The Ugly Side

Status
Not open for further replies.

PuritanSchmidt

Puritan Board Freshman
Please do not tar and feather me for asking this, but I want to because I do not want to idolize or even over esteem this specific theologian.

I am a Calvinist and probably always will be, however I do want to know if there is an ugly side to Calvin. For example, Martin Luther had a very ungodly hatred for the Jews. I still admire Luther and his contribution, but it helps show me that he is still human.
 
Sin is an easy answer. You ask a man if he is a sinner and he will answer yes without cringing. However, if you talk about specific sins, it is infinitely more effective. (Yes I know that being a sinner should be enough to make any man cringe, but I admittedly still want to know)
 
To be honest, Luther was much more transparent with his personal life and thoughts than was Calvin. People love reading about Luther for that reason (I mean what other Reformer would openly refer to his flatulence as a form of spiritual warfare!). Calvin was much more reserved in that respect and so much of his personal life remains something of a mystery.
 
From what I know, there isn't a "dark side" to Calvin. He was a worthless sinner, but one saved by God's grace who seems to have taken his sanctificaiton seriously. However, you may hear the "dark side of Calvinism". Usually, this is what people who think the doctrines of grace are disgusting things and there are usually a number of straw men thrown in to the mix.
 
Every man has an ugly side. It's called sin.

I think its important to remember that the reformers were all men of their times, and thus they were susceptible to the sins of their times. To be honest, Luther's contemporaries probably didn't think twice about his hatred of the Jews or about some of the things he said about women. (And he was a happily married man, which indicates that a lot of his statements about women were probably a reflection of the time rather than a deep statement about his character). I suspect that several hundred years from now, people will look back on us and our sins and say something to the effect of, "How could they have done that!" - when we're not even cognizant that what we're doing is sin - that's the nature of our fallen state.

Reading Luther makes me realize how many sins I must commit every day without even knowing it. Ugh.
 
Most biographies of Calvin will bring out that he struggled with being irascible and severe with others. I think we see evidence, though, that he recognized these failings and sought to mortify them.
 
Every man has an ugly side. It's called sin.

I think its important to remember that the reformers were all men of their times, and thus they were susceptible to the sins of their times. To be honest, Luther's contemporaries probably didn't think twice about his hatred of the Jews or about some of the things he said about women. (And he was a happily married man, which indicates that a lot of his statements about women were probably a reflection of the time rather than a deep statement about his character). I suspect that several hundred years from now, people will look back on us and our sins and say something to the effect of, "How could they have done that!" - when we're not even cognizant that what we're doing is sin - that's the nature of our fallen state.

In just the last 100 years, I believe racism would fall in this category.
 
His "involvement" in the events leading up to Servetus' execution is held, by many, to be his "dark side." If you don't see it that way, then there's probably not another dark side for you to look for. He's in the clear. ;)
 
Or maybe it's our modern American Hollywood/Dipsy view of the Jews that's warped and not Luther's.
 
Calvin for instance was a proponent of adultery being punished by the State by the use of the Death Penalty.
Certainly nothing "dark" about that. :2cents:


Well there are at least two of us that feel that way. :)
More than that, Friend. ;)


And still more.

---------- Post added at 05:35 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:34 AM ----------

Or maybe it's our modern American Hollywood/Dipsy view of the Jews that's warped and not Luther's.

Luther's anti-Jewishness is often wrongly confused with anti-semitism.
 
Please do not tar and feather me for asking this, but I want to because I do not want to idolize or even over esteem this specific theologian.

I am a Calvinist and probably always will be, however I do want to know if there is an ugly side to Calvin. For example, Martin Luther had a very ungodly hatred for the Jews. I still admire Luther and his contribution, but it helps show me that he is still human.

What's amazed me is how "good" Mr. Calvin seems to have been. He had a few peculiar beliefs (e.g. perhaps believed in the perpetual virginity of Mary) but here's the greatest theologian of all time.

In a fallen world, where idolatry is perhaps the most basic sin (putting something God has created in place of Him, whether that be a person, idea, intellect, a sin, etc.) we ought not be so surprised when we see it. Nor ignore how it is in ourselves. Also, we are commanded to try and hold others in a good light, especially those in the household of faith- not overlooking their sin, yet understanding our lack in assessing it, and being charitable in our esteem (Ninth Commandment).
 
If I had to baptize a Jew, I would take him to the bridge of the Elbe, hang a stone round his neck and push him over with the words I baptize thee in the name of Abraham


From Grisiar's "Luther," - a well documented quote. And others are all over the place, just read Luther's "On Jews and their Lies"

Seriously, Tim? I'm not one to demonize Luther. Like I said, he was a sinner just like myself and a man of his times. But I would hope we would acknowledge that this is not a biblical view.
 
Seriously, Tim? I'm not one to demonize Luther. Like I said, he was a sinner just like myself and a man of his times. But I would hope we would acknowledge that this is not a biblical view.

And when he said that Saxons were the most honest of Germans because they are the dumbest? Do we take that as it stands, or was it just Luther being Luther? And the point still stands that our contemporary view of Jews may very well be just as far off as Luther's. By definition we're partially blind to our environment. Just this week there was a post about negative Arab influence on America, and everyone thought it natural. And if someone posted figures showing Jewish crime rates higher than Arab crime rates (insider trading, smuggling, money laundering, espionage, etc...) that natural dislike of Arabs would still be there.

I think one has to spend some significant number of years time out of this country to see things more clearly. Kathleen, I would be interested in your opinon of what Billy Graham said to President Nixon about the Jewish influence on American culture, and how it related to Luther's thoughts.
 
No disrespect intended, but I think the original post of this thread is off focus.

What is being described of Luther, Calvin, etc., is not a dark-side that is an essential characteristice to Calvinism. It is rather a characteristice of the flesh, something shared by all regardless of doctrinal/religious persuasion.
 
No one's perfect.

If you want perfect Reformers go and find some; you'll have a hard time.

The feted theologians of today, including some Calvinists, will have their "ugly sides".
 
the ugly side is that his entire lifework of about 8,600 points has been compressed into 5 by those who want to join in but are not into the required reading list.
 
Tim, I'm not going to get into an argument with you about "the Jews." To be honest, I have Jewish family members, and so I this isn't something I like to argue about - I get really touchy and annoyed when people start making broad generalizations - and when the political state of Israel is somehow equated with everyone who happens to be Jewish. If you actually think that Luther's characterizations of and attitudes towards the Jews are biblical, then I don't think I'm going to change your mind and I'm not particularly interested in trying. Been there done that.
 
I didn't say Luther's statements were Biblical. I said we have the opposite problem, which does more than just imply Luther had a problem. And there are people with French and Arab family members here also, but nobody loses it when the French and Arabs are painted with a broad brush. And that was my main point; that remember that we are products of our culture just as Luther was, so we should at least suspect we may have a bias as well.
 
Tim, a few things:

1. My point was that Luther was a fallen man, prone to the sins of his time. Just as we are also fallen and prone to the sin of our times. I was not trying to make any kind of political statement.

2. It seemed as though you were defending Luther's position as Biblical. If that wasn't your intent, than I misunderstood and I am sorry.

2. My not wanting to discuss "the Jews" doesn't mean I'm losing it. Its just not a discussion I'm willing to have, because its a personal thing for me -and something that I've discussed to death with people. Who wants to talk about whether their cousins are part of the evil empire? I don't come to the PB to discuss these issues. Also, as Chris points out, we'd really be taking the thread off track, and I don't want to do that for the sake of the original post
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top