Did John Calvin Fall Away and Prove "He Was Never Saved?"

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 beliefs. Hence, the originator of the popular doctrine of "once saved always saved" (known in certain circles as "perseverance of the saints") violated the cry of the Reformation -- "Sola Scriptura" -- by murdering a doctrinal heretic without Scriptural justification. This event was something John Calvin had considered long before Michael Servetus was even captured, for John Calvin wrote his friend and personal associate, Farel, on February 13, 1546 (seven years prior to Michael Servetus' arrest) and went on record as saying:

"If he [Servetus] comes [to Geneva], I shall never let him go out alive if my authority has weight."

Evidently, in that day John Calvin's authority in Geneva, Switzerland had ultimate "weight." This is why some referred to Geneva as the "Rome of Protestantism" and to John Calvin as the "Protestant 'Pope' of Geneva."

During Servetus' trial, John Calvin wrote:

"I hope that the verdict will call for the death penalty."

All of this reveals a side of John Calvin that is not well-known or very appealing, to say the least. Obviously, he had a prolonged, murderous hate in his heart and was willing to violate Scripture to put another to death and in a most cruel way. Yes, after Calvinists were persecuted and put to death by Rome (for not agreeing with Rome)...how did they respond? By putting to death others who didn't agree with THEM.

To "rescue" Servetus from his heresies, Calvin replied with the latest edition of his 'Institutes of the Christian Religion,' which Servetus promptly returned with insulting marginal comments. Despite Servetus's pleas, Calvin, who developed an intense dislike of Servetus during their correspondence, refused to return any of the incriminating material."

Convicted of heresy by the Roman Catholic authorities, Servetus escaped the death penalty by a prison break. Heading for Italy, Servetus unaccountably stopped at Geneva, where he had been denounced by Calvin and the Reformers. When Servetus stopped in Geneva, he made the mistake of attending a church service that was being officiated by Calvin. He was recognized and arrested promptly after the service.

"Calvin had him [Servetus] arrested as a heretic. Convicted and burned to death."

Yes, he escaped the death penalty of Rome, only to succumb to the death penalty of a Protestant. Talk about "out of the kettle into the fire"...

From the time that John Calvin had him arrested on August 14th until his condemnation, Michael Servetus spent his remaining days in an atrocious dungeon with no light or heat, little food, and no sanitary facilities.

Let it be noted that the Calvinists of Geneva put half-green wood around the feet of Michael Servetus and a wreath strewn with sulfur on his head. Half green wood burns at a much slower rate of speed with a more intense rate of heat. Sulfur on his head would cause his head to slowly (little by little) ignite like a match. By the time of his death, Michael Servetus would've had the bottom half of his flesh falling off of the bone with the top of his skull completely exposed. 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.

Where in scripture did Christ command such cruel acts of torture?

Where in scripture did Christ command even "humane" acts of slaying "heretics"?

Farel (Calvin's friend and personal associate) 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 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 ...."

Although we essentially have the same in the conversion of the repentant thief (Lk. 23:42,43 cf. Lk. 18:13) and the Scripture, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved" (Acts 2:21; Rom. 10:13), Farel still reckoned Michael Servetus an unsaved man at the end of his life:

"Farel noted that Servetus might have been saved by shifting the position of the adjective and confessing Christ as the Eternal Son rather than as the Son of the Eternal God." How nice of him!

Calvin had thus murdered his enemy, and there is nothing to suggest that he ever repented his crime. The next year he published a defense in which further insults were heaped upon his former adversary in most vindictive and intemperate language.

All of this is most ironic, because it is through Calvin we are taught that if someone falls away from the faith...they were never saved to begin with. If Calvin's actions weren't a prime example of "falling away" I don't know what is.

PART 2: A RESPONSE TO THE EXECUTION OF MICHAEL SERVATUS UNDER THE APPROVED CONSENT, VOTE AND ADVISEMENT OF JOHN CALVIN.

The following is an actual dialogue between myself and someone who was making excuses for John Calvin's murderous acts. It starts out with my reply to him stating Calvin was justified by what he did because that's how people operated in the 1500's. Really? Read on:

"Just imagine if John Wesley and Charles Finney did the VERY SAME THING with people who opposed THEM. Calvinists would be salivating with delight, hypocritical judgment and accusation. But, since the founder of Calvinism is found to be someone who condoned and instigated murder...well then...they respond in making excuses for him.

People who wish to make excuses for Calvin say: "Well, it was the times they lived in. That's how people operated back then" (James White). Really? Is it the "times we live in" that serve as the deciding factor as to whether or not we obey the Bible, or is it the Bible in ANY age that decides this? According to James White, John McArthur and others: it's medieval, torch wielding hypocrites (who are doing the very same things the Catholic church did to them) who decide this.

We shouldn't condone or vote for someone's murder NO MATTER if the laws of our day are in agreement with it or not. The issue isn't "was Servatus a heretic". The issue is...MURDER IS WRONG AND GOD NEVER APPROVES OF IT. Why not rather suffer the persecution of the heretic than to return evil for evil? Where is there to be found even an inkling of "turn the other cheek" in this matter? Calvin was no different than Saul of Tarsus casting his vote for the execution of Stephen...except for the fact Calvin claims he was regenerated and Paul clearly was not.

Worldly or even so called "Protestant" governing bodies are NOT our conscience...nor is their approval or disapproval the deciding factor in what is right and what is wrong. THE BIBLE IS.

And no, I am not an Arminian with an axe to grind. I am merely a Bible believing saint who can see both sides of the equation from the outside-in.

Calvin was wrong. Plain and simple.

And so are the people who try to disassociate Calvin from something he was well associated with, even though he didn't start the fire (Paul never cast a single stone at Stephen either). No, being a murderer doesn't necessarily mean your doctrine is all wrong. And likewise, NOT being a murderer doesn't mean your doctrine is all right. But if I knew a local pastor (whose doctrines were ALL right) but condoned the executions of those who opposed him, I must say I'd be sick to my stomach over the matter-----and I certainly wouldn't sit under his teaching in ANY capacity. I would much rather sit under the ministry of someone who hasn't got it all together, doctrinally speaking-----that doesn't murder those who oppose his "perfection".

Kind of a simple rule to live by isn't it? "If you wouldn't sit under the ministry and teaching of a modern teacher who condones murder...why would you sit under the ministry of a man, who lived centuries ago, that did?"

But, it's a scary thought to ponder; There are some people living today, who claim to be Christian, and a partaker of the Divine nature (does that nature condone murder?) who would more than likely have no problem whatsoever, sitting under the teaching and ministry of a murderer...so long as they were Calvinist and had all of their doctrinal ducks in a row.

Lord help this blind generation who heaps teachers to their itching ears.
P.S Wouldn't it be easier for you Calvinists just to admit he was wrong? Did he die for your sins? If admitting he was wrong, are you any less forgiven of your sins?"
‪#‎iamofpaul ‪#‎iamofcephas ‪#‎heroworship

Calvinist response:
"Sad no one did it to Wesley and Finney, the church would be in much better shape today. Or at least put both of them on a desert island with no hope of escape".

My response: "Yup, another Calvinist lusting after the (potential) murder of those who hold differing opinions. No, the church would be in better shape if all of the people who hold to bitter contempt, vain glory, hatred, pride and self righteousness (even in light of murder) would simply repent. I see the errors with Wesley, Finney, Calvin and YOU...but I wouldn't wish for your murder or exile. I would much rather be on the receiving end of the fire. Name one verse in the New Testament where we are to BURN or execute those who oppose us (even if we're in the right). You can't...because it's not there. One of the works of the flesh listed in Galatians 5:19-20 is MURDER. And one who condones it, wishes for it, or uses his hands to do it, are all equally a murderer. It's the principle of "If you hate a brother in your heart, you are guilty of murder".

I can't believe such things have to be explained to folks who claim to be a "partaker of the divine nature". 2 Peter 1:4-

No, the church would be a better place if people like you repented for their hatred.

And wouldn't it be easier for you Calvinists just to admit Calvin was wrong? Did he die for your sins? If you admit he was wrong, are you any less forgiven of your sins? Perhaps it's time for Calvinists to grapple with the fact that "Calvinism is NOT the Gospel"...nor is Wesley-ism, Finney-ism, You-ism or me-ism: JESUS CHRIST AND HIS ATONING BLOOD IS THE GOSPEL. Now who would argue with that?"
#iamofpaul #iamofcephas #heroworship

Calvinist response:

"You sir are the one with hatred for the true doctrines of God. I am not saying we should go back to putting people to death but the God never revoked the death penalty for blasphemy, therefore the government putting blasphemers to death is not a sin in God's eyes".

My response: "And what you mean by "true doctrines of God" is Calvinism, right? How is me questioning the murderous acts of a man, equate to me hating ANYTHING? I actually agree with a lot of what Calvin taught. But that doesn't mean I am compelled to make excuses for his blatant errors. I can separate the two...the good with the bad. Perhaps if he weren't already on your "pedestal of hero-worship", you Calvinists wouldn't be so preoccupied with setting him back up, when he is knocked down (by his own historically documented actions). Why is it SO hard to admit he failed in one area? Is it because you know, deep down inside, that the sin is so heinous, that your conscience would no longer allow you to partake of his teachings? This is the exact same thing followers of cult leaders do when their leader's sins are exposed.

Funny, one of Calvin's main doctrines (that's still taught today) is that if you fall away, it proves you were never saved.

I wonder, when John Calvin cast his lot to burn Michael Servatus to death for not agreeing with Calvinism...would this be considered "falling away"? Gasp! Of course it couldn't mean John Calvin fell away! For it is by the teachings of Calvin that we learn if one falls away, he was never a genuine believer to begin with. If the shoe fits?

The historical record is devoid of John Calvin EVER repenting of murdering someone who didn't agree with him. If it's wrong for the Catholics to do it; isn't it wrong for a Protestant to do it as well? Oh, but so long as it's over doctrine that's equated as being one in the same with salvation...it's okay then, right? Where in scripture does Christ command such things? The story of Michael Servatus is WELL doccumented and MOST Calvivists pretend it never happened while brushing it under the rug. Why? Because it would appear John Calvin wasn't really saved.

If murder isn't falling away...I don't know what is.

If murder isn't rejecting Christ...I dont know what is.

So if murder is falling away...John Calvin appears to be the ironic victim of his own doctrine. If murder isn't falling away, you are left in the uncomfortable position of making excuses for a well documented murderer. But if murder is falling away (and it is) John Calvin's own doctrine proves he was NEVER saved. I'm not saying he wasn't saved...I'm saying JOHN CALVIN says he was never saved. Yes, John Calvin will stand before the Judgment Seat of Christ. to give an account for his deeds (just like all of us). John Calvin ignored the teaching of a Judgment Seat for believers. Why? Well, when you look at how he conducted himself, it's no wonder. It's no wonder he purported a "once saved always saved" position. But ignoring the Biblical teaching of the judgment seat will in no way deprive you of its reality. 2 Corinthians 5:10 states (to the church) that we will ALL stand before the Judgment Seat of Christ.

And in reply to your excuse for "Biblical murder"...I'm not even going to reply to such tripe and nonsense. Read the sermon on the mount...Foxes Book of Martyrs and Martyrs Mirror...that will be my only reply". Is there also a "Biblical fornication"? You my friend, are treading the same murky waters of those who encourage "Biblical Homosexuality". Why? All so John Calvin's murderous acts appear "godly". Was Calvin crucified for your sins?

May Christ be with you richly brother".

Calvinist response:
"John Calvin did not have murderous acts, he acted in a Godly way to the best of his abilities".

My response: "Let me rephrase your last statement: "John Calvin DID have murderous acts (history cannot be denied). However, he was under the presumption he was acting in a Godly way. Therefore, we must presume Calvin was acting to the best of his abilities, according to his own understanding. But scripture is the measure by which we should do and act: NOT our own understanding or that of the laws of the land. With that said, he was wrong....completely and utterly wrong. Why is this so hard for you to admit?"

Dear brother, do you define what is right and what is wrong by what Calvin did or didn't do? Is your conscience subject to Calvin or to scripture? Is Calvin going to judge you when 1 Corinthians 5:10 becomes a reality? I am not suggesting Calvin was unsaved. I am merely trying to drive the point home that Calvin wasn't crucified for your sins. Are you having a hard time harmonizing how the"perfect" sacrifice of the life of John Calvin can still take away your sins, if indeed he is proven to be wrong? Why is it so hard to admit he was wrong? So long as you equate "denying Christ" as being one in the same with "admitting Calvin was wrong"...I'm not so sure you even know Christ.

I certainly hope you don't believe this...but this is the message you Calvinist's convey when you REFUSE to admit failure in the lives of your founders.

Calvin wasn't perfect...nor are you or I or anyone else. It's okay to admit failure. Failure to do so is a failure in and of itself. Refusing to admit murder is wrong (in any age) is refusal to believe the Word of God. Period. This is just as much a sin as murder itself.

Blessings to you dear brother".

END OF DIALOGUE

Let the reader make up their mind, according to their conscience pitted up against the Word of God, as to which position they will hold.