Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: RnMomof7, Ward Smythe, forthedeclaration, jerrym
Again from Rev. D.A. Waite, Th.D., Ph. D . Not my own work.

B. JOHN CALVIN HIMSELF MODIFIED HIS POSITION AND OPPOSED HIS OWN FORMER TEACHING OF "LIMITED ATONEMENT" IN FAVOR FINALLY OF AN "UNLIMITED ATONEMENT."

We have saved one of the most powerful witnesses until last, namely, JOHN CALVIN HIMSELF. Yes, John Calvin himself, as we will see, is his own most convincing witness AGAINST HIS OWN FORMER ERROR of "LIMITED ATONEMENT" and in FAVOR finally of "UNLIMITED ATONEMENT."

1. Some "LIMITED ATONEMENT" Fanatics Disagree That Calvin, In These Quotes Favored "UNLIMITED ATONEMENT."

I was very much surprised to receive a long, long letter from a very devoted "LIMITED ATONEMENT" man a few weeks ago, who told me that I had misinterpreted John Calvin in the quotations that I will be using here. He interpreted Calvin's words in a "LIMITED ATONEMENT" sense which he claims is the way ALL "LIMITED ATONEMENT" people understood them. Read his quotations very carefully, and see if there can be any doubt whatsoever, unless people are "WRITING OUT OF BOTH SIDE OF THEIR PEN"!!

2. Dr. John R. Rice Quoted August H. Strong On Calvin's MODIFICATION OF HIS VIEWS."

Though I to not concur in everything Rice writes on a number of subjects, yet, as I was reading his book, PREDESTINED FOR HELL? NO! [1958 and 1977] (pp. 11-12), I noted an interesting lead. Rice wrote: However, it is fair to say that CALVIN IS THOUGHT TO HAVE MODIFIED HIS VIEWS SOMEWHAT THROUGH THE YEARS. Dr. Augustus H. Strong, in his standard Systematic Theology Vol. II, Doctrine of Salvation, page 778, quotes CALVIN'S LATER COMMENTS to prove this, as follows:...(op.cit. p. 12). Part of Rice's quotation from Strong was a follows:

The progress in Calvin's thought may be seen by comparing some of his earlier with his later utterances. . . . IN LATER DAYS Calvin wrote in his Commentary on 1 John 2:2--"he is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for the whole world"--as follows: "CHRIST SUFFERED FOR THE SINS OF THE WHOLE WORLD. and in the goodness of God is OFFERED UNTO ALL MEN WITHOUT DISTINCTION, HIS BLOOD BEING SHED NOT FOR A PART OF THE WORLD ONLY, BUT FOR THE WHOLE HUMAN RACE; for although in the world nothing is found worthy of the favor of God, yet he HOLDS OUT THE PROPITIATION TO THE WHOLE WORLD, since without exception he SUMMONS ALL TO THE FAITH OF CHRIST, which is nothing else than the door unto hope." (Rice, op. cit., p.12). Let it be very plainly stated: Calvin himself here repudiates "LIMITED ATONEMENT" and affirms an "UNLIMITED ATONEMENT"!! And everyone of his "followers" should do likewise!! No amount of semantical gymnastics can twist the clear meaning of Calvin's words quoted above into anything else but that!!

3. John Calvin Witnesses For "UNLIMITED ATONEMENT" In His Commentary On Mark 14:24.

Mark 14:24 states in English (KJV): And He said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, WHICH IS SHED FOR MANY. (Mark l4:24). Here is the comment that John Calvin made on Mark 14:24, as translated and published in the Harmony of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, Volume III, p. 139 [as published by Eerdmans in Grand Rapids, 1972]:

"The word many DOES NOT MEAN A PART OF THE WORLD ONLY, BUT THE WHOLE HUMAN RACE: he contrasts many with one as if to say that he would not be the Redeemer of one man, but would meet death to deliver many of their cursed guilt. No doubt that in speaking to a few Christ wished to make His teaching available to a larger number...So when we come to the holy table not only should the general idea come to our mind that THE WORLD IS REDEEMED BY THE BLOOD OF CHRIST but also each should reckon to himself that his own sins are covered. (op. cit., p. 139).

In this passage, John Calvin clearly and unmistakably affirms his belief in the "UNLIMITED ATONEMENT" of the Lord Jesus Christ who "SHED" His blood for "THE WHOLE HUMAN RACE" with the result that it can be said that "THE WORLD IS REDEEMED BY THE BLOOD OF CHRIST." What could be clearer? John Calvin by no means took the "Fifth Amendment" on this verse! In fact, where many of his "LIMITED ATONEMENT" followers use the "many" to try to force a "LIMITED ATONEMENT" into that word, John Calvin broadened it out in an "UNLIMITED ATONEMENT" sense as it should be broadened by way of contrast with a "few."

4. .John Calvin Witnesses for "UNLIMITED ATONEMENT" In His Commentary On Romans 5:18:

Romans 5:18 states in English (KJV): Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. (Romans 5:18) Calvin's comment on Romans 5:18, as translated and published in the COMMENTARY ON ROMANS AND THESSALONIANS, 1973, pp. 117-18 [as published by Eerdmans in Grand Rapids] was: "Paul makes grace COMMON TO ALL MEN, not because it in fact EXTENDS TO ALL, but because IT IS OFFERED TO ALL. Although CHRIST SUFFERED FOR THE SINS OF THE WORLD. AND IS OFFERED BY THE GOODNESS OF GOD WITHOUT DISTINCTION TO ALL MEN, yet not all receive him (op. cit., p. 829). If indeed Christ "SUFFERED FOR THE SINS OF THE WORLD," John Calvin was himself (at least at the time of his writing this Commentary on Romans) a confirmed believer, as is the BIBLE FOR TODAY, in an "UNLIMITED ATONEMENT" of the Lord Jesus Christ! Any self-respecting friend of John Calvin presently holding the unscriptural and anti-Scriptural error of "LIMITED ATONEMENT," should immediately get rid of it--If only in deference to their friend! A BETTER reason, however, for getting rid of it, would be because it is unbiblical!

5. John Calvin Witnesses For "UNLIMITED ATONEMENT" In His Last Will, And Farewells

Calvin's "LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT, April 25, 1564" as printed in the History of the Christian Church, Vol. 8, pp. 828-29, by Philip Schaff [as published by Eerdmans in Grand Rapids, 1972], states: "I testify also and declare, that I suppliantly beg of Him, that He may be pleased so to was and purify me in the blood which my Sovereign Redeemer HAS SHED FOR THE SINS OF THE HUMAN RACE, that under His shadow I may be able to stand at the judgment-seat...."(op. cit., p 829). Here is a clear testimony made by John Calvin who was about to die, in 1564, that He, at least at the end of his life, had come to believe most definitely that the Lord Jesus Christ "SHED" his precious "BLOOD" "FOR THE SINS OF THE HUMAN RACE "

This is, in very essence, an "UNLIMITED ATONEMENT" for which we have been speaking, writing, and arguing these many months [28 to be exact]. Again, let me urge every follower of John Calvin, because of the biblical truth of his position, to JOIN HIM in this sound belief in the "UNLIMITED ATONEMENT" that is, that the Lord Jesus Christ "HAS SHED" His blood "FOR THE SINS OF THE HUMAN RACE"!! Notice that in these words, John Calvin, however, seemed to be in DOUBT of HIS SALVATION! Thus he sounded like he no longer was certain, for himself, at least in the "perseverance of the saints." This is a rather SAD statement, I believe, for Calvin himself to make on his death bed!

177 posted on 02/27/2002 9:14:37 AM PST by xzins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies ]


To: xzins
Re. 177.

Your esteemed Dr. Waite does not recognize one very important fact.

John Calvin's Commentaries were devotional in nature. Even Jacob Arminius declared the excellence of them.

John Calvin's Institutes contained his systematic theology. Never once did Calvin claim that the theology so carefully defined in the Institutes was defective. Not once did he repudiate their content.

Only those who are looking for some type of disagreement between the devotional content of the Commentaries and the systematic nature of the Institutes see a contradiction, or claim that Calvin "softened" his approach.

The fact that there are those who claim these things arises from the fact that they cannot "logically" see how his systematic theology fits with his devotional material. They proclaim "You can't offer the Gospel to all, it just doesn't make sense!"

180 posted on 02/27/2002 9:22:33 AM PST by Jerry_M
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies ]

To: xzins; Ward Smythe
No comment on my 175? Seems that John Owens poses a "logical" difficulty for you.
194 posted on 02/27/2002 9:55:58 AM PST by Jerry_M
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies ]

To: xzins, RnMomof7
#177 -- As for myself, I have never liked the term "Limited Atonement". The Atonement is, as the Calvinist Boettner has upheld, "strictly an infinite transaction".

I prefer the term "Limited Redemption", for God has only predestined to irresistibly cause a limited number of people to repent and be redeemed.. The Atoning Blood certainly suffices for Joseph Stalin, but it was never intended to apply to the Sins of Joseph Stalin. The Father knew full well that He had not chosen to elect Stalin to have his personality unilaterally re-engineered by the Spirit ("regenerated") so that he would Want to Repent; as such, God caused it to be certain, before Stalin was ever born, that Stalin never would repent.

And Jesus, the Son of God, certainly did not go to the Cross under the delusion that He was dying to give Stalin "a chance". Statistically speaking, Stalin had precisely a zero percent chance of Repenting from before the foundation of the world, because the Father had specifically predestined Stalin to Not Repent.

So while the Atonement (being an infinite transaction) was sufficient for Stalin, God certainly never intended that it should be efficacious to him.

196 posted on 02/27/2002 10:03:18 AM PST by OrthodoxPresbyterian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies ]

To: xzins
Your post cited Calvin's will, in which he said that the blood of Christ was shed for the human race and claimed that this was evidence that Calvin embraced universal atonement. Baloney, to put it mildly. Jesus did shed His blood for the human race - he didn't die for dogs! But he did not shed His blood for every human. If he had, then he would have paid for the sins of everyone who has ever lived, and no-one would be condemned to hell, ever. In which case the Unitarians are right and we can quit worrying about predestination or free will.
199 posted on 02/27/2002 10:13:13 AM PST by JenB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson