The following
Calvin quote is given by Norman Geisler in Chosen But
Free (page 156-157, 1st edition; pages
161-162, 2nd edition):
Eternal
Predestination of God IX.5
Mark 14:24. This is my blood- I have
already warned, when the blood is said to be poured out
(as in Matthew) for the remission of sins, how in
these words we are directed to the sacrifice of Christ's
death, and to neglect this thought makes any due
celebration of the Supper impossible. In no other way can
faithful souls be satisfied if they cannot believe that
God is pleased in their regard. 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. It is incontestable
that Christ came for the expiation of the sins of the
whole world".
Geisler’s Interpretation:
The
“many” for whom Christ died means the whole human race[1]
Geisler utilizes
this alleged quote from Calvin’s treatise, The Eternal
Predestination of God. Unfortunately, the majority of
this quote doesn’t appear in that treatise, but is rather
from one of Calvin’s commentaries on the Gospels. Hence, the
quote is somewhat of a fabrication: only the last sentence
is from The Eternal Predestination of God. To prove
this, first read through Calvin’s comment on Mark 14:24
below. I have bolded the text used by Geisler. Observe how
the sentence “It is incontestable that Christ came for
the expiation of the sins of the whole world” is
completely absent.
Mark
14:24. This is
my blood. I have already remarked that, when we are
told that the blood is to be shed—according to the
narrative of Matthew—FOR
THE REMISSION OF SINS, these words direct us to the
sacrifice of the death of Christ, without the remembrance
of which the Lord’s Supper is never observed in a proper
manner. And, indeed, it is impossible for believing souls
to be satisfied in any other way than by being assured
that God is pacified towards them.
Which is shed for many.
By the word many he means not a part
of the world only, but the whole human race; for he
contrasts many with one;
as if he had said, that he will not be the Redeemer of
one man only, but will die in order to deliver many
from the condemnation of the curse. It must at the
same time be observed, however, that by the words for
you, as related by Luke—Christ directly addresses the
disciples, and exhorts every believer to apply to his own
advantage the shedding of blood Therefore, when we
approach to the holy table, let us not only remember in
general that the world has been redeemed by the blood of
Christ, but let every one consider for himself that his
own sins have been expiated.[2]
Where is the
sentence “It is incontestable that Christ came for the
expiation of the sins of the whole world”? It is found
in Calvin’s treatise, The Eternal Predestination of God.
How did this happen? Did Geisler deliberately fabricate this
quote? My judgment is no, it is probably not deliberate, it
is rather sloppy scholarship. I went back and checked the
source Geisler pulls from: R.T. Kendall’s book Calvin and
English Calvinism to 1649. A section of a lengthy
footnote on page thirteen reads as follows:
…‘The word many’, Calvin says, ‘does
not mean a part of the world only, but the whole human
race’. Comm. Mark 14:24. It is ‘incontestable that
Christ came for the expiation of the sins of the whole
world’. Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God
(1961) (hereinafter called Predestination), 148.”[3]
If Geisler
utilized Kendall here, what seems to have happened is that
whoever compiled this quote ignored a period and thought
Kendall was quoting from only one source, when in fact he
was quoting from two. However, when republishing this quote,
Geisler (or someone) must have knowingly went and added a
fuller context to the quote from Calvin’s comments on Mark
14:24, and simply added the sentence in the extra sentence.
Interestingly, Calvin’s comment on Mark 14:24 is cited
elsewhere in Chosen But Free, and the reference given
is to Calvin’s comment on Mark 14:24, so obviously Geisler
must be aware of the correct reference, minus the added
sentence.
The section from
The Eternal Predestination of God is worth quoting at
length. Calvin is responding to Georgius (a universalist) on
unlimited atonement:
Georgius thinks he argues very acutely when
he says: Christ is the propitiation for the sins of the
whole world; and hence those who wish to exclude the
reprobate from participation in Christ must place them
outside the world. For this, the common solution does not
avail, that Christ suffered sufficiently for all, but
efficaciously only for the elect. By this great absurdity,
this monk has sought applause in his own fraternity, but
it has no weight with me. 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 (Jn 3.15). 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. If possession
lies in faith and faith emanates from the Spirit of
adoption, it follows that only he is reckoned in the
number of God's children who will be a partaker of Christ.
The evangelist John sets forth the office of Christ as
nothing else than by His death to gather the children of
God into one (Jn 11.52). Hence, we conclude that, though
reconciliation is offered to all through Him, yet the
benefit is peculiar to the elect, that they may be
gathered into the society of life. However, while I say it
is offered to all, I do not mean that this embassy, by
which on Paul's testimony (II Cor 5.18) God reconciles the
world to Himself, reaches to all, but that it is not
sealed indiscriminately on the hearts of all to whom it
comes so as to be effectual. As for his talk about no
respect of persons, let him learn first what the term
person means, and then we shall have no more trouble in
the matter.[4]
If in fact
Geisler got this quote from Kendall’s footnote, it should be
immediately pointed out that Kendall has taken the quote out
of context. Frederick Leahy explains,
“…those who appeal to Calvin's remarks on
the "all" and "world" passages have been less than fair to
him, at times, quoting selectively and even out of
context. Such manipulation results in distortion. Thus
Kendall quotes, out of context, from "Concerning the
Eternal Predestination of God," it is "incontestable that
Christ came for the expiation of the sins of the whole
world." In context Calvin's intent becomes clear. He is
discussing 1 John 2:2:
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 (Jn.
3:15). 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.
When Calvin's statement, in italics above, is
wrested from its context, it can convey a meaning opposite
to the Reformer's intention.”[5]
[1] CBF 156-157.
Emphasis by Dr. Geisler.
[2] John Calvin,
Commentary on The Harmony of The Gospels Vol. 3, in
The Comprehensive John Calvin Collection (Ages
Digital Library, 1998).
[3] R.T Kendall,
Calvin and English Calvinism to 1649, (Waynesboro:
Paternoster Press, 1997), 13. Emphasis by Kendall.
[4] John Calvin,
Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God,
148-149. The full context of this quote is available on
line at: http://www.reformed.org/documents/calvin/calvin_predestination.html.
[5]
Frederick S. Leahy, “Calvin and the Extent of the
Atonement,” Reformed Theological Journal 8 (November
1992), 60.