Questions about Calvin - History

Andrewn

Well-Known Member
CF Ambassadors
Supporter
Jul 4, 2019
5,801
4,309
-
✟678,402.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Both Luther and Zwingli started the Reformation movement before Calvin. Which one of them had more effect on him? Or, worded differently, which of them was closer to Calvin theologically, politically (in relation to Catholics and Anabaptists), and temperamentally.

Also, how was his relationship with Bullinger?
 

JM

Coram Deo.
Supporter
Jun 26, 2004
17,337
3,604
Canada
✟738,496.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
Both Luther and Zwingli started the Reformation movement before Calvin. Which one of them had more effect on him? Or, worded differently, which of them was closer to Calvin theologically, politically (in relation to Catholics and Anabaptists), and temperamentally.

Also, how was his relationship with Bullinger?
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Andrewn
Upvote 0

Andrewn

Well-Known Member
CF Ambassadors
Supporter
Jul 4, 2019
5,801
4,309
-
✟678,402.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Thank you for this most fascinating video.

The speaker discusses the position of Bullinger and Calvin against Nontrinitarian beliefs of Servetus that lead to his execution in Calvin's Geneva.

Wikipedia has the following statements about Servetus' beliefs:

"In 'Genesis' God reveals himself as the creator. In 'John' he reveals that he created by means of the Word, or Logos. Finally, also in 'John', he shows that this Logos became flesh and 'dwelt among us'. Creation took place by the spoken word, for God said "Let there be ..." The spoken word of Genesis, the Logos of John, and the Christ, are all one and the same."

"Servetus affirmed that the divine Logos, the manifestation of God and not a separate divine Person, was incarnated in a human being, Jesus, when God's spirit came into the womb of the Virgin Mary. Only from the moment of conception was the Son actually generated. Therefore, although the Logos from which He was formed was eternal, the Son was not Himself eternal."

It seems that Servetus affirmed that the Logos existed from eternity as the Creator but was not begotten of the Father from eternity! This, to me, sounds like a paradox that doesn't make sense.

"At his trial, Servetus was condemned on two counts, for spreading and preaching Nontrinitarianism, specifically, Modalistic Monarchianism, or Sabellianism, and anti-paedobaptism (anti-infant baptism)."

Is Severus' position on the Trinity, in your opinion, typical of Modalism?
 
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
Thank you for this most fascinating video.

The speaker discusses the position of Bullinger and Calvin against Nontrinitarian beliefs of Servetus that lead to his execution in Calvin's Geneva.

Wikipedia has the following statements about Servetus' beliefs:

"In 'Genesis' God reveals himself as the creator. In 'John' he reveals that he created by means of the Word, or Logos. Finally, also in 'John', he shows that this Logos became flesh and 'dwelt among us'. Creation took place by the spoken word, for God said "Let there be ..." The spoken word of Genesis, the Logos of John, and the Christ, are all one and the same."

"Servetus affirmed that the divine Logos, the manifestation of God and not a separate divine Person, was incarnated in a human being, Jesus, when God's spirit came into the womb of the Virgin Mary. Only from the moment of conception was the Son actually generated. Therefore, although the Logos from which He was formed was eternal, the Son was not Himself eternal."

It seems that Servetus affirmed that the Logos existed from eternity as the Creator but was not begotten of the Father from eternity! This, to me, sounds like a paradox that doesn't make sense.

"At his trial, Servetus was condemned on two counts, for spreading and preaching Nontrinitarianism, specifically, Modalistic Monarchianism, or Sabellianism, and anti-paedobaptism (anti-infant baptism)."

Is Severus' position on the Trinity, in your opinion, typical of Modalism?
You make it sound like a confusions in terms, with Son being used for the incarnated Logos, but not the Logos in eternity. The Logos is eternal, but becomes human in 3 BC. As far as I know that is orthodox.

However he denied that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were separate persons. Wikipedia says he was modalist.
 
Upvote 0

Andrewn

Well-Known Member
CF Ambassadors
Supporter
Jul 4, 2019
5,801
4,309
-
✟678,402.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
You make it sound like a confusions in terms, with Son being used for the incarnated Logos, but not the Logos in eternity. The Logos is eternal, but becomes human in 3 BC. As far as I know that is orthodox.
According to the Nicene Creed, the Son of God is "begotten of the Father before all ages." He became human in 3 BC but He was born / begotten from eternity.

However he denied that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were separate persons. Wikipedia says he was modalist.
According to @ViaCrucis, "The Trinity is not three separate Persons, but three distinct Persons. The Persons are not separate, but they are distinct." Post #51 in the following thread:

"One God in three Persons" is heresy?? since when?

So, denying that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are separate person is the Orthodox belief. And the problem with Servetus' theology is that he denied that the Son of God is born from eternity.

The Orthodox Faith - Volume I - Doctrine and Scripture - The Symbol of Faith - Son of God
 
Upvote 0

Radagast

comes and goes
Supporter
Dec 10, 2003
23,821
9,817
✟312,047.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Upvote 0

JM

Coram Deo.
Supporter
Jun 26, 2004
17,337
3,604
Canada
✟738,496.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
The eternal generation of the Son is biblical.

In this divine and infinite Being there are three subsistences, the Father, the Word or Son, and Holy Spirit, of one substance, power, and eternity, each having the whole divine essence, yet the essence undivided: the Father is of none, neither begotten nor proceeding; the Son is eternally begotten of the Father; the Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father and the Son; all infinite, without beginning, therefore but one God, who is not to be divided in nature and being, but distinguished by several peculiar relative properties and personal relations; which doctrine of the Trinity is the foundation of all our communion with God, and comfortable dependence on him. ( 1 John 5:7; Matthew 28:19; 2 Corinthians 13:14; Exodus 3:14; John 14:11; 1 Corinthians 8:6; John 1:14,18; John 15:26; Galatians 4:6 ) London Baptist Confession of Faith

Found this collection from Calvin:

"But as Christ was not yet manifested, we necessarily understand that the Word was begotten of the Father before all ages." (1.13.7)

Now O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was," (John 17:5.) Nor is this omitted by John: for before he descends to the creation of the world, he says, that "œin the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God." We, therefore, again conclude, that the Word was eternally begotten by God, and dwelt with him from everlasting. In this way, his true essence, his eternity, and divinity, are established." (1.13.8)

"For as the Jews themselves teach that the other names of God are mere epithets, whereas this, which they call the ineffable name, is substantive, and expresses his essence, we infer, that the only begotten Son is the eternal God, who elsewhere declares, "œMy glory will I not give to another," (Isaiah 42:8.)" (1.13.9)

"This distinction did not take its beginning at the incarnation: for it is clear that the only begotten Son previously existed in the bosom of the Father, (John 1:18.)" (1.13.17)

"They object, that if the Son is truly God, he must be deemed the Son of a person: which is absurd. I answer, that both are true; namely, that he is the Son of God, because he is the Word, begotten of the Father before all ages; (for we are not now speaking of the Person of the Mediator,) and yet, that for the purpose of explanation, regard must be had to the Person, so that the name God may not be understood in its absolute sense, but as equivalent to Father. For if we hold that there is no other God than the Fathers this rank is clearly denied to the Son." (1.13.23)

"For ever since Christ was manifested in the flesh he is called the Son of God, not only because begotten of the Father before all worlds he was the Eternal Word, but because he undertook the person and office of the Mediator that he might unite us to God." (1.13.24)

Yours in the Lord,

jm
 
  • Like
Reactions: Andrewn
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
According to the Nicene Creed, the Son of God is "begotten of the Father before all ages." He became human in 3 BC but He was born / begotten from eternity.
We're both going on a very brief summary. But based on that, Servetus accepted that the Logos was eternal, but said that he didn't become the Son until incarnated. This looks like a difference in how "Son" is used. If he thought the Logos didn't exist until the incarnation that would be a substantial difference. Perhaps there's a bigger difference, but if so it didn't appear in the summaries I've seen.
According to @ViaCrucis, "The Trinity is not three separate Persons, but three distinct Persons. The Persons are not separate, but they are distinct." Post #51 in the following thread:
To my knowledge, Servetus denied that the Trinity was three persons. "Distinct" may be better than "separate," but that wasn't the problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Andrewn
Upvote 0

Radagast

comes and goes
Supporter
Dec 10, 2003
23,821
9,817
✟312,047.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
According to the Nicene Creed, the Son of God is "begotten of the Father before all ages." He became human in 3 BC but He was born / begotten from eternity.


According to @ViaCrucis, "The Trinity is not three separate Persons, but three distinct Persons. The Persons are not separate, but they are distinct." Post #51 in the following thread:

"One God in three Persons" is heresy?? since when?

So, denying that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are separate person is the Orthodox belief. And the problem with Servetus' theology is that he denied that the Son of God is born from eternity.

The Orthodox Faith - Volume I - Doctrine and Scripture - The Symbol of Faith - Son of God

In the sense of that thread, @hedrick means "distinct."
 
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
Here's what a page at calvin.edu has to say:

"According to Servetus, in God there is one single person. Servetus was clearly opposed to the splitting up of the divine essence and contented that the persons of the Trinity are rather “forms” that God has chosen to manifest itself. According to Servetus, Christ was made a man by God, and his human nature prevents him from being God and participating in the eternity nature of God. As a result, God was eternal, but Jesus Christ (the Son), since he was begot by the Father, was not eternal .”"

https://calvin.edu/centers-institutes/meeter-center/files/resources-page/TheServetusControversy.pdf

"Even more controversial was his rejection of the doctrine of the Trinity, which he said has no basis in the Bible. Instead of speaking of One God in Three Persons, Servetus stressed the unity of God. He saw Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as modes of operation rather than distinct entities. God is seen by humans to relate to the world as Creator, Savior, and Inspirer. But the Godhead’s inner being is unknowable by humans – as many mystics have also said. For Servetus, the eternal Word, which was conjoined with the human Jesus, was a phase of God’s activity, not a separate person in the Godhead. Likewise the Holy Spirit is God’s spirit moving in our hearts."

Michael Servetus – the Martyred Interfaith Prophet — The Interfaith Observer

These make him look like a pretty standard modalist.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Andrewn
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
However those pages may understate the issue. Here's what a UU source says about the Son:

"He thought of the trinity as manifesting an “economy” of the forms of activity which God could bring into play. Christ, the Son of God, did not always exist. Once but a shadow, he had been brought to substantial existence when God needed to exercise that form of activity. In some future time he would no longer be a distinct mode of divine expression." Michael Servetus

That makes me wonder just whether he actually did think that the Logos was eternal. One form of modalism says that the persons represent different ways in which God has worked in different periods. Perhaps that's what is going on here.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Andrewn
Upvote 0

Radagast

comes and goes
Supporter
Dec 10, 2003
23,821
9,817
✟312,047.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
These make him look like a pretty standard modalist.

If you read his book, you will see that Servetus goes much further than a modern modalist would (for example, in denying the Incarnation, as traditionally understood).
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0