John Calvin was a Monster

Peter Lumpkins sets straight James White on Calvin’s execution of Servetus:

It’s a joke to suggest Servetus broke no laws in Geneva. Servetus was guilty of heresy which was against the law (4:28).
Not so fast. At the time of Servetus’ arrest, no laws in Geneva had been broken. We apparently have few, if any, records of Servetus’ doing anything but renting a hotel room and attending church the next day. He’d broken no laws in Geneva. Was it a crime to have been convicted of heresy by Rome? If so, John Calvin and every Geneva pastor should also have been arrested as well. Thus at the time the authorities came and pulled Servetus from Calvin’s church, Barker was correct; Servetus had broken no laws of Geneva. From all indication, Servetus was only passing through and already had a boat ticket to Naples (see below). Even so, at the time no law apparently existed in Geneva which called for Servetus’ death even if he was a known heretic. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, “No law, current in Geneva, has ever been adduced as enacting the capital sentence…but in 1535 all the old laws on the subject of religion had been set aside at Geneva; the only civil penalty for religion, retained by the edicts of 1543, was banishment” (Encyclopedia Britannica, Volume 21, 1892, p.685, emphasis added). Hence the author concludes, “The extinct law seems to have been arbitrarily revived” for the specific purpose of putting Servetus to death. According to famed Reformation historian, William Naphy, Servetus “would probably become the first person to be executed for heresy in Geneva…”(William G. Naphy, Calvin and the Consolidation of the Genevan Reformation p.183).

It is recommended to read the entire post. Click here.
For Part 1, click here.

5 comments

  1. I would not be quoting Peter Lumpkins. If I all of this is true (I don’t know), then are we to believe that just because Calvin was a sinner that his theology and gifts to the church are to be discarded?

    If this is the case, then I must discard your post from Peter Lumpkins. For he takes up for and defends a patheological liar. That by the above implied argument makes anything peter lumpkins says irrelevant.

    I submit a better way: each of us have blind spots. each of us are desiring to hold to the Pure Truth of God in Christ. Let us measure the good and the bad against the Word of God and move forward from their.

    Grace and Peace
    -Anon

    1. Thank you for your thoughts.

      The Bible does not fully divorce someone’s actions from their theology:

      Mat 7:15 “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves.
      Mat 7:16 You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles?

      Knowing them by their fruits is a consistent theme in the New Testament. Paul even writes:

      2Co 11:13 For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ.
      2Co 11:14 And no wonder! For Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light.
      2Co 11:15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also transform themselves into ministers of righteousness, whose end will be according to their works.

      Although it is a mistake to say “this guy was evil so we should reject everything he says”, we can definitely say “this guy was evil, stop exalting him and double check his theology.” I don’t know the theology of Peter Lumpkins and quoting him by no means is an endorsement. But his historical post seems legitimate.

      On a side note: The goal of this site is to post a diversity of Open Theism positions, including quotes from Arminians and Calvinists on the issue. I have posted plenty of quotes which I do not fully agree with even from mainstream Open Theist theologians, even from individuals who err greatly on moral issues. The idea is that no one person should assume they have it all figured out. We should avoid hubris.

    2. I don’t think you need John Calvin to know the Bible. Do you think that if Hitler declared, “God is Sovereign! I have been justified by faith! By Sovereign grace! As God’s elect! Terrible sinner that I am, I have murdered millions of persons. However, my faith is in the Sovereignty of God! Therefore, I shall depart this world to my home in Heaven! No repentance for my crimes is necessary. I believe!”

      You see, the fact is that John Calvin declares some doctrines that are actually true. However, John Calvin… like Hitler in the allegory: does not truly know Jesus Christ.

      John Calvin set forth doctrine. But the void of the emptiness of the true love of Jesus should be obvious. The man called for the genocide of Christians worldwide who did not believe in infant baptism: and vehemently urged kings to kill them all! Men, women and children.

      No, I don’t believe that if Hitler would have written the books Calvin wrote: they would be of any value. Because an unregenerate and unrepentant genocider wrote them.

      Hitler and Calvin are equal.

      By their fruits we will know them.

      The Pharisees who murdered Jesus Christ and were unrepentant… likewise could write books on theology.

      You could believe Lucifer was God, remain unrepentant for your sins, NOT BORN AGAIN, never know Jesus: and write everything Calvin wrote. Which is what happened.

      He had NO CONSCIENCE over the murder and genocide of Christian men, women and children that he personally engaged in and promoted and sought to inspire in his conspiracy to genocide true Christians.

Leave a Reply to civilanonymity Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s