Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.
The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 10 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
The Kingdom that Turned the World Upside Down  /  Chapter 32, The New Zion in Geneva  /  Discussion Questions
All Questions
Question 10
Calvin denied Jesus introduced new moral/lifestyle teachings beyond Moses and argued that what was “holy and lawful back then cannot be forbidden to Christians today”; how does that claim reshape Christian ethics around war, civil office, coercion, and violence, and what concrete choices would you need to reconsider if Jesus truly did bring a new way of life for His people?
Another way to ask: Calvin said Jesus didn’t bring new lifestyle teachings beyond Moses, so what was allowed back then is still allowed now. How does that affect Christian choices about war, government power, forcing others, and violence—and what would you rethink if Jesus really did call His people to a new way of life?

Direct Answer In the transcript, Calvin’s claim effectively carries Old Testament models of magistracy, sword-use, and state-enforced religion into Christianity, making coercion and even war potentially “holy and lawful” for Christians. If Jesus truly brought a new way, Bercot implies Christians would need to reconsider using the sword to defend the church and treating the state as God’s kingdom.

Support from Transcript:

  • Calvin said there is no “different rule of life…than what the people of old had,” urging Christians to cling to “the law of Moses.”
  • He concluded: “an occupation that was considered holy and lawful back then cannot be forbidden to Christians today.”
  • The Helvetic Confession assigns magistrates to “draw the sword,” punish, banish, suppress heretics, execute, and even wage war “in the name of God.”
  • Calvin defended Christian use of temporal power by appealing to OT judges and kings (David, Hezekiah, Josiah) and Daniel.
  • Bercot counters with Jesus: disciples did not fight because His kingdom is “not of this world.”
  • He concludes Calvin’s “new Zion” was an earthly kingdom maintained like other states.
Discussion Follow-ups What specific roles or actions (political power, coercive enforcement, violence for “religion”) become questionable if Jesus’ kingdom operates by different principles? How should Christians relate to the state if church and government are not “twin parts” of God’s kingdom?

Jumpstarter 10 of 10
Back Questions Done