sinners, not just certain
sinners. Listen to the plain teaching of 2nd peter 3:9, "The Lord is not
slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is
longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all
should come to repentance." This Scripture clearly reveals that it
is possible for ALL men to repent. God is NOT willing for any to perish.
If Calvinism is correct, then how can you reconcile God's desire for all
men to repent if He only predestinates certain of them to salvation?
Calvinism makes no sense at all. Calvin's Folly
Calvin wrote the "Institute's of Christian Religion" when only 27 years old
at an impressionable time in history when an organized theology was needed.
Calvin has misled so many people that many still consider the writing of the
"Institute's" the single most influential book on theology in church history.
One wonders what his writing could have achieved in the hearts and minds of
men if only he truly had the love of Jesus. His insistent stress upon the
awful majesty and righteousness of God drove him to emphasize with equal
severity the utter worthlessness of fallen and sinful man. He taught the
belief that we are powerless in the salvation act, the belief that man's
salvation rests solely upon grace, but only for the elect.
Because man is
fallen and the human intellect is distorted and has become the instrument of
his sin, the consequences of natural theology are idolatrous. The followers of
Calvin lived in the delusion that the spirit of Christ worked within them,
drawing them toward the perfection that God had called them. Calvin's
doctrines had a tendency toward perfectionism and demanded rigorous control
over private and social behavior. Calvin never had the humility to acknowledge
that those like him who seek to be justified by the law have fallen from
grace. Certainly, Calvin was not saved. In all essentials, Calvin's state was a theocratic dictatorship. Contrary
to the teachings of Jesus, he assumed the existence of a capitalist economic
system for society and set up his ethics on that basis. Like the lukewarm
church of today, he identified good works with the accumulation of riches.
According to this perverse logic, God dispenses riches and poverty as He
wills. It is not man's merit, or man's toil that gets a person riches, rather
it is God's grace and riches are given as an evidence of God's favor.
On the Perseverance of the Saints Contrary to what most people think, John Calvin
didn't teach eternal security at all. Calvin insisted that believers
must persevere in faith if they are to remain in grace. He believed that
the elect will persevere in faith and continue in grace to ultimate final
salvation. These damnable heresies are far from the teachings of the
Bible. The very fact that Calvinism requires a saint to "persevere" to
the end is damnable heresy. Eternal security is the preservation of the
saints, NOT the perseverance of the saints. To "persevere" is works
salvation. The cult of Seventh-Day Adventism similarly teaches
that a person cannot KNOW they're saved until the final judgment.
Biblical salvation is instant and forever, NOT pending of anything.
Sadly, even the Salvation Armyteaches this damnable heresy (belief # 9
on their official statement of faith). This is a dangerous heresy
because it eliminates the FREE GIFT of eternal life. A gift is
completely free with NO strings attached. There is NO delay period, or
testing period before we get it. We receive eternal life the very
moment we trust Christ as our Personal Saviour to forgive our sins.
Romans 5:15 and Romans 6:23 declare that eternal life is a "gift" from God.
Romans 5:15 even calls it a "free gift." Man's works and efforts have
absolutely NOTHING to do with God's salvation. Whether a believer
continues in the faith is irrelevant. Either they are saved and
can never lose it, or else they aren't saved now and never had it to begin
with. You cannot undo your spiritual birth, just as you cannot undo your
physical birth. John 3:16 is so clear on the matter of salvation, "For
God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever
believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." If a
lost sinner simply believes upon Christ, they will never perish. Arminius didn't really teach anything, he
simply refuted the heresies of Calvinism. Although I do agree with
the first four refutes of Calvinism by Arminius, I certainly cannot accept
his heresy that the believer can lose salvation. Calvin wasn't
correct on this issue either. Although I DO agree that a believer
can never lose their salvation, NO matter what depth of sin they choose to
go into, I do NOT accept the unbiblical heresy by Calvin that we should
"persevere" to the end to be saved. In Calvin's commentary on 1st
John 3:9, he uses the word "perseverance", clearly stating:
"the hearts of the
godly are so effectually governed by the Spirit of God, that through an
inflexible disposition they follow his guidance." (John Calvin) "the power of the Spirit is so
effectual, that it necessarily retains us in continual obedience
to righteousness." (John Calvin)
This is not eternal security. Rather
Perseverance of the Saints is a perseverance in a behavior consistent with
that expected of a child of God. However, Calvin failed to accept the
FACT that believers DO sin, sometimes horribly so. Sometimes believers
go into a life of sin and never get right with God. Their fellowship
with God is broken, but their relationship is not. David committed
adultery and then killed the woman's husband. David was unrepentant for
one year. If David would have died in that unrepentant state, he would
have gone straight to Heaven, NOT Hell as Calvin taught. Fortunately for
David, he did repent. However, Solomon lived a wicked life of rebellion
against God until the end. Calvin's teachings are nonsense.
Calvin's teachings are indeed a form of Lordship Salvation. There is
much confusion on the last point of Calvinism. Some people believe that
Calvin taught unconditional eternal security. Others believe that Calvin
taught eternal security conditioned upon the perseverance of the believer.
Clearly, from Calvin's own statements, he believed in Lordship Salvation, that
a believer cannot simply trust Christ to be saved, but that a life of
commitment and perseverance was also necessary as proof of conversion.
These are damnable heresies. Although the Bible does teach that a man
becomes a new creature in Christ when he is regenerated at Salvation, we
cannot always judge that salvation from the outward appearance. Lot by
all appearances was an unsaved heathen, but God called Him a righteous man
(2nd peter 2:7). There are many believers who willfully live in sin, but
that DOESN'T mean that they aren't saved. The critics who deny this
truth are adding works to salvation.
The Truth of the Matter John Calvin
was a heretic! Yes, it is true that a
person cannot be saved unless God the Holy Spirit is working in their heart,
but the Bible plainly teaches that it's the Holy Spirit's task to convict THE
WORLD of sin, righteousness, and judgment. Yes, God knew in advance
(before the world began) who would one day trust Him, and He predestinated
them to be conformed TO THE IMAGE OF HIS SON, but NOT to salvation. God
NEVER chooses anyone to be saved. He did predestinate them before the world
began, but only because He saw that those people would one day choose of their
own free will to be saved. God NEVER forces anyone to be saved, nor does
God ever choose anyone to be saved. It is easy to go astray in one's
doctrines if we fail to realize that God lives in eternity where there is NO
time. Thus, there is NO chronology in God's world, only man's.
This is why Revelation speaks of "the Lamb slain before the foundation of the
world. This is why the Bible teaches that "a day is as a thousand years
and a thousand years as a day with the Lord (2nd Peter 3:8)."
Predestination simply means that God was making plans for those whom He knew
would one day be saved. The Bible teaches once saved, always saved.
How can a man be "unborn" physically or spiritually? Once you've been
"born again" (John 3:3), it is irreversible. If a man departs from the
faith, it is simply because he never had it to begin with, "They went out from
us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt
have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest
that they were not all of us" -1st John 2:19. There is nothing taught in
the Bible about "perseverance." Christians are all Hell-deserving
sinners saved by God's grace. Eternal life is a FREE GIFT paid for
in-full by the blood of Jesus. John Calvin was an unsaved
heretic and a cruel tyrant, who perverted the Gospel of Christ into a
false gospel. We are NOT supposed to allow men's doctrines to
steer us away from the Truth of God's Word. A good Bible teaching or
preacher will always steer us towards Christ and the Word of God, NOT away
from It. The Apostle Paul was a mature man of God. The carnal
believers in the church of Corinth were in a similar situation as many of
today's believers, "Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus
Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among
you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same
judgment. For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them
which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.
Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of
Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was
Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? I thank
God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; Lest any should say that I had baptized in
mine own name" -1st Corinthians 1:10-15. I am NOT an Arminian or a
Calvinist, I am a born again Christian! Let this be our stand! END
Please read the best explanation I've ever read
concerning the Gospel and repentance, by Pastor Harry A. Ironside
(1876-1951). Clearly, Ironside taught a Free Grace view
of the Gospel...
“The
Gospel is not a call to repentance, or to amendment of our ways, to make
restitution for past sins, or to promise to do better in the future. These
things are proper in their place, but they do not constitute the Gospel; for
the Gospel is not good advice to be obeyed, it is good news to be believed. Do
not make the mistake then of thinking that the Gospel is a call to duty or a
call to reformation, a call to better your condition, to behave yourself in a
more perfect way than you have been doing in the past …
Nor
is the Gospel a demand that you give up the world, that you give up your sins,
that you break off bad habits, and try to cultivate good ones. You may do all
these things, and yet never believe the Gospel and consequently never be saved
at all.”
Hebrews 2:9,
“But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the
suffering of death,
crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.”
John
Calvin’s interpretation of the Bible justified the murder of his
theological opponents. He himself did not cut off any heads or light any
fires that burned human heretics alive, but John Calvin’s preaching
from the Old and New Testaments claimed those capital punishments
aligned with God’s interests.
How so? Calvin did not believe all
Old Covenant laws had been set aside by the New Covenant Jesus
inaugurated. He didn't buy into the plain sense of Hebrews: “God has
made the first covenant obsolete” (Hebrews 8:13). He maneuvered around
Paul’s conclusion: “the Law became a tutor to lead us to Christ and now
that faith has come we are no longer under a tutor” (Galatians 3:24-25;
cf. Rom 10:4). Calvin dismissed this data from the New Testament and
decided the moral laws in the Old Covenant laws of the Torah still
applied. And killing people who perverted his pure doctrine was a moral
necessity.
Calvin specifically justified capital punishment of
heretics with Leviticus 24:16. “The one who blasphemes the name of the
Lord should be put to death; all the congregation must stone him. Any
foreigner or native who blasphemes the Name should be put to death.”
Jesus’
teaching to “love your enemies” didn’t stop Calvin from approving and
promoting the death of his theological enemies. And Paul’s instructions
for dealing with people who theologically disagree with you were equally
ignored: “A servant of the Lord must not quarrel but must be kind to
everyone, be able to teach, and be patient with difficult people. Gently
instruct those who oppose the truth. Perhaps God will change those
people’s hearts, and they will learn the truth” (2 Timothy 2:24-25).
Calvin did not patiently discuss his differences with people who
promoted competing ideas. Calvin requested beheadings, made death threats, and praised God for orchestrating the torture of heretics.
Calvin spelled out his theologically reinforced vengeance in a personal letter:
“I
am persuaded that it is not without the special will of God that, apart
from any verdict of the judges, the criminals have endured protracted
torment at the hands of the executioner.” - Calvin's letter to Farel on 24 July (for more words directly from Calvin’s pen, read Selected Works of John Calvin)
Calvin
believed God made sure criminals didn’t die quickly when tortured. This
vengeful attitude and his support for outdated Old Covenant laws that
legislated capital punishment for competing theologians that challenged
his preferred doctrines looked more like ISIS than Jesus.
John Calvin’s Fight Against Heretics
Personal
correspondence and city council records betray John Calvin’s
extraordinary influence in Geneva. Although he was asked to leave in
1538 when he enforced his strict moral standards and pushed for the
church’s independent power to excommunicate people, Genevan officials
invited him to return in 1541 to resolve church divisions. Upon his
return, the city council approved his Ecclesiastical Ordinances that
included the establishment of the Consistory. The Consistory, a church court that oversaw the discipline of the citizens of Geneva, met every Thursday to review cases (This book is a chronicle of the Consistory’s records from 1542-1544.)
John Calvin led the court. Although the Consistory did not have the
power to imprison, exile, or kill those who were guilty, Calvin could
still convince the city magistrates to wield such power when his
theological opponents contradicted him.
When Jacques Gruet, a
theologian with differing views, placed a letter in Calvin’s pulpit
calling him a hypocrite, he was arrested, tortured for a month and
beheaded on July 26, 1547. Gruet's own theological book was later found
and burned along with his house while his wife was thrown out into the
street to watch.
Michael Servetus, a Spaniard, physician,
scientist and Bible scholar, suffered a worse fate. He was Calvin's
longtime acquaintance who resisted the authority of the Roman Catholic
Church. However, he angered Calvin by returning a copy of Calvin's
Institutes with critical comments in the margins. So what did Calvin do?
You can read his resolution from a personal letter he wrote to a
friend:
“Servetus offers
to come hither, if it be agreeable to me. But I am unwilling to pledge
my word for his safety, for if he shall come, I shall never permit him
to depart alive, provided my authority be of any avail.” - Letter to Farel, 13 February 1546
The
next time Servetus attended Calvin's Sunday preaching service on a
visit, Calvin had him arrested and charged with heresy. The 38 official
charges included rejection of the Trinity and infant baptism. The city
magistrates condemned him to death. Calvin pleaded for Servetus to be
beheaded instead of the more brutal method of burning at the stake, but
to no avail. Some people see Calvin’s compassion in pursuing a more
humane method of death, but ultimately he supported killing Servetus and
all such heretics.
On
October 27, 1553, green wood was used for the fire so Servetus would be
slowly baked alive from the feet upward. For 30 minutes he screamed for
mercy and prayed to Jesus as the fire worked its way up his body to
burn the theology book strapped to his chest as a symbol of his heresy.
Calvin summarized the execution this way:
“Servetus
. . . suffered the penalty due to his heresies, but was it by my will?
Certainly his arrogance destroyed him not less than his impiety. And
what crime was it of mine if our Council, at my exhortation, indeed, but
in conformity with the opinion of several Churches, took vengeance on
his execrable blasphemies?”
How could such torture be condoned? In November 1552 the Geneva Council declared Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion
to be a "holy doctrine which no man might speak against." Disagreeing
with Calvin’s view of God was a violation warranting the death penalty
according to the way John Calvin interpreted Leviticus 24:16. The Geneva
city council records describe one verdict where a man who publicly
protested against John Calvin’s doctrine of predestination was flogged
at all the city’s main intersections and then expelled (“The Minutes Book of the Geneva City Council, 1541-59,” translated by Stefan Zweig, Erasmus: The Right to Heresy). You did not get to disagree with Calvin in this town.
Bad Bible Interpretation Can Kill People
John Calvin argued:
“Whoever
shall now contend that it is unjust to put heretics and blasphemers to
death, knowingly and willingly incur their guilt. It is not human
authority that speaks, it is God who speaks and prescribes a perpetual
rule for His Church.”
Most
bad Bible interpretation causes disappointment in an unbiblical god,
anxiety about what he demands, or a false sense of security rooted in
biased beliefs. But it can kill. John Calvin justified murder with his
bad Bible interpretation. It isn't representative of his entire life or
his contribution to the Protestant church, but we are wise to learn from
a mistake he made. That’s why I design and teach Hermeneutics
courses. I don’t want culture to contort the way I compel people to
follow Jesus. I want the Bible to shape my values and not the other way
around. If you want to learn how to interpret the Bible more accurately,
you can download my Bible Interpretation workbook and start watching
this free online video Hermeneutics course.
John
Calvin followed Augustine’s biblical justification for burning
heretics. Augustine excused extreme measures through his interpretation
of Jesus’ Great Banquet parable in Luke 14:16-24. When the master could
not fill up his banquet in the parable, he commanded his servants in
Luke 14:23 “to compel people
to come so that my house will be filled.” Augustine and Calvin believed
burning heretics would “compel” more people to enter their house of
God. Interpreting “compulsion” as a license to kill without
consideration for Jesus’ other teaching to “love your enemies” is a
major hermeneutical error. Any part of Jesus’ teaching should be
interpreted in light of the whole.
PART III
Calvinists Justify the Known Murderer, John Calvin.
Incarcerated criminals who’d received lifelong prison sentences often
use foolhardy lackeys to do their dirty work for them. Many crimes are
committed by proxy, exonerating the mafia masterminds in jail of some of
the most heinous murders – thanks to the stupid lackeys who revere,
fear and even worship their bosses in prison. It is a well-documented
fact that John Calvin wielded great power over civil and ecclesiastical
authorities and could sway the masses to dance to his tune like a proper
Pied the Piper (No, I’m not referring to John Piper).
A master of the art of
organization, Calvin had been able to transform a whole city, a whole
State, whose numerous burghers had hitherto been freemen, into a rigidly
obedient machine; had been able to extirpate independence, and to lay
an embargo on freedom of thought in favour of his own exclusive
doctrine. The powers of the State were under his supreme control; as wax
in his hands were the various authorities, Town Council and Consistory,
university and law-courts, finance and morality, priests and schools,
catchpoles and prisons, the written and the spoken and even the secretly
whispered word. His doctrine had become law, and anyone who ventured to
question it was soon taught-by arguments that burked discussion, by the
arguments of every spiritual tyranny, by jail, exile, or burning at the
stake-how in Geneva only one truth was valid, the truth of which Calvin
was the prophet. But the sinister power of this zealot extended
far beyond the walls of Geneva. The Swiss federated cities regarded him
as their chief political member; throughout the western world the
Protestants had appointed this “violentissimus Christianus” their
commander-in-chief; kings and princes vied with one another in wooing
the favour of a militant ecclesiastic who had established in Europe a
Church organization second in power only to that ruled by the Roman
pontiff. Nothing could happen in the political world without his
knowledge; very little could happen there in defiance of his will. It
had become as dangerous to offend the preacher of St.-Pierre as to
offend emperor or pope. “The Right to Heresy” or “How Calvin Killed a Conscience” – Castellio against Calvin
It baffles the mind and often borders on the bizarre to see how
Calvinists who call themselves loving and obedient sheep and followers
of Jesus Christ fight tooth and nail to defend their hero, the murderer
and serial killer – JOHN CALVIN (French: Jean Calvin, born Jehan Cauvin: 10 July 1509 – 27 May 1564).
Many Calvinists who have been defending the doctrines of John Calvin
their entire life are now beginning to sing another song. Instead of
defending the doctrines of grace, they are doing everything in their
power to defend John Calvin. The song is called “How to Justify a Murderer.”
The main reason for their U-turn is – wait for it – the INTERNET. Yep!
that’s right – the INTERNET. The internet is single-handedly the best
proof that Bible prophecy is the truth and nothing but the truth. Listen
up!
Therefore whatsoever ye have
spoken in darkness shall be heard in the light; and that which ye have
spoken in the ear in closets shall be proclaimed upon the housetops. (Luke 12:3)
The Amplified Bible says it thus:
Whatever you have spoken in the darkness shall be heard and listened
to in the light, and what you have whispered in [people’s] ears and
behind closed doors will be proclaimed upon the housetops.
I trust that you’ve noticed the connection between the internet and
the Bible? The internet by far has made the most significant
contribution to the uncovering of John Calvin’s murderous activities in
Geneva, even more than all the books written on the subject put
together. Believe it or not, some of the most zealous Calvinists are now
beginning to admit – on the INTERNET – that Calvin was a murderer, and
indeed a serial killer par excellence.
Many lesser-known Calvinists, but of no lesser importance, are trying to put some distance between themselves and John Calvin. “OK
Mr Serial Killer, we are so sorry for having to put you in our
imaginative prison but don’t fret; we revere, honour and adore your
“Institutes” so much that we will personally undertake the task of
telling people that God never loved them and that his Son never died for
them on the cross.” Some South African Calvinists who no longer
want to be known as Calvinists and yet still approve of his doctrines
openly admit that they do not condone his atrocious crimes. Others claim
that history bears witness to the fact that he never killed Servetus. Shall we then page through some of the best and well-known encyclopedias to see what HISTORY tells us?
Servetus forwarded the manuscript of an enlarged revision of his ideas, the Christianismi Restitutio, to
Calvin in 1546 and expressed a desire to meet him. After their first
few letters, Calvin would have nothing more to do with him and kept the
manuscript. He declared to his eloquent French preacher colleague
Guillaume Farel that if Servetus ever came to Geneva he would not allow
him to leave alive. A rewritten version of Servetus’ manuscript
was secretly printed in 1,000 copies at Vienne in 1553. In discussing
the relationship between the Spirit and regeneration in that book,
Servetus almost incidentally made known his discovery of the pulmonary
circulation of blood. In the book, Servetus argued that both God the
Father and Christ his Son had been dishonoured by the Constantinian
promulgation of the Nicene Creed, thus obscuring the redemptive role of
Christ and bringing about the fall of the church; Servetus felt he could
restore the church by separating it from the state and by using only
those theological formulations that could be proved from Scripture and
the pre-Constantinian fathers. When some of Servetus’ letters to
Calvin fell into the hands of Guillaume de Trie, a former citizen of
Lyon, he exposed Servetus to the inquisitor general at Lyon. Servetus
and his printers were seized. During the trial, however, Servetus
escaped, and the Catholic authorities had to be content with burning him
in effigy. He quixotically appeared in Geneva and was
recognized, arrested, and tried for heresy from Aug. 14 to Oct. 25,
1553. Calvin played a prominent part in the trial and pressed for
execution, although by beheading rather than by fire. (Was he
the first ISIS terrorist who would rather have dissenters beheaded than
scorched to death?). Despite his intense biblicism and his wholly
Christocentric view of the universe, Servetus was found guilty of
heresy, mainly on his views of the Trinity and Baptism. He was burned
alive at Champel on October 27. His execution produced a Protestant
controversy on imposing the death penalty for heresy, drew severe
criticism upon John Calvin, and influenced Laelius Socinus, a founder of
modern Unitarian views. () (Emphasis and parenthesis added). Encyclopaedia Britannica
As you can see, John Calvin, opted for an execution by decapitation, the
more humane Islamic way, than by fire, the more inhumane Roman Catholic
way. Murder by proxy? You bet! John Calvin never ventured to pollute
his hands with the impure blood of his non-elected enemies. He
graciously let others do the job for him and they graciously performed
his wishes to the letter.
At his trial, Servetus was condemned on two counts, for spreading and preaching Nontrinitarianism and anti-paedobaptism (anti-infant baptism).[27] Of paedobaptism Servetus had said, “It is an invention of the devil, an infernal falsity for the destruction of all Christianity.“[28] . . . As
Servetus was not a citizen of Geneva, and legally could at worst be
banished, the government, in an attempt to find some plausible excuse to
disregard this legal reality, had consulted with other Swiss Reformed cantons (Zurich, Bern, Basel, Schaffhausen.)
They universally favoured his condemnation and suppression of his
doctrine, but without saying how that should be accomplished.[31]Martin Luther had condemned his writing in strong terms. Servetus and Philip Melanchthon had strongly hostile views of each other. The party called the “Libertines“,
who were generally opposed to anything and everything John Calvin
supported, were in this case strongly in favour of the execution of
Servetus at the stake (while Calvin urged that he be beheaded instead).
In fact, the council that condemned Servetus was presided over by Perrin
(a Libertine) who ultimately on 24 October sentenced Servetus to death by burning for denying the Trinity and infant baptism.[32] When Calvin requested that Servetus be executed by decapitation as a traitor rather than by fire as a heretic, Farel, in a letter of 8 September, chided him for undue lenience.[33] The Geneva Council refused his request. On 27 October 1553 Servetus was burned at the stake just
outside Geneva with what was believed to be the last copy of his book
chained to his leg. Historians record his last words as: “Jesus, Son of the Eternal God, have mercy on me.“[34] Calvin agreed that those whom the ruling religious authorities determined to be heretics should be punished: “Whoever
shall maintain that wrong is done to heretics and blasphemers in
punishing them makes himself an accomplice in their crime and guilty as
they are. There is no question here of man’s authority; it is God who
speaks, and clear it is what law he will have kept in the church, even
to the end of the world. Wherefore does he demand of us a so extreme
severity, if not to show us that due honor is not paid him, so long as
we set not his service above every human consideration, so that we spare
not kin, nor blood of any, and forget all humanity when the matter is
to combat for His glory.” [35] (Wikipedia) (Emphasis added) Servetus,
Michael , 1511-53, Spanish theologian and physician.His name in Spanish
was Miguel Serveto. In his early years he came in contact with some of
the leading reformers in Germany and Switzerland-Johannes Oecolampadius,
Martin Bucer,Wolfgang Fabricius Capito, and probably Martin Luther. But
he held views, concerning the Trinity in particular, that brought
condemnation from the theologians of the Reformation as well as from
those of the Roman Catholic Church. When he published Detrinitatis erroribus (1531) and De trinitate (1532),
the feeling of opposition was so strong that he assumed the name of
Michel DE Villeneuve, from the family home, Villanueva, and spent some
time in Lyons, working on an edition of Ptolemy’s geography and other
scientific works, then in Paris studying medicine. There he is said to
have seen John Calvin. He became well-known for his ability in
dissection and had unusual success as a physician; he discovered that
some of the blood circulates through the lungs. From 1541 to1553 he
lived in the palace of the archbishop of Vienne as his confidential
physician. When (1553) he had a work setting forth his ideas of
Christianity secretly printed, investigation was begun by the
Inquisition. Servetus, arrested, tried, and condemned, escaped from
prison. Several months later, while making his way to Italy, he was
seized in Geneva by Calvin’s order. There, after along trial, in which Calvin’s condemnation was a stern factor, he was burned on Oct. 27, 1553. See biographies by R. H. Bainton (1953) and J. F. Fulton (1954)
As you can see the internet is replete with abundant and highly
reputable scholarly evidence that John Calvin was responsible for the
death of Michael Servetus, albeit a murder by proxy because he
resourcefully manipulated the authorities, in much the same way the
Roman Catholic church manipulated kings and queens. Despite these
damnable evidences against John Calvin, these Calvinists accuse the
authors of some of the best and most reliable encyclopedias of bearing
false witness. Have they studied “The Minutes Book of the Geneva City
Council, 1541-59” (translated by Stefan Zweig, Erasmus: The Right to
Heresy) that meticulously bears witness to the following incidents?
During the ravages of the pestilence in 1545 more than twenty men and women were burnt alive for witchcraft.
From 1542 to 1546 fifty-eight judgments of death and seventy-six decrees of banishment were passed.
During the years 1558 and 1559 the cases of various punishments for all sorts of offenses amounted to four hundred and fourteen.
One burgher smiled while attending a baptism: three days imprisonment.
Another, tired out on a hot summer day, went to sleep during a sermon: prison.
Some working men ate pastry at breakfast: three days on bread and water.
Two burghers played skittles: prison.
Two others diced for a quarter bottle of wine: prison.
A blind fiddler played a dance: expelled from the city.
Another praised Castellio’s translation of the Bible: expelled from Geneva.
A
girl was caught skating, a widow threw herself on the grave of her
husband, a burgher offered his neighbor a pinch of snuff during divine
service: they were summoned before the Consistory, exhorted, and ordered
to do penance.
Some cheerful fellows at Epiphany stuck a bean into the cake: four-and-twenty hours on bread and water.
A couple of peasants talked about business matters on coming out of church: prison.
A man played cards: he was pilloried with the pack of cards hung around his neck.
Another sang riotously in the street: was told ‘they could go and sing elsewhere,’ this meaning he was banished from the city.
Two bargees had a brawl: executed.
A
man who publicly protested against the reformer’s doctrine of
predestination was flogged at all the crossways of the city and then
expelled.
A book printer who in his cups [columns] had railed at
Calvin, was sentenced to have his tongue perforated with a red-hot iron
before being expelled from the city.
Jacques Gruent was racked and then executed for calling Calvin a hypocrite.
Each
offense, even the most paltry, was carefully entered in the record of
the Consistory, so that the private life of every citizen could
unfailingly be held up against him in evidence.”
Have they studied the issues presented in the sources quoted in Philip Schaff’s “History of the Christian Church,” vol. 8:
“The death penalty against heresy, idolatry and blasphemy and
barbarous customs of torture were retained. Attendance at public worship
was commanded on penalty of three sols. Watchmen were appointed to see
that people went to church. The members of the Consistory visited every
house once a year to examine the faith and morals of the family. Every
unseemly word and act on the street was reported, and the offenders were
cited before the Consistory to be either censured and warned, or to be
handed over to the Council for severer punishment.”
Several women, among them the wife of Ami Perrin, the captain-general, were imprisoned for dancing.
A
man was banished from the city for three months because on hearing an
ass bray, he said jestingly ‘He prays a beautiful psalm.’
A young man was punished because he gave his bride a book on housekeeping with the remark: ‘This is the best Psalter.’
Three men who laughed during a sermon were imprisoned for three days.
Three children were punished because they remained outside of the church during the sermon to eat cakes.
A
man who swore by the ‘body and blood of Christ’ was fined and condemned
to stand for an hour in the pillory on the public square.
A child was whipped for calling his mother a thief and a she-devil.
A girl was beheaded for striking her parents.
A
banker was executed for repeated adultery. (Compare this incident with
Paul’s handling of the man who committed adultery with his father’s wife
– 1 Corinthians 5:1; 2 Corinthians 2:1-7)
A
person named Chapuis was imprisoned for four days because he persisted
in calling his child Claude (a Roman Catholic saint) instead of Abraham.
Men and women were burnt to death for witchcraft.
Have our dearest Calvinist friends studied the issues from Other Sources:
Belot, an Anabaptist was arrested for passing out tracts in
Geneva and also accusing Calvin of excessive use of wine. With his books
and tracts burned, he was banished from the city and told not to return
on pain of hanging (J.L. Adams, The Radical Reformation, pp. 597-598).
Martin
Luther said of Calvin’s actions in Geneva, “With a death sentence they
solve all argumentation” (Juergan L. Neve, A History of Christian
Thought, vol. I, p. 285).
“About the month of January 1546, a
member of the Little Council, Pierre Ameaux, asserted that Calvin was
nothing but a wicked man – who was preaching false doctrine. Calvin felt
that his authority as an interpreter of the Word of God was being
attacked: he so completely identified his own ministry with the will of
God that he considered Ameaux’s words as an insult to the honour of
Christ. The Magistrates offered to make the culprit beg Calvin’s pardon
on bended knees before the Council of the Two Hundred, but Calvin found
this insufficient. On April 8, Ameaux was sentenced to walk all round
the town, dressed only in a shirt, bareheaded and carrying a lighted
torch in his hand, and after that to present himself before the tribunal
and cry to God for mercy” (F. Wendel, Calvin, pp. 85, 86).
Truly, we may ask:
“Doth a fountain send forth at the same place sweet water and bitter?” (James 3:11)
CHOOSE YOU THIS DAY ON WHOSE SIDE YOU PREFER TO BE – MICHAEL SERVETUS OR JOHN CALVIN
Contrary to Calvin’s own views on infant baptism, many Calvinists
unflinchingly take sides with Michael Servetus who called paedobaptism
“an invention of the devil, an infernal falsity for the destruction of
all Christianity. Fortunately, time machines are merely a figment of the
imagination. Were it possible to send people back into the past, we
could probably have sent these anti-paedobaptist Calvinists back to 1553
so that they could find out first-hand wha the truth is and how Calvin
treated those who regarded infant baptism a deception to be of the
devil. On the other hand, they could probably have pleaded with Calvin
to spare Servetus’ life with whom they wholeheartedly agree on infant
baptism. The million dollar question is: Whose side would they have taken if
they’d been at Michael Servetus’ infamous trial – his or John Calvin’s? I
doubt whether they would have taken Servetus’ side because they would
certainly have ended up on the stake with him for their opinion on
infant baptism. However, I doubt whether they would have been bold
enough to cry out “Jesus, Son of the Eternal God, have mercy on me.“[34] Calvinists have no need of this kind of emotionalism because God
sovereignly “monergisms” them with mercy. Why then should they cry out
for mercy when it is given to them monergistically? Surely any plea for
mercy wold immediately defame God’s sovereignty who declares “I will
have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom
I will have compassion” (Romans 9:15).
By virtue of their election, there is no need for them to cry out for
mercy. Should they, like Michael Servetus burn like a steak tied to a
stake, God’s mercy is already sovereignly bestowed on them, Poor
Servetus, his plea for mercy must have fallen on deaf ears because he
was not one of the elect.
WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SIN AND HIGH TREASON?
Calvinists seem to have a problem with articulating the true meaning
of words, to the extent that they not only make a distinction between
“world” and “world,” “all” and “all”,” “whosoever” and “whomsoever” but
also between high treason and sin. In our introductory video, Jerry
Johnson(SEE VIDEO AT BOTTOM OF THE PAGE) admits that John Calvin was a sinner but firmly asserts that
Michael Servetus was much much worse because he committed high treason
against the community, the church, and Christ. Before I continue, I
would like to focus your attention on one little thing Jerry Johnson
said toward the end of his video.
Until next week, this is Jerry Johnson standing contra mundum, and with the City Council of Geneva, against the world. (The expression “contra mundum” means to stand against or in defiance of all general opinion).
This is glaringly yet another one of the Calvinists’ “Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious” oxymorons.
I want you to put on your thinking caps for a moment, as our beloved
and revered Calvie, Paul Washer would say. Calvinists assert that the
word “world” in John 3:16
and in many other passages in Scripture do not refer to the entire
world (the whole of mankind) but only to the world of the elect. If it
were true that “world” is limited to the world of the elect only, Jerry
Johnson’s final remark in the video would have to be changed to read as
follows: “Until next week, this is Jerry Johnson standing contra
mundum, and with the City Council of Geneva, against the world
of the elect.” What did Jesus say about a house that is divided against
itself? “Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation,
and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand.” (Matthew 12:25). High treason may be defined as a deliberate act – by word of mouth,
in writing or any other means – to misrepresent the intrinsic
character/personality of someone with an intent to present him/her in a
light other than the one the person himself/herself presents to others.
High treason, therefore, involves the deliberate misrepresentation of a
sovereign king or queen or person in leadership of a country so as to
damage their cause/purpose and the well-being of their subjects. Let us
now scrutinize Calvinism and the doctrines of grace in the light of this
particular definition of high treason.
DOES CALVINISM MISREPRESENT THE INTRINSIC CHARACTER OF THE SOVEREIGN GOD, THE TRINITY?
GOD IS (THE ESSENCE) OF LOVE
God never revealed Himself as the God of love. He is not an Entity or
a Person who merely possesses the ability to show forth love and
compassion. He IS love – the very essence of love. In this sense He can say of Himself “I AM LOVE,” (1 John 4:8 and 16),
the very fountain of love. Yes, of course He is also the essence of
righteousness, holiness and justice but it is his love that motivated
Him to create the angelic beings, the entire cosmos and also mankind in
his own image. His entire being is focused on loving his creation and
especially his creatures. Even his hatred of sin and rebellion emanates
from his love because sin separates his creatures from Him with whom He
wishes to be in a relationship. In reality God who is the very essence
of love cannot do otherwise but love all of humanity without exception,
and indeed, so much that He gave his Son to die for the sins of
humankind as a whole. Calvinists rarely talk about God being the very essence of love. “The
Institutes of the Christian Religion” by John Calvin hardly ever
mentions God’s love. Their wrong emphasis on the sovereignty of God,
especially in his alleged choice of a select few, predestined for
salvation, tarnishes his essence which is love. To them love is not
conditioned on who He is (the essence of love) but on who his creatures
are in his sight. If you are an elect He unconditionally loves you but
if you are a reprobate He unconditionally hates you. Hence their wrong
exegesis of Romans 9:13: “Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.” True love is to desire the very best – not only for those whom you
love and who love you – but even for your worst enemies, and the best
you can wish for them is that they be saved. Paul of Tarsus was
relentlessly persecuted by his own people and yet he was prepared to
suffer an eternity in hell for the sake of the salvation of his brethren
after the flesh.
“I say the truth in Christ, I
lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost, That I
have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart. For I could wish
that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen
according to the flesh.” (Romans 9:1-3)
THIS IS TRUE LOVE
Paul and Silas were put in prison for their doctrinal steadfastness
on how one is saved and what it means to be saved. Their sincere and
intense love for Christ’s gospel (doctrine) of salvation inspired them
to face even the worst of persecutions, prison and death. It was love
that compelled them to preach the Gospel (doctrine of salvation) (2 Corinthians 5:14). You cannot proclaim the Gospel if Christ’s love does not propel you to do so. The mistake all Calvinists make, is to draw a distinction between
God’s love and God’s doctrine. The truth is that God’s doctrine is God’s
love revealed and God’s love is God’s doctrine in action. Therefore, to
assume that love is merely part of doctrine and to suggest that love is
not as important as doctrine is not entirely correct. Love is not a
part of God’s doctrine. It IS His doctrine. That’s precisely why John 3:16
is the most quoted verse in the entire history of mankind; “For God so
loved the world (a concise doctrinal statement, decree or
declaration) that he gave his only begotten Son (doctrine of his love in
action), that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have
everlasting life. In what way is God’s love merely a part of his
doctrine in this particular passage in Scripture? Nonetheless, Calvinists have no other option but to interpret God’s
love and doctrine in the way they do because, according to them, God
does not love the non-elect. Show me where the non-elect are included in
the abbreviation of the doctrines of grace as we find it represented in
the acronym “TULIP?” Let’s briefly look at it.
TOTAL DEPRAVITY (YES; THE NON-ELECT ARE AS TOTALLY DEPRAVED AS THE ELECT).
UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION (YES; THEY WERE UNCONDITIONALLY ELECTED TO SPEND AN ETERNITY IN HELL, EVEN BEFORE THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD).
LIMITED ATONEMENT (NO; THE ATONEMENT IS LIMITED TO THE ELECT ONLY)
IRRESISTIBLE GRACE (NO; GOD DOES NOT BESTOW HIS IRRESISTIBEL GRACE ON THE NON-ELECT)
PERSEVERANCE OF THE SAINTS (NO; THEY ARE NOT SAINTS BUT THE REPROBATE)
The hatred Calvinists so easily contrive for non Calvinists (the
non-elect) is an extension of John Calvin’s murderous disposition. How
do they jusitfy their hatred? To emulate God and to defend his
sovereignty they have no other choice (excuse the pun) to hate
unbelievers (the non-elect) because God hates them. So what do we have so far:
Do not expect forgiveness from Calvinists.
Do not expect love from Calvinists.
Ok then… but this is to be expected, they are a cult of course.
A serial killer is
traditionally defined as a person who has killed three or more
people over a period of more than a month, with down time (a “cooling
off period”) between the murders, and whose motivation for killing is
usually based on psychological gratification https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_killer (John Calvin)
BELOW IS A VIDEO BY JERRY JOHNSON A CALVINIST PREACHER ATTEMPTING TO JUSTIFY JEAN CALVIN'S CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR
Just as Martin Luther (1483-1546) was a heretic for teachings the necessity of the sacraments (including water baptism) for salvation, John Calvin (1509-1564) was also a heretic. Calvin taught infant baptism, and also that the Sacraments were EQUAL with the Word of God. Calvin and Luther BOTH taught baptismal regeneration.
Calvin even had people killed for disagreeing with his heresy on infant baptism. So many people today are naive of such men. I've been reading Christian books for years that quote Martin Luther and John Calvin—come to find out they both endorsed the heretical sacraments and infant baptism. Sacraments are NOT taught in the Bible.There is NO way that such men could have been saved because they ADDED works to faith, which is no faith at all. Calvin taught that believers must persevere to the end to be saved. This is works salvation. The reformation was plagued with the remnants of Catholicism, perverting the simple plan of salvation (2nd Corinthians 11:3-4).Martin Luther came out of Catholicism, but Catholicism didn't come out of Martin Luther. Luther simply started his own demonic cult as a surrogate religion for frustrated Catholics. Mr. Luther was a heretic. The same can definitely be said of John Calvin. Why is it that so many people feel compelled to join manmade religions rather than study the Word of God for themselves? Jesus told us in John 5:39 to SEARCH THE SCRIPTURES!
No comments:
Post a Comment