- Sep 18, 2010
- 7,538
- 2,694
- Country
- Sweden
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
I have heard different answers to this question. Anyone with good knowledge of Calvin, who knows his view on this topic?
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Did Calvin believe in limited atonement?
- Thread starter zoidar
- Start date
- Jan 28, 2002
- 28,187
- 45,807
- 69
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Calvinist
- Marital Status
- Married
Hello @zoidar, like the Bible, Calvin (who wrote more in his short lifetime than most of us will ever read in ours) has said a number of things that can be easily misunderstood when they are taken out-of-context. This is true concerning the topics of unconditional election and limited atonement.
That said, the teaching that Calvin is most famous (or perhaps infamous) for is what is referred to as "double predestination" (which Calvin called the, "decretum horrible", or the horrible or fearful decree of God). The decretum horrible teaches that while all of us, w/o exception, freely choose to walk the broad road towards perdition from birth .. e.g. Ephesians 2:1-3, God chooses to interfere with the free will choices of some to save them .. e.g. Ezekiel 36:26-27; Ephesians 2:4-5 (so that ~all~ of us would not be lost), while allowing others to continue on freely in their choice to walk the broad road.
So, I don't believe that we need to look any farther than Calvin's teaching on the decretum horrible to understand that he taught both unconditional election and limited atonement.
God bless you!!
--David
That said, the teaching that Calvin is most famous (or perhaps infamous) for is what is referred to as "double predestination" (which Calvin called the, "decretum horrible", or the horrible or fearful decree of God). The decretum horrible teaches that while all of us, w/o exception, freely choose to walk the broad road towards perdition from birth .. e.g. Ephesians 2:1-3, God chooses to interfere with the free will choices of some to save them .. e.g. Ezekiel 36:26-27; Ephesians 2:4-5 (so that ~all~ of us would not be lost), while allowing others to continue on freely in their choice to walk the broad road.
So, I don't believe that we need to look any farther than Calvin's teaching on the decretum horrible to understand that he taught both unconditional election and limited atonement.
God bless you!!
--David
Upvote
0
- Sep 18, 2010
- 7,538
- 2,694
- Country
- Sweden
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
Thanks St_worm!
Since what you posted is about the way God elected and who, and not particularly about the atonement, IMO we do need to look further. You can believe in unconditional election (I would say even double predestination), and still hold to universal atonement. That is the view of Lutherans, who believe in single predestination.
God bless you too David!
Last edited:
Upvote
0
- Nov 21, 2008
- 53,410
- 11,947
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- SDA
- Marital Status
- Married
Upvote
0
- Jan 28, 2002
- 28,187
- 45,807
- 69
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Calvinist
- Marital Status
- Married
Hello again brother, I understand your meaning (at least, I think that I do
), but it seems to me that you're talking about a distinction w/o much of a difference here, especially where Calvin is concerned.We Calvinists believe in limited or (perhaps better) definite atonement, such that the atoning work of the Lord Jesus is applied to God's elect, IOW, to those who come to saving faith and believe, alone. On the other hand, I don't believe that I've ever met a Calvinist who would insist that the Lord's atoning sacrifice would not be sufficient to atone for the sins of everyone, everywhere, w/o exception, if everyone/everywhere came to saving faith.
Perhaps I should stop and ask you what you are hoping to discover about Calvin before continuing?
In the meantime (so much for stopping
), this may help (though it is hardly the whole of Calvin's teaching on the topic, and as I said earlier, taking Calvin out-of-context is often ill-advised). The is taken from Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion.A passage of Ezekiel’s is brought forward, that “God does not will the death of the wicked but wills that the wicked turn back and live” [Ezek. 33:11 p.].26 If it pleases God to extend this to the whole human race, why does he not encourage to repentance the very many whose minds are more amenable to obedience than the minds of those who grow harder and harder at his daily invitations? Among the people of Nineveh [cf. Matt. 12:41] and of Sodom, as Christ testifies, the preaching of the gospel and miracles would have accomplished more than in Judea [Matt. 11:23].
If God wills that all be saved, how does it come to pass that he does not open the door of repentance to the miserable men who would be better prepared to receive grace? Hence we may see that this passage is violently twisted if the will of God, mentioned by the prophet, is opposed to His eternal plan, by which He has distinguished the elect from the reprobate.
Now if we are seeking the prophet’s true meaning, it is that he would bring the hope of pardon to the penitent only. The gist of it is that God is without doubt ready to forgive, as soon as the sinner is converted. Therefore, in so far as God wills the sinner’s repentance, he does not will his death. But experience teaches that God wills the repentance of those whom he invites to himself, in such a way that he does not touch the hearts of all. Yet it is not on that account to be said that he acts deceitfully, for even though only his outward call renders inexcusable those who hear it and do not obey, still it is truly considered evidence of God’s grace, by which he reconciles men to himself.
Let us therefore regard the prophet’s instruction that the death of the sinner is not pleasing to God as designed to assure believers that God is ready to pardon them as soon as they are touched by repentance but to make the wicked feel that their transgression is doubled because they do not respond to God’s great kindness and goodness. God’s mercy will always, accordingly, go to meet repentance, but all the prophets and all the apostles, as well as Ezekiel himself, clearly teach to whom repentance is given. ~Calvin, J. (2011). Institutes of the Christian Religion & 2 (J. T. McNeill, Ed.; F. L. Battles, Trans.; Book 3/24/15). Westminster John Knox Press.
Blessings to you in Christ!!
--David
p.s. - if you'd care to read it, I think that Spurgeon (a self-declared 5-Point Calvinist) gets at the heart of the matter (and to the heart of what Calvin himself generally believed/taught, as well) when he said this (in his commentary on Ezekiel 33:11):
33:11 “Tell them, ‘As I live’—this is the declaration of the Lord GOD—‘I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that the wicked person should turn from his way and live. Repent, repent of your evil ways! Why will you die, house of Israel?’ ”
It is a token of the great mercy of God that he is earnest in his pleading with men to turn from their sins that he may not be compelled to punish them as he must do if they go on in their iniquities. A cruel governor is glad of an opportunity to show his severity and, therefore, not especially anxious to prevent offenses. But a kind, tenderhearted monarch he must be who leaves his throne and comes down among the rebels and, with tears in his eyes, cries to them, “Oh, do not do this wicked thing I hate! Do not offend me! Do not compel me to take the sword out of its scabbard! Do not force me to say that I will have no mercy on you, but turn, turn from those evil courses that will certainly bring you harm!”
We would seek to give to all and every Scripture the genuine meaning it contains. But solemnly penetrating and heart-searching as his exhortation is, and given as it is by God himself, if someone rejects it, he thereby adds to his sin. God calls to the sinner to turn, but he never will unless there is something more than the call. By the public ministry, by sickness, by the Bible, by conscience—yes, and by the common and universal operations of the Holy Spirit, God calls to people. But they seem determined to die; and, therefore, they go over hedge and ditch to destruction—and this against all the warnings and rebukes of the Most High.
So they will continue in their sins and aggravate them by the rejection of the exhortation that was meant to deliver them from sin, and so they make themselves even more guilty before God by turning against his Word that was meant to have a blessing for them. If I say, “Repent, repent of your evil ways! Why will you die?” one may take no notice of it. But if the Holy Spirit will come and say this, then he will certainly be obedient to it; for he has the key of the heart, and he knows how, without violating the free agency of man, to make man willing in the day of his power. So that when he says, “Repent, repent,” they do repent, and when he says, “Why will you die?” they begin to reason with themselves, and they see it is an ill thing that they should perish, and, therefore, they turn to God. ~Charles H. Spurgeon, Exekiel 33:11, Commentary
Upvote
0
- Sep 18, 2010
- 7,538
- 2,694
- Country
- Sweden
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
I'm hoping Calvin didn't teach definite or limited atonement, since I think it's a problematic teaching.Hello again brother, I understand your meaning (at least, I think that I do
We Calvinists believe in limited or (perhaps better) definite atonement, such that the atoning work of the Lord Jesus is applied to God's elect, IOW, to those who come to saving faith and believe, alone. On the other hand, I don't believe that I've ever met a Calvinist who would insist that the Lord's atoning sacrifice would not be sufficient to atone for the sins of everyone, everywhere, w/o exception, if everyone/everywhere came to saving faith.
Perhaps I should stop and ask you what you are hoping to discover about Calvin before continuing?
It seems to me many Calvinists today have taken Calvin's teaching farther than Calvin himself intended. Maybe that is the case with the atonement?In the meantime (so much for stopping
A passage of Ezekiel’s is brought forward, that “God does not will the death of the wicked but wills that the wicked turn back and live” [Ezek. 33:11 p.].26 If it pleases God to extend this to the whole human race, why does he not encourage to repentance the very many whose minds are more amenable to obedience than the minds of those who grow harder and harder at his daily invitations? Among the people of Nineveh [cf. Matt. 12:41] and of Sodom, as Christ testifies, the preaching of the gospel and miracles would have accomplished more than in Judea [Matt. 11:23]. If God wills that all be saved, how does it come to pass that he does not open the door of repentance to the miserable men who would be better prepared to receive grace? Hence we may see that this passage is violently twisted if the will of God, mentioned by the prophet, is opposed to His eternal plan, by which He has distinguished the elect from the reprobate. Now if we are seeking the prophet’s true meaning, it is that he would bring the hope of pardon to the penitent only. The gist of it is that God is without doubt ready to forgive, as soon as the sinner is converted. Therefore, in so far as God wills the sinner’s repentance, he does not will his death. But experience teaches that God wills the repentance of those whom he invites to himself, in such a way that he does not touch the hearts of all. Yet it is not on that account to be said that he acts deceitfully, for even though only his outward call renders inexcusable those who hear it and do not obey, still it is truly considered evidence of God’s grace, by which he reconciles men to himself. Let us therefore regard the prophet’s instruction that the death of the sinner is not pleasing to God as designed to assure believers that God is ready to pardon them as soon as they are touched by repentance but to make the wicked feel that their transgression is doubled because they do not respond to God’s great kindness and goodness. God’s mercy will always, accordingly, go to meet repentance, but all the prophets and all the apostles, as well as Ezekiel himself, clearly teach to whom repentance is given. ~Calvin, J. (2011). Institutes of the Christian Religion & 2 (J. T. McNeill, Ed.; F. L. Battles, Trans.; Book 3/24/15). Westminster John Knox Press.
Blessings to you in Christ!!
--David
p.s. - if you'd care to read it, I think that Spurgeon (a self-declared 5-Point Calvinist) gets at the heart of the matter (and to the heart of what Calvin himself generally believed/taught, as well) when he said this (in his commentary on Ezekiel 33:11):
33:11 “Tell them, ‘As I live’—this is the declaration of the Lord GOD—‘I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that the wicked person should turn from his way and live. Repent, repent of your evil ways! Why will you die, house of Israel?’ ” It is a token of the great mercy of God that he is earnest in his pleading with men to turn from their sins that he may not be compelled to punish them as he must do if they go on in their iniquities. A cruel governor is glad of an opportunity to show his severity and, therefore, not especially anxious to prevent offenses. But a kind, tenderhearted monarch he must be who leaves his throne and comes down among the rebels and, with tears in his eyes, cries to them, “Oh, do not do this wicked thing I hate! Do not offend me! Do not compel me to take the sword out of its scabbard! Do not force me to say that I will have no mercy on you, but turn, turn from those evil courses that will certainly bring you harm!”
We would seek to give to all and every Scripture the genuine meaning it contains. But solemnly penetrating and heart-searching as his exhortation is, and given as it is by God himself, if someone rejects it, he thereby adds to his sin. God calls to the sinner to turn, but he never will unless there is something more than the call. By the public ministry, by sickness, by the Bible, by conscience—yes, and by the common and universal operations of the Holy Spirit, God calls to people. But they seem determined to die; and, therefore, they go over hedge and ditch to destruction—and this against all the warnings and rebukes of the Most High.
So they will continue in their sins and aggravate them by the rejection of the exhortation that was meant to deliver them from sin, and so they make themselves even more guilty before God by turning against his Word that was meant to have a blessing for them. If I say, “Repent, repent of your evil ways! Why will you die?” one may take no notice of it. But if the Holy Spirit will come and say this, then he will certainly be obedient to it; for he has the key of the heart, and he knows how, without violating the free agency of man, to make man willing in the day of his power. So that when he says, “Repent, repent,” they do repent, and when he says, “Why will you die?” they begin to reason with themselves, and they see it is an ill thing that they should perish, and, therefore, they turn to God. ~Charles H. Spurgeon, Exekiel 33:11, Commentary
From what you are posting I don't see the atonement being mentioned. Without binding together Calvin's view of predestination and election with his view on atonement I don't see how you can make a case for Calvin holding to definite atonement, since the one does not need to confirm the other. Why not posting something from Calvin where he talks specifically about the atonement?
Again, God can choose before time the elect and predestine them for salvation and still send Jesus to make atonement for every sin of all sinners in the whole world. That is the Lutheran view.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
- Jan 28, 2002
- 28,187
- 45,807
- 69
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Calvinist
- Marital Status
- Married
Hello again brother (@zoidar), I guess I didn't realize how much I've let the ULI petals of T~ULI~P bleed into one another. I'll try to find something definitive from Calvin on petal "L" alone and get back to you.
That said, I don't believe that Calvin or Spurgeon would take the time to blink before beginning a counterargument against someone pressing the idea that Lord's atoning sacrifice on the Cross might be insufficient in any way to save anyone (or everyone).
God bless you!!
--David
That said, I don't believe that Calvin or Spurgeon would take the time to blink before beginning a counterargument against someone pressing the idea that Lord's atoning sacrifice on the Cross might be insufficient in any way to save anyone (or everyone).
God bless you!!
--David
Upvote
0
- Aug 21, 2003
- 10,051
- 1,802
- 60
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Good Day, Zoidar
You may find this helpful:
In Him,
Bill
You may find this helpful:
Calvin, Indefinite Language, and Definite Atonement by Paul Helm | Monergism
This is Chapter 4 of From Heaven He Came and Sought Her: Definite Atonement in Historical, Biblical, Theological, and Pastoral Perspective Edited by David
www.monergism.com
In Him,
Bill
Upvote
0
- Sep 18, 2010
- 7,538
- 2,694
- Country
- Sweden
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
I have read it a few times, trying to get the right understanding. I see from the article it's much of a defense against the arguments that say Calvin really didn't hold to precise atonement, more than proving Calvin actually did hold precise atonement. The author himself says he goes with the weaker argument, that Calvin didn't teach precise atonement, but the consequence of his teaching leads one to the conclusion he unknowingly held this view, since this is what fits Calvin's other teachings the best.
I'm not to say it can't fit together. It can! I haven't tried to make a case for Calvin holding to unlimited atonement, but the question remains if he did believe the atonement is precise or unlimited. I don't think the author made a that good case for Calvin's view of the atonement being precise, though he made a good defense against the arguments that say: "It can't be so!" What I think this leaves us with is: we really don't know for sure.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
