The middle point of the TULIP of Calvinism is “Limited
Atonement,” usually represented as the affirmation that only the sins of the
elect were laid on Christ, while the sins of the rest of the human race were
not. The Bible is very clear on this question—see my article on it here. What, however, did
Calvin teach? Consider the following quotation from his commentary on Romans
5:18:
Atonement,” usually represented as the affirmation that only the sins of the
elect were laid on Christ, while the sins of the rest of the human race were
not. The Bible is very clear on this question—see my article on it here. What, however, did
Calvin teach? Consider the following quotation from his commentary on Romans
5:18:
18. 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. . . . . He does not say the
righteousness — dikaiosunen, but the justification — dikaioma, of Christ, in
order to remind us that he was not as an individual just for himself, but that
the righteousness with which he was endued reached farther, in order that, by
conferring this gift, he might enrich the faithful. He makes this favor
common to all, because it is propounded to all, and not because it is in
reality extended to all; 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.
all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came
upon all men unto justification of life. . . . . He does not say the
righteousness — dikaiosunen, but the justification — dikaioma, of Christ, in
order to remind us that he was not as an individual just for himself, but that
the righteousness with which he was endued reached farther, in order that, by
conferring this gift, he might enrich the faithful. He makes this favor
common to all, because it is propounded to all, and not because it is in
reality extended to all; 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.
Similarly, commenting on Galatians 5:12, Calvin wrote:
“[I]t 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.”
of all men without exception, as Christ suffered for the
sins of the whole world.”
Commenting on Mark 14:24, Calvin wrote:
“The word many does not mean a part of the
world only, but the whole human race.”
world only, but the whole human race.”
Calvin preached that those for whom Christ died could be
lost:
lost:
“It is no small matter to have the souls
perish who were bought by the blood of Christ.” (Sermon 6, 2 Tim 2:19,
pg. 83, A Selection of the Most Celebrated Sermons of John
Calvin, John Calvin)
perish who were bought by the blood of Christ.” (Sermon 6, 2 Tim 2:19,
pg. 83, A Selection of the Most Celebrated Sermons of John
Calvin, John Calvin)
In the words of the P. J. Zondervan Professor of Historical
Theology at Calvin Theological Seminary and renowned Reformed scholar Richard
Muller:
Theology at Calvin Theological Seminary and renowned Reformed scholar Richard
Muller:
As to the specific issues usually gathered together under
the vague language of “limited atonement” . . . there is also a body of
material, including statements made by Calvin, most notably in commentaries and
sermons, that points toward several non-speculative forms of hypothetical
universalism, notably as found in the thought of Davenant and DuMoulin, as
argued within the bounds of the traditional formula, sufficienter pro omnibus,
efficienter pro electis, [sufficient for all, efficient for the elect.] . . .
He . . . prefer[ed] to speak of the valor and virtus of Christ’s work as
extending to all sin or to the redemption of the world, undergirding the
indiscriminate preaching of the gospel and the promise that all who believe
will be saved. . . . Calvin taught that the value, virtue, or merit of Christ’s
work served as sufficient payment for the sins of all human beings, and
provided the basis for the divine promise that all who believe will be saved,
assuming that believers are recipients of God’s grace and that unbelievers are
“left without excuse[.]” . . . On the other hand, Calvin assumed
that Christ’s work, albeit sufficient payment for the sins of the world and for
securing the salvation of all human beings in even a thousand worlds, is by
divine intention effective for the elect only[.] . . . In the case of the
doctrine of Christ’s satisfaction for sin, since Christ paid the price of all
sin and accomplished a redemption capable of saving the whole world, his
benefits are clearly placed before, proffered, or offered to all who hear . . .
Calvin’s approach to the value, merit, or sufficiency of Christ’s work assumed
that it was unlimited and could therefore undergird the universality of the
promise and the indiscriminate preaching of the gospel[.] (pgs. 104-106, Calvin
and the Reformed Tradition: On the Work of Christ and the Order of Salvation,
Richard A. Muller. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2012).
the vague language of “limited atonement” . . . there is also a body of
material, including statements made by Calvin, most notably in commentaries and
sermons, that points toward several non-speculative forms of hypothetical
universalism, notably as found in the thought of Davenant and DuMoulin, as
argued within the bounds of the traditional formula, sufficienter pro omnibus,
efficienter pro electis, [sufficient for all, efficient for the elect.] . . .
He . . . prefer[ed] to speak of the valor and virtus of Christ’s work as
extending to all sin or to the redemption of the world, undergirding the
indiscriminate preaching of the gospel and the promise that all who believe
will be saved. . . . Calvin taught that the value, virtue, or merit of Christ’s
work served as sufficient payment for the sins of all human beings, and
provided the basis for the divine promise that all who believe will be saved,
assuming that believers are recipients of God’s grace and that unbelievers are
“left without excuse[.]” . . . On the other hand, Calvin assumed
that Christ’s work, albeit sufficient payment for the sins of the world and for
securing the salvation of all human beings in even a thousand worlds, is by
divine intention effective for the elect only[.] . . . In the case of the
doctrine of Christ’s satisfaction for sin, since Christ paid the price of all
sin and accomplished a redemption capable of saving the whole world, his
benefits are clearly placed before, proffered, or offered to all who hear . . .
Calvin’s approach to the value, merit, or sufficiency of Christ’s work assumed
that it was unlimited and could therefore undergird the universality of the
promise and the indiscriminate preaching of the gospel[.] (pgs. 104-106, Calvin
and the Reformed Tradition: On the Work of Christ and the Order of Salvation,
Richard A. Muller. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2012).
Calvin was exactly right when he taught that Christ’s death
was a payment for the sins of all men, not for the elect alone. Calvinists
everywhere should give heed to what John Calvin said and recognize that the
sins of every individual of the human race were placed on Christ, who suffered
for them all, since God so loved the world—not the elect only—that He gave His
only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have
everlasting life. Christ Jesus gave Himself a ransom for all (Jn 3:16; 1 Tim
2:6).
was a payment for the sins of all men, not for the elect alone. Calvinists
everywhere should give heed to what John Calvin said and recognize that the
sins of every individual of the human race were placed on Christ, who suffered
for them all, since God so loved the world—not the elect only—that He gave His
only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have
everlasting life. Christ Jesus gave Himself a ransom for all (Jn 3:16; 1 Tim
2:6).
Recent Comments