The Highway Forums General Discussion Open Forum Character of John Calvin

With GREAT reluctance I'm replying to you Joe on this matter. Thredj wasn't even implying what YOU have stated elsewhere, that you won't even read articles, etc., which seek to defend Calvin or what he taught. The issue isn't about "Calvin" or any other man but rather it has to do with false accusations which defame a man's character, misrepresent what a man actually believed or taught. What it comes down to is defending the truth; whether it be a human being or a doctrine of Scripture.

What Thredj was saying, in contradistinction, is that as far as what he holds to be true, it doesn't matter whether Calvin is guilty of murder or not, which accusations are meant to not only discredit the man but more directly the doctrines which have unfortunately have been labeled using his name, aka: Calvinism. Thus, both the honor of the saints and more importantly, the honor of God is the issue at hand. One's theology should never rest upon any man, but upon the Holy Spirit's influence and enlightenment of the inspired biblical record. THAT is what Thredj was confessing. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> And I certainly am one to wholly agree.

Unfortunately, I don't find much credibility to your statement. Why? Because the Gospel is known by the comprehension and communication of words. And this necessarily involves the intellect of man. There is no "idea" of Gospel which exists somewhere in the universe, ala: Plato, of which everything else is but a defective copy and representative of it to one degree or another. Men are incapable of all knowledge (omniscience), but they are capable of comprehending truth. For this is the very purpose of God in providing through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit the written Word; that we may know the truth and preach/teach it to others. Paul often speaks of "the faith", which surely implies there was and is a corpus of truth which men have come to know and which is to be known by all. Should someone ask YOU, "What is the Gospel", of necessity, that is if you attempt to reply at all, you will express your answer in words not inspired by God. In my estimation, Calvinism expresses the Gospel far better than I could ever do if I was forced to begin totally ignorant and have to formulate the Gospel on my own. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

So, what is all this leading up to? Simply this, that regardless of how imperfect Calvinism may be, it is the closest and purest expression of biblical truth, the Gospel, the revelation of God which exists among men. Personally, I am more than content to label myself as a "Calvinist", despite the fact that John Calvin wouldn't approve of that label. In fact, it has been said that the man was of such humility that he wouldn't have approved of anyone even naming their dog after him. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/giggle.gif" alt="" /> But nevertheless, the term has been used for centuries and it functions well for the purpose that it serves, i.e., to summarize biblical truth.

In His grace,