How Calvin justified persecuting his opponents

John Calvin’s interpretation of the Bible justified the murder of his theological opponents. He himself did not cut off any heads or light any fires that burned human heretics alive, but John Calvin’s preaching from the Old and New Testaments claimed those capital punishments aligned with God’s interests.

How so? Calvin did not believe all Old Covenant laws had been set aside by the New Covenant Jesus inaugurated. He didn't buy into the plain sense of Hebrews: “God has made the first covenant obsolete” (Hebrews 8:13). He maneuvered around Paul’s conclusion: “the Law became a tutor to lead us to Christ and now that faith has come we are no longer under a tutor” (Galatians 3:24-25; cf. Rom 10:4). Calvin dismissed this data from the New Testament and decided the moral laws in the Old Covenant laws of the Torah still applied. And killing people who perverted his pure doctrine was a moral necessity.

Calvin specifically justified capital punishment of heretics with Leviticus 24:16. “The one who blasphemes the name of the Lord should be put to death; all the congregation must stone him. Any foreigner or native who blasphemes the Name should be put to death.”

Jesus’ teaching to “love your enemies” didn’t stop Calvin from approving and promoting the death of his theological enemies. And Paul’s instructions for dealing with people who theologically disagree with you were equally ignored: “A servant of the Lord must not quarrel but must be kind to everyone, be able to teach, and be patient with difficult people. Gently instruct those who oppose the truth. Perhaps God will change those people’s hearts, and they will learn the truth” (2 Timothy 2:24-25). Calvin did not patiently discuss his differences with people who promoted competing ideas. Calvin requested beheadings, made death threats, and praised God for orchestrating the torture of heretics.

Calvin spelled out his theologically reinforced vengeance in a personal letter:
“I am persuaded that it is not without the special will of God that, apart from any verdict of the judges, the criminals have endured protracted torment at the hands of the executioner.” - Calvin's letter to Farel on 24 July (for more words directly from Calvin’s pen, read Selected Works of John Calvin)
Calvin believed God made sure criminals didn’t die quickly when tortured. This vengeful attitude and his support for outdated Old Covenant laws that legislated capital punishment for competing theologians that challenged his preferred doctrines look more like ISIS than Jesus.

John Calvin’s Fight Against Heretics

Personal correspondence and city council records betray John Calvin’s extraordinary influence in Geneva. Although he was asked to leave in 1538 when he enforced his strict moral standards and pushed for the church’s independent power to excommunicate people, Genevan officials invited him to return in 1541 to resolve church divisions. Upon his return, the city council approved his Ecclesiastical Ordinances that included the establishment of the Consistory. The Consistory, a church court that oversaw the discipline of the citizens of Geneva, met every Thursday to review cases (This book is a chronicle of the Consistory’s records from 1542-1544.) John Calvin led the court. Although the Consistory did not have the power to imprison, exile, or kill those who were guilty, Calvin could still convince the city magistrates to wield such power when his theological opponents contradicted him.

When Jacques Gruet, a theologian with differing views, placed a letter in Calvin’s pulpit calling him a hypocrite, he was arrested, tortured for a month and beheaded on July 26, 1547. Gruet's own theological book was later found and burned along with his house while his wife was thrown out into the street to watch.

Michael Servetus, a Spaniard, physician, scientist and Bible scholar, suffered a worse fate. He was Calvin's longtime acquaintance who resisted the authority of the Roman Catholic Church. However, he angered Calvin by returning a copy of Calvin's Institutes with critical comments in the margins. So what did Calvin do? You can read his resolution from a personal letter he wrote to a friend:
“Servetus offers to come hither, if it be agreeable to me. But I am unwilling to pledge my word for his safety, for if he shall come, I shall never permit him to depart alive, provided my authority be of any avail.” - Letter to Farel, 13 February 1546
The next time Servetus attended Calvin's Sunday preaching service on a visit, Calvin had him arrested and charged with heresy. The 38 official charges included rejection of the Trinity and infant baptism. The city magistrates condemned him to death. Calvin pleaded for Servetus to be beheaded instead of the more brutal method of burning at the stake, but to no avail. Some people see Calvin’s compassion in pursuing a more humane method of death, but ultimately he supported killing Servetus and all such heretics.
 
Continued :

On October 27, 1553, green wood was used for the fire so Servetus would be slowly baked alive from the feet upward. For 30 minutes he screamed for mercy and prayed to Jesus as the fire worked its way up his body to burn the theology book strapped to his chest as a symbol of his heresy. Calvin summarized the execution this way:
“Servetus . . . suffered the penalty due to his heresies, but was it by my will? Certainly his arrogance destroyed him not less than his impiety. And what crime was it of mine if our Council, at my exhortation, indeed, but in conformity with the opinion of several Churches, took vengeance on his execrable blasphemies?” - Calvin
How could such torture be condoned? In November 1552 the Geneva Council declared Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion to be a "holy doctrine which no man might speak against." Disagreeing with Calvin’s view of God was a violation warranting the death penalty according to the way John Calvin interpreted Leviticus 24:16. The Geneva city council records describe one verdict where a man who publicly protested against John Calvin’s doctrine of predestination was flogged at all the city’s main intersections and then expelled (“The Minutes Book of the Geneva City Council, 1541-59,” translated by Stefan Zweig, Erasmus: The Right to Heresy). You did not get to disagree with Calvin in this town.
Bad Bible Interpretation Can Kill People

John Calvin argued:
“Whoever shall now contend that it is unjust to put heretics and blasphemers to death, knowingly and willingly incur their guilt. It is not human authority that speaks, it is God who speaks and prescribes a perpetual rule for His Church.”
Most bad Bible interpretation causes disappointment in an unbiblical god, anxiety about what he demands, or a false sense of security rooted in biased beliefs. But it can kill. John Calvin justified murder with his bad Bible interpretation. It isn't representative of his entire life or his contribution to the Protestant church, but we are wise to learn from a mistake he made.

John Calvin followed Augustine’s biblical justification for burning heretics. Augustine excused extreme measures through his interpretation of Jesus’ Great Banquet parable in Luke 14:16-24. When the master could not fill up his banquet in the parable, he commanded his servants in Luke 14:23 “to compel people to come so that my house will be filled.” Augustine and Calvin believed burning heretics would “compel” more people to enter their house of God. Interpreting “compulsion” as a license to kill without consideration for Jesus’ other teaching to “love your enemies” is a major hermeneutical error. Any part of Jesus’ teaching should be interpreted in light of the whole.
 
We should probably exhume John Calvin, drag his corpse into a court of Law, convict him of his crimes, and punish him for them. I believe we have precedent for a Pope trying a dead pope for their crimes.
 
We should probably exhume John Calvin, drag his corpse into a court of Law, convict him of his crimes, and punish him for them. I believe we have precedent for a Pope trying a dead pope for their crimes.
Can I ask you a few serious questions?

Do you see any evidence of the fruit of the spirit in his life ?

How can any follower of Jesus justify persecuting those who disagree with you theologically ?

Doesn’t Jesus teach us we will know them by their fruits ?
 
Matthew 5:43-48
“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Jesus' command also appears in Luke 6:27 and Luke 6:35

Matt 22:37-40
And He said to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the great and foremost commandment. 39 The second is like it, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets.”

1 John 2:3-6
3 By this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments. 4 The one who says, "I have come to know Him," and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him; 5 but whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God has truly been perfected. By this we know that we are in Him: 6 the one who says he abides in Him ought himself to walk in the same manner as He walked.

1 John 3:14-19
14 We know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love the brethren. He who does not love abides in death. 15 Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer; and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him. 16 We know love by this, that He laid down His life for us; and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren. 17 But whoever has the world's goods, and sees his brother in need and closes his heart against him, how does the love of God abide in him? 18 Little children, let us not love with word or with tongue, but in deed and truth.


1 John 4:7-14
7 Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God; and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. 8 The one who does not love does not know God, for God is love. 9 By this the love of God was manifested in us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world so that we might live through Him. 10 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. 11 Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. 12 No one has seen God at any time; if we love one another, God abides in us, and His love is perfected in us. 13 By this we know that we abide in Him and He in us, because He has given us of His Spirit.

1 John 4:16-21
16 We have come to know and have believed the love which God has for us. God is love, and the one who abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him. 17 By this, love is perfected with us, so that we may have confidence in the day of judgment; because as He is, so also are we in this world. 18 There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves punishment, and the one who fears is not perfected in love. 19 We love, because He first loved us. 20 If someone says, "I love God," and hates his brother, he is a liar; for the one who does not love his brother whom he has seen, cannot love God whom he has not seen. 21 And this commandment we have from Him, that the one who loves God should love his brother also.

hope this helps !!!
 
Can I ask you a few serious questions?
Sure.

Do you see any evidence of the fruit of the spirit in his life ?
Nope, but that doesn’t count for much since you would get the same answer if you asked about:
  • Jerome
  • Augustine
  • John Wesley
  • Mother Teresa
  • Billy Graham
I really don’t know any of these people well enough to pass judgement on their “fruit” (or lack of fruit).

How can any follower of Jesus justify persecuting those who disagree with you theologically ?
Are you really prepared to follow that to its logical conclusion?
We need to reject the salvation of everyone living in the 18th Century, 17th Century, 16th Century, 15th Century, 14th Century because their “fruit” fails the modern test of Christian Love.
Technically, we may need to reject Peter, Paul, Barnabas, Mark and Luke based on the fights recorded in the book of Acts and Jesus command to Love one another.

Doesn’t Jesus teach us we will know them by their fruits ?
Sort of. What he actually says is …

Matthew 7:15-20 [NASB]
"Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn [bushes,] nor figs from thistles, are they? So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. So then, you will know them by their fruits.

I am not an expert, but it sort of seems more like Jesus will be doing most of the inspecting and we are just to “beware”. Of course, if we ARE to inspect the fruit, then it also talks about “burning” the branches … which is what you are complaining because they DID (in the 1500’s).
 
@civic, you do know that one can be a murderer of man without literally killing his body? I believe you are guilty of murdering John Calvin's character, from what I have read concerning him. MIchael Servetus was a brilliant man, and so was Calvin, after all he wrote the Institutes of the Christian Religion at a young age of 26.

Concerning Michael Servetus, whom I agreed with him more than Calvin on the trinity, and Calvin would agree more with your position, I know, I have read both carefully. Servetus' last word, so history said if one can trust history, which we know is not to be trusted 100% since history is written by Victors, Not the loser! HIs words were:
"Jesus, Son of the eternal God, have mercy on me. These words reflected his anti-Trinitarian views as you would teach, as he did not believe Jesus was the eternal Son of God, but THE Son of the eternal God.
He did not reject Jesus being God in the flesh, he just rejected Jesus being the Eternal Son! Which he should have! Calvin was wrong on this point, yet on many others subjects he had truth, except baptising babies, which is heresy. I do not know all that Michael Servetus taught and believe since his works were burned with him, which both were wrong, I will add this: Michael Servetus went to Geneva to confront Calvin ~ Calvin did not have others go and search for him~so, Servetus' put himself in harm's way by going to Geneva to confront Calvin. It was the city's magistrates of Geneva that put him to death, not Calvin ! Without history we can see this was wrong on Servetus' part. But, we are not called to preach about men, pro or con, so I would not waste much time on this, since we follow the scriptures not man.
 
Last edited:
@civic, you do know that one can be a murderer of man without literally killing his body? I believe you are guilty of murdering John Calvin's character, from what I have read concerning him. MIchael Servetus was a brilliant man, and so was Calvin, after all he wrote the Institutes of the Christian Religion at a young age of 26.

Concerning Michael Servetus, whom I agreed with him more than Calvin on the trinity, and Calvin would agree more with your position, I know, I have read both carefully. Servetus' last word, so history said if one can trust history, which we know is not to be trusted 100% since history is written by Victors, Not the loser! HIs words were:

He did not reject Jesus being God in the flesh, he just rejected Jesus being the Eternal Son! Which he should have! Calvin was wrong on this point, yet on many others subjects he had truth, except baptising babies, which is heresy. I do not know all that Michael Servetus taught and believe since his works were burned with him, which both were wrong, I will add this: Michael Servetus went to Geneva to confront Calvin ~ Calvin did not have others go and search for him~so, Servetus' put himself in harm's way by going to Geneva to confront Calvin. It was the city's magistrates of Geneva that put him to death, not Calvin ! Without history we can see this was wrong on Servetus' part. But, we are not called to preach about men, pro or con, so I would not waste much time on this, since we follow the scriptures not man.
Your church history is skewed. I posted his hatred tiered believers who disagreed with his theology and he predicted them , ran them out of his country.

Jesus and the Apostles say he was not of God. Calvin used the OT law abusing it to uphold the death penalty for his opponents .

Straight from the pit of hell. He was worse that the Pharisees who opposed Jesus and was just like Saul when he was unsaved persecuting believers.
 
@civic
Straight from the pit of hell. He was worse that the Pharisees who opposed Jesus and was just like Saul when he was unsaved persecuting believers.
You need to read up more than what you thus far. Servetus was already a haunted man from two different nations had already pronounced death to him by the Catholic Church of those nations. Calvin was more in line with Catholics, you need to read more civic on the Trinity and what Calvin and the Catholic church taught and what Michael Servetus taught, what little we know of him since all of his works were burned, which to me is sad, since we cannot judge righteously, without having all truth before us from both sides.

Remember, we can murder a person without killing their body with a false testimony concerning someone we know little about, other than history, and by just repeating what others have written.

Matthew 12:36​

“But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.”
 
@civic

You need to read up more than what you thus far. Servetus was already a haunted man from two different nations had already pronounced death to him by the Catholic Church of those nations. Calvin was more in line with Catholics, you need to read more civic on the Trinity and what Calvin and the Catholic church taught and what Michael Servetus taught, what little we know of him since all of his works were burned, which to me is sad, since we cannot judge righteously, without having all truth before us from both sides.

Remember, we can murder a person without killing their body with a false testimony concerning someone we know little about, other than history, and by just repeating what others have written.

Matthew 12:36​

“But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.”
Servetus was not the only one he condemned to death learn your church history about the evil man you are defending. Calvin was filled with hate to all that opposed his views. He was just like Saul.
 
@civic
Servetus was not the only one he condemned to death learn your church history about the evil man you are defending. Calvin was filled with hate to all that opposed his views. He was just like Saul.
He was the only one that was put to death in Geneva! Of course many were for much less by the RCC. But, if my memory serves me well, MS was the only one that was put to death in Geneva~and, btw, he would have never had been put to death there if he did not go there to confront Calvin, that was a big mistake on his part.

Btw, I'm not defending John Calvin, I said he believed more like you on the trinity than me ~ MS and I believe much alike, what little we know of him. I'm against putting any to death over biblical doctrines, I'll leave that to God. Those days are so much different than our days, so much different.
 
Last edited:
@civic

He was the only one that was put to death in Geneva! Of course many were for much less by the RCC. But, if my memory serves me well, MS was the only one that was put to death in Geneva~and, btw, he would have never had been put to death there if he did not go there to confront Calvin, that was a big mistake on his part.

Btw, I'm not defending John Calvin, I said he believed more like you on the trinity than me ~ MS and I believe much alike, what little we know of him. I'm against putting any to death over biblical doctrines, I'll leave that to God. Those days are so much different than our days, so much different.
getting the trinity right has nothing to do with a persons salvation.

the era one lived in the past has nothing whatsoever to do with obedience to Christ.

the Apostles were living proof- they died as martyrs for their faith never returning evil for evil. They left judgement for Christ unlike calvin who had many people condemned. The OP clearly shows the history od calvin and how he justified the deaths of many.
 
@civic~we both are at the mercy of history and that it true. For the first time I'm posting something I just read on


I never have read hardly anything from this sight, other than what others have posted, but as I was using google, this came up first.
 
Back
Top Bottom