John Calvin Anniversary

wolfsbane

Tomorrow, July 10, is the 500th anniversary of the birth of the great Reformer, John Calvin.

His influence on the Church and mankind has been immense. Even Baptists like me thank God for the light his servant brought to a dark world. Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion is a superb work of theology:
http://www.reformed.org/master/index.html?mainframe=/books/institutes/


“The longer I live the clearer does it appear that John Calvin’s system is the nearest to perfection.”

— Charles Haddon Spurgeon

PDN

It had to happen.

prinz

6th July was the 594th anniversary of the death of Jan Hus, who preached reformation long before it became popular but there was no mention of that in this forum.I feel he deserves a mention if we're going to remember men like Calvin.

Húrin

wolfsbane wrote: »

“The longer I live the clearer does it appear that John Calvin’s system is the nearest to perfection.”

— Charles Haddon Spurgeon

Surely Spurgeon would need to know what perfection consisted of to make a comment like that?

kelly1

wolfsbane wrote: »

Tomorrow, July 10, is the 500th anniversary of the birth of the great Reformer, John Calvin.

Boooooh

prinz

kelly1 wrote: »

Boooooh

Now, now :pac:

He wasn't averse to allowing people be put to death though so as far as his system being nearest perfection

wolfsbane

PDN wrote: »

It had to happen.

'Predestined'

wolfsbane

Húrin wrote: »

Surely Spurgeon would need to know what perfection consisted of to make a comment like that?

Yes - he was comparing it to the Bible's teaching and found it the closest he had encountered. The Bible's teaching is perfect - but of course Spurgeon himself was just as liable to an imperfect understanding of it as was Calvin.

We have not yet attained, but press on toward the mark.

wolfsbane

prinz wrote: »

Now, now :pac:

He wasn't averse to allowing people be put to death though so as far as his system being nearest perfection

Indeed, he brought with him some of the faulty ideas of his old system. But a vast improvement overall.

Manach

He was the chap who man who deposed Queen Mary? If so, double boo.

PDN

Manach wrote: »

He was the chap who man who deposed Queen Mary? If so, double boo.

Not unless Queen Mary was the Queen of Geneva.

ocianain

Calvin created the Christian police state, his Institutes is a depressing read. Sin could be a capital offense in Geneva, when Geneva was Catholic a priest forgave sin, sin was removed. Under Calvin confession was heard in court and the sinner was removed (executed), good ol' Cal executed his daughter-in-law, yeah, he was a great guy.:rolleyes:

ocianain

Huss was even worse

Tim Robbins

ocianain wrote: »

Huss was even worse

Can anyone post some objective and critical references to Calvin?

Richard Dawkins slated him for predistination, as if it was even more far fetched than creationism.

Does predistination mean everything is worked out in advance, all the scores for the drogs matches for externity PDN, or just whether you go to heaven?

Also for his nasty side:
- Helped some spanish intellectual get killed.
- Believed in witch burning.
Anything else?

On the plus side, what's so good about him? Russell gives a chapter to Augustine and a chapter to Aquainus in History of Westen Philosophy, not so much to Calvin.

So what's so good about him?

prinz

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Can anyone post some objective and critical references to Calvin?

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/90247/John-Calvin

Google is your friend.

prinz

Calvinism was based around the absolute power and supremacy of God.
The world was created so that Mankind might get to know Him. Calvin believed that Man was sinful and could only approach God through faith in Christ - not through Mass and pilgrimages.
Calvin believed that the New Testament and baptism and the Eucharist had been created to provide Man with continual divine guidance when seeking faith.
In Calvin’s view, Man, who is corrupt, is confronted by the omnipotent (all powerful) and omnipresent (present everywhere) God who before the world began predestined some for eternal salvation (the Elect) while the others would suffer everlasting damnation (the Reprobates).
The chosen few were saved by the operation of divine grace which cannot be challenged and cannot be earned by Man’s merits. You might have lead what you might have considered a perfectly good life that was true to God but if you were a reprobate you remained one because for all your qualities you were inherently corrupt and God would know this even if you did not. However, a reprobate by behaving decently could achieve an inner conviction of salvation. An Elect could never fall from grace.

However, God remained the judge and lawgiver of men. Predestination remained a vital belief in Calvinism.

from http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/John_Calvin.htm

He also wanted a theocracy, and ran Geneva basically as the Ayatollah runs Iran from what I can tell. Not my idea of perfection. Deeply suspect imo.

The similarities to the Islamic Republic and to the Taliban are striking tbh.

Tim Robbins

prinz wrote: »

from http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/John_Calvin.htm

He also wanted a theocracy, and ran Geneva basically as the Ayatollah runs Iran from what I can tell. Not my idea of perfection. Deeply suspect imo.

The similarities to the Islamic Republic and to the Taliban are striking tbh.

What's so great about him? Can anyone tell me?

prinz

Tim Robbins wrote: »

What's so great about him? Can anyone tell me?

He took a couple of steps on the journey to reformation.

Tim Robbins

prinz wrote: »

He took a couple of steps on the journey to reformation.

He got rid of Bishops and came up the idea of predestination.
Big deal?

prinz

Tim Robbins wrote: »

He got rid of Bishops and came up the idea of predestination.
Big deal?

Mighty oaks from little acorns grow. I think you'll find he had a bigger influence than what you've mentioned.

Tim Robbins

prinz wrote: »

Mighty oaks from little acorns grow. I think you'll find he had a bigger influence than what you've mentioned.

Empty vessels make the most noise. These phrases get us nowhere.

Seriously, did this guy come up with anything remotely intellectua (anything like say Ontological argument, Cosmological argument, First Cause argument)?
Doesn't predestination contradict free-will?

prinz

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Empty vessels make the most noise. These phrases get us nowhere.

Seriously, did this guy come up with anything remotely intellectua (anything like say Ontological argument, Cosmological argument, First Cause argument)?
Doesn't predestination contradict free-will?

Do you need to be spoon fed everything? How about you go find out....

Tim Robbins

prinz wrote: »

Do you need to be spoon fed everything? How about you go find out....

I read your link and found nothing. Anything else I've read about the bloke contained nothing of intellectual merit.

If you asked me why someone I thought had some intellectual talent I could tell you in my own words. In fact, I'd enjoy the question.

So I dind't see a problem posing it.

prinz

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Can anyone post some objective and critical references to Calvin?

Tim Robbins wrote: »

I read your link and found nothing. Anything else I've read about the bloke contained nothing of intellectual merit.

Well, depends on your definition of intellectual I suppose. You made a little almost freudian slip in an earlier post using that same word, so I do not know what standard you attach to it unfortunately. If the Encyclopaedia Britannica isn't up to your standards I apologise profusely

Tim Robbins wrote: »

If you asked me why someone I thought had some intellectual talent I could tell you in my own words. In fact, I'd enjoy the question.

Except you didn't ask for my own words, you asked for objective references ( see above). Use your imagination and find some. Personally I am not an expert in Mr. Calvin so I wouldn't start trying to sate your own impressive intellect with my limited knowledge. What I do know is you have a habit of asking questions which could be quickly answered with an iota of effort on your own part.

wolfsbane

ocianain said:

Calvin created the Christian police state,

That is disputed, for example (p271):
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=xOm1j8RBtw4C&pg=PA21&lpg=PA21&dq=The+European+reformations+By+Carter+Lindberg&source=bl&ots=WzZjx5lO9S&sig=m054DEl3G85FF5SAP0SCQiBOEK4&hl=en&ei=4cJcSrjhLpCQjAfp8KzQDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1

his Institutes is a depressing read.

Sinners would find it depressing - as they would the Bible. Both depict man as eternally lost and in need of a Saviour.

Sin could be a capital offense in Geneva,

Still can be in the USA, China and several other countries. Depends on the sin.

when Geneva was Catholic a priest forgave sin, sin was removed.

Are you saying murderers got off with a penance?

Under Calvin confession was heard in court

Same today in most democracies.

and the sinner was removed (executed),

OK, most countries use imprisonment for the most serious offences today. Not penance nor execution.

good ol' Cal executed his daughter-in-law,

Have you a reference for that, as I can't find any? I did see where his sister-in-law was banished from Geneva for adultery. Hardly an extreme measure, given the times.

wolfsbane

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Can anyone post some objective and critical references to Calvin?

Here's a good overview:
The Many Faces of John Calvin
http://gregscouch.homestead.com/files/manyfaces.html

Tim Robbins

prinz wrote: »

Except you didn't ask for my own words, you asked for objective references ( see above). Use your imagination and find some. Personally I am not an expert in Mr. Calvin so I wouldn't start trying to sate your own impressive intellect with my limited knowledge. What I do know is you have a habit of asking questions which could be quickly answered with an iota of effort on your own part.

Word...
here's what I mean..
Augustine - came up with philosophical arguments such as just war which are still used today. Undoutably a clever man.
Thomas Aquinas - Gets a chapter in Russell's history of western philosophy - undoutably a clever man.
Anslem - Ontological argument. Undoutably a clever man.
Copernicus - Verfied Gallieo's view of solar system. Undoutably a clever man.
Le Maitre - Proofed Einsteiin wrong. Undoutably a clever man.
C. S. Lewis - Doubful how clever he was. Logic all over the place, but with respect he's not taken very seriously by any philosopher or academic except a subset of christians who probably aren't skilled or that interested in any form of logic.
Calvin - ?

prinz

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Word...
here's what I mean..
Augustine - came up with philosophical arguments such as just war which are still used today. Undoutably a clever man.
Thomas Aquinas - Gets a chapter in Russell's history of western philosophy - undoutably a clever man.
Anslem - Ontological argument. Undoutably a clever man.
Copernicus - Verfied Gallieo's view of solar system. Undoutably a clever man.
Le Maitre - Proofed Einsteiin wrong. Undoutably a clever man.
C. S. Lewis - Doubful how clever he was. Logic all over the place, but with respect he's not taken very seriously by any philosopher or academic except a subset of christians who probably aren't skilled or that interested in any form of logic.
Calvin - ?

By your definition then you can only be worthwhile and/or 'clever' if you produced a body of intellectual work. Perhaps you should have a look at what he did, the repercussions of what he did, and how others took up the baton he started with and continued his trip. I mean you judge Aquinas as a clever man because he gets a chapter in someone else's book Plenty of people have had a profound effect upon the history of man without ever lifting a pen to discuss their 'philosophies'.

Tim Robbins

prinz wrote: »

By your definition then you can only be worthwhile and/or 'clever' if you produced a body of intellectual work. Perhaps you should have a look at what he did, the repercussions of what he did, and how others took up the baton he started with and continued his trip.

I have and I see nothing.
By getting rid of Bishops you could argue he was contributing to democracy, but compare that to what the Greeks had already done 1,500 years earlier.

According to Russell, both Calvin and Luther rubbished Copernicus theory of the Earth going around the Sun. If they played a game of chess, I'd put my money on Copernicus having the edge.

Plenty of people have had a profound effect upon the history of man without ever lifting a pen to discuss their 'philosophies'.

Yes, Socrates (if the accounts from Plato were accurate) never published and had a profound effect on the thinking of man.

But this point is completly irrelevant. Calvin had published. I'm just wondering is there anything which would indicate he was a bright spark or was he up at the Ted Haggard, C.S. Lewis, Lee Strobel end of the specturm.

ocianain

A google search called "punishment for adultery in calvins geneva" turns up this gem;

http://www.edwardtbabinski.us/history/death_penalty.html

The confession I cited was spiritual, I'm aware of no democracy where one receives spiritual absolution in court. Wouldn't this be a conflict of church and state? Calvin tried to fuse state and religion, Geneva was to become the New Jerusalem. He was more Muslim then Christian, which from the beginning saw a separation between Church and State (Render unto Caesar that which is Caesars, render to God what is Gods). Calvin was a smart guy, he was not a great philosopher.

Tim Robbins

ocianain wrote: »

Calvin was a smart guy, he was not a great philosopher.

Excuse my Roman Orthodox atheist ignorance, but where is the evidence he was smart?