Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Evangelical
History and Religion
John Calvin: Pastor. Theologian. Immigrant Nuisance?

John Calvin: Pastor. Theologian. Immigrant Nuisance?

Last updated on: September 18, 2026 at 9:38 am by Guest Contributor

0 Comments

John Calvin: Pastor. Theologian. Immigrant Nuisance? 2026-09-18T09:38:17-04:00 Guest Contributor

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

The second part of a guest contributor series by Steven Tyra

In the last installment, I introduced Ludwig Lavater’s advocacy on behalf of Zurich’s immigrant population. Lavater’s concern for the “sojourners” formed an uncomfortable contrast with Reformed writers today arguing that American citizenship should be rooted in ethnic descent or the “right of blood.” Lavater was a native Zuricher of unimpeachable credentials and so could not be accused of motivated reasoning. However, Reformed theology was not just written for migrants but also by them.

Look no further than the career of John Calvin (d. 1564).

Calvin was forced to flee his native France in the wake of the Placards Affair of 1534 and the state persecution of Protestants that followed. He lived most of his adult life as a resident alien in the cities that hosted him, only gaining citizenship in Geneva in late 1559 (less than five years before his death). In other words, he fit neatly into the category of “foreigner” described by Lavater.

Engraving depicting François I’s persecution of Protestants in the years following the Placards Affair

And he was often treated accordingly. Social historians such as William Naphy have documented how Calvin’s conflicts in Geneva were fueled as much by cultural anxiety as by theology. Many of the city-state’s old patrician families resented the growing influence of this foreigner in their midst, whom some simply referred to as “that sinful Frenchman.”[i] Their worst fears were realized when Calvin lobbied the city council to open the gates to waves of Protestant refugees from France, the Low Countries, Italy, the Holy Roman Empire, England, and Scotland—nearly doubling the town’s initial population of around ten thousand in just a few decades.[ii] Even worse, Calvin used his pulpit to demand the construction of a social safety net—schools, hospitals, orphanages—to support the increasingly diverse community.

This was the Geneva that the Scottish refugee John Knox famously dubbed “the most perfect school of Christ that ever was in the earth since the days of the apostles.”[iii] Yet it was no paradise for the old patrician families. If you were to raise the shades of those disgruntled Genevans today, they would tell you the tale of a charismatic immigrant who infiltrated their republic, gained a following, and wielded his influence to transform their culture. And they would not be lying. The Reformation did change Geneva, profoundly. The evidence is written in the stones of the old city even today. I have fond memories of attending worship for several weeks of Summer 2019 in the Auditoire de Calvin, the little chapel that stands next to Saint-Pierre Cathedral. The Church of Scotland still holds weekly English services there in a tradition stretching back to the sixteenth-century refugees—Knox and his colleagues.

New languages in the streets and new faces in the pews were the legacy of Reformed Protestantism no less than fiery sermons or revised liturgy.

The Auditoire de Calvin in Summer 2019. Picture by author.

“Equal to their own blood kinsmen”

Reformed advocates for the “right of blood” in modern America might be tempted to dismiss (or even deplore) Calvin’s cultural legacy in Geneva while still trying to claim his theology. What matters from this perspective are the reformer’s Institutes of the Christian Religion and biblical commentaries, not the hospitals, orphanages, and changing demographics.

But historical reality is not so easily parsed. Scholars have increasingly recognized that Calvin’s lived experience as an exile both shaped his ideas and how he read the Bible. Kenneth J. Woo’s recent John Calvin, Refugee Theologian (Baker Academic, 2025) traces this theme extensively; I recommend it as an entrée for readers new to Calvin Studies as a whole. “The dynamics of refugeeism and exile . . . created conditions of displacement that, in turn, produced the theology that we associate with the reformers” and Calvin above all, Woo writes.[iv] You cannot sever Calvin the theologian from Calvin the migrant.

Two examples from Calvin’s biblical interpretation will illustrate the point. Calvin preached a weekday sermon series on Job over 1554-1555.[v] When he came to chapter 31, he anticipated Lavater’s concern for sojourners, arguing that care for them was an essential mark of Christian righteousness:

Job notably speaks about foreigners (estrangers), just as God commends them throughout all Holy Scripture—and not without cause. Those who are in their own country will have enough support. They will be related to the people there; they will have many means and forms of assistance, and nobody will be able to harm them. On the other hand, poor foreigners are stripped of all aid. They have neither parents nor kindred; they have neither aid nor favor as the world sees it. Here, therefore, is where we must prove our humanity—that is, if we wish to declare that we truly serve God without looking to our own advantage. The opposite is also true: the Lord condemns the outrages that we inflict on foreigners more rigorously than those we inflict on neighbors (voisins).[vi]

Calvin agreed with Lavater that mistreating foreigners rendered a city or a people utterly contemptible—in God’s eyes no less than in history’s.[vii] The ties of kinship were real and, properly practiced, could be a blessing. However, they could also blind us to the greater claims of “humanity.” Showing kindness to your patrial community was not enough if you wanted to be commended by God like Job. Calvin delivered this admonition in the vernacular to an audience composed of both native-born Genevans and newcomers. It doesn’t take much historical imagination to realize that he was interpreting the Bible in light of his community’s lived reality, and of his own.

The sermon on Job 31 claimed that “all Holy Scripture” commended the care of foreigners. Calvin would substantiate this point in his late Harmony of the Law (1563), which commented on Exodus through Deuteronomy. The refugee theologian frequently lingered over the Torah’s commands for equity towards sojourners in the land. Take his gloss on Leviticus 19:33-34, which instructed the Israelites to “love the alien as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.”[viii] Calvin insisted that

the people are commanded to cultivate equity (colere aequitatem) with everyone without exception. For if there had been no mention of sojourners, the Israelites might have supposed that they had performed their whole duty simply by harming nobody from their own nation (ex gente sua). But when God commends foreigners and sojourners to them as equal to their own blood kinsmen (consanguineos), then they must recognize that equity is to be cultivated with all. Nor is it without cause that God puts himself forward as the foreigners’ own protector, lest injury be done to them. Since they have nobody [i.e among the Israelites] who is willing to incur hatred by defending them, they are more liable to suffer violence and oppression than if they were guarded by native protections.[ix]

Calvin again spoke as a man who had walked this road himself. He knew all too well the sway that “blood” exercised over the human mind and heart. Cries of patria! were powerful. Yet God had named himself as the protector of foreigners, and God’s people owed kindness and equity to newcomers no less than to their own kin (consanguinei). In the end, faith ran thicker than blood. That Calvin saw this as the obvious teaching of “all Holy Scripture” should give us pause when we hear “biblical” cases for the “right of blood” today. What looks “natural” to one interpreter might strike another as directly contrary to the text. It depends very much on the path you have traveled to get there.

Echoes in the Past

What, then, can modern Americans learn from Zurich and Geneva’s conflicts over “sojourners” during the Reformation? It’s true that the past provides no ready-made solutions to our questions. That’s not how history works—at least not history studied responsibly. All the same, we can hear echoes (however faint) of the sixteenth century in our current reckoning over the meaning of citizenship.

In the United States today, the questions of birthright citizenship and immigration are deeply intertwined but not identical. It might be possible in theory to support the Fourteenth Amendment’s “right of soil” while rejecting the possibility that adult immigrants can ever truly be naturalized, can ever truly belong to American culture. “Heritage” citizens remain more American than others even if we have to afford legal protections to the children of immigrants as a constitutional necessity.

In practice, however, pessimism regarding naturalization and opposition to birthright citizenship go hand in hand because they derive from the same set of assumptions. The fundamental question in either case is, What makes someone “American?” Is it physical lineage and continuity of place—the fact that “my ancestors fought in the Civil War” (as JD Vance suggests) or have otherwise been here two or three centuries?[x] Then obviously both newcomers and their children and even their children’s children will be less American than others. The legal niceties of naturalization and birthright citizenship alike will be unable to efface the reality written in blood and soil.

Indeed, it’s fair to wonder whether twenty-first immigrants and their progeny could ever accumulate enough “heritage” to satisfy the “right of blood.” When has a family been here long enough to be considered “native?” When precisely did yours become native, now that we’re on the subject? If neither legal naturalization nor constitutional birthright is enough, it’s hard to see how citizenship itself does not become a moving target whose legitimacy can always be challenged. “Well, sure, you and your parents might have been born here—but your grandparents were from Italy.” Anyone who thinks that’s too fanciful should read more about the history of genealogical purity tests in the United States and Europe throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.[xi]

Of course, citizenship need not be—and is never in the country’s founding documents—defined by the “right of blood” at all. The essence of Americanness could instead be certain ideas and norms: democratic self-rule, for instance, and the rule of law over personalities (among many others). In that case, citizenship would be lodged not in blood but in something like a creed. Any person who willingly adopted its tenets could be as American as anyone else, no matter where she or her parents were born. This is hardly an original thought, to the point it might seem hackneyed.[xii] But it is also where the sixteenth-century reformers have the most to say to our present moment.

At bottom, Calvin, Lavater, and other Reformed leaders were fighting with their magistrates about the nature of community. Who truly belonged in their cities? What lines demarcated the “native” from the “foreigner?” The town councils clung to patrial notions of citizenship. Belonging came down to lineage, kin, and continuity of place. Your people are from around here. The gates could open to newcomers, but slowly and always with an eye to preserving the culture practiced by the political elites.

By contrast, “the sinful Frenchman” and his allies pushed to redraw society around common values and commitments. The reformers did not entirely discard the ties of kinship, yet they were quick to relativize them whenever they obstructed the city’s Christian duty to “humanity” (as they saw it). “The Lord condemns the outrages that we inflict on foreigners more rigorously than those we inflict on neighbors.” The important thing was what we all shared a common faith now; it mattered little when you or your ancestors first arrived.

Modern Americans might object to how narrowly Reformed Protestants of that era defined “common belief.” Zurich, Geneva, and other Protestant towns were not about to take in Catholic refugees, still less Anabaptists or other “radicals.” We know in hindsight that centuries of confessionalized violence followed. Fair enough—yet it’s still possible to appreciate how a community centered on creed differed in kind from one traced in blood. The roads from early Protestant theology to classical liberalism are not always straight (and some end in cul-de-sacs), but they do exist.[xiii]

The point is to discern echoes in any event, not to find exact parallels. In our setting, the citizenship debate arguably features a clash between “blood” and “creed” as well. Nativist politicians who praise “Heritage Americans” wish to build society on lineage and continuity of place. America is not an “idea” that can be embraced by just anyone.[xiv] Reformed nativists such as Crenshaw and Cline might therefore resonate with Protestant magistrates in the 1500s who resisted the influx of refugees in their towns. What good was common faith if it ended up dissolving the “right of blood” (they might ask)? Patrimony was at stake!

That Crenshaw and Cline would at the same time claim the theological legacy of the reformers makes for a poignant irony. Reformed theology was stamped from the beginning by the lives of immigrants and displaced persons. Recent scholarship has shown how even seemingly abstract concepts such as “predestination” were articulated out of the concrete experience of exile.[xv] MAGA-aligned “Calvinists” could benefit from reading Calvin more carefully.

Conversely, readers who cheered the verdict in Trump v. Barbara might find themselves in unexpected sympathy with early Protestant champions of the “sojourner.” The Fourteenth Amendment guarantees that any child born in this land is fully American. That guarantee in turn implies a creedal model of American identity. If citizenship hinges on “constitutional jurisdiction” rather than bloodline, what matters is loyalty to the constitution and willing submission to its authority. These ideas can be passed on to or adopted by anyone, regardless of lineage. This was in fact a bipartisan proposition until quite recently.[xvi] You could also add that a society built on ideas needs healthy institutions to inculcate them. The reformers understood this too, which is why they lavished so much care on catechisms for the young and in many places pushed for publicly funded education (a worthy topic for another time).

“Our ancestors also migrated from somewhere else.” Only an echo from the past, perhaps—yet one that resounds rather loudly in 2026. Reformed Protestants can celebrate an American Heritage embodied in the country’s founding documents, public institutions, and shared democratic values. It’s doubtful whether a tradition built by migrants and centered on shared faith can ever support the notion of “Heritage Americans.”

Steven Tyra (PhD, Baylor University) is a history teacher in Waco, Texas. He is the author of Neither the Spirit without the Flesh: John Calvin’s Doctrine of the Beatific Vision (T&T Clark, 2024) and the forthcoming After Life: The Soul’s Journey Through Western Christianity (T&T Clark, December 2026).

[i] see William G. Naphy, Calvin and the Consolidation of the Genevan Reformation (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2003), 66, 95.

[ii] https://www.unhcr.org/news/stories/q-museum-shines-light-refugee-contribution-reformation

[iii] See M. A. van den Berg, Friends of Calvin (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2009), 228.

[iv] Woo, John Calvin, Refugee Theologian, xxxii.

[v] For details and context, see T. H. L. Parker, Calvin’s Old Testament Commentaries (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 1993), 12-13.

[vi] Calvin, Sermons de M. Jean Calvin Sur Le Livre de Job. Recueillis Fidelement de Sa Bouche Selon Qu’il Les Preschoit (Geneva: François Perrin, 1569), 600.

[vii] In the same passage, Calvin goes on to contrast the inhospitality of some sixteenth-century Christians with the supposedly more virtuous conduct of the ancient pagans, who managed to do right without even knowing the true God.

[viii] The full text reads, “When an alien resides with you in your land, you shall not oppress the alien. The alien who resides with you shall be to you as the native-born among you; you shall love the alien as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God” (NRSV).

[ix] CO 24, 673.

[x] “JD Vance Claims One of Our Worst Traditions as His Own,” New York Times (July 23, 2025). https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/23/opinion/jd-vance-claremont-american-citizen.html

[xi] For example, Virginia’s “Racial Integrity Act” of 1924 established what is called the “one drop rule,” meaning a person was classified as “black” under the law if any non-white ancestry could be discovered in his or her family line. Similar purity standards (with varying standards) were established throughout the country in the Jim Crow Era. Likewise, the attempts of Nazi researchers to discover even the remotest Jewish ancestry among their citizens is infamous.

[xii] The idea of America as a “creedal nation” was defended as recently as 2025 in the pages of the Wall Street Journal (not known as a bastion of “liberalism”!): https://www.wsj.com/opinion/why-america-is-a-creedal-nation-75676aa8

[xiii] A good place to start would be İsmal Kurun, The Theological Origins of Liberalism (London: Lexington Books, 2016).

[xiv] See note 24 above.

[xv] See Woo, John Calvin, Refugee Theologian, 60-63.

[xvi] Republican President Ronald Reagan was fond of remarking that “anyone, from any corner of the Earth, can come to live in America and become an American.” You do not have to appreciate every aspect of Reagan’s presidency to see how this differs meaningfully from the nativist rhetoric of JD Vance. See https://www.reaganfoundation.org/ronald-reagan/quotes/since-this-is-the-last-speech-that-i-will-give-as-president-i-think-it-s-fitting

History and Religion

Politics and Religion

Previous Post

September 17, 2026

A Renaissance Purge of Ancient Scriptures

Next Post

September 18, 2026 Guadalupe's Pilgrim Image Visits Our Parish School

Recent Comments

0 | Leave a Comment

"I have an identical twin, and Thomas was always the disciple I connected with most. ..."

Terry

In the Footsteps of Thomas: A ..."

"I've never thought of Constantine as a villain. Do Christians generally? Maybe the ones who ..."

stevewe

Defending Constantine

"The TV sitcom BEWITCHED was an old favorite of mine"

philipjenkins

How Scotland Gave Us Our Modern ..."

"From now on whenever I see a clipper ship, see a certain brand of Scottish ..."

Terry

How Scotland Gave Us Our Modern ..."

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category abolitionism Abortion Abraham Joshua Heschel Abraham Kuyper Abraham Lincoln Academia Activism Adam Renberg Advent Adventist africa African American Religion Agnes Howard Albert Camus American History American Religious History American Revolution American West Anabaptists Ancient History Andrea Turpin Andrei Tarkovsky Anglicanism Annales Ansley Lillian Quiros anti-Catholicism Antisemitism Anxious Bench apologetics Apparitions Arash Azizi Archaeology archives art Artificial Intelligence Asia Asian Americans Augustine Authors Bad Bunny Baptism Baptists Barack Obama Battle of Hastings Benjamin Franklin Bernard-Henri Levy Beth Allison Barr Beth Moore Bethany Mannon Bible Bill Cunningham Billy Graham Black Music Bob Dylan Body Boenhoffer Books Breastfeeding Bruce Springsteen C.S. Lewis Calvinism Cancel Culture Capitalism Carmelites Catholicism Cedric Robinson Cesar Chavez Charismaticism charity Charles Dickens Charles Lindbergh Che Guevara Chicago Children Chinese Christianity Chris Gehrz Christ Christian death Christian Higher Education Christian life Christian Nation Christian Nationalism Christianity Today Christmas Church life Church Practice cinema Civil Religion Civil Rights Movement Civil War civility Classics Climate Change Cold War Colonial Mexico colonialism Comer Communism community complementarianism Conference on Faith and History Congregationalism Conspiracies Conspiracy Conversion Narratives Coronavirus Costa Rica Council of Nicaea Covid-19 Creation Critical Race Theory Crusades Culture culture wars Daniel K. Williams David Barton David Swartz Death Ways death with dignity DEI democracy Democratic Party Devotion Digital Age Diplomacy discipleship diversity Donald Trump Drama Dua Lipa Early Church early modern Early modern Catholicism Easter Eastern Christianity economic exploitation Education elections Elie Wiesel Elizabeth II Elizabeth Taylor emotions Empire Engineering England enslavement Entertainment Episcopal Church Erica Ramirez eschatology Eurocentrism Evangelicalism Evangelicals Exegesis Family Feminism Film Flannery O'Connor folk music Food Foreign Policy founding fathers Franciscans Franciscus Junius fundamentalism Funerals G.K. Chesterton Gender Genocide genre geography George W. Bush George Washington George Whitefield Global Christianity Global church Grief Guadalupe Guest Post guest post gun control gun violence Gustavo Gutierrez Hamid Dabashi Harold John Ockenga Harvest Hate Hawaiian Christianity Healing health care Heather Cox Richardson Hell Heresy Hermeneutics Higher Education Hinduism Hippocratic oath Historical Fiction Historical Methodology Historical Profession Historical Profession Historical Theology Historical Thinking historiography Holidays Holocaust horror movies Human rights Humanitarian Work humanities Hummingbirds Hungary hymns Imago Dei Immigration Injustice Interviews Iran Islam Islamophobia Israel Ivan's Childhood Jacob Randolph James Bratt Janine Giordano Drake Japanese history Japanese Literature Jean Paul Sartre Jesse Miranda Jesus Jesus Christ Jimmy Carter Joan Baez Joan Didion Joanne Freeman João B. Chaves Joao Chaves Joey Cochran John Calvin John Fea John Tillotson John Turner Johnny Cash Jonathan Edwards Jonathan Tran Joseph Smith Josh Howerton Journalism Jr. Judaism Jürgen Moltmann Just War Justice Justin Brierley Karl Barth Katelyn Beaty koi ponds Kris Kristofferson Kristin Kobes Du Mez Latin American Religious History Latino Americans Lectio Divina Leisure Lent Leonard Cohen liberal arts liberalism Liberation Theology Linda Ronstadt Lisa Clark Diller Literature Lou Reed Lynchings Lynneth Miller Renberg Mainline Protestantism Malcolm Foley Marilyn Monroe Maritime history Mark Noll Marriage Martin Luther Martin Luther King Martyrdom Marxism Mary Masih Alinejad mass shootings material culture medieval Christianity Medieval Ethiopia Melissa Borja memory Mennonites Mental Health Mental Illness Methodism Mexican Americans Mexicans Mike Madrid Miles Mullin Min Jin Lee Miscarriage Missionaries Mister Rogers Mitt Romney modernity Monasticism Mormonism Motherhood Mothers of the Church Moving Music Musicals Nadya Williams Nahua Christianity Native Americans Natsume Sōseki New Contributor New England New Year New York Nico Non-Violent Protest Orthodoxy pacifism Paleo Evangelicals Palestinians Parenting Patti Smith Paul Kingsnorth Pedro Calderón de la Barca Pentecostalism Philip Jenkins Phillis Wheatley physician-assisted suicide pilgrimage Pilgrims Piracy pluralism Plutocracy Poetry Politics Pope Francis Pope Leo XIV post-modernism prayer preaching Presbyterians prosperity gospel Protest Public Executions Public history Publishing Puritans purity culture Quakers race Race Massacres Racial Capitalism racial reconciliation racialization Racism Raha Bahloulipour Re-Enchantment reading Reformation Refugees religion and the university religion and war Religious Freedom Religious Nones Religious Pluralism Religious Symbols religious violence Republican Party Revival Rita Coolidge Ritual Roger Williams Roman Catholic church Royalty Russell Moore same-sex marriage Sarah Irving-Stonebraker Scandinavia Science Science and Technology Scopes trial Scriptural Interpretation secularism Selena Quintanilla seminary Seventh-Day Adventists sexual morality Sexuality Sikhs Silence slaveholders theology Slavery Slavoj Zizek social justice Social Media Southern Baptist Convention Southern Religion Spain Spiritual Autobiography Spiritual but not religious Spiritual Discipline Sports Stanley Hauerwas Suffering Summer Camps Sunday Night Odds and Ends Supernatural Supreme Court Syriac Christianity Tal Howard Taylor Swift Teaching Technology Television Thanksgiving The Beatles The Mission theater TheoBros Theology Thomas Dixon Thomas Jefferson Thomas Kidd Thomas Merton Tim Gloege Tim Walz Tom Holland Tourism tradition Tragedy Translation Transnationalism Travel Trump Ukraine Uncategorized Unitarians United Methodist Church US History Vanessa Chan Velvet Underground Verónica A. Gutiérrez Veronica Gutierrez Vikings Violence Virgin Mary Virtue Virtue ethics Visions Voting War WCTU Wendell Berry Westminster Assembly White Evangelicalism Wildfires Winnie the Pooh Witches women Women in Ministry Women's and Gender Studies Work Worship writing Yasunari Kawabata Zena Hitz

Select a Month November 2026 October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who was the first woman mentioned in the Bible after Eve?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Leah Rebekah Rachel Sarah