Posting # 21

John Calvin's Unlimited Atonement

 "Fundamental to the doctrine of faith in John Calvin (1509-1564)

is his belief that Christ died indiscriminately for all men.”

      The above claim is the introductory sentence to the first chapter of R. T. Kendall's book Calvin and English Calvinism to 1649 (republished, Paternoster Press, 1997).   This claim was made much earlier by Moise Amyraut (1596 – 1644) who thought he was following Calvin when he insisted that Christ died for all men.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

      Kendall buttresses this assertion with citations from Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion, Sermons on Isaiah and numerous quotations from Calvin's commentaries including - Isaiah 53:12; Matt. 11:27; 20:28; 26:24; Mark 14:24; John 1:28; 3:16, 17; 4:42, 11:25; 12:47; 14:16, 31; 15:9, 15; 17:1, 2, 3, 9, 20; Rom. 4:13; 5:10, 11, 15, 17, 18; 8:38-39; 10:16; Gal. 5:12; Col. 1:14; Heb. 2:9; 8:4; 9:14, 28; 2 Peter 1:10; 1 John 2:1, 2 (See NOTE # 1 below.).

      Kendall is the author of more than 40 books.   His purpose in this book is not to demonstrate that Calvin's view of the atonement is scriptural.   His only purpose is to set forth what Calvin believed.   Kendall's book is a piece of historical theology not dogmatic theology.

      Dr. R.T. Kendall followed Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones as Senior Minister of Westminster Chapel for 25 years from 1977 to 2002.   He retired to Largo Sound in Key Largo, Florida. He describes his relationship to Lloyd-Jones: “We were like father and son for the four years I was also his Minister – from 1977 to 1981.”

      In a personal email to me, dated 9/7/04, Kendall writes: “I know that Martyn Lloyd-Jones was absolutely convinced I got it right as to Calvin's views.   He showed me passage after passage I had not even used.” (This quote is used with Kendall's permission.)   This does not mean that Lloyd-Jones accepted Calvin's doctrine of faith.   It means that Lloyd-Jones was fully convinced that John Calvin did not believe in “limited atonement.”

UNLIMITED ATONEMENT  

      That Calvin believed “that Christ died indiscriminately for all men” is an astonishing claim for those who, like myself, have always read the works of Calvin from the perspective of the five points of the Canons of Dort.    We must keep in mind, however, that the five Arminian propositions and Dort's response to them (Total Depravity-Unconditional Election-Limited Atonement-Irresistible Grace-Perseverance of the Saints) were formulated some 40 years after Calvin's death.

      In Kendall's words, Calvin believed: “That Jesus died for everybody without exception but that the blood he shed was applied to God's elect only and made effectual as a consequence of Christ's intercession at the Father's right hand.”

      Calvin repeatedly and explicitly affirms four of the traditional five points of doctrine explicated in the Canons of Dort.   Such repeated, explicit, affirmations regarding the doctrine of “limited atonement” are not found in Calvin's writings.   Serious students of Calvin admit that there is only one instance in Calvin's writings that appears to be an explicit denial of the universality of the atonement and this solitary quote is far from obvious (See NOTE # 2 below.).

THE SO-CALLED "UNIVERSALISTIC" TEXTS

      Calvin seldom comments on those texts that speak plainly of Christ having died to save “the world” or “all men” (the texts I refer to as the "so-called" universalistic texts N.P.). Calvin leaves such verses alone because he accepts these verses to mean what they clearly say. “He [Calvin] generally leaves verses like these alone, but never does he explain, for example, that ‘all' does not mean all or ‘world' does not mean world , as those after him tended to do” (Kendall, p. 13).  

      The internal quotes in the following paragraph are from the works of Calvin and are accurately referenced on page 14 of Kendall's book:

     “Had Christ died only for those whom God has chosen by His secret decree, then, it would obviously cease to be a pledge to all.   But ‘our Lord Jesus suffered for all and there is neither great nor small who is not inexcusable today, for we can obtain salvation in Him'.   This is why ‘no worse injury can be done to Him than not to believe the Gospel'.   John 3:16 says God so loved ‘the world' which is ‘a general term, both to invite indiscriminately all to share in life and to cut off every excuse from unbelievers'.”

      Therefore faith to Calvin may be described as knowing and personally believing “what God has already done in Christ” (p. 20).   Because Christ died for all, without exception, this grace can be offered to all and believers can look to Christ by faith and thus be assured that what Christ has done for “all” necessarily includes them.

NEITHER A UNIVERSALIST NOR AN ARMINIAN

      Although Calvin believed that Christ died for “all,” it is obvious that he was not a Universalist.   Kendall quotes Calvin, “God does not indiscriminately adopt all into the hope of salvation but gives to some what He denies to others.”   Again quoting Calvin, “eternal life is foreordained for some, eternal damnation for others” (p. 15).

     Christ died for every person without any exception, nevertheless, until faith is given, “all that He has suffered and done for the salvation of the human race remains useless and of no value for us” (Institutes III. i. 1).

      The decree of election is not rendered effectual by Christ's death, according to Calvin, but the ascension was the event that “opened the way into the Heavenly Kingdom, which had been closed through Adam” (Calvin's Institutes II.xvi.16).   Christ first shed his blood and then entered heaven to intercede for God's people.   This is for-shadowed by the High Priest who never entered the place of intercession without the blood having first been shed (Commentary on Isa. 53:12).   The analogy is this: “The death of Christ was the fulfillment of open sacrifice on the Altar; the Intercession was the fulfillment of the high priests sprinkling the blood on the Mercy Seat.   It is there that the atonement is limited, not at the place of the sacrifice” (p. vii, Kendall).

      Christ intercedes only for the elect.   They receive the grace to believe that Christ died for them.   “I pray for them. I am not praying for the world, but for those you have given me, for they are yours” (John 17:9).

"MANY," "ALL," "WORLD" CAN DENOTE "ALL"

NOTE # 1 - Kendall's “Appendix 1” is comprised of 16 pages of nothing but quotations taken from Calvin's commentaries (pp. 214 – 230).   Here is a portion of these quotes:

Isa. 53:12 - “ He bore the sin of many.   I approve of the ordinary reading, that He alone bore the punishment of man, 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.”

John 1:28 - “And when he says the sin of the world he extends this kindness indiscriminately to the whole human race.”

John 3:16 - “He nevertheless shows He is favorable to the whole world when He calls all without exception to the faith of Christ, which is indeed an entry into life.”

John 3:17 - “The word world comes again so that no one at all may think he is excluded."

John 4:17 - “He declared that the salvation He had brought was common to the whole world, so that they should understand more easily that it belonged to them also.”

John 12:47 - “For He delayed pronouncing judgment on them, because He had come rather for the salvation of all."

John 14:30 - “For the word world here embraced the whole human race.”

John 16:8 - “I think that under the word world are included both those who were to be truly converted to Christ and hypocrites and reprobates.”

John 17:9 - “He openly declares that he does not pray for the world, for He is solicitous only for His own flock which He received from the Father's hand.”

Rom. 5:18 - “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.”

Gal. 5:12 - “For God commends to us the salvation of all men without exception, even as Christ suffered for the sins of the whole world.”

Col. 1:14 - “He says that 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.”

Heb. 2:9 - “He suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for every man.”

Heb. 8:4 - “He made atonement for the sins of the world as a Priest.”

Heb. 9:28 - “He says many meaning all, as in Rom. 5:15.”

1 John 2:1 - “The reason why God does not impute our sins to us is because He looks upon Christ the intercessor.”

      On pages 229, 230 Kendall records these citations from Calvin's Sermons on Isaiah where Georgius argues “Christ is the propitiation of the sins of whole world; and hence those who wish to exclude the reprobate from participation in Christ must place them outside the world.”   This argument has no weight with Calvin because:   “Wherever the faithful are dispersed throughout the world, John extends to them the expiation wrought by Christ's death.   But this does not alter the fact that the reprobate are mixed up with the elect in the world.   It is incontestable that Christ came for the expiation of the sins of the whole world.   But the solution lies close at hand; that whosoever believes in Him should not perish but should have eternal life (John 3:16). For the present question is not how great the power of Christ is or what efficacy it has in itself, but to whom He gives Himself to be enjoyed.”   According to Calvin, Christ “gives himself to be enjoyed” to the elect only by continually interceding for them at the “mercy seat.”

      Again, Calvin notes that although the message that “God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men's sins against them” (2 Cor. 5:18, 19) “reaches to all, but that it is not sealed indiscriminately on the hearts of all to whom it comes so as to be effectual.”

APPENDIX # 2, BY DR. CURT DANIEL

NOTE # 2 - Kendall's “Appendix 2” is an extract from the Ph. D. thesis of Dr. Curt Daniel, New College, Edinburgh 1983 (pp. 231 - 238). Daniel discusses the only example of what appears to be an “explicit denial of the universality of the atonement” that can be found in  Calvin's writings (p. 231).

      This single instance appears where Calvin is refuting Heshusius' view that unbelievers eat and drink the body and blood of Christ when they profanely partake of the Lord's Supper.   Heshusius (a Lutheran) contended that this is true because it is said “this is my body” and “this is my blood.”   Calvin believed that Christ is only spiritually present in the elements.   That is, Christ is truly present in the elements of the Lord's Supper only for those who partake in true faith by the power of the Holy Spirit.

      Calvin therefore argues: “And as he [Heshusius] adheres so doggedly to the words, I should like to know how the wicked can eat the flesh which was not crucified for them? And how they can drink the blood which was not shed to expiate their sins? I agree with him, that Christ is present as a strict judge when his supper is profaned.   But it is one thing to be eaten and another to be a judge . . . . Christ, considered as the living bread and the victim immolated on the cross, cannot enter any human body which is devoid of his Spirit” ( Tracts and Treatise , Vol. II, p. 527).

THE ABOVE PARAGRAPH IS NOT "AN  EXPLICIT DENIAL OF

THE UNIVERSALITY OF THE ATONEMENT"

      Calvin, in the above quote, points to the fact that he [Heshusius] “adheres so doggedly to the words.” What words? “this is my body,” “this is my blood.”   Calvin is here arguing that Christ is only spiritually present and consequently only those who partake in true faith eat and drink the body and blood of Christ.

      Daniel says: “We would paraphrase the words in the Treatise quotation as follows: ‘I should like to know how the wicked can eat the flesh of Christ if they do not believe that Christ was crucified for them'” (p. 236).

      Traditionally Reformed scholars have looked at the phrases “the flesh which was not crucified for them” and “the blood which was not shed to expiate their sins” in isolation from the context of Calvin's refuting the physical presence of Christ in the elements.   So viewed the phrases seem to clearly teach that Calvin did not believe that Christ was crucified and shed his blood for “all men.”

      Beginning with this supposedly “clear teaching” they then claim that all the other references in Calvin's writings about the extent of the atonement must be interpreted in the light of ‘this one explicit statement” (p. 232).   Daniel argues against such a methodology by noting that it strikes him as strange indeed that those who so intensely search among the writings of Calvin can only produce this solitary quotation.   He then observes, “Surely to argue on the basis of this solitary quote, no matter what it means, against the flood of the rest of the testimony is precarious at best” (p. 231).

FURTHER PROOF

      In the rest of Appendix 2 Daniel cogently argues his case by citing the many references in Calvin's Institutes , the Treatise and commentaries that emphasize that those who do not partake of the supper in true faith by the power of the Spirit do not eat the body or drink the blood of Christ.

      Daniel concludes that Calvin taught: “That Christ died for all men.   The believer knows that he is a man and therefore that Christ died for him.   Saving faith accepts this.   The conclusion is that without a Universal atonement no man can know by the Gospel that Christ died for him.   In this sense we can agree with Kendall's introductory sentence to his first chapter: ‘Fundamental to the doctrine of faith in John Calvin (1509-1564) is his belief that Christ died indiscriminately for all men'” (p. 238).

My Observations (Neal Punt)

      Calvin's doctrine of faith would provide the church with a clear basis in its outreach ministry, for saying to everyone — “Christ died for you.”   Such a gospel would also provide an assurance of salvation for believers. Because Christ atoned for the sins of every human being, therefore believers may know that Christ atoned for their sins.

      However, we do not accept Calvin's doctrine of faith for two reasons:

1.) The Rule of Intended Consequences —  The three persons of the Trinity are fully united in their work and intentions.    Election by the Father, redemption by the Son and sanctification by the Holy Spirit are all intended for the same persons.  All those whose sin was atoned for by Christ were elect in Him before he foundation of the world.  "Being confident of this, that he who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus" (Phil. 1:6).  God does not begin a good work in any of his elect and not "carry it on to completion."

2.) God's Justice — If some perish for whom Christ died then God would be demanding double payment: the payment of Christ's atonement and the payment of the reprobate's judgment.   Calvin's reply to this objection that they are “doubly culpable” because of their ingratitude, “in not receiving the blessing in which they could share by faith” (p. 16), is inadequate.   Calvin's answer might apply to those who hear the gospel but it would not pertain to those who never hear the good news during their lifetime on earth.   Calvin seldom spoke of such people.

      To make the claim, as J. I. Packer and many others do, that the Synod of Dort's formula of limited atonement states what Calvin “would have said had he faced the Arminian thesis” (p. 1) misses the point completely.   For the question is not “what Calvin would have said.” The question is: “What, in fact, did Calvin say about the extent of the atonement?”

How does all of the above relate to Evangelical Inclusivism?

     (A) - I have emphatically said that Evangelical Inclusivism is based on three biblical facts, one of which is: “We must accept the so-called ‘universalistic' texts as written” (See Point 3. below.).   With Calvin's doctrine of faith he would have no difficulty accepting the fact that: “the 'so-called' universalistic texts speak of an actual, certain to be realized salvation and they do so in terms of all persons."

      The difference is that for Calvin the narrowing of the universalistic texts is found in Christ's limited intercessory work which is done in behalf of the elect only even though he atoned for the sins of everyone.

      On the other hand Evangelical Inclusivism finds that the “so-called” universalistic texts are limited by the exceptions that are necessarily imposed upon these passages by the broader context of the Scriptures as a whole (See Point 3 below.).

     (B) - The only real question is: How does the Bible limit the extent of those passages that clearly state that Christ died to save “the world,” or “all men”?

     The subject of John Calvin's Unlimited Atonement is continued at Posting # 22.

                                                 Cordially, Neal Punt <whenindoubt1@charter.com>

EVANGELICAL INCLUSIVISM is the teaching that all persons are elect in Christ except those who the Bible expressly declares will be finally lost, namely, those who ultimately reject or remain indifferent to whatever revelation God has given of himself to them whether in nature/conscience or in gospel presentation.

Evangelical Inclusivism is based upon these three biblical facts:

1) The so-called "universalistic" texts speak of a certain-to-be-realized salvation as Calvinist have consistently maintained and they do so in terms of all persons as Arminians have always affirmed. (See Posting # 2.)

2) All persons, except Jesus Christ, are liable for and polluted by the imputed sin of Adam (inherited sin). However, the Scriptures do not teach or imply that anyone is consigned to eternal damnation solely on the basis of their sin in Adam APART FROM actual, willful and persistent sin on the part of the person so consigned. (See Posting # 3.)

3) We must accept the so-called "universalistic" texts as written. We may allow only thoseexceptions that are necessarily imposed upon these passages from the broader context of the Scriptures as a whole. (see Posting # 4.)

Contact the author, Neal Punt, at: whenindoubt1@charter.net

© 2003 by Northland Books. Box 63, Allendale MI 49401. Unlimited permission to copy and distribute this document without altering text is hereby granted if this source is acknowledged.