Throwing Calvin Under The Bus to Save Talbot?

Sam Frost, known for his pandering; even as noted by his own "friends" such as Dee Dee Warren -- Frost now attempts to throw even John Calvin under the bus so Frost can protect his mentor; Kenneth Talbot.
Talbot was recently cited as calling for the killing of people who do not "obey" him. Talbot was very clear that when he is in charge, he wants to execute people...people he calls "blights on society" and "road bumps" that he and his followers "don't want in their kingdom". (Read and listen to the comment here)

No apostle in the New Testament EVER urges killing people for their beliefs or for not "obeying" them. However Frost and his murderous mentor are trying to use Calvin to justify themselves. On March 11, 2013 Frost wrote:

"How can someone condemn the establishment of God's Law, when Calvin very clearly approved of the State carrying out the execution of Servetus for heresy? How can they, with a straight face, call Dr. Talbot a murderer?" -- source

The problem is Talbot ISN'T advocating the "establishment of God's Law" -- instead Talbot is advocating his interpretation of "God's law" then saying that whomever doesn't "obey" him and his followers when they are "in charge" will be "just quick executed". All through Talbot's murderous speech, he uses words like "us" and "we" and "our" when speaking of himself and his followers being in charge, executing people and keeping blights and road bumps out of THEIR kingdom -- not Christ's kingdom, but THEIR personalized kingdom.

Next, notice the admission here by Frost -- Calvin [approved of the STATE] carrying out execution. We'll get into the details in a moment to see if Frost posed even this correctly, but just note that Calvin didn't kill Servetus. Calvin didn't call for the killing/execution of people when they didn't "obey" him. This comes down to what Martin Luther called the "two-swords" or "two kingdoms".  Luther strongly advocated that the secular/worldly/civil sword is responsible for keeping order and peace; the outward condition of life, whereas the Church is responsible for keeping order and peace within the spiritual realm of life.



LUTHER ON SECULAR VS CHRISTIAN AUTHORITY

"But take heed and first fill the world with real Christians before you attempt to rule it in a Christian and evangelical manner. This you will never accomplish; for the world and the masses are and always will be unchristian, even if they are all baptized and Christian in name. Christians are few and far between (as the saying is). Therefore, it is out of the question that there should be a common Christian government over the whole world, or indeed over a single country or any considerable body of people, for the wicked always outnumber the good...For this reason one must carefully distinguish between these two governments. Both must be permitted to remain; the one to produce righteousness, the other to bring about external peace and prevent evil deeds. Neither one is sufficient in the world without the other. No one can become righteous in the sight of God by means of the temporal government, without Christ's spiritual government. Christ's government does not extend over all men; rather, Christians are always a minority in the midst of non-Christians. Now where temporal government or law alone prevails, there sheer hypocrisy is inevitable, even though the commandments be God's very own. For without the Holy Spirit in the heart no one becomes truly righteous, no matter how fine the works he does. On the other hand, where the spiritual government alone prevails over land and people, there wickedness is given free rein and the door is open for all manner of rascality, for the world as a whole cannot receive or comprehend it." -- source (see also)

It is clear, not in mere assertion as Frost did with Calvin, but clear in actual quotation that Luther does NOT agree with Talbot's desire to take up both "swords" to himself like a deranged cult leader.

There is a reason Calvin didn't put any logs on the fire that took Servetus' life. As a matter of fact (again not mere assertion like Frost), Calvin pleaded with the secular town council of Geneva to have mercy on Servetus. Reformed Theologian J.I. Packer writing of the ordeal had this to say:

"Calvin, whose role in Servetus' trial had been that of expert witness managing the prosecution, wanted Servetus not to die but to recant, and spent hours with him during and after the trial seeking to change his views." -- source

Servetus was the victim of the "secular sword" of that time; what there was of it since the Reformation had not yet Reformed the Sacralism that permeated Europe since the days of Roman Catholicism's merger with the Roman Empire.  Servetus was not put to death simply because of his anti-Trinitarian beliefs but because of his inciting disorder in general.

However, let's grant for a moment the FALSE premise Frost is using to whitewash Talbot's urging for murder. Let us suppose for a moment Calvin was guilty of killing Servetus. How does this help Talbot? If Calvin, whom we now see DIDN'T "clearly approve of the State's execution" of Servetus -- If Calvin behaved in a way that he took up both "swords" he was wrong. Talbot is wrong and now we have Frost; a FAKE, self-appointed "pastor"; known for his pandering, his public drunkenness trying to help save his mentor by throwing Calvin under the bus.  Will these frauds stop at anything to bolster their cult?