John Calvin's Commentary on John Chapter 3
From the horse's mouth to yours.... yuucck.
Posted on 06/15/2004 6:53:50 PM PDT by RnMomof7
All,
Here are some comments, which may be interesting: John 1:29 Who taketh away the sin of the
He uses the word sin in the singular number, for any kind of iniquity; as if he had said, that every kind of unrighteousness which alienates men from God is taken away by Christ. And when he says, the sin Of The world, he extends this favor indiscriminately to the whole human race; that the Jews might not think that he had been sent to them alone. But hence we infer that the whole world is involved in the same condemnation; and that as all men without exception are guilty of unrighteousness before God, they need to be reconciled to him.
John the Baptist, therefore, by speaking generally of the sin of the world, intended to impress upon us the conviction of our own misery, and to exhort us to seek the remedy. Now our duty is, to embrace the benefit which is offered to all, that each of us may be convinced that there is nothing to hinder him from obtaining reconciliation in Christ, provided that he comes to him by the guidance of faith.
http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol34/htm/vii.vii.htm
John 3: 16. For God so loved the
Both points are distinctly stated to us: namely, that faith in Christ brings life to all, and that Christ brought life, because the Heavenly Father loves the human race, and wishes that they should not perish.
The word only-begotten is emphatic, to magnify the fervor of the love of God towards us. For as men are not easily convinced that God loves them, in order to remove all doubt, he has expressly stated that we are so very dear to God that, on our account, he did not even spare his only-begotten Son.
Since, therefore, God has most abundantly testified his love towards us, whoever is not satisfied with this testimony, and still remains in doubt, offers a high insult to Christ, as if he had been an ordinary man given up at random to death.
John 3: 17. For God sent not his Son into the
The word world is again repeated, that no man may think himself wholly excluded, if he only keep the road of faith.
We ought not, therefore, to look at any thing else in Christ, than that God, out of his boundless goodness chose to extend his aid for saving us who were lost; and whenever our sins press us -- whenever Satan would drive us to despair -- we ought to hold out this shield, that God is unwilling that we should be overwhelmed with everlasting destruction, because he has appointed his Son to be the salvation of the world.
they who reject the grace offered in him deserve to find him the Judge and Avenger of contempt so unworthy and base.
The meaning amounts to this, that the Gospel is especially, and in the first instance, appointed for believers, that it may be salvation to them; but that afterwards believers will not escape unpunished who, despising the grace of Christ, chose to have him as the Author of death rather than of life.
http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol34/htm/ix.iii.htm
DG
John Calvin's Commentary on John Chapter 3
From the horse's mouth to yours.... yuucck.
"God chose Jacob for His mercy before either child was born
(Romans 9)"
It is useful to note that Romans 9 does NOT say that Esau was "hated," or "chosen to be hated," before he was born.
DG
p.s. I know you did not say this, but some do.
Esau was a simple man, ruled by his senses. Jacob, a smooth man, a man of tents, of learning. Natural man and spiritual man, the old second son, new Adamic nature routine.
I am not going to argue with your doctrinal stand Pilgrim. Englesma may be right. For purposes of this discussion I could care less. But for purposes of this discussion I think it is important to note that Englesma's position is not one of Classical Calvinism, nor is it the position of Calvin himself. Englesma may be 100% correct and Calvin and the Classical Calvinists and the Arminians may all be damnable heretics for thinking that God has any kind of love for those who ultimately go to hell, but the point is that Englesma is the one who is out of the mainstream.
I did not call anyone a hyper calvinist. I just used Philip Johnson's chart to show that at least he thinks some of the positions taken by some of the posters here are out of the mainstream of Calvinism and are approaching what Philip Johnson considers "hyper-Calvinism". Its not a term I made up. Indeed, to an Arminian all Calvinists are hyper-Calvinists. The term was invented by Calvinists to separate themselves from the extremes of their theology. To an Arminian the whole Calvinist theology is hyper and extreme.
Now if you will not agree with the definition of Philip Johnson, then what would you define as a hyper-Calvinist. Is there such a thing. Is it possible to be so extreme in your Calvinism that you would be considered a heretic by even classical Calvinists? Or is it the ones who hold to the Classic definitions of Calvinism that are just too lukewarm for people like you?
BTW do you agree with Englesma, or Calvin on this subject? I don't particularly care, I'd just like to know.
The thinking of the article is so wrong. It is human thinking, not of the Holy Spirit.
Christ loves EVERYBODY and he died for EVERYBODY. He died for you, he died for me. He died for Bin Laden. He died for the WORLD, everyone EVER born.
The whole reason the non-believer is condemned is because they don't believe that Christ died on the cross for them! Because they REJECT Christ - the free gift to save their souls.
Jesus is Savior to all, Lord of Heaven and Earth.
Hi, RnMomof7!!! Long time no see!
What I think (just my honest opinion) is that where you stand (or what you believe) about Election as you walk this earth has little direct bearing on our duty as Christians, which is to intercede for the lost and help to lead the elect (whoever that is, and none of us know) to Christ (our Lord!!!)---- and, most especially, to GLORIFY GOD. (And the Westminster Catechism would add: "...and to enjoy Him forever.")
And what was it that Micah the prophet said about what the LORD requires of each and every one of us?
It's fun to discuss doctrines like this, which make us search the Word of God and really THINK... On the other hand, getting into ARGUMENTS about something like Election, which two Christians that are equally loved by the Father may not agree on, is a waste of time, and an obstacle in fulfilling our calling (duty).
With regard to Jacob and Esau, here are the relevant passages for anyone interested:
I have loved you, saith the LORD. Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us? [Was] not Esau Jacob's brother? saith the LORD: yet I loved Jacob, And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness. - Malachi 1:2-3
And not only [this]; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, [even] by our father Isaac; (For [the children] being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;) It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. - Romans 9:10-13
What you say is so true, hopefulpilgrim, and I really needed to hear it.
Bless you!
Wow, I haven't gotten an "Amen" in a llllloooong time. : )
Evangelists and Bible Teachers and street preachers and on-fire new teenage converts do all the heavy lifting and spend all their time and spiritual energy in leading lost people to Christ and then all the crusty old theologians spend all their time and energy trying to figure out why they came.
Wow. It seems you'd get an Amen from non other than John Calvin himself.
When Christ says, in other passages, that he is come to judgment, (John 9:39;) when he is called a stone of offense, (1 Peter 2:7;) when he is said to be set for the destruction of many, (Luke 2:34:) this may be regarded as accidental, or as arising from a different cause; for they who reject the grace offered in him deserve to find him the Judge and Avenger of contempt so unworthy and base. A striking instance of this may be seen in the Gospel; for though it is strictly the power of God for salvation to every one who believeth, (Romans 1:16,) the ingratitude of many causes it to become to them death.. Both have been well expressed by Paul, when he boasts of having vengeance at hand, by which he will punish all the adversaries of his doctrine after that the obedience of the godly shall have been fulfilled, (2 Corinthians 10:6) The meaning amounts to this, that the Gospel is especially, and in the first instance, appointed for believers, that it may be salvation to them; but that afterwards believers will not escape unpunished who, despising the grace of Christ, chose to have him as the Author of death rather than of life. [Emphasis added]
Why is it so important to you that God loves you more than another?
Hey, ya' got that right, P-Marlowe. I think what all we crusty old theologians are doing is RELISHING our salvation and and try to put the pieces of the puzzle together.
What's a koett?
Interesting. I'm not a Calvinist, so am not familiar with his writings. Which work of his are you quoting?
It's reassuring, though, that apparently Calvin himself was not a postmodernist, and that he understood the plain words of scripture to mean what they appear to mean.
Actually Alamo-Girl, Jesus wasn't criticizing Martha for criticizing Mary. He was telling Martha that you can get so wrapped up in "serving" the Lord that you fail to sit at His feet to listen. Martha apparently got the message because when Lazarus died it was Martha who ran to the Lord while Mary waited in the house.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.