Added: 2 years ago
From: DGconferences
Views: 1,815
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (8)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Arminian100, you said execution is wrong "in general". How about this ? Mean something in one way or the other ! That's not even an opinion. Are you familiar with the word "lukewarm" ?

    -psygnsup-

  • Actually, governmental execution or capital punishment was part of the Jewish system ordained by God himself. Under the new covenant we don't submit to Jewish law, but it's clear that God, at least in principle, is pro execution, granted it's done justly and by the appropriate authorities. Bear in mind that Calvin was not the primary party responsible for Servetus' execution. He was a witness; moreover he pleaded for a more humane method of execution.

  • execution in general is wrong. Period. Regardless of what you think of Calvinism/Calvin... the execution of Servetus is wrong. No matter what "context" you place Calvin in. But.... nice try.

  • @Arminian100 You say "execution, in general, is wrong. Period.".

    Laugh, that statement doesnt even make sense, either it is wrong PERIOD, or it is only wrong "generally", make up your mind.

    The Bible does actually uphold governmental execution of criminals and in a theocracy such as Calvins Geneva the heresies of Servetus were considered to be criminal and indeed Servetus was more dangerous then any robber or murderer.

  • @Arminian100

    Besides, you people seem to miss the fact that Calvin was not even the one in charge of Servetus's execution and that the vast majority of Europeans at that time (both Protestant and catholic, excluding the Anabaptists) agreed completely that Servetus should be executed, he was widely known as a troublemaker. Geneva at that time had essentially only three choices, either hand over Servetus to the inquisition, execute him theirselves, or thirdly.... be seen as protectors of heresy.

  • @Arminian100 I am not necessarily saying the execution of Servetus was the right thing to do but it is obvious that people are way to hard on Calvin over this, are you really going to throw out the whole doctrine of the election over this one incident?? Servetus was a blatant disturber of the peace. The execution of Servetus is really more of a political issue then a theological issue. Most Calvinists today reject the idea of a theocracy yet you still attack Calvinism over this issue??

  • @Arminian100 Your arminianism is nothing but veiled papism, it is merely popery without the pomp and pageantry, but it is still dangerous to the body of believers. The devil wishes nothing more then to attack the sovereignty of God over his creation.

  • @Arminian100 Calvin actually OPPOSED the cruel style in which Servetus was executed, these people that act like Calvin had absolute authority over Genevian government regarding this issue are simply ill informed. He refused to show up to the execution because he did not believe in burning as a merciful method of execution. All Calvin did was uphold the right of a theocratic government to execution heretics. I do not agree with this but you should cut him some slack, it was the 16th century.

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more