John Piper Wishes John Calvin Was Not A Cruel Murderer, Yet Continues To Teach "Calvin"-ism

[caucazhin]

calvin,thwe puritans & augustine where evil egotistical fools with self righteous malice in their hearts

[mwilson70201]

@yankobutt King David was an old testament Jew, a man of war and passion. He was not a born again child of God yet he acknowledged his sin and God judged it. When did Calvin or Luther ever admit they sinned in authorizing the murder of men based on doctrinal differences? What evidence of God's chastisement for these sins is there? I've read many words by Calvin and Luther including their encouragements to murder Jews and anabaptist but never a word of repentance. I John 4:15 says it all.

[fanooch1]

Hey. God, before all creation, chose Calvin to slowly roast Servetus to death in one of the cruelest ways a man can be killed. Calvin had no choice. God is Sovereign. Move along. Move along.

[5355vbxjbj76rvn]

The validity of Calvin's theology is independent of Calvin's actions. They do not compromise it - they can obscure it. If he is right about (say) the Sovereignty of God, that remains a fact, regardless of anyone's acts, good or bad, including his.

[mwilson70201]

@5355vbxjbj76rvn And the basis of Calvin's theology is independent of scripture. In his Institutes he continuously cites Augustine an acknowledged Neoplatonist for support of his doctrine. Augustine's election is a rehash of Plato and Aristotle's pagan ideas of the monad (pagan god) as the 1st cause who alone is determinateness and controls all actions of lesser beings who are indeterminate. Fatalism defined.

[caucazhin]

@mwilson70201 AMENNN 2 those words brother any church that takes up the sword is no church @ all............PEACE

[droptozro]

@5355vbxjbj76rvn

It's a type of ad-hominem.. but sorry, it's a justified one. Whether or not anyone should have to tackle Calvin's unbiblical definition of "sovereignty"(or any Calvinists following) is of course the BETTER way of debating it. But sorry, it's not entirely independent---ESPECIALLY when it comes to Christians, for the fact remains that no murderer has eternal life from 1 John, and also the fact remains that no murderer has the Spirit of God, thus their theology is carnality.

[escapingplatoscave]

@yankobutt It was over the trinity and infant baptism, both not reasons to warrant murder...

[wassupmrdan]

Calvinism predates Calvin. What is called Calvinism are the doctrines of grace as taught in the Bible. It was called "Calvinism" in Calvin's day because it was the doctrine he taught. Whoever titled this video needs a history lesson.

[jmange]

@wassupmrdan Exactly right. Jesus was the first "Calvinist" (John 6:37, 44, 65, etc.) and Paul was among the most explicitly Calvinist writers there has ever been.

I for one am somewhat glad that John Calvin himself had faults, even serious faults (as did Luther, and Augustine, and so many others), so we can avoid idolizing any individual and instead focus on God. The idea that personal attacks on John Calvin will erase the truth of the doctrines he taught from Scripture is laughable.

[escapingplatoscave]

@jmange Jesus was the first "Calvinist" That is a ridiculous statement. Jesus didn't write "The Institutes Of The Christian Religion," John Calvin did. Jesus didn't condone the burning of "heretics." You will know false teachers by their fruit. All evil is not ordained by God. God is grieved by sin. Calvinism is heresy.

[jmange]

@escapingplatoscave ... I had hoped what I meant was obvious. Jesus taught the doctrine that is today called Calvinism, that God is fully sovereign and no one comes to Him unless elected by Him. That is the point. What is called Calvinism is simply Biblical Christianity, and regardless of what you think of John Calvin himself, we should all submit to the authority of Scripture.

[escapingplatoscave]

@jmange What does God use to draw people to him?  The gospel...and how can people hear without a preacher? (Romans 10:14) And if God be lifted up, he will draw ALL men unto himself (John 12:32)

[TheCASSMAN777]

@escapingplatoscave in John 12:32 "All men" is meant by all ethnicities. The context talks about how Greeks were in the crowd listening to Jesus along w/the Jews. Also if you read John 6:44 Jesus says that No one can come to me unless the Father draws him, and I WILL raise him up on the last day. Notice it doesn't say that he might raise him up, or that he could possible raise him up.

[TheChristcrucified]

Wonder if a pastor involved in an event such as this would receive an ounce of pampering like Calvin did? Answer: NO

[escapingplatoscave]

@TheChristcrucified You're right. There would be a national uproar if a pastor did what John Calvin did. So, why do people defend John Calvin and make him a hero?

[TheChristcrucified]

Wonder if a pastor was involved in something of that nature in this day and age if he would receive the same pampering as Calvin? Answer: NO

[thirdimpact]

But in context, the case of the woman caught in adultery was an example of mob rule. The Bible clearly lays out that we are to obey the laws of the land, and the Jewish people under Roman rule were not permitted to execute someone over adultery. From their evil perspective, the religious leaders wished to execute Jesus for blasphemy, but had to use political sedition and rebellion as their pretext.

There is a difference between mob rule and justice by the state.

[escapingplatoscave]

@thirdimpact None of the "heresies" that John Calvin had Michael Servetus executed over were worthy of death. John Calvin was a dangerous, insane man and I hope the prideful spirit of Calvinism that lives on dies fast.

[thirdimpact]

@escapingplatoscave I would normally debate this further, but I just received a call that my fiance's mother is in the hospital. Please keep Kathleen in your prayers. She should be okay, but I'm obviously a little distracted to defend Calvinism.

[thirdimpact]

Why do we need to apologize for viewing blasphemy as a grave sin? It is only viewed as detestable because we live in a society that has decided that the dangers of a theocracy far outweigh the possible benefits. I would agree with this assessment, too. But in the context of the society Calvin was in, if spiritual crimes (blasphemy, adultery, lying, etc.) warranted the same earthly justice as secular crimes (murder, theft, etc.), then a death sentence was APPROPRIATE.

[escapingplatoscave]

@thirdimpact The solution to "perceived" heretics is not to KILL them. It's to separate. I can't believe you are defending a murderer. Where does it end? Should murderers be murdered? John Calvin was in no position to murder people. Using the time period he lived in is no excuse either. Do you recall the story of when an adulteress was caught and was about to be stoned? Do you remember what Jesus said? "He who is without sin cast the first stone."

[thirdimpact]

@escapingplatoscave How do you define murder? Is the state giving a serial killer the death penalty murder? I'm not saying that in a representative republic or democracy that blasphemy should be punishable by death. But in a society that views blasphemy as a capital offense, Calvin was carrying out the sentence that the society of that time had already deemed appropriate. In the Old Testament, blasphemy was punishable by stoning. Was that murder?

[escapingplatoscave]

@thirdimpact Murder is murder and we do not live in the Old Testament. We live in the New Testament: The age of grace. All you have to do is look at the story of Jesus with the adulteress woman. He prevented her from being stoned with a single sentence: "He who is without sin cast the first stone." How can one sinner kill another sinner? That makes no sense. What authority does one sinner have over another? Michael Servetus did not "blaspheme" God.

[thirdimpact]

@escapingplatoscave And whether the sentence was justified or not, denying the essential doctrine of the Trinity as stated in Scripture is blasphemy. That shouldn't be at issue. Only what the justified sentence for that infraction.

[escapingplatoscave]

@thirdimpact Read the article in my description box called "The Fruit of Cain Multiplied: The Murderer John Calvin"

[bartguys]

yall below me are dumb and sooooo constrained. instead of just what calvin did, WHAT ABOUT THE VIEW OF A HISPANIC??

Look what all those "believers" did to my people in what North America used to be?

What would Jesus do? Would he colonialize others' land?

It hasn't been to spread the "word of God", come on, it's u guys trying to play mommy and daddy on everyone. give it up and be "Christ followers". He didn't go to internships (well no one knows age 13-30) but u guys are "of this world" like

[escapingplatoscave]

@bartguys I'd really love to respond to you, but I have no idea what you just said.

[bartguys]

@escapingplatoscave Basically, no follower of its prodecessor will be accurately. NOT ONE CHRISTIAN CAN BE LIKE CHRIST, just like when someone is called a Marxist, Marx had great qualities, but when applied it was diluted; like Christianity.

Imagine Jesus in 2011, he woulda got mocked for his simple dress and accepting everyone, and not being so scupulous of the bible like all these "biblical scholars".

All these dudes is debate, all u guys do is complicate stupid shit.

[escapingplatoscave]

@bartguys That's my point to begin with. If the gospel isn't clear enough as it is, there is no reason to be a Christian in the first place. There are thousands and thousands of denominations within Christianity. Calvinism is just one of them...Why would I attach a philosophy to myself taught by a murderer named John Calvin instead of relying on the Bible alone?

[bartguys]

@escapingplatoscave Because faith is subjective and by noting on all the sects/dichotomies/philosophies of Christianity, it shows the depth and power of the human mind. But- IN PRACTIVCE, what have our forefathers of faith done for us?? They've just shown the audacity, self-indilgence, and piety of the human.

But damn, pop quiz- name 10 Women from the Bible... Go!..

.

.

Now name 10 Men from the bible!... 12 disciples, Jesus, Yahweh.. lol

what the white man does, dominates

[escapingplatoscave]

@bartguys What is your theological position? Are you a Calvinist?

[bartguys]

@escapingplatoscave See, "theological", all too ideological for me dude. They're imaginary, like democrat and republican, socialist and capitalist, all part of the same thing.

When I was a believer I didn't like the predispositional nature of Calvinism but it's expected because at the end of the day, it's not fulfilling. Like all ideologies, they point to idealism, IDEALS that aren't real yet and we should all mature and see the real fundamental, evident, & inevitable. Nature

[samtorrance5590]

@bartguys 1. Mary, mother of Jesus. 2. Mary Magdalene. 3. Esther. 4. Ruth. 5. Priscilla. 6. Widow whos son is raised. 7. Eve. 8. Sarah. 9. Rachel. 10. Lydia.

There are quite a few more as well :) A quick google search, "women in the bible".

[bartguys]

@samtorrance5590 LOL GOOGLE SEARCH!!!

That's why I said "Pop Quiz"!!! Are u canadian or something, you've never heard of a pop quiz??

Bro I know for a fact you couldn't think of 10 women in the Bible off the top of your head.

White dudes these days

[samtorrance5590]

@bartguys Lol apologies, I didn't realise you were messing about. Nah, you're right, I've read about more but off the top of my head could only get 7. The rest I found on google. I know I cheated but did I win the Pop Quiz? (Oh, I'm British.)

[bartguys]

@samtorrance5590 Lol its good dude. But no one wins in religion only the white men. 10 MEN from the Bible?? Easy- Adam, Noah, Moses, Abraham, Jesus, Yahweh, 12 disciples!!!

Calvinists like Piper are predispositionalists and misogynists like the authors of the bible-- a bunch of horny, old, Jewish men. No wonder there's so much death and despair until Jesus. A Brit like you should know that especially with the late passing of the brillian Christopher Hitchens.

[mikeisi]

I'm curious, as a 'non-calvinist', what do you believe happens to people who never hear the gospel?

[escapingplatoscave]

@mikeisi According to Romans 1:20, everyone is without excuse...so I believe everyone has a certain amount of light given to them. I believe God will be fair.

[mikeisi]

@escapingplatoscave I guess what I'm asking though is.....do you believe that a person that has NEVER heard the gospel (never heard of Jesus, the cross etc...) can be saved based upon that 'certain amount of light'?

[escapingplatoscave]

@mikeisi I believe they can, but with all the missionaries, it's difficult to find anyone who hasn't at least heard the gospel before. That's the great commission given by Jesus: To preach the gospel to "every" creature. The two greatest commandments Jesus gave was to love God and your neighbor.  It's difficult to know for sure, but I don't know how petty God really is. Would he cast an otherwise decent person out of heaven for not knowing his name?

[mikeisi]

@escapingplatoscave but then how can they be saved if they don't know the name? For example...what do you think of Romans 10:14?

[escapingplatoscave]

@mikeisi I've never heard of someone waking up one day WITHOUT looking at the Bible and suddenly having the name of the son of God enter their mind for salvation. That's what would have to happen if Calvinism were really true. You wouldn't even need the Bible in the first place.

[escapingplatoscave]

@mikeisi I've never heard of someone waking up one day WITHOUT looking at the Bible and suddenly having the name of the son of God enter their mind for salvation. That's what would have to happen if Calvinism were really true. You wouldn't even need the Bible in the first place.

[mikeisi]

@escapingplatoscave So then...are you concluding that if a person never hears the Gospel...they perish? Correct?

[escapingplatoscave]

@mikeisi I don't believe God is like that...Romans 1:20 very clearly illustrates how creation itself bears witness that there is a God. People may not know absolutely everything about God (and I still don't even WITH the Bible) but I believe God will judge according to the light each person has been given. The holy spirit can still convict people's hearts even though they have never heard the gospel. I believe people can still repent without even hearing it.

[mikeisi]

@escapingplatoscave but then what is the point of witnessing then? If people can and do get saved by the revealed light stated in Romans 1...what is the point of the great commission?

[escapingplatoscave]

@mikeisi If you are able to give a more clear presentation using scripture, why not?  My question is: If Calvinism is true and God has already chosen those who are saved and those who are damned, why does he want us to fulfill the great commission in the first place knowing that certain people are wired to "hear" the gospel and certain people are wired to "not hear?" It seems counter-productive and pointless to me.

[mikeisi]

@escapingplatoscave forget Calvinism for a second. You seem to be suggesting that a person "can be saved" by having faith in God through the light that is given them. All I am asking is...if that is true, then why the great commission? Why is there an importance of 'preaching the gospel' if you don't need to hear it? You ask "why not?"...I can't think of a reason. Why send missionaries to suffer if people don't need to hear the gospel?

[escapingplatoscave]

@mikeisi I was responding to your question about people who have never heard the gospel. That doesn't mean I don't think people should still teach it. If you have scripture, you can make everything more clear for the lost. All I'm saying is that I believe people can still go to heaven if they weren't fortunate enough to have a missionary nearby because of the light God gives to every person.

[mikeisi]

@escapingplatoscave Fair enough. Would I be correct then to say that you believe people who ARE witnessed to have a 'easier' or 'better chance' at being saved, then the person who is simply relying on the general revelation laid out in Romans 1?

[escapingplatoscave]

@mikeisi Basically, yes.

[mikeisi]

@escapingplatoscave If you believe it is a 'dreary' concept that Christ died for a select few, and thus disbelieve that idea....how is it not equally a dreary concept that the God of this universe leaves one's eternal soul up to wither or not one person witnesses to the other? Doesn't it seem unfair that people who get witnessed to have a better chance at salvation then those who don't?

[escapingplatoscave]

@mikeisi Doesn't it seem unfair that God elected a few people before they were even born to be saved and elected MANY to be damned before they were born based upon absolutely nothing but his "sovereignty?" Why does it say in Proverbs that someone is "wise" for winning souls? Why would that even be in the Bible if it weren't possible to "win" souls? I believe many, many people will be in heaven as a result of soul-winning.

[mikeisi]

@escapingplatoscave I understand but with due respect your not answering my question. You seem (as i'm judging) to hold the issue of 'fairness' to a high degree. So what I'm asking you is.....how is it 'fair' that God let's SOME people be witnessed to and thus have a good 'chance' at salvation while some native in the Amazon is never 'witnessed' to and thus has a LOWER chance at salvation?

[escapingplatoscave]

@mikeisi That's a lot more fair than being put on a "damned for eternity with no choice" list before you are born.

[mikeisi]

@escapingplatoscave But the point is...it's NOT fair. You have to see that right? Think about it; the God of this universe could, if he wanted, reveal Himself to any one soul in all time and history and speak the Gospel of Christ to that individual....but based upon the new testament, He doesn't. He instead revealed it to the Jews 2000 years ago, and then instructs them to begin telling the world from now on.  He's putting souls into the hands of finite man. Is that fair?

[escapingplatoscave]

@mikeisi If God wasn't leaving up to people to spread the gospel, he would never have instructed the great commission. It is a scary thought, but he did in effect, leave it up to us to share the gospel.

[escapingplatoscave]

@mikeisi If God wasn't leaving up to people to spread the gospel, he would never have instructed the great commission. It is a scary thought, but he did leave it up to us to share the gospel.

[escapingplatoscave]

@mikeisi If God wasn't leaving up to people to spread the gospel, he would never have instructed the great commission. It is a scary thought, but he did leave it up to us to share the gospel...

[escapingplatoscave]

@mikeisi If God wasn't leaving up to people to spread the gospel, he would never have instructed the great commission. It is a scary thought, but he did leave it up to us to share the gospel...

[escapingplatoscave]

@mikeisi If God wasn't leaving up to people to spread the gospel, he would never have instructed the great commission. It is a scary thought, but he did leave it up to us to share the gospel...

[escapingplatoscave]

@mikeisi If God wasn't leaving up to people to spread the gospel, he would never have instructed the great commission. It is a scary thought, but he did leave it up to us to share the gospel......

[mikeisi]

@escapingplatoscave But I think your displaying why you can't reject Calvinism simply based upon that you see it as 'unfair'. If you reject it because you literally believe that scripture doesn't teach it, I can respect that. For example if you believe passages in Romans 9, or 1 Thess 1:4-5 are simply being read in error then I can maybe buy that...but arguing that election is 'not fair' simply doesn't hold water;...(see 2)

[mikeisi]

@escapingplatoscave (2)...for the other side of the coin is just as troublesome; namely that an all powerful God, who wants every single individual that has ever lived to be saved is simply standing by letting mere mortals do His work for him. That to me seems just as 'unfair'. If God wants every single person to be saved, how come he doesn't reveal Himself to them in the exact way he did to Paul at his conversion?

[escapingplatoscave]

@mikeisi Mark 16:15 says preach the gospel to every creature. God isn't going to fulfill the "great commission" for us. It almost seems like God has pretty much stopped "talking" to his creation and left us with the Bible after Jesus ascended to heaven. I don't know why God is choosing to be so mysterious and forcing people into these kind of conversations...but he left us with his word...and that's it. We might as well do as he says and go win souls. He won't do it for us.

[mikeisi]

@escapingplatoscave I no doubt believe that we should 'do what he says' and go win souls. However Paul clearly teaches that while He may 'plant'...and Apollos may 'water'...it is GOD who 'gives growth'. I think this is a common misunderstanding about election. It doesn't teach that we are not supposed to witness...it simply teaches that when you DO witness, and a person converts...it was God all along moving the hearts of those involved.

[escapingplatoscave]

@mikeisi I don't think anyone doubts God is the one who saves, but he wants us to win souls, which simply means to run through the word with someone to show them they are a sinner and then God can do the rest. Romans 10:14 is pretty devastating to Calvinism. "How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching?"

[mikeisi]

@escapingplatoscave I would respectfully disagree about Romans 10:14. Again, Calvinism (a term which I hate by the way) doesn't hold that we aren't called to witness since God is the one who chooses. It simply is an acknowledgment of God's sovereignty over all things including the hearts of man. What IS devastating (i believe) to the opposing view is Romans 9:18-20. The hypothetical question Paul is proposing here doesn't make sense unless Election is true in my opinion

[escapingplatoscave]

@mikeisi The Bible does contain the words "elect" and "predestination" but what they mean is subject to discussion given their context. It is very clear that "salvation" is open to anyone, (whosoever,) so that pretty much destroys Calvinism right off the bat. John Calvin, the man who founded Calvinism, was an unrepentant murderer and we know from the word that no murderer has eternal life abiding in them. What does that say about his merit as a theologian right off the bat?

[mikeisi]

@escapingplatoscave (a) First of all, Calvin did not 'found calvinism'. It's not like he said "I decree a new theology and I'm calling it CALVINISM!" Calvinism was (unfortunately) a term later attributed to a specific theology. Wither he was a bad person or not I'm not gonna get into...what I will get into though is that he did not 'introduce' anything new...anymore than Luther did. He simply played a part in restoring theology that He believed was biblical....(see b)

[mikeisi]

@escapingplatoscave (b) Now the bible obviously existed before Calvin; so when examining his '5 points', one should of course test them by scripture to see if wither or not they are biblical. I believe they are. Thus one can forget Calvin altogether. I believe when reading scripture that I comes to the same points and conclusions that Calvin did.

[escapingplatoscave]

@mikeisi You haven't read the Bible cover to cover if you think Calvinism is the true gospel. I challenge you to read the Institutes of the Christian Religion and then read the entire Bible over and over again to see why Calvin was wrong theologically. It didn't take me more than a few seconds to see why Calvinism is wrong. The fact that John Calvin was a murderer was just icing on the cake for my hatred of it.

[mikeisi]

@escapingplatoscave I would argue I've come to opposite conclusions.  Cover to cover reveals to me how obvious God is sovereign over all things including the hearts of man (Proverbs 21:1). But of course we can agree to disagree.

[escapingplatoscave]

@mikeisi If that is so, God is quite irrational. Why would he "weep" over sins that he decreed? Why would he be grieved by the wickedness of man when he is the one causing them to be wicked? Why would he flood his own creation due to the wickedness he programmed into his creatures? It is the functional equivalent of Jim Henson being mad at Kermit the Frog for complaining about being green. Point by point, Calvinism fails on every level. It is like a withering TULIP.

[mikeisi]

@escapingplatoscave Consider what you just said... "God is quite irrational. Why would he weep over sins that he decreed"......Now, how is that any different from what Paul says in Romans which I stated above?

*You will say to me then, "Why does He still find fault? For who can resist His will?" 9:19.*

How is the question Paul is anticipating from his readers not exactly the same as what you are questing right now? You are stating what Paul is predicting.

[escapingplatoscave]

@mikeisi According to 1 Tim 2:3-4 and 2 Peter 3:9, God actually desires that ALL MEN come to the knowledge of the truth and be saved. I think we can both agree that not all men WILL be saved. Why? Because God HAS to allow free will. He simply will not force a person against THEIR WILL. He has to limit his will. All you have to do is look at a child when they resist their parent's will. There is free will. God made us in his image. The goal is to align our will with his.

[mikeisi]

@escapingplatoscave You didn't really answer my question. But I will say that our 'free will' is not the debate.  I do believe man has the ability to choose, yet I also believe scripture teaches that if God simply left salvation up to that free will..NOBODY would choose to align their will with his. We would ALL fall away. This is clearly taught in Isaiah 1:9 which Paul reaffirms in Romans 9:21. It's not that we don't have a will...its that naturally that will is corrupt.

[escapingplatoscave]

@mikeisi Do you like free gifts? Who doesn't? Why would a person turn down the free gift that Jesus offered? People do turn it down, but it's their choice, not his.

[mikeisi]

@escapingplatoscave for example, picture a person who is drunk and stumbling to their car getting ready to drive. A friend intervenes...takes the keys away...puts the drunkard in the backseat and drives him home to his house, forces him into a cold shower, then lays him in bed. Now...does that mean the drunkard doesn't have a will?

I think ultimately what separates us is how we view the results of Sin. You believe it 'impairs' us...I believe it kills us. (Ephesians 2:1)

[escapingplatoscave]

@mikeisi The wages of sin is DEATH, but the gift of God is ETERNAL LIFE. How do you receive that gift? The same way you'd receive any other gift. You just receive it and believe it.