Public Blasphemy — For Rev. Bayly

Over at Bayly Blog I accidentally put my foot in it — which of course is not an uncommon occurrence.

Someone took a swipe at Calvin’s treatment of Servetus and I stood up for Calvin by noting that if magistrates had stayed consistent by dealing with future Servetus’ in a similar manner we would not have arrived at the point where homosexuality is seen as normative, and we would not have arrived at the point where homosexuals are allowed to evangelize our children through the curriculum in the government schools and we would not be slaughtering 1.3 million babies every year.

Rev. Tim Bayly, for reasons known only to him, took strong exception to this comment and even after I cited the fact that all of Christian Europe was after Servetus and that the Westminster Confession article 23 requires this kind of action from the magistrate Rev. Bayly still didn’t want the discussion taking place at his blog. I suppose it is possible that Tim has some former homosexuals in his congregation and so he doesn’t want to upset them by what he views as a heavy handed approach. I guess I should say that new laws forbidding crimes wouldn’t be enforced ex post facto. Converted homosexuals are my brothers in Christ and no law passed after the fact would effect them.

Rev. Bayly seems to think my position is uncharitable and unloving. It is popular to think that way and so I don’t fault him. Rev. Bayly really needs to ask himself though if it was uncharitable and unloving of God to require capital punishment for public blasphemers in the Old Covenant and if it wasn’t then what has changed?

The reality, is that when Calvin supported the decision that the Geneva Magistrates made on Servetus it was the most loving thing he could have done. Would the Magistrates and Calvin had turned a blind eye to the teachings of Servetus it would have been like ignoring a Cancer festering in a healthy body. When Calvin supported the decisions of the Magistrates in Geneva against Servetus he at the same time supported the health of Families, Churches, and the Societal unity in Geneva. To have allowed Servetus to go unchecked would have been hatred against God and His glory and it would have been a violation of God’s law word regarding blasphemers.

We have seen where Servetus’ Unitarianism has led in our own country. What started with the theological blasphemies of Servetus, by way of a long and winding ideological path that has snaked further and further away from the old Christian paths, has led to the death of 1.3 million babies every year in this country. It has led to the feminization and homosexulization of our culture. A little leaven does indeed leaven the whole loaf.

Some will contend that it is hard hearted and mean spirited to suggest that the State should bear the sword against public Blasphemers. But let us consider again the flip side of this. If public Blasphemers and publicly expressed God haters are allowed to hold sway we must ask the question who will they exercise the use of the sword against? Our culture reveals that they will yield the sword against those that they consider involved in public blasphemy against their god or gods concept.

One of the gods of our age is the god of sex without fertility. Getting pregnant is a public blasphemy against that god. The penalty that the State makes provision for is death for the conceived child. So the sum of this is that Magistrates will always bring the sword against public blasphemy. The Geneva magistrates brought it against Servetus for publicly blaspheming God. Our current magistrates create an environment where the sword is brought against the unborn for publicly blaspheming our sex without fertility god.

It would seem to me that since the Magistrates always ends up bringing the sword against the blasphemers of some god that we should advocate for magistrates bringing the sword against those who blaspheme the God of the Bible, thus showing a tender-heartedness and love towards those who are being killed in the name of false religions and false gods.

Rev. Bayly commented that under my belief system only a handful of people would be left alive. The truth however though, is that under God’s system the land would flourish and the 1.3 million yearly aborted that Rev. Bayly cares about so deeply would be among a host of those left alive.

Author: jetbrane

I am a Pastor of a small Church in Mid-Michigan who delights in my family, my congregation and my calling. I am postmillennial in my eschatology. Paedo-Calvinist Covenantal in my Christianity Reformed in my Soteriology Presuppositional in my apologetics Familialist in my family theology Agrarian in my regional community social order belief Christianity creates culture and so Christendom in my national social order belief Mythic-Poetic / Grammatical Historical in my Hermeneutic Pre-modern, Medieval, & Feudal before Enlightenment, modernity, & postmodern Reconstructionist / Theonomic in my Worldview One part paleo-conservative / one part micro Libertarian in my politics Systematic and Biblical theology need one another but Systematics has pride of place Some of my favorite authors, Augustine, Turretin, Calvin, Tolkien, Chesterton, Nock, Tozer, Dabney, Bavinck, Wodehouse, Rushdoony, Bahnsen, Schaeffer, C. Van Til, H. Van Til, G. H. Clark, C. Dawson, H. Berman, R. Nash, C. G. Singer, R. Kipling, G. North, J. Edwards, S. Foote, F. Hayek, O. Guiness, J. Witte, M. Rothbard, Clyde Wilson, Mencken, Lasch, Postman, Gatto, T. Boston, Thomas Brooks, Terry Brooks, C. Hodge, J. Calhoun, Llyod-Jones, T. Sowell, A. McClaren, M. Muggeridge, C. F. H. Henry, F. Swarz, M. Henry, G. Marten, P. Schaff, T. S. Elliott, K. Van Hoozer, K. Gentry, etc. My passion is to write in such a way that the Lord Christ might be pleased. It is my hope that people will be challenged to reconsider what are considered the givens of the current culture. Your biggest help to me dear reader will be to often remind me that God is Sovereign and that all that is, is because it pleases him.

5 thoughts on “Public Blasphemy — For Rev. Bayly”

  1. jetbrane, you have hit on very sensitive subject, since its implications are world changing . . . that the keeping of God’s commandments are for the generational wellbeing and protection of those that fear and love him and for the punishment of those who mock and hate Him. For whatever reasons, the keeping of God’s law is looked upon as great evil by many Christians who seem to spend a good part of their time apologizing for the “nasty” God of the Old Testament, while bending over backwards to give mercy and support to those that hate God and do violence to those that love Him. Then Jehoshaphat the king of Judah returned safely to his house in Jerusalem.2 And Jehu the son of Hanani the seer went out to meet him, and said to King Jehoshaphat, “Should you help the wicked and love those who hate the Lord? Therefore the wrath of the Lord is upon you (2 Chr. 19:1-2).

    Since when has God’s commandments become the bane of civilization, for which His very own people must side with the wicked to protect themselves from them? Such insanity! Of course, madness is one of the curses that God said He would bring upon His people should they turn their backs on His law (Deu. 28:28). Perhaps, that explains the “purpose driven life” of antinomian Christendom to lead the way for America to fly off the cultural cliff as fast as it can.

  2. It always confounds me that people think that leaving the law-breaker unpunished is the most loving action. Homosexuality without consequence has resulted in the greatest amount of deadly consequence for the homosexual community. Had the violation been justly punished, the homo community would have 1/1000th of its numbers and aids deaths would be a rarity. As it is, men enticed into it become sick, suffer and die. With as much sarcasm as I can muster, let me say oh how kind and loving it is to leave man unrestrained.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *