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.
Can anyone please point out for me anywhere in Calvin's writings in which he explicitly taught the doctrine of limited atonement?
I don't think he did. Iirc, limited atonement came about later after Calvin's death.
How Calvinistic was John Calvin? What did he teach concerning the extent of the atonement? Let us ponder his own words:
Isaiah 53:12- "I approve of the ordinary reading, that He alone bore the punishment of many, because on Him was laid the guilt of the whole world. It is evident from other passages, and especially from the fifth chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, that many sometimes denotes all."
Mark 14:24- "The word many does not mean a part of the world only, but the whole human race." In other words, Christ’s blood was shed for the whole human race.
Matthew 20:28- "‘Many’ is used, not for a definite number, but for a large number, in that He sets Himself over against all others. And this is its meaning also in Rom. 5:15, where Paul is not talking of a part of mankind but of the whole human race."
John 1:29- "And when he says the sin OF THE WORLD, He extends this favour indiscriminately to the whole human race....all men without exception are guilty of unrighteousness before God and need to be reconciled to Him....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...faith."
John 3:16- "He has employed the universal term whosoever, both to invite all indiscriminately to partake of life, and to cut off every excuse from unbelievers....He shows Himself to be reconciled to the whole world, when He invites all men without exception to the faith of Christ."
Romans 5:18- "He makes this favor common to all, because it is propoundable to all, and not because it is in reality extended to all (i.e. in the experience); for though Christ suffered for the sins of the whole world, and is offered through God’s benignity indiscriminately to all, yet all do not receive Him."
2 Corinthians 5:19- God "shows Himself to be reconciled to the whole world" and Calvin goes on to say that the "whole world" means "all men without exception."
Galatians 5:12- "It is the will of God that we should seek the salvation of all men without exception, as Christ suffered for the sins of the whole world."
Colossians 1:15- "This redemption was procured by the blood of Christ, for by the sacrifice of His death all the sins of the world have been expiated."
Hebrews 5:9- "He (the writer of Hebrews) has inserted the universal term ‘to all’ to show that no one is excluded from this salvation who proves to be attentive and obedient to the Gospel of Christ."
Calvin even taught that the lost were purchased by Christ's blood: "It is no small matter to have the souls perish who were bought by the blood of Christ" (The Myster of Godliness, p. 83).
Skip's Lighthouse: CALVIN'S FAVORITE FLOWER WAS NOT A T.U.L.I.P.
This would mean that John Calvin was not a Calvinist, at least not according to how the term is understood today.
There are four point Calvinists. Granted, he wouldn't want any aspect of theology named after him.
1 Corinthians 3
4
For when one says, "I follow Paul," and another, "I follow Apollos," are you not mere men?
5
What, after all, is Apollos? And what is Paul? Only servants, through whom you came to believe--as the Lord has assigned to each his task.
Well, I believe that Christ's death was enough for all sins you commit: past, present and future.
Our ordination is a gift from God. We cannot earn it. We all deserve eternal damnation, yet God is merciful.
There are several views on that. Another view is that his central concept is what he calls our mystical union with Christ. I think you can make a good argument that this is what Paul meant by faith, or at least was the most important thing that faith led to. Predestination wasn’t even in the first edition of the Institutes. This is part of why there can be liberals who admire Calvin. I hesitate to say Calvinists, because that term has come to mean believers in TULIP.The central theme of Calvin's writings was not predestination or limited atonement but God's grace, and I believe that those who claim to be Calvin's followers neglect this theme when they act ungracious to anyone who disagrees with their soteriology.
10 And not only this, but when Rebecca also had conceived by one man, even by our father Isaac 11 (for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls), 12 it was said to her, “The older shall serve the younger.” 13 As it is written, “Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated.”
14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? Certainly not! 15 For He says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion.” 16 So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to the Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I may show My power in you, and that My name may be declared in all the earth.” 18 Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens.
19 You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?” 20 But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, “Why have you made me like this?” 21 Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?
22 What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23 and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory, 24 even us whom He called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?
Calvinist - Arminian = Lutheran
29. The best and infallible preparation for grace and the sole disposition toward grace is the eternal election and predestination of God.
30. On the part of man, however, nothing precedes grace except indisposition and even rebellion against grace.
31. It is said with the idlest demonstrations that the predestined can be damned individually but not collectively. This in opposition to the scholastics.
32. Moreover, nothing is achieved by the following saying: Predestination is necessary by virtue of the consequence of God’s willing, but not of what actually followed, namely, that God had to elect a certain person.
33. And this is false, that doing all that one is able to do can remove the obstacles to grace. This in opposition to several authorities.
34. In brief, man by nature has neither correct precept nor good will.
Contend Earnestly: Luther's 97 Theses: Disputation Against Scholastic Theology
The doctrine of unconditional election says that God chooses those who will be saved free of any condition in himself or in us. It says that there is nothing in us that warrants God choosing us. Paul argues for unconditional election in Romans 9:6-13, where he explains that God chose Isaac over Ishmael and Jacob over Esau without regard to anything they had done.
He anticipates the common objection, “Not fair!” in verse 14. Paul continues in building his case, stating that mercy is not mercy and grace is not grace unless God is free to give them to whomever he chooses...
This is what unconditional election teaches us: God, in his grace, moves first to free our wills from the bondage of sin, so we can hear and see and believe the beauty of the Gospel. Why do I love this doctrine?
It humbles me. I bring nothing. I add nothing. I accomplish nothing apart from the grace of God. By grace I have been saved through faith. This is not my own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of my works, so that I may not boast (Eph. 2:8-9). I am no better than anyone else because I have faith in Christ. My faith is not an accomplishment that I can boast about. It is the gift of God.
It comforts me. I believe in Christ because of God’s gracious and free act of choosing me before the foundation of the world (Eph. 1:4). There is nothing I can do to “un-deserve” his gracious act because I have done nothing to deserve it in the first place. I can rest in God’s love because it moves toward me unconditionally.
It astonishes me... I have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. I was dead in my trespasses and sins. Why me? I am astonished at God’s free, unmerited love and grace which he has lavished on me.
Why I Love the Doctrine of Unconditional Election
Augustine of Hippo produced a first concise interpretation of Romans 9 to which reformed commentators approach Romans 9:14-25. Expositing Romans 9:16, Augustine noted that God “loved Jacob in unmerited mercy, yet hated Esau with merited justice”. He explained,
Since this judgment [of wrath] was due them both, the former learned from what happened to the other that the fact that he had not, with equal merit, incurred the same penalty gave him no ground to boast of his own distinctive merits (Augustine 2005: n.p)
None, according Augustine, “is set free saved by unmerited mercy” and none “is damned save by a merited condemnation.”(ibid). God chose some individuals to bestow His mercy and others, the not chosen, His justice. Augustine expounded,
Certainly wrath is not repaid unless it is due, lest there be unrighteousness with God; but mercy, even when it is bestowed, and not due, is not unrighteousness with God. And hence, let the vessels of mercy understand how freely mercy is afforded to them, because to the vessels of wrath with whom they have common cause and measure of perdition, is repaid wrath, righteous and due.(Augustine 1887: 423–4)
Martin Luther understood Romans 9:15 to mean, “I will have mercy on whom I intended to have mercy, or whom I predestinated for mercy.”(Luther 1976: 139), He went further,
“I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion (9:15). That means: I will give grace, in time and life, to him concerning whom I purposed from eternity to show mercy. On him will I have compassion and forgive his sin in time and life whom I forgave and pardoned from all eternity.(ibid)
Reformed Approach to Romans 9:14-25
I don't think he did. Iirc, limited atonement came about later after Calvin's death.
I don't know what you mean.
Martin Luther, like John Calvin, taught total depravity and unconditional election. This is from Luther's 97 Theses, which he wrote before the 95 Theses:
I don't know what you mean.
Martin Luther, like John Calvin, taught total depravity and unconditional election. This is from Luther's 97 Theses, which he wrote before the 95 Theses:
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?