Where was Calvin wrong?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Henry from Canada

Puritan Board Freshman
This may seem to be a stupid question.

If so, please accept my apologies.

We all agree that only God is perfect. No man is perfect, and papal infallibility is an illusion.

However, in all these months/years of studying Calvinist authors, I have never seen any Calvinist author or Calvinist disagree with Calvin on any topic.

Did Calvin have any errors in his Bible interpretation?

Have a good day!!
 

fredtgreco

Vanilla Westminsterian
Staff member
Originally posted by Henry from Canada
This may seem to be a stupid question.

If so, please accept my apologies.

We all agree that only God is perfect. No man is perfect, and papal infallibility is an illusion.

However, in all these months/years of studying Calvinist authors, I have never seen any Calvinist author or Calvinist disagree with Calvin on any topic.

Did Calvin have any errors in his Bible interpretation?

Have a good day!!
Henry,

I have posted on this in the past, but I believe that Calvin was inconsistent in his view of the sacraments, specifically regarding his view of Roman Catholic baptism as valid.
 

VictorBravo

Administrator
Staff member
I don't have access right now to them, but my edition of Calvin's commentaries is full of editorial notes indicating disagreement with various points by other Calvinistic authors.

I think the beauty of what Calvin did was that he systematized the gospel in a manner that was true in fundamentals. Calvinists don't disagree there. But, in other details, there is plenty of disagreement to be found.

Vic
 

non dignus

Puritan Board Sophomore
I think Calvin was wrong on the idea of national prayer. It was something to the effect that the magistrate could or should call the people to pray. Perhaps it was more appropriate for his time and place.
 

R. Scott Clark

Puritan Board Senior
The orthodox had some minor disagreements with Calvin, sometimes exegetical and sometimes theological. There was substantial agreement, however, between Calvin and the confessional orthodox who followed him.

Many (particularly Amyraldians and Arminians) have alleged that the orthodox changed Calvin's doctrine of the atonement, but the evidence for this charge is not strong.

Many of the alleged disagreements have to do with the different circumstances experienced by the orthodox and the questions they had to face that Calvin did not.

There are probably other expressions or loci where the orthodox from the 17th century on dissented from Calvin, but they did not tend to point out where they disagreed.

There are things in Calvin's doctrine of man (anthropology), particularly his assignment of the image of God almost exclusively to the soul would not find unanimous support today among confessional orthodox folk.

rsc
 

tdowns

Puritan Board Junior
More info please.

Originally posted by trevorjohnson
His comments on Genesis 3:15 was that this verse spoke of the womenly fear of snakes! Nothing at all about the Proto-evangelium in his commentary.
Hi Trevor, could you elaborate for me, I need educatin'.

Thanks,

Trevor:book2:
 

Saiph

Puritan Board Junior
Originally posted by R. Scott Clark
There are things in Calvin's doctrine of man (anthropology), particularly his assignment of the image of God almost exclusively to the soul would not find unanimous support today among confessional orthodox folk.

rsc
Interesting. Maybe that is where it crept into my mind.
 

CDM

Puritan Board Junior
Originally posted by C. Matthew McMahon
I disagree with Calvin on head coverings, as well as his treatment on the Sabbath.
Could you please surmise your position on headcoverings? Maybe on another thread? Lately, I have been wrestling with this very issue. It seems to me Cor 11, Christian history (up to 20th century America) are overwhelminly in favor of headcoverings.

I admit I've been leaning toward pro-headcovering. And I have read the headcovering thread here.

Thanks
 

ChristopherPaul

Puritan Board Senior
Calvin did teach the perpetual virginity of Mary and on that I disagree.

I also disagree with his interpretation of 1 Corinthians 11:1-16 on Headcoverings which regardless if my wife covers or not, it would not be for the reasons Calvin argues.
 

just_grace

Puritan Board Freshman
Not a stupid question, but an intelligent one, the guy is a great teacher.

Everyone is into Calvin because of this do or die thing,

God ain't.




Originally posted by Henry from Canada
This may seem to be a stupid question.

If so, please accept my apologies.

We all agree that only God is perfect. No man is perfect, and papal infallibility is an illusion.

However, in all these months/years of studying Calvinist authors, I have never seen any Calvinist author or Calvinist disagree with Calvin on any topic.

Did Calvin have any errors in his Bible interpretation?

Have a good day!!
 

Henry from Canada

Puritan Board Freshman
A question for David:

Could you please explain:
"Everyone is into Calvin because of this do or die thing,"

I am not sure I understand.

Have a good one!
 

pduggan

Puritan Board Freshman
Calvin held to a certain stoicism that led him to criticize David's 'excessive' displays of emotion in the Psalms.

Calvin also held that there was no exegetical basis for thinking that the "let us" phrases of Genesis 1 were trinitarian.

Calvin also held that the idea that Christ would have been incarnate without a fall is speculative, likely in opposition to 'Sabellianism' [update: actually, socinianism]. But Gaffin et al, have done a good job showing how even unfallen creation had an implied eschatology, which would presumably have involved the second person of the trinity in some fashion. We of the earth must 'bear the image of the man from heaven' in any case.

[Edited on 1-4-2006 by pduggan]
 

Me Died Blue

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Originally posted by pduggan
Calvin also held that the idea that Christ would have been incarnate without a fall is speculative, likely in opposition to 'Sabellianism' (If I recall correctly). But Gaffin et al, have done a good job showing how even unfallen creation had an implied eschatology, which would presumably have involved the second person of the trinity in some fashion. We of the earth must 'bear the image of the man from heaven' in any case.
This thread will not become a discussion on this issue, but I think it is necessary for the sake of all readers to note that this is not simply one of Calvin's "unique" or personal errors along the same lines as the other (legitimate) answers to this thread's question, including your other ones, Paul. Rather, essentially all of historic Reformed Christendom has universally agreed with Calvin is this issue, including the various confessional standards as well as the other Reformers and the Puritans, up through the American systematic theologies and the Princeton theologians, and also everyone in our current day as well except for a select few.

Again, this is not to begin a discussion on this issue, but to make sure it is clear to all readers that this was not merely one of Calvin's own personal, unique views in the same vein as the other things being noted in this thread.
 

Me Died Blue

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Originally posted by pduggan
Fair enough.

I'm curious: have there been threads on that matter elsewhere?
Not that I am aware of, other than the discussion going on about it within the current Federal Vision Update thread.
 

just_grace

Puritan Board Freshman
Originally posted by Henry from Canada
A question for David:

Could you please explain:
"Everyone is into Calvin because of this do or die thing,"

I am not sure I understand.

Have a good one!

Sorry to reply so late, if I reply outside of the quote box, it gets deleted, server error :)

To answer your question...

Morbid curiosity!

What are you thoughts!
 

C. Matthew McMahon

Christian Preacher
Originally posted by fredtgreco
Originally posted by Henry from Canada
This may seem to be a stupid question.

If so, please accept my apologies.

We all agree that only God is perfect. No man is perfect, and papal infallibility is an illusion.

However, in all these months/years of studying Calvinist authors, I have never seen any Calvinist author or Calvinist disagree with Calvin on any topic.

Did Calvin have any errors in his Bible interpretation?

Have a good day!!
Henry,

I have posted on this in the past, but I believe that Calvin was inconsistent in his view of the sacraments, specifically regarding his view of Roman Catholic baptism as valid.
I'd agree with Calvin being inconsistent here. Also on the view he held in spiritualizing the Sabbath above all the other commands he could have spiritualized.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top