by Angus Harley

The series of articles I have written recently about the so-called extent of the atonement material in Calvin revealed that he did not use any modern playbook. In fact, the actual question of the extent of the atonement is not something he was interested in. Yes, theological comments are made by him that place him within a broad Calvinistic stream as to to comments about those for whom Jesus died, but his hermeneutic is not concerned with abstracting the death of Christ and then asking of it, ‘for whom did Christ die on the cross two thousand years ago?’ For the same reason, he had no time in a practical sense (although he acknowledged its theological viability) for Lombard’s formula: the cross was sufficient for all, but efficient for some. Calvin had his own playbook, one that predated ‘Covenant Theology’, TULIP,  Amyraldianism, and Arminianism, never mind the modern representations of each of these models.

We are going to see yet another version of Calvin’s unique playbook in action, this time in regard to his comments about those who are redeemed by the blood of Christ, only to cast off Christ’s redemption to pursue godlessness. This type of statement by Calvin is considered by some as a bomb-proof example of Amyraldianism or unlimited atonement. We will look at two comments by Calvin that supposedly teach this bomb-proof theology: his commentary on 2 Peter 2:1 and his commentary on Jude 1:4. These are joined together because Calvin says that Jude 1:4 is but a version of 2 Peter 2:1. I include Jude 1:4 for another reason: Calvin’s statement on that verse is considered by some to be even stronger that his view of 2 Peter 2:1. 

It is striking that the Amyraldians take to these ‘redeemed, no longer redeemed’ texts of Calvin as a duck to water, but Calvinists not so. I have found that popular or ordinary Calvinism accuses Calvin of ‘Arminianism’ in these comments. Some Calvinistic Calvin-scholars have given very little time to these comments by Calvin. To this day, I have found only one Calvinistic scholar, Jonathon Rainbow, who faces the full force of these ‘redeemed, yet not redeemed’ comments by Calvin. Due to this deficiency in the Reformed reading of Calvin, the Amyraldian take on these ‘redeemed, yet not redeemed’ comments remains a powerful counter-reading.

 2 Peter 2:1

Calvin’s comment

“1.But there were. As weak consciences are usually very grievously and dangerously shaken, when false teachers arise, who either corrupt or mutilate the doctrine of faith, it was necessary for the Apostle, while seeking to encourage the faithful to persevere, to remove out of the way an offense of this kind. He, moreover, comforted those to whom he was writing, and confirmed them by this argument, that God has always tried and proved his Church by such a temptation as this, in order that novelty might not disturb their hearts. “Not different,” he says, “will be the condition of the Church under the gospel, from what it was formerly under the law; false prophets disturbed the ancient Church; the same thing must also be expected by us.”

It was necessary expressly to shew this, because many imagined that the Church would enjoy tranquillity under the rein of Christ; for as the prophets had promised that at his coming there would be real peace, the highest degree of heavenly wisdom, and the full restoration of all things, they thought that the Church would be no more exposed to any contests. Let us then remember that the Spirit of God hath once for all declared, that the Church shall never be free from this intestine evil; and let this likeness be always borne in mind, that the trial of our faith is to be similar to that of the fathers, and for the same reason — that in this way it may be made evident, whether we really love God, as we find it written in Deuteronomy 13:3.

But it is not necessary here to refer to every example of this kind; it is enough, in short, to know that, like the fathers, we must contend against false doctrines, that our faith ought by no means to be shaken on account of discords and sects, because the truth of God shall remain unshaken notwithstanding the violent agitations by which Satan strives often to upset all things.

Observe also, that no one time in particular is mentioned by Peter, when he says there shall be false teachers, but that all ages are included; for he makes here a comparison between Christians and the ancient people. We ought, then, to apply this truth to our own time, lest, when we see false teachers rising up to oppose the truth of God, this trial should break us down. But the Spirit reminds us, in order that we may take the more heed; and to the same purpose is the whole description which follows.

He does not, indeed, paint each sect in its own colors, but particularly refers to profane men who manifested contempt towards God. The advice, indeed, is general, that we ought to beware of false teachers; but, at the same time, he selected one kind of such from whom the greater danger arose. What is said here will hereafter bsecome more evident from the words of Jude, [Judges 1:4,] who treats exactly of the same subject.

Who privily shall bring in. By these words he points out the craftiness of Satan, and of all the ungodly who militate under his banner, that they would creep in by oblique turnings, as through burrows under ground. The more watchful, then, ought the godly to be, so that they may escape their hidden frauds: for however they may insinuate themselves, they cannot circumvent those who are carefully vigilant.

He calls them opinions of perdition, or destructive opinions, that every one, solicitous for his salvation, might dread such opinions as the most noxious pests. As to the word opinions or heresies, it has not, without reason, been always deemed infamous and hateful by the children of God; for the bond of holy unity is the simple truth. As soon as we depart from that, nothing remains but dreadful discord.

Even denying the Lord that bought them. Though Christ may be denied in various ways, yet Peter, as I think, refers here to what is expressed by Jude, that is, when the grace of God is turned into lasciviousness; for Christ redeemed us, that he might have a people separated from all the pollutions of the world, and devoted to holiness and innocency. They, then, who throw off the bridle, and give themselves up to all kinds of licentiousness, are not unjustly said to deny Christ by whom they have been redeemed. Hence, that the doctrine of the gospel may remain whole and complete among us, let this be fixed in our minds, that we have been redeemed by Christ, that he may be the Lord of our life and of our death, and that our main object ought to be, to live to him and to die to him. He then says, that their swift destruction was at hand, lest others should be ensnared by them.”

What follows now is an exegesis of Calvin’s statement on 2 Peter 2:1.

The assembly is the setting

Some read the above statement and think it proves the principle of universal redemption: Jesus died for the world, redeeming, there, every single person in the world. Others offer a vaguer reading, maintaining that Jesus’ death on the cross provided redemptive blessings for the world, which are taken up only by the elect- those who are of faith. 

However, given Calvin’s commentary on 2 Peter 2:1, the above interpretations are radically out of step with his reasoning.  For one thing, the entire comment by him is concerned with the assembly and false teachers in it. There is no indication of a universal redemption upon the cross.Thus, Calvin lays out his real concern in this comment:

” “Not different,” he says, “will be the condition of the Church under the gospel, from what it was formerly under the law; false prophets disturbed the ancient Church; the same thing must also be expected by us.”

To insist on the setting of the cross and Jesus’ death there two thousand years ago is a plain case of vanilla eisegesis. The sole and true setting is the assembly.

Calvin’s nuanced use of universal terms

Calvin is not remotely concerned, therefore, with the theme of Christ’s death being of a universal benefit. That is why, in the above quote, he might use what is called ‘universal’ terminology but does so in his own fashion. He writes:

“He calls them opinions of perdition, or destructive opinions, that every one, solicitous for his salvation, might dread such opinions as the most noxious pests. As to the word opinions or heresies, it has not, without reason, been always deemed infamous and hateful by the children of God; for the bond of holy unity is the simple truth. As soon as we depart from that, nothing remains but dreadful discord.”

Who are the “every one” here? It is “every one” who is “solicitious for his salvation”; or, to be pointed, ‘everyone in the assembly solicitious for his salvation’. It is not ‘everyone in the world whom Christ died for on the cross’, ‘or everyone in the world’.

Calvin also states, “that [God] might have a people separated from all the pollutions of the world“. Here, in black and white, is a reference to the world as a system that produces nothing but evil. There is no connotation of ‘every single person’, much, much, less of ‘every single person who receives blessings from the cross’, or Christ dying for ‘every single person in the world’.

I will cheat just a tad here to give Calvin’s opening comment on 2 Peter 2:2, wherein he uses “world” once more in the sense of an evil system, not as ‘every single person’:

“And many shall follow. It is, indeed, no slight offense to the weak, when they see that false doctrines are received by the common consent of the world, that a large number of men are led astray, so that few continue in true obedience to Christ. So, at this day, there is nothing that more violently disturbs pious minds than such a defection.” [Calvin’s commentary on 2 Peter 2:2.]

Two historical stages to the one act of redemption

Modern views of God’s redemptive act locate the event of redemption solely in the cross: God redeemed us in Christ upon the cross. The question then becomes who “us” represents: elect or every single person in the world?

Calvin’s theology does not play by that rule, either. He believed in redemption having two historical facets: the first historical facet was the procurement, or price, of our redemption in Jesus’ death on the cross; and, the second historical facet is the real-time act of our redemption by faith in Jesus’ death on the cross. These two historical facets constitute one act of redemption in time, in history.

This model of redemption is brought out in Calvin’s comment. By his death, his blood, Jesus procured redemption. Yet, see how the actual act of redemption of “us” is not on the cross per se but in the experience of the assembly, so that they are drawn out of the world to follow the Lord:

“Even denying the Lord that bought them. Though Christ may be denied in various ways, yet Peter, as I think, refers here to what is expressed by Jude, that is, when the grace of God is turned into lasciviousness; for Christ redeemed us, that he might have a people separated from all the pollutions of the world, and devoted to holiness and innocency. They, then, who throw off the bridle, and give themselves up to all kinds of licentiousness, are not unjustly said to deny Christ by whom they have been redeemed. Hence, that the doctrine of the gospel may remain whole and complete among us, let this be fixed in our minds, that we have been redeemed by Christ, that he may be the Lord of our life and of our death, and that our main object ought to be, to live to him and to die to him. He then says, that their swift destruction was at hand, lest others should be ensnared by them.”

The fake faithful in the visible assembly

Still, we must account for the fact that part of the assembly was ‘redeemed’ by the blood and then fell away from this redemption. How does this work in Calvin’s thought? 

To get behind his position on redemption, we need to comprehend the visible-invisible assembly doctrine of Calvin’s. He was a believer, like Calvinists, in the visible-invisible assembly distinction. The invisible assembly was the true assembly, the elect, those of true faith (not fake faith), who were spiritually redeemed by the blood of Christ. The visible assembly comprises those same true believers mixed in with fake believers. The former is the assembly as seen by God; the latter the assembly as we perceive it in the flesh.

Yet, it is evident that this distinction by itself does not account for Calvin’s insistence that these fake believers were ‘redeemed’. So, what is going on?

External (physical) and Internal (spiritual) redemption

We spoke before of how Calvin views the one act of redemption in two historical stages: Jesus’ procuring redemption; and its application in time to the assembly. This is a hard enough distinction for many to comprehend. Much, much harder is Calvin’s belief in external and internal (whole) aspects of the one act of redemption. This nuanced position reflects his doctrine of the visible and invisible assembly.

To Calvin, God’s redemptive work in Christ Jesus is a complete spiritual act that accomplishes full salvation. Ensuing from faith in Christ’s blood are the many internal and spiritual blessings of salvation applied for, in, and on the soul. This completed act of spiritual redemption- through faith in Jesus’ death- is for the the invisible assembly alone, the elect only.

Yet, this spiritual and internal work is accompanied by another dimension of redemption, one that is external and pertains to life in this physical world, in the flesh. This is the point at which the reader will get bamboozled, no doubt; but I exhort you to hang on in there. External redemption is of the visible assembly only, for the visible assembly lives in this physical world. It is crucial to remember that, the visible assembly comprises fake and true believers. When Jesus redeemed his true saints (the elect in the invisible assembly), along with them were sown by Satan a vast number of fake believers. These ones, along with the true believers, did experience certain fruits and blessings that pertained to ‘spiritual redemption’s’ impact on life in this world. Now, this is not to say that fake believers were spiritually redeemed and then experienced these external fruits; for fake believers in the assembly did not experience true, or spiritual, redemption, only its external impact or form. What is implied by this highly confusing language? All in the visible assembly put their ‘faith’ in Christ’s ransom (even though for many it was fake faith), and proceeded to leave behind a life of disobedience in the flesh, in the world, and turned to follow their new Master, and this obedience was in the body, in the flesh, within this physical domain called ‘the world’.

Two aspects to the one act of redemption:

  1. Full and complete redemption from sin in the spiritual realm, for the elect alone, the invisible assembly;
  2. External redemption from physical participation in sin within this material, physical world, for the visible assembly:
    • 2A. For true believers, this physical aspect of redemption is the inevitable outworking of true and spiritual redemption as it impacts this physical world.
    • 2B. For fake believer, this physical aspect of redemption is a ‘fruit’ of being caught up with true believers. God’s raises the true seed, Satan plants tares. Fake believers never experience true redemption.

Two examples

First, let’s take an OT example of these two aspects of redemption, the external and the complete (internal, spiritual). Calvin comments on Isaiah 59:20:

“And to them who have turned away from iniquity. That the bastard children of Abraham may not apply indiscriminately to themselves what he has just now said, he proceeds to show to whom the redemption shall come, namely, to those only who have been truly consecrated to the Lord. It is certain that many returned from Babylon, who were not moved by any feeling of repentance, and yet who became partakers of the same blessing. But the Prophet speaks of the complete redemption which the elect alone enjoy; for, although the fruit of external redemption extends also to hypocrites, yet they have not embraced the blessing of God for salvation. The design of the Prophet is, to show that the punishment; of banishment will be advantageous, that God may gather his Church, after having purified it from filth and pollution; for we must always bear in remembrance what we saw elsewhere as to the diminution of the people.”

I went to the above quote because it is a tad more nuanced than those found elsewhere in Calvin, for it refers to the “fruit of external redemption” and not merely to “external redemption”. He puts matters this way to imply that real redemption does have an external form to it: it propels the sinner from life in physical conformity to this world’s standards, unto physical obedience to God’s truth. Yet, this external form of redemption sweeps up fake believers and puts them under its influence, for they, too, go through a form of physical transformation, which brings them from out under the world’s lifestyle conducted in the body, to temporarily, in the body, follow Christ’s teaching. Redemption is therefore both spiritual, internal and also external or physical. It is the latter dimension alone that fake believers, who were never spiritually redeemed, experience after a fashion.

Fast forward to the NT assembly in its visible form. It heard the message of spiritual redemption in the Gospel. In ‘believing’ in this message, ‘believers’ joined the community of faith, the assembly, that was devoted to this Gospel and separated from the filthy world. Think of Judas- separated from the world and its evil life unto service of the Christ, having ‘believed’ the Gospel. Yet, Judas, like the rest, was tested by the evil one and he was found wanting. In this we see that, he had never been internally or spiritually redeemed. He was, therefore, redeemed in a superficial, external, fashion only, solely as to the flesh and body, and this brought the ‘fruit’ with it of a temporary separation from the world.

Let’s summarize Calvin’s aspectival view of redemption:

  • External redemption is concerned with the physical only, not the spiritual. It is physical transformation that is indicated, not spiritual/regenerative.
  • External redemption pertains only to the visible assembly (elect and non-elect) and not to the invisible assembly (the elect only).
  • Both the elect and non-elect in this external form of redemption experience physical transformation in this world.
  • This external form of redemption is, as to the elect alone the physical expression of God’s redemptive work applied to the soul.
  • This external form of redemption is, as to the non-elect alone, merely a temporary, physical fruit of the impact in this world of God’s true and spiritual redemption.

The redemptive Gospel vs reversal, fake, gospel

This theology suits better Calvin’s references to the Gospel and God’s word. The whole content of Calvin’s statement on 2 Peter 2:1 is concerned with how the Gospel and its message of redemption impacted redemptively the assembly. This is yet another reason to exclude the notion that the redemption referred to is of every single person in the world at the time of Christ’s death. It also obviates the argument that it refers to ‘every single person in the world’ at that time, for the Gospel is here given to the assembly, to believers.

In an asymmetrical fashion, Satan uses false teachers and a false gospel to dislodge certain ‘believers’ (who were not the elect and were always fake believers) from the visible assembly, to undo and reverse this external redemption through the Gospel, and to bring them back to Satan through false teachers and a fake gospel. This concept is clearly brought out in Calvin’s commentary on 2 Peter 2:20:

“For if after. He again shews how pernicious was the sect which led men consecrated to God back again to their old filth and the corruptions of the world. And he exhibits the heinousness of the evil by a comparison; for it was no common sin to depart from the holy doctrine of God. It would have been better for them, he says, not to have known the way of righteousness; for though there is no excuse for ignorance, yet the servant who knowingly and wilfully despises the commands of his lord, deserves a twofold punishment. There was besides ingratitude, because they wilfully extinguished the light of God, rejected the favor conferred on them, and having shaken off the yoke, became perversely wanton against God; yea, as far as they could, they profaned and abrogated the inviolable covenant of God, which had been ratified by the blood of Christ. The more earnest then ought we to be, to advance humbly and carefully in the course of our calling. We must now consider each sentence.

“By naming the pollutions of the world, he shews that we roll in filth and are wholly polluted, until we renounce the world. By the knowledge of Christ he no doubt understands the gospel. He testifies that the design of it is, to deliver us from the defilements of the world, and to lead us far away from them. For the same reason he afterwards calls it the way of righteousness. He then alone makes a right progress in the gospel who faithfully learns Christ; and he truly knows Christ, who has been taught by him to put off the old man and to put on the new man, as Paul reminds us in Ephesians 4:22.”

Returning to the vomit

Please remember, to Calvin, redemption as experienced by fake believers in the visible assembly was never truly spiritual. It provided a temporary deliverance from Satan’s mastery over the sinner’s bodily life his world. As there was no spiritual redemption involved in this for fake believers, it was but a matter of time, through the influence of a false gospel and false teachers, that these sons of darkness returned to their master, Satan, and to his worldly teaching and lifestyle.

None of the above usually deters Amyraldians, as the are utterly convinced that Jude 1:4, arguably the stronger form of Calvin’s comments, is unquestionably promoting a universal redemption on the cross.

Jude 1:4

Calvin’s comment

“For there are certain men crept in unawares. Though Satan is ever an enemy to the godly, and never ceases to harass them, yet Jude reminds those to whom he was writing of the state of things at that time. Satan now, he says, attacks and harasses you in a peculiar manner; it is therefore necessary to take up arms to resist him. We hence learn that a good and faithful pastor ought wisely to consider what the present state of the Church requires, so as to accommodate his doctrine to its wants.

The word παρεισέδυσαν, which he uses, denotes an indirect and stealthy insinuation, by which the ministers of Satan deceive the unwary; for Satan sows his tares in the night, and while husbandmen are asleep, in order that he may corrupt the seed of God. And at the same time he teaches us that it is an intestine evil; for Satan in this respect also is crafty, as he raises up those who are of the flock to do mischief, in order that they may more easily creep in.

Before of old ordained. He calls that judgment, or condemnation, or a reprobate mind, by which they were led astray to pervert the doctrine of godliness; for no one can do such a thing except to his own ruin. But the metaphor is taken from this circumstance, because the eternal counsel of God, by which the faithful are ordained unto salvation, is called a book: and when the faithful heard that these were given up to eternal death, it behooved them to take heed lest they should involve themselves in the same destruction.It was at the same time the object of Jude to obviate danger, lest the novelty of the thing should disturb and distress any of them; for if these were already long ago ordained, it follows that the Church is not tried or exercised but according to the infallible counsel of God. 

The grace of our God. He now expresses more clearly what the evil was; for he says that they abused the grace of God, so as to lead themselves and others to take an impure and profane liberty in sinning. But the grace of God has appeared for a far different purpose, even that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we may live soberly, righteously, and godly in this world. Let us, then, know that nothing is more pestilential than men of this kind, who from the grace of Christ take a cloak to indulge in lasciviousness.

Because we teach that salvation is obtained through God’s mercy alone, the Papists accuse us of this crime. But why should we use words to refute their effrontery, since we everywhere urge repentance, the fear of God, and newness of life, and since they themselves not only corrupt the whole world with the worst examples, but also by their ungodly teaching take away from the world true holiness and the pure worship of God? Though I rather think, that those of whom Jude speaks, were like the libertines of our time, as it will be more evident from what follows.

The only Lord God, or, God who alone is Lord. Some old copies have, “Christ, who alone is God and Lord.” And, indeed, in the Second Epistle of Peter, Christ alone is mentioned, and there he is called Lord. But He means that Christ is denied, when they who had been redeemed by his blood, become again the vassals of the Devil, and thus render void as far as they can that incomparable price. That Christ, then, may retain us as his peculiar treasure, we must remember that he died and rose again for us, that he might have dominion over our life and death.”

Same but different

I am not going to remake the wheel: the above comment by Calvin is the same in general content as his comments on 2 Peter 2:1. It is abundantly obvious that it is the assembly that is the setting, not the cross of Christ. 

Interestingly, Calvin’s view of the reprobate in the assembly identifies them not as drawn from that mass of humanity supposedly redeemed on the cross, but as secretly planted in the assembly by Satan. In fact, Calvin then states how, from eternity, these sons of Satan were ordained unto destruction. That group is contrasted to those elected in eternity unto eternal life.

Jude 1:4 is, according to Calvin, conveying the same teaching as 2 Peter 2:1. His references in Jude 1:4 to Christ’s redemption by his blood is not denoting the time of the cross but effect of the cross of Christ within the lives of those in the visible assembly. For as we have seen, the blood of Christ that brings whole or true redemption to the invisible assembly is accompanied by an external form of redemption that impacts the entire visible assembly, which incorporates fake believers.

Calvin’s logic

Calvin’s teaching of aspectival redemption is striving to deal with biblical texts that do refer to a form of deliverance of those who later go on to reject the Gospel and their ‘redemption’ by it. For example, Peter and Jude do not write that the faux Christians were seemingly ‘bought’ by their Master, for they were actually bought. Calvin points us to the experience of Israel, and also to NT individuals like Judas, who most certainly did experience a form of deliverance that came from the Gospel and the intervention of God’s kingdom. All of which, to Calvin, in no way indicates universal redemption, either upon the cross or after it. It harmonizes with his view of the visible-invisible assembly for Calvin to refer to redemption as reflecting  temporary/external redemption and also permanent spiritual redemption. It is failure to properly appreciate these dual aspects in Calvin’s theology of ‘redemption’ that has led to so many Calvinists rejecting Calvin’s statement as ‘Arminian’ and to Amyraldians claiming that Calvin is advancing universal ‘redemption’.