Kill them all; for God knows His own
The quote above, "Kill them all; for God knows His own" is usually rephrased as "Kill them all, God will sort them out." It was attributed by Caesar of Heisterbach, a papal representative and military leader of the Cathar Crusade, during the Abbot's sack of Beziers in southern France around 10,000 residents were massacred because the city had been officially allied with the Cathars, a Christian heresy. This means that this infamous statement was made by a Christian leader in the process of slaughtering Christians whose beliefs differed from the "officially-approved beliefs".
On July 24, 1984, a Utah woman named Brenda Lafferty and her baby daughter Erica were brutally murdered by her husband's older brothers, Dan and Ronald, who were members of an extremist sect of Mormonism. While not denying the killings, Dan Lafferty has steadfastly maintained he is not guilty of homicide. So who's the culprit? None other than the Almighty Himself. Dan Lafferty claims that God instructed him to kill his sister-in-law and little niece.
During a jailhouse interview with Christopher Turgeon he said he has no regret or remorse and truly believes what he did was right because it was ordered by God. "I can't question God's methods," he said. "I just obey." Turgeon was charged with first-degree murder in the March 1998 shooting death of Dan Jess, a Mountlake Terrace man.
Tragically there are countless examples of people who have killed in the name of God. Their spiritual justification raises troubling questions about the legitimacy of some basic theological claims. It's been said that there have been more people killed in the name of God than all the wars combined.
The murder of Michael Servetus is just another example of this type of "De-Formed" religious thinking. John Calvin not only justifies a murder, but in an effort to justify his evil act, he creates a doctrine that shifts the responsibility from himself to God. For more insight on this subject, please read Chosen but Free written by Norm Geisler. Also, there is an interesting perspective on how a pecuilar doctrine is created by John Calvin to cover up the murder of Michael Servetus. An excerpt of this is included below. It is quoted from the book, Did John Calvin Murder Servetus, written by Standford Rives."Calvin's doctrine after the killing of Servetus was shaped by his need to justify his role in the killing of Servetus.. We would expect Caiaphas to do likewise so as not to lose face for having Jesus killed as an alleged blasphemer. Hence, Calvin's doctrine is often dictated by Calvin's policy of protecting himself rather than providing true doctrine, Unless you know Calvin's true responsibility in the Servetus affair, you will never anticipate the need to read Calvin with Skepticism.
Moreover, and more importantly, the Servetus affair was the direct result of the license provided by Calvin's peculiar doctrine...Right up to that time and throughout all his life, Calvin espoused a doctrine that shifted the responsibility of evil in man to God's predetermined will. Calvin insisted that man had no free will even to resist doing evil. Calvin declared that God directs all the evil we do...When we cast our eyes at the killing of Servetus, we can legitimately ask the question: what would one expect from a theologian who saturates his mind with the belief that God directs all murderer's thoughts and God makes murderers murder?
The answer is obvious: with Calvin's bizarre idea, one can license himself from murdering another because it is God's will and direction...then, if you are in God, and God's spirit is in you, then you can freely murder and still enjoy Christ's covering because God directed the evil, and He (God) is beyond every taint. His Glory covers your murder."
John Calvin attempts to justify the murder in his book titled The Defense of Othodox Faith Against the Prodigious Errors of the Spaniard Michael Servetus. In the book Calvin boldly argues that all who oppose God's truth are worse than murderers because murder merely kills the body whereas heresy damns the soul for eternity and that God explicitly instructed Christians to kill heretics and even smite with the sword any city that abandoned the true faith. How is this view any different than Caesar of Heisterbach, or others mentioned in this blog who claim that God instructed them to kill? And is this view worse than Calvin's doctrine of Uncoditional Election which says that God predestines some to salvation, and others to eternal damnation?
The common theme between Caesar of Heisterbach, Dan Lafferty, Christopher Turgeon and John Calvin is they each believed that God directed their murders; thus, justifying their murderous acts. These type of men will debate their religion, fight for it, kill for it, die for it, and will do anything except live for it.
For those who are reading this blog, don't be deceived, John Calvin was a cold blooded murderer who destroys the name of Christ by his violence and hatred while justifying his sin and while masquerading himself under the banner of heaven.
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction"
Also see Blogs: and their related comments
------------
There is no way to defend Calvin's conduct with scripture. Yes, he was loving and caring toward those who agreed with him. Yes, he expended himself and shortened his life through visiting the sick, caring for the flock and preaching continually. But in his treatment of those who disagreed with him he was anything but Christian.
Is not Christ the standard for His followers? And is He not always the same, unchanged by time or culture? How can the crusades be condemned (and rightly so) for all the evil and killing that was done under the banner of the Cross while excusing Calvin for doing much of the same, though on a smaller scale? Calvin's conduct day after day, year after year was the very antithesis of Christianity and those who are truly led by the Spirit of God. We can not escape drawing this conclusion from God's Word. Check out the Bible verses in the comment section of this blog and see how Calvin compares.
But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peacable, gentle, and easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy (James 3:17)
ReplyDeleteHe that saith he abideth in Him (Christ) ought himself also walk, even as He (Christ) walked. (1 John 2:6)
Whoever hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him. (1 John 3:15)
If someone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen, how can he love God whom he has not seen? (1 John 4:20)
Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I have become sounding brass or a clanging cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, but have not love, it profits me nothing. Love suffers long and is kind; love does not envy; love does not parade itself, is not puffed up; does not behave rudely, does not seek its own, is not provoked, thinks no evil; does not rejoice in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth; bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never fails. (1 Corinthians 13:1-8a)
For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love. (Galatians 5:6)
But if you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. (Luke 6:32)
We know that we have passed from death to life, because we love the brethren. He who does not love his brother abides in death. 1 John 3:14
Beloved, let us love one another, for love is of God; and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. He who does not love does not know God, for God is love. In this the love of God was manifested toward us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through Him. In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins. Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. No one has seen God at any time. If we love one another, God abides in us, and His love has been perfected in us. By this we know that we abide in Him, and He in us, because He has given us of His Spirit. And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent the Son as Savior of the world. Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God. And we have known and believed the love that God has for us. God is love, and he who abides in love abides in God, and God in him. Love has been perfected among us in this: that we may have boldness in the day of judgment; because as He is, so are we in this world. There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves torment. But he who fears has not been made perfect in love. We love Him because He first loved us. If someone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen, how can he love God whom he has not seen? And this commandment we have from Him: that he who loves God must love his brother also. (1John 4:7-21)
1) When is it justifiable for a Christian to murder another person? 2) Can John Calvin be Scripturally justified for murdering Michael Servetus? 3) Does a murderous hate, according to Scripture, render one spiritually unable to accurately interpret the Scriptures?
ReplyDeleteTo kill a man is not to defend doctrine. It is to kill a man (Castillio)
ReplyDelete"God does not bring war upon us. We bring it upon ourselves. Man's inhumanity to others is not God-driven."
Seldom if ever in religious history has posthumous insult been more violent or odius, or more self-righteously used in the service of God"
The question for John Piper was "would you change anything about John Calvin?" His answer "If I could change one thing about John Calvin, it would be that he wasn't involved in the Servetus affair". Mr. Piper, a well known Calvinist acknowledges that Calvin supported the execution of Michael Servetus. In an effort to minimize the impact of this cruel and un-Christian act, Piper makes a passive attempt to claim that Calvin did not want Servetus burned at the stake. However, history tells a different story. Furthermore, while the Servetus affair is John Calvin's most well known murder, it wasn't the only murder ordered by John Calvin, infact, Calvin was responsible for the murders and torturing of numerous individuals - all in the name of God!
ReplyDeleteDon't just blindly follow the Calvinist propaganda that John Calvin was a Godly man. Do your own research. Put my claims to the test.
The burning of Michael Servetus . We now come to the dark chapter in the history of Calvin which has cast a gloom over his fair name, and exposed him, not unjustly, to the charge of intolerance and persecution. On October 27, 1553 John Calvin, the founder of Calvinism, had Michael Servetus, the Spanish physician, burned at the stake just outside of Geneva for his doctrinal heresies.
ReplyDeleteLet it be noted that the Calvinists of Geneva put half-green wood around the feet of Servetus and a wreath strewn with sulfur on his head. It took over thirty minutes to render him lifeless in such a fire, while the people of Geneva stood around to watch him suffer and slowly die! Just before this happened, the record shows:
"Farel walked beside the condemned man, and kept up a constant barrage of words, in complete insensitivity to what Servetus might be feeling. All he had in mind was to extort from the prisoner an acknowledgement [sic] of his theological error -- a shocking example of the soulless cure of souls. After some minutes of this, Servetus ceased making any reply and prayed quietly to himself. When they arrived at the place of execution, Farel announced to the watching crowd: 'Here you see what power Satan possesses when he has a man in his power. This man is a scholar of distinction, and he perhaps believed he was acting rightly. But now Satan possesses him completely, as he might possess you, should you fall into his traps.'
When the executioner began his work, Servetus whispered with trembling voice: 'Oh God, Oh God!' The thwarted Farel snapped at him: 'Have you nothing else to say?' This time Servetus replied to him: 'What else might I do, but speak of God!' Thereupon he was lifted onto the pyre and chained to the stake. A wreath strewn with sulfur was placed on his head. When the faggots were ignited, a piercing cry of horror broke from him. 'Mercy, mercy!' he cried. For more than half an hour the horrible agony continued, for the pyre had been made of half-green wood, which burned slowly. 'Jesus, Son of the eternal God, have mercy on me,' the tormented man cried from the midst of the flames ...."
Walter Nigg, The Heretics (Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1962)
Continued...
ReplyDeleteIs it possible for a man such as John Calvin to have been a "great theologian" and at the same time to act in this reprehensible way and afterwards show no remorse? Dear reader, do you have a heart that could, like John Calvin, burn another person at the stake?
Let us illustrate this another way. Suppose a man from your congregation with a reputation for being a spiritual leader captured your neighbor's dog, chained it to a stake, then used a small amount of green kindling to slowly burn the dog to death. What would you think of such a person, especially if he afterwards showed no remorse? Would you want him to interpret the Bible for you?
To make the matter even worse for John Calvin, a person, unlike a dog, is created in the image of God! Like it or not, we can only conclude from this evidence that John Calvin's heart was darkened, and not enlightened, as a result of his murderous hate for Servetus. At best, Calvin was spiritually blinded by this hate and therefore, spiritually hindered from rightly dividing the word of truth. At worst, which was apparently the case, John Calvin himself was unsaved, according to Scripture:
"But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars - their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death" (Rev. 21:8).
"We know that we have come to know him if we obey his commands. The man who says, 'I know him,' but does not do what he commands is a liar and the truth is not in him" (1 Jn. 2:3,4).
How Should A Heretic Be Dealt With?
How should a heretic or any false teacher be dealt with, that is, if one is willing to abide by the Biblical guidelines? Paul wrote Titus and touched upon this very issue, which first starts out as a qualification for eldership in the church:
"He [the elder] must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it. For there are many rebellious people, mere talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision group they must be silenced, because they are ruining whole households by teaching things they ought not to teach -- and that for the sake of dishonest gain" (Titus 1:9-11).
Clearly, then, a false teacher should be "silenced," not by having him killed, as Calvinism's founder did, but by refuting him with Scripture. This is the true Christian method.
If Calvin's example is the standard, the next time a cult member comes to our door, we should physically overpower them, bind them to a stake, and make human candles out of them. Can you imagine a professing Christian doing this, much less a reputed theologian? If done, could you force yourself to believe such a person was truly saved and adhere to his unique, doctrinal distinctives?
Also, false teachers should be openly named as Paul openly named Hymenaeus and Philetus who were destroying the faith of some of the Christians whom Paul knew:
John Calvin (Continued)
ReplyDelete"Their teaching will spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, who have wandered away from the truth. They say that the resurrection has already taken place, and they destroy the faith of some" (2 Tim. 2:17,18).
This is also an important preventative against a false teacher's spiritual poison.
Why did Calvin grossly violate these Scriptural guidelines? Since Paul's Holy Spirit inspired directives (and example) regarding how to deal with a heretic were diametrically opposed by Calvin, isn't it safe to assume that Calvin was governed by a different spirit than Paul had?
"No event has more influenced history's judgment of Calvin than the role he played in the capture and execution of the Spanish physician and amateur theologian Michael Servetus in 1553. This event has overshadowed everything else Calvin accomplished and continues to embarrass his modern admirers."
Two important questions remain: (1) Can John Calvin be Scripturally justified for murdering Michael Servetus? (2) Does a murderous hate, according to Scripture, render one spiritually unable to accurately interpret the Scriptures?
"Copied"
"Jacques Gruet was the first victim of Calvin’s discipline who suffered death for sedition and blasphemy. His case is the most famous next to that of Servetus. He was a regular frequenter of taverns, and opposed to any rules in Church and State which interfered with personal liberty. When in church, he looked boldly and defiantly into the face of the preacher. He first adopted the Bernese fashion of wearing breeches with plaits at the knees, and openly defied the discipline of the Consistory which forbade it. Calvin called him a scurvy fellow, and gives an unfavorable account of his moral and religious character, which the facts fully justified.
ReplyDeleteThe Council arrested Jacques Gruet, who had been heard uttering threats against Calvin a few days previously, and had written obscene and impious verses and letters. In his house were found a copy of Calvin’s work against the Libertines with a marginal note, Toutes folies, and several papers and letters filled with abuse of Calvin as a haughty, ambitious, and obstinate hypocrite who wished to be adored, and to rob the pope of his honor.
Gruet was tortured every day for a month, after the inhuman fashion of that age. He confessed that he had affixed the libel, and that the papers found in his house belonged to him; but he refused to name any accomplices. He was condemned for religious, moral, and political offences; being found guilty of expressing contempt for religion; of declaring that laws, both human and divine, were but the work of man’s caprice; and that fornication was not criminal when both parties were consenting; and of threatening the clergy and the Council itself. Gruet was beheaded on the 26th of July, 1547. Click the link to read the entire account and other atrocities committed by Calvin and his followers. History of the Christian Church, Volume VIII: Modern Christianity. The Swiss Reformation.
Jerome Bolsec was a French refugee who opposed John Calvin. He began his Christian life as a Roman Catholic and a former Carmelite monk at Paris and later became Protestant.
ReplyDeleteJerome Bolsec was interested in theology and around 1571 attended the weekly meetings of the pastors of Geneva. Calvin would preach that since the fall of Adam, every aspect of human nature is corrupted depravity and a seed of sin, including reason and will and we are not capable of knowing and choosing God for ourselves. Sinners were pre-destined to hell by the encumbrance of their "original sin" inherited from Adam and we are powerless in the salvation act. According to Calvin's ruthless system, non-elect infants who die would spend eternity in hell. God was made the author of both good and evil and man is deprived of any choice in the matter. Jerome Bolsec was not under the Calvinist spell and it sounded to him that Calvin was suggesting that God is the cause of sin, to him this concept was absurd and deceitful. Jerome envisioned a more personal God that interacts with us with love and mercy.
Bolsec publicly challenged Calvin's teaching on pre-destination. Argueing against the assumption that Christ died only for the elect and faith was a gift settled from eternity, Bolsec said that these doctrines made God a tyrant. The moderation of Bolsec could only be seen as reactionary to a despot like Calvin and Bolsec was accused as being an accomplice of satan, thrown into prison and tried by the little Council of Geneva. Bolsec was not alone in his estimation of the dictator, many others found his teaching deviate and morally offensive. Bolsec was later banished from the city, not for the sake of truth, but for peace. Jerome Bolsec finally returned into the graces of the Roman Catholic Church.
Bolsec got in the final word by publishing "The Life of Calvin" in 1577. This work of revenge charged Calvin with greed, financial misconduct and sexual aberration. This book is only a footnote on the immeasurable division that Calvin has wrought in the Body of Christ. Jerome Bolsec died in 1584.
In the book, For Faith & Freedom, which is cited above, there is a chapter titled: The Double Legacy Of Michael Servetus - It starts on Page 41. It is an excellent account from history that discusses the outrage from both Christians & non-Christians on the murder of Michael Servetus. Listed below are excerpts from this chapter. (even non-Christian see the hypocrisy in all this, yet Calvinists do not?)
ReplyDelete"The Scriptures are full of enigmas and inscrutable questions which have been in dispute for over a thousand years without agreement, nor can they be resolved without love which appeases all controversies. Yet on account of these enigmas, the earth is filled with innocent blood...On controversial points we would do better to defer judgement, even as God, who knows us to be guilty, yet postpones judgement and waits for us to amend our lives. To kill a man is not to defend doctrine. It is to kill a man". - Sebastian Castellio (page 41).
"Seldom if ever in religious history has posthumous insult been more violent or odius, or more self-righteously used in the service of God" Earl Morse Wilbur (Page 42)
"We are all heretics in the eyes of those who do not share our views...let us be tolerant towards one another, and let no man condemn another's belief" - Sebastian Castellio (page 42) A rebuttal to John Calvin's justification of executing Servetus.
"Who would wish to be a Christian when he saw that those who confessed the name of Christ were destroyed by Christians themselves with fire, water, and the sword without mercy and more cruelly treated than brigands and murderers? Who would not think Christ as a Moloch, or some such god, if he wished that men should be immolated to him or burned alive. Who would wish to serve Christ on condition that a difference of opinion on a controversial point with those in authority should be punished by burning alive at the command of Christ himself more cruelly than in the bull of Phalaris, even though in the midst of the flames, he should call with a loud voice upon Christ, and shall cry out that he believed in Him. Imagine Christ the judge of all, present. Imagine Him pronouncing the sentence and applying the torch. Who would not hold Christ for Satan? What more can Satan do than burn those who call upon the name of Christ?" - Sebastian Castellio (page 42-43).
"The author's aim (John Calvin) is to justify himself, to attack Servetus, and to prove that Servetus was rightly punished by death. I propose to subject this book to a critical examination. In accordance with his usual controversial manner, Calvin will probably describe me as one of Servetus's desciples, but I hope that no one will thereby be misled. I am not defending the thesis of Servetus, but I am attacking the false thesis of Calvin...I do not even possess a copy of Servetus's books,since Calvin has burned all the copies he could lay his hands on, and I therefor do not know what ideas Servetus put forward...I hope to make clear to everyone what sort of man this (John Calvin) is whom the lust for blood has driven crazy". Sebastian Castellio (page 45).
Calvin's Reign of Terror (part 1)
ReplyDeleteCalvin's Reign of Terror
(*V.I.P. Please Read This*) This is who Calvinists are following (copied)
After some negotiation, Ami Perrin, commissioner for Geneva, persuaded Calvin to return. He did so, though unwillingly, on September 13, 1541. His entry was modest. Geneva was a church-city-state of 15,000 people, and the church constitution now recognized "pastors, doctors, elders and deacons," but the supreme power was given to the magistrate, John Calvin. In November 1552, the Council declared Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion to be a "holy doctrine which no man might speak against." Thus the State issued dogmatic decrees, the force of which had been anticipated earlier, as when Jacques Gruet, a known opponent of Calvin, was arrested, tortured for a month and beheaded on July 26, 1547, for placing a letter in Calvin's pulpit calling him a hypocrite. Gruet's book was later found and burned along with his house while his wife was thrown out into the street to watch. Gruet's death was more highly criticized by far than the banishment of Castellio or the penalties inflicted on Bolsec -- moderate men opposed to extreme views in discipline and doctrine, who fell under suspicion as reactionary. Calvin did not shrink from his self-appointed task. Within five years fifty-eight sentences of death and seventy-six of exile, besides numerous committals of the most eminent citizens to prison, took place in Geneva. The iron yoke could not be shaken off. In 1555, under Ami Perrin, a revolt was attempted. No blood was shed, but Perrin lost the day, and Calvin's theocracy triumphed. John Calvin had secured his grip on Geneva by defeating the very man, Ami Perrin, commissioner of Geneva, who had invited him there.
Calvin forced the citizens of Geneva to attend church services under a heavy threat of punishment. Since Calvinism falsely teaches that God forces the elect to believe, it is no wonder that Calvin thought he could also force the citizens of Geneva to all become the elect. Not becoming one of the elect was punishable by death or expulsion from Geneva. Calvin exercised forced regeneration on the citizens of Geneva because that is what his theology teaches.
Calvin's Reign of Terror (part 2)
ReplyDeleteMichael Servetus, a Spaniard, a physician, a scientist and a Bible scholar was born in Villanova in 1511. He was credited with the discovery of the pulmonary circulation of the blood from the right chamber of the heart through the lungs and back to the left chamber of the heart. He was Calvin's longtime friend in their earlier resistance against the Roman Catholic Church. Servetus, while living in Vienne (historic city in southeastern France), angered Calvin by returning a copy of Calvin's writings, Institutes, with critical comments in the margins. Servetus was arrested by the Roman Catholic Authorities on April 4 but escaped on April 7, 1553. He traveled to Geneva where he attended Calvin's Sunday preaching service on August 13. Calvin promptly had Servetus arrested and charged with heresy for his disagreement with Calvin's theology. The thirty-eight official charges included rejection of the Trinity and infant baptism. Servetus was correct in challenging Calvin's false teaching about infant baptism leading to salvation, but he was heretical in his rejection of the doctrine of the Trinity. Servetus pleaded to be beheaded instead of the more brutal method of burning at the stake, but Calvin and the city council refused the quicker death method. Other Protestant churches throughout Switzerland advised Calvin that Servetus be condemned but not executed. Calvin ignored their pleas and Servetus was burned at the stake on October 27, 1553. Servetus was screaming as he was literally baked alive from the feet upward and suffered the heat of the flames for 30 minutes before finally succumbing to one of the most painful and brutal death methods possible. Servetus had written a theology book, a copy of which Calvin had strapped to the chest of Servetus. The flames from the burning book rose against Servetus' face as he screamed in agony.
John Calvin was proud of his killing of Servetus, bragging and celebrating. Many theological and state leaders criticized Calvin for the unwarranted killing of Servetus, but it fell on deaf ears as Calvin advised others to do the same. Calvin wrote much in following years in a continual attempt to justify his burning of Servetus. Some people claim Calvin favored beheading, but this does not fit charges of heresy for which the punishment as written by Calvin earlier was to be burning at the stake. Calvin had made a vow years earlier that Servetus would never leave Geneva alive if he were ever captured, and Calvin held true to his pledge.
Another victim of Calvin's fiery zeal was Gentile of an Italian sect in Geneva, which also numbered among its adherents Alciati and Gribaldo. More or less Unitarian in their views, they were required to sign a confession drawn up by Calvin in 1558. Gentile signed it reluctantly, but in the upshot he was condemned and imprisoned as a perjurer. He escaped only to be twice incarcerated at Berne where, in 1566, he was beheaded. Calvin also had thirty-four (34) women burned at the stake after accusing them of causing a plague that had swept through Geneva in 1545. John Calvin's actions were very paganistic like his mentor, Saint Augustine. Jesus and all of the Apostles would have abhorred and condemn these blatant mass murders.
Calvin's Reign of Terror (part 3)
ReplyDeleteThe citizens of Geneva hated John Calvin as he clearly stated. In 1554 Calvin wrote "Dogs bark at me on all sides. Everywhere I am saluted with the name of 'heretic,' and all the calumnies that can possibly be invented are heaped upon me; in a word, the enemies among my own flock attack me with greater bitterness than my declared enemies among the papists." Calvin, quoted in Schaff, History, volume 8, page 496. The history of John Calvin's reign of terror in Geneva is undisputed. Calvin himself had historical records kept that have survived to this day.
John Calvin had no love, no compassion, no patience and no tolerance for those who did not believe his Institutes. Criticism of Calvin's Institutes was considered heresy for which the sentence was death by burning at the stake. To his dying day Calvin preached and taught from his works. By no means an aged man, he was worn out in these frequent controversies. On April 25, 1564, he made his will, leaving 225 French crowns, of which he bequeathed ten to his college, ten to the poor, and the remainder to his nephews and nieces. His last letter was addressed to Farel. He was buried without pomp in a spot which is not now ascertainable. In the year 1900 a monument of expiation was erected to Servetus in the Place Champel. Geneva has long since ceased to be the head of Calvinism.
John Calvin's murder of people who held different doctrinal views, his failure to acknowledge or repent from his sins, his incomplete gospel, his placing of his own writings above the Bible, his distortion of God and the Scriptures, and his dependence upon infant baptism places into question his salvation. In all of his writings is not found a clear declaration of his salvation by faith in the birth, life, crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior. Calvin was a cruel, murderous, tyrant who considered himself to be the pope of Geneva. The Bible never advocates harming an individual due to his unbelief or lack of understanding. Jesus taught to "turn the other cheek" instead. None of the Apostles taught action against unbelievers but instead taught the believer to seek them out to present the gospel in love. (COPIED)
While I don't agree with everything that john Piper teaches however,, I do agree with his his following comment "This war will not be won by bullets. It will be won by brokenness and humility and sacrifice. It will be won when we identify with the children in our suffering rather than with the abortionist in his killing.”
ReplyDeletePeople who murder others, as John Calvin did, are not of God. No matter how much Calvinists try, if they are honest, they will have to admit that John Calvin was a tyrant and a murderer.
Hershel Harvell Jr wrote: Oct 17, 2009 Reply[this is good]I have read about some of these executions that have been mentioned here, but I did not read about them in some book that was full of quotes or that was written from those who are biased against Calvin, but I read about this from historians who actually lived during this time and saw what happened and I did not get, from my reading, what all those who posted to this blog believe. Instead I got from my reading the view that Calvin did point out heretics during his ministry at Geneva, but he did not control the magistrate and did not convict nor execute anyone.
ReplyDeleteBut let's say for the argument that he did. Does this in itself automatically rule out that his doctrines were untrue? or does this mean that we should also do away with what he has written? If this is the case then I can throw out part of the scripture because I admit that Moses was a murderer, David was a murderer, and Paul {Saul} was a murderer. Some would argue that Moses and Paul murdered before they knew God, but what about David? If we are to reject theological concepts or what some have written about God based on how they lived and the failures they had, then we could rightly throw out many Psalms because King David wrote many of them.
What I am say is we should never judge doctrine based on whether there are people in that doctrine who have failed God or not. Doctrine should be based on scripture. The Bible is plain about what Calvin taught. The Apostle Paul himself taught exactly what Calvin taught. Election, Predestination, Reprobation, Justification, etc is from God and not from Calvin.
This is why those who have written in the comments section here could not critique history because they judge history by their own times. This is also why they cannot understand God's word because they are interpreting it with contemporary practices and not in the historical
Hershell,
ReplyDeleteThank you for the comments. There is overwhelming evidence that John Calvin was responsible for the murder of Servetus, as well as others, who disagreed with Calvin on religious matters. The video at the top of this blog is an admission from John Piper, a well known Calvinist, that John Calvin was guilty of killing Servetus. Furthermore, there are hundreds of historical accounts that John Calvin was a murderer. For example, there is an excellent book written by Sanford Rives titled "Did John Calvin Muder Michael Servetus". Mr. Rives is a reformed Calvinist and an attorney, who examines the historical evidence you speak of. See: http://www.jesuswordsonly.com/Did-Calvin-Murder-Servetus/calvinfreebookonline.html
Your point that others, such as Paul, Moses and David were murderers completely misses the point since these men were remorseful of their actions and repented from their evil ways. John Calvin never did this, instead he justified his actions and even wrote a book (tract) titled: Defense of Orthodox Faith against the Prodigious Errors of the Spaniard Michael Servetus.
You are correct to point out that doctrine should only be judged by scripture, at the same time, we should also compare the actions of men to scripture. To do anything less, would be a sham. Please consider the historical evidence by Rives. I will provide you with other historical refrences upon request.
Thank you for your comments, and your time.
THE ONLY TRUE RELIGION, IS A RELIGION BASED ON TRUTH
Is it possible? Part 1
ReplyDeleteIs it possible for a man such as John Calvin to have been a "great theologian" and at the same time to act in this reprehensible way and afterwards show no remorse? Dear reader, do you have a heart that could, like John Calvin, burn another person at the stake?
Let us illustrate this another way. Suppose a man from your congregation with a reputation for being a spiritual leader captured your neighbor's dog, chained it to a stake, then used a small amount of green kindling to slowly burn the dog to death. What would you think of such a person, especially if he afterwards showed no remorse? Would you want him to interpret the Bible for you?
To make the matter even worse for John Calvin, a person, unlike a dog, is created in the image of God! Like it or not, we can only conclude from this evidence that John Calvin's heart was darkened, and not enlightened, as a result of his murderous hate for Servetus. At best, Calvin was spiritually blinded by this hate and therefore, spiritually hindered from rightly dividing the word of truth. At worst, which was apparently the case, John Calvin himself was unsaved, according to Scripture:
"But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars - their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death" (Rev. 21:8).
"We know that we have come to know him if we obey his commands. The man who says, 'I know him,' but does not do what he commands is a liar andthe truth is not in him" (1 Jn. 2:3,4).
How Should A Heretic Be Dealt With?
How should a heretic or any false teacher be dealt with, that is, if one is willing to abide by the Biblical guidelines? Paul wrote Titus and touched upon this very issue, which first starts out as a qualification for eldership in the church:
"He [the elder] must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it. For there are many rebellious people, mere talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision group they must be silenced, because they are ruining whole households by teaching things they ought not to teach -- and that for the sake of dishonest gain" (Titus 1:9-11).
Clearly, then, a false teacher should be "silenced," not by having him killed, as Calvinism's founder did, but by refuting him with Scripture. This is the true Christian method.
If Calvin's example is the standard, the next time a cult member comes to our door, we should physically overpower them, bind them to a stake, and make human candles out of them. Can you imagine a professing Christian doing this, much less a reputed theologian? If done, could you force yourself to believe such a person was truly saved and adhere to his unique, doctrinal distinctives?
Also, false teachers should be openly named as
Clearly, then, a false teacher should be "silenced," not by having him killed, as Calvinism's founder did, but by refuting him with Scripture. This is the true Christian method.
ReplyDeleteIf Calvin's example is the standard, the next time a cult member comes to our door, we should physically overpower them, bind them to a stake, and make human candles out of them. Can you imagine a professing Christian doing this, much less a reputed theologian? If done, could you force yourself to believe such a person was truly saved and adhere to his unique, doctrinal distinctives?
Also, false teachers should be openly named as Paul openly named Hymenaeus and Philetus who were destroying the faith of some of the Christians whom Paul knew:
"Their teaching will spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, who have wandered away from the truth. They say that the resurrection has already taken place, and they destroy the faith of some" (2 Tim. 2:17,18).
This is also an important preventative against a false teacher's spiritual poison.
Why did Calvin grossly violate these Scriptural guidelines? Since Paul's Holy Spirit inspired directives (and example) regarding how to deal with a heretic were diametrically opposed by Calvin, isn't it safe to assume that Calvin was governed by a different spirit than Paul had?
"No event has more influenced history's judgment of Calvin than the role he played in the capture and execution of the Spanish physician and amateur theologian Michael Servetus in 1553. This event has overshadowed everything else Calvin accomplished and continues to embarrass his modern admirers."
Two important questions remain: (1) Can John Calvin be Scripturally justified for murdering Michael Servetus? (2) Does a murderous hate, according to Scripture, render one spiritually unable to accurately interpret the Scriptures?
"Copied"
Justifying a fault doubles it...
ReplyDeleteComments Copied from Brian Baker's Vox Blog: http://brianbaker.vox.com/
ReplyDeleteRecently I read "Did Calvin Murder Servetus?"by Stanford Rives Esq. This volume of erudition was succinct and thoroughly researched. The author listed over 300 bibliographical sources and had 990 footnotes. This volume told the sordid affair of the murder of Michael Servetus by John Calvin the reformer,who lived in Geneva,Switzerland. It became evident that John Calvin had Michael Servetus burned to the stake because Servetus dared to correct the supercilious John Calvin and his errant theology. Calvin did not take any criticism, it grew him him like a cancer and given the chance, like Caine acted out his hatred, and murdered Michael Servetus. Servetus had written to John Calvin and stated that Calvin had a demon because of his doctrine of infant baptism. Servetus knew the scriptures, but because Calvin adored the words of Augustine, he made infant baptism a pillar of his teaching. Calvin also failed to comprehend the words of the apostle Paul and developed a teaching on predestination. Calvin in his misdirected intelligence, actually made God the author of sin.
When one Jacques Gruet posted a handbill opposing Calvin, he was arrested, tried and executed for blaspheming God and slandering the local authorities. Wrote Calvin, "With God and His Sacred Scriptures before our eyes we say, in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, Amen:...We condemn you, Jacques Gruet, to be taken to Champel and there have your body attached to a stake and burned to ashes and so you shall finish your days to give an example to others who would commit the like".
ReplyDeleteThis is Calvin-ISM not Christianity,
Hershel,
ReplyDeleteI'm not certain as to what you are trying to say on this subject. It seems as though you are making the argument that God condones murder.
On October 17, 2009, you say, "Does this (murder) in itself automatically rule out that his doctrines were untrue? Or does this mean that we should also do away with what he has written? If this is the case then I can throw out part of the scripture because I admit that Moses was a murderer, David was a murderer, and Paul {Saul} was a murderer".
First of all, you are equating the works of John Calvin to the same level as the Holy Scriptures. Yes, God used imperfect people, such as Paul, in the construction of the Bible, but there is a MAJOR difference between the holy scriptures and the writings of John Calvin; The scriptures are inspired by God, where as the writings of John Calvin are not. The Bible is infallible, whereas, Calvin's works are not; thus, just because God used imperfect people, such as Paul, does not invalidate the Bible, nor does it make the Bible imperfect. You are comparing apples to oranges in your argument above and it is not relative to the subject matter that we are discussing.
Based on the comments that you have made, It seems as though you are trying to justify the murderous acts of Calvin by using the examples of Moses, David and Paul, but you fail to see the MAJOR differences between their actions and John Calvin's.
We can debate whether Moses showed remorse or not, and whether the Egyptian's death was accidental or intentional, but the fact remains that Moses did not premeditate the killing of the Egyptian is certain. Not so with John Calvin. Not only was the murder of Servetus calculated and premeditated, but also Calvin later wrote a book titled The Defense of Orthodox Faith against the Prodigious Errors of the Spaniard Michael Servetus, where he justified the killing and extinction of Servetus and others like him.
You also gave examples of Paul and David in your argument. Again, you seem to miss the Major differences here. With Paul, yes - he was a murderer, but that was before he believed, not afterwards. And with David, yes -what he did was wrong, but he was sorry for what he had done, and he did not justify his actions by twisting God's Word to conform it to his sin. Again, not so with John Calvin. John Calvin never repented from his ways. He never showed remorse and instead justified his murderous actions all the way to his grave. Three years prior to Calvin's death, he wrote in 1561: "Such monsters (i.e the Anabaptists) should be exterminated, as I have exterminated Michael Servetus the Spaniard". If you don't believe me, just read the history books, or at least read The Defense of Orthodox Faith against the Prodigious Errors of the Spaniard Michael Servetus written by John Calvin himself.
One final thing, many Calvinists, including yourself, seem to making relative truth arguments, by claiming that we can't be critical of John Calvin's actions because that was what people did back then. This is a weak argument and can not be reconciled with the Word of God. Absolute Truth, must be objective, universal & constant and must be in alignment with the Bible; otherwise, it is un-true.
In closing, I have three questions for you: 1) When is it justifiable for a Christian to murder another person? 2) Can John Calvin be Scripturally justified for murdering Michael Servetus? 3) Does a murderous hate, according to Scripture, render one spiritually unable to accurately interpret the Scriptures? 4) One final question: If you are chosen by God to be saved, than how do you know for certain that you are among God's elect?
Justifying a Fault Doubles It!
---------------
Continued...
ReplyDeleteThere are many Calvinists who claim that Calvinism is the Gospel. However, the Bible gives a completely different account of what the Gospel is. So which one is correct, the Calvinist account or the Biblical account?
The simple test to determine if Calvinism is the Gospel or not, is to open the Bible and read for yourself what the Gospel is. Then compare it to what the Calvinist says.. You will find the two don't match.
Moreover, in your assessment of Calvinism, please consider the following questions:
1) If Calvinism is the Gospel, then logic holds that the Gospel was lost or non- existent until John Calvin came along, which was not until the 16th century. Does this mean that Christians who lived before John Calvin were lost because the Gospel did not exist?
2) If John Calvin was a murderer, and if Calvin's writings advocate the killing and extinction of non-believers (or non-Calvinists), can we claim that Calvin's works are of God and biblically based?
3) If Calvinism’s view that God has created a master list before creation to determine which people are saved, and which people are dammed, then why waste time on evangelism or Christian missionary work? Or why even pray for the lost?
4) If John Calvin's writings are proven to be wrong on some points, such as his belief in pedo-baptism and that God is the author of evil, then how reliable are his other doctrines?
5) Do Calvinists follow Christ or Calvin? Usually, the name of a religion or a denomination will reflect its core beliefs; thus, when a person says they are a Christian, this usually implies what this person believes. So what does it mean when a person calls themself a Calvinist? The name says it all. However, Calvinists want to have it both ways, they claim they follow both Christ & Calvin. I am not about to say that people who call themselves Calvinists are not Christians, however, I will say I don't believe Calvinism is biblical. The Bible is very clear that we can not serve two masters, and yet this is what Calvinists are precisely doing when they claim they are both a Christian and a Calvinist.
6) If Calvinism is true, and a person is chosen by God to be saved, then how does this person know for sure that they are in fact chosen?
----
Don't you see that Calvinism, is just another "ism". It's a man made philosophical system that has twisted the scriptures and are preaching a different Gospel. John Calvin was a murderer, plain and simple - This is a fact, that can not be denied. His doctrines, such as pedo-baptism, are rejected by most Christians, including most Calvinists. And yet, Calvinists want us to believe his writings are trustworthy?
Unfortunately for those who make the claim that Calvinism is the Gospel, they are basing their beliefs on a man, rather than the sovereign God and His infallible Word, and, as a result, they are following after a much different Gospel than what is described in the Bible.
"But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed" Galatians 1:8-9
There is no way to defend Calvin's conduct with scripture. Yes, he was loving and caring toward those who agreed with him. Yes, he expended himself and shortened his life through visiting the sick, caring for the flock and preaching continually. But in his treatment of those who disagreed with him he was anything but Christian.
ReplyDeleteIs not Christ the standard for His followers? And is He not always the same, unchanged by time or culture? How can the crusades be condemned (and rightly so) for all the evil and killing that was done under the banner of the Cross while excusing Calvin for doing much of the same, though on a smaller scale? Calvin's conduct day after day, year after year was the very antithesis of Christianity and those who are truly led by the Spirit of God. We can not escape drawing this conclusion from God's Word. Check out the Bible verses in the comment section of this blog and see how Calvin compares.