John Calvin on the Atonement

The teaching of John Calvin on the atonement has given rise to considerable controversy on the nature and extent of the atonement. Works by such eminent scholars as A. C. Clifford, B. G. Armstrong, Paul van Buren, R. T. Kendal, Isaac Watts, Philip Doddridge, John Newton, E. Calamy, J. Bellamy, J. Edwards, Thomas Chalmers, Ralph Wardlow, J, Bunyan, and J. C. Ryle; also Luther, Melanchthon, Bullinger, Latimer, Cranmore, Coverdale, and Calvin himself, plus some Westminster divines such as Richard Baxter, on the one side of the debate, and Jonathan Rainbow, Jim Packer, Paul Helm, Roger Nicole, Carl Bangs, plus a significant number of the Westminster divines, to name but a few are on the other side of the controversy.

Claims and counter-claims have been made, each asserting that he has understood the mind of Calvin, and faithfully represents it.

But given the discrepancy between these views, each side can hardly be correct.  The interesting thing is that those who would describe themselves as “authentic Calvinists,” represented by the scholars mentioned in the first section of the paragraph above, have succeeded in drawing their theological views directly from Calvin’s writings, while those in the other school – the high orthodox, or scholastic, theologians, of whom the puritan Dr John Owen is a fine representative - tend to draw heavily on medieval Aristotelian philosophy to help them argue their case, though they might deny this.  

The remainder of this article is now available on Smashwords.com Go to smashwords.com and search for Hazlett Lynch.  You will also see on that site other interesting information products, some of which are free for you to take.

But it is important that you go to original sources for you information on any man, and not to what other writers think they wrote.  Go right to the horse's mouth, as we say, and discover exactly what Calvin believed on this critically important matter of the atonement.