Luther:

1) Therefore the prophets and all the saints before Christ cry out so often and so anxiously: “Come, O Lord!” as people desirous of looking upon His glory and that light of the Seed of Abraham and David which all the godly in the New Testament enjoy by God’s great favor. Moreover, note should be taken of the explanation of the universal principle, “ALL NATIONS SHALL BE BLESSED,” which, of course, in Holy Scripture is a common way of saying that not a single one of the nations is blessed except through this Seed. The same thought occurs in John 1:9: “It enlightens every man,” and also in 1 Tim. 2:4: “God desires all men to be saved”not that all are enlightened, but that the universal blessing, scattered abroad among all nations, comes from this Seed. An exclusive rather than a universal principle is meant, as though one said: “Nowhere is there light, life, and salvation except in this Seed.” Martin Luther, “Lectures on Genesis,” in Luther’s Works, 4:177

2) There are many arguments against predestination, but they proceed from the “prudence of the flesh.” Therefore he who has not denied himself and learned to subject his questions to the will of God and hold them down will always keep asking why God wills this and does that, and he will never find the reason. And very properly. Because this foolish wisdom places itself above God and judges His will as something inferior, when actually it should be judged by Him. Therefore the apostle in a few words destroys all the arguments; first restraining our temerity so that we do not sit in judgment over the will of God by saying: “But who are you, O man, to answer back to God”? (Rom. 9:20). It is as if he were saying: “You are under the will of God; why do you presume, therefore, to argue with Him and try to catch Him”? Then he adds the express reason: “Has the potter no right over the clay”? (Rom. 9:21)…

The second argument is that “God desires all men to be saved” (1 Tim. 2:4), and He gave His Son for us men and created man for eternal life. Likewise: All things exist for man, and he himself exists for God that he may enjoy Him, etc. These points and others like them can be refuted as easily as the first one. For these verses must always be understood as pertaining to the elect only, as the apostle says in 2 Tim. 2:10 “everything for the sake of the elect.” For in an absolute sense Christ did not die for all, because He says: “This is My blood which is poured out for you” and “for many”–He does not say: for all”–“for the forgiveness of sins” (Mark 14:24, Matt. 26:28). Martin Luther, “Lectures on Romans,” in Luther’s Works, 25:375.

3) 4. God wants all men to be saved. Elsewhere we read (John 13:18): “I know whom I have chosen.” If anyone wants to be agreeable, he has a hundred arguments which they may oppose. They want only that to be heard which they themselves say. To such people, then, say, “Farewell.” We must answer (1 Cor. 11:16): “If anyone is disposed to be contentious, we recognize no such practice.” On the other hand, those who really want to learn are quiet and at peace. If you say something twice to someone, he should look for another teacher, because our doctrine is the sort which brooks no contention. The Holy Spirit, then, must not fight against Himself. In this vein Augustine says: “No one saves except the one God. Nowhere is there salvation except in God.” John, the illuminator, that teacher, is reported as saying: “All in this city.” This is an exclusive proposition that is expressed in universal terms. Every man is an animal, therefore only man is. In the same way: He causes all men to be saved, therefore He is the only Savior. This is a strong idea and appears to have confirmation from the text:

5. One God. Here the exclusive proposition connects with the universal. That is: No man saves; or, God alone saves. The good and godly heart will not laugh. This is a very fine statement, for outside of God there is no salvation. God is our God. He is salvation. Whatever good happens to anyone comes from God; whatever evil, from Satan. All men (v. 4). That is, He is their Salvation. God saves them with His goodness. Then He also makes these things come true. There is the question whether this means eternal or temporal salvation. We can take Augustine’s statement either way, because no one saves except God alone.

I think he is speaking about general salvation. He saves from the perils of adultery, fornication, poverty, error. Whoever now has escaped some peril escapes as God saves him. Ps. 107 confirms this idea. There God lists all their perils and their many works. He lists prison, poverties, captivity, the perils of the sea; and everywhere He says: “You shall confess, etc.” He is speaking about the most general salvation. Paul says in ch. 4:10: “He is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe.” That passage clearly distinguishes between “all men” and “those who believe.” The latter He saves eternally, but not the former. Accordingly, when we make a distinction of salvation between faithful and faithless people, we must draw from those passages this conclusion, that Paul here refers to general salvation. That is, God saves all the faithful, but He does not save the faithless in the same way. After all, He gives the victory even to wicked kings, but to David He gave a singular victory. To him, while he was still a mere lad but a pious one, He gave the throne of the kingdom. God preserves from plague both the ungodly and the godly. He gives both the light of the sun. Is this not a general statement? He tells us to pray for all men, because such a prayer for men is acceptable, even if they are wicked. The grace of God is one and the same, even for the faithless. We must therefore pray not only for the faithful but for all men. That prayer offered for them is both heard and pleasing, because He wants it so and desires to save all men. God wants to be asked that we may gain this request from Him, as Paul says Rom. 3:29: “Is He not the God of the Gentiles also”? He commands us to pray, and He accepts our prayer even for the wicked, because He is considering the following: that through our prayers He wants to save even the wicked, to give peace, wife, etc. Prayer for all men is acceptable, because He desires all men to be saved. Paul is not speaking about God’s incomprehensible will–a topic forever secret, as here regarding the will of His command. There is a will which is hidden and reserved for Himself. This He points out to us in word and deed. His other will He reveals with many signs. Therefore we take this passage to refer to the will of His command or work, not to His hidden will. The contentious man, however, does not agree. From the material we have just treated and from other passages which agree you see this, as below in chapter 4 and in the psalm. Why? Because He wants to save all men. God pours out His blessings so that doing this good thing–giving rain, for instance, to all men–pleases Him. It is therefore our duty to pray that the rain come. Satan, on the other hand, has his delight in the wicked, who desire to disturb this peace.

And come to the knowledge. This also refers to the will of the precept: “God wants all men to be saved.” He wants to illumine all men under the sun, because He Himself shows the light of the sun to the whole world. If they wish to ask us: “Why does He make some people blind”?, that is God’s hidden and incomprehensible will. However, I see the sun shining as a sign. In this way He wants “all men to be saved.” You see, He causes the sun of Christ to rise in the world. He has given us the command that we illumine all men: “Go and preach to every creature” (Matt. 28:19), that is, He exposes to absolutely all men the light or knowledge of the truth. This is nothing else than that He wants all men to know this. After all, the Gospel comes that men may know the Gospel. Many do not know it. This relates to His most secret will. But His will which He has given us to teach is incomprehensible. These questions are too deep for you to explore. Adam broke his neck over them. This is beyond us and means nothing to us. We must think about those matters which have been expounded and given to us, for instance, the fact that He has given light to all men, and what they do not perceive with their eyes has still been expounded.

Thus Paul’s statement is very simple. It is our job to pray that we may have a quiet life; that there be one salvation; that a prince have a safe rule and realm on earth; that a husband have a safe home and wife; the state, a safe magistracy; the housefather, a healthy crop. Next, we pray that all men may know the truth; that they may know the source from which they receive their blessings. You see, through our prayer and thanksgiving we indicate that these come from one Man. But these things do not bring one to a knowledge of the truth.

5. For there is one. Here we have the explanation: these things belong not only to Christians but to all men. Therefore we must pray to one God on behalf of all men. He must reveal Himself to the Gentiles that they may know how to have this Word of salvation and all good things. Mediator. What is the knowledge of the truth? It is to know the one God, from whom come those temporal blessings. He is clearly setting down a twofold salvation. There is a true God, who saves all men with a general salvation; and Christ the Mediator, who saves with an eternal salvation which also comes from God but through Jesus Christ. After all, Christ was not incarnate to have kingdoms, wives, and children. We have those gifts without the death of Christ. In those prior things God is our Savior without Christ. However, in our eternal salvation God is not our Savior without the Mediator. You see that Paul is speaking about salvation in general. This he then divides into temporal and eternal salvation. No matter what he assigns to God, this is salvation left to God through Christ. Some people select other gods, but we know the God of all men. He has not left Himself without witnesses that they might see the one God, but this is because they do not know Him.

Between God and men… 6. who gave Himself as a ransom for all. It is not clear whether this “for all” means for all men or for all those who are redeemed. It sounds as if he were speaking only about the faithful, because he seems to be making a distinction between temporal and eternal salvation. That is, he seems to say that all who are redeemed are redeemed through Him and not another. Whoever wants to argue may go his own way. He appears to be making a distinction here between faithful and faithless men. Yet he speaks about the faithful in such a way that there is no man among them who makes satisfaction for himself but through Christ. This is a very beautiful passage about redemption, about which Paul is happy to write. He speaks of redemption, or of the price of redemption, which means the price by which captives are ransomed. As Christ pays His life and head for our life and head, He has become the Price by which satisfaction is made for divine justice and wrath on our behalf. Some people think that Christ’s death has been set as an example, a type, an ideal of Christians. This is preaching scarcely half of Christ. He truly is the Price of redemption, which God elsewhere calls the forgiveness of sins. The wrath of God is real, not imaginary. It is no joke. Were it false, mercy would be false. You see, as wrath is, so is the mercy which forgives. May God avert that joke from us. When genuine wrath is at its highest, so is genuine mercy. Thus most truly has Christ taken the wrath of God upon Himself and has carried it on our behalf. He takes this upon Himself not only as an example, but He is the very true Price which is paid for us. If He has placed Himself in His own Person to turn away wrath from us, He has established Himself as the Price for us. If He is the Price, He has given not gold or silver but Himself. But here come the new Enthusiasts and Zwingli, and they say: A man, not the Son of God, has suffered for us. They make the Savior nothing more than a man. They go so far as to say that as God He does not suffer and that therefore only His humanity has been given for us. As proof they use this text, “the man.” This passage we must observe as the rule and must explain other passages according to it, as, for instance, Phil. 2:7 and the passage (John 6:63) “The flesh is of no avail, etc.” The figure alloiosis is a matter of case for case, number for number. The city which I establish they have upset when the word for one nature is used for the other and also in the case of “Son” in Rom. 8:3, where the words “the Son of God” are taken for “man.” Rather, one ought to say: whenever the word for one nature appears, whatever is said about the one nature must be understood as referring to the entire Person. Here, for instance, “man” is the word for one nature; yet the whole Person is referred to. This must be kept in force, etc., whenever the word for the part is attributed to the whole. “The Ethiopian is white,” because he has white teeth. “He struck the son of the king,” but this fellow says: “No, because he was struck in the leg.? In all matters we must note the manner of speaking. Grammar ought to set the norm of speaking. The sophist says: “No. He struck the leg of the king’s son.” But this limb along with the son is one person. They cannot be torn apart in nature. It is the true Son of God and Son of Man who is crucified. It is said in truth: the Son of God is crucified, not as concerns the divine nature but according to the Person.

I had begun to treat the point concerning the communication of attributes, for that error creeps in with the others, and according to that device Christ, the Salvation of the whole world, will be lost. He will follow us who have been redeemed through His humanity alone. That error wants this word used as confirmation through alloiosis, that is, through an exchange. Consequently it has been taken up into an article of our faith and has been set forth in sacred literature that Christ is God in true substance and nature. If that article stands, it follows inevitably that whoever harms one limb of this Person harms the whole Person. He divides that Person, as it were, into two persons. He says that His humanity suffered, but not the divinity. This has outward appeal: “The divinity cannot be killed.” It does not follow, however, that therefore the Son of God was not crucified. Whoever bows down to worship Christ worships the Son of God, because he touches and worships that Person who is God. When I strike the king and touch his arm, I have not struck his skin. “You have struck the tunic with which he was clothed and covered. They did not crucify God but someone clothed as God.” Man. When we hear a term such as this, nature will be such that when people have the term on their side, they let it stand as it is; but if it is against them, they take pride in their full sacks. Then the term signifies a part of that Person, because it is the word for the human nature. But because that Man is in substance a divine Person, “man” here has to mean man in a sense other than elsewhere because of the union of persons.

Mediator. Unless you know this, you will lose Christ. Peter said: “I struck him.” The Enthusiasts say: “How could you? You know that a man is composed of body and soul. How can you touch the soul? Therefore you have injured only the flesh.” The flesh and soul are one person. These are statements from nature. When someone hits a dog in the leg with a stone, because of the injured limb we say that the whole dog is injured. This is synecdoche. In passing, I wanted to warn about this: in what sense Christ is Man in regard to His Person and yet is the Mediator, even if you were to separate Christ?s divinity from His humanity. Christ entered into glory. Here Christ is taken for His human nature according to alloiosis. But “Christ” signifies the entire Person, who is the Son of Man and Son of God. Yet this was before He was glorified. Yet it is truly said that the entire Christ is glorified, although in the other Person. “I live by faith” (Gal. 2:20) even in that Man, because He is one Person. I will attach myself to Christ as to the Person who in work and practice cannot be separated. They can separate Him in their speculations. If I prostrate myself before Christ, I do so before the Son of God as well as before the Son of Man in one Person. Without apology the expression issues from Christ and is directed to the blind man. John 9:36–37: “Who is the Son of God”? “And you have heard Him, etc.” There Christ says that the blind man is hearing and seeing the Son of God. I see the very Person, who is truly God. I look at a man; nevertheless, his intellect is his better part. Yet I hear him. I hear that person which is a real spirit, even if I may not see his reason and intellect. I see that part–the part of the flesh–joined with reason. We must listen to grammar, to the usus loquendi about matters, and to sophist keenness. This deceived Wycliffe, too. They look at the reason for speaking but not at the manner of divine operation. Therefore it deceives them. Christ is established as one Person consisting of God and Man. No suffering, no work can apply to Him without our saying that it touches His entire Person. Martin Luther, “Lectures on 1 Timothy,” in Luther’s Works, 28:261

Aquinas:

1) Objection 1. It seems that the will of God is not always fulfilled. For the Apostle says (1 Timothy 2:4): “God will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth.” But this does not happen. Therefore the will of God is not always fulfilled. . .

Reply to Objection 1. The words of the Apostle, “God will have all men to be saved,” etc. can be understood in three ways.

First, by a restricted application, in which case they would mean, as Augustine says (De praed. sanct. i, 8: Enchiridion 103), “God wills all men to be saved that are saved, not because there is no man whom He does not wish saved, but because there is no man saved whose salvation He does not will.”

Secondly, they can be understood as applying to every class of individuals, not to every individual of each class; in which case they mean that God wills some men of every class and condition to be saved, males and females, Jews and Gentiles, great and small, but not all of every condition.

Thirdly, according to Damascene (De Fide Orth. ii, 29), they are understood of the antecedent will of God; not of the consequent will. This distinction must not be taken as applying to the divine will itself, in which there is nothing antecedent nor consequent, but to the things willed.

Read the rest of this entry »

C. Hodge:

XII. “Who will have all men to be saved and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.” 1 Tim. 2: 4.
[March 1st, 1868.]

There are two principles which must control the interpretation of the Scriptures. That is, when a passage admits of two interpretations, the choice between them is to be determined, first, by the analogy of Scripture. If one interpretation contradicts what the Bible elsewhere teaches and another accords with it, then we are bound to accept the latter. Or, secondly, the interpretation must be decided by established facts. That is, if one interpretation agrees with such facts and another contradicts them, then the former must be true.

This passage admits of two interpretations so far as the signification of the words are concerned. First, that God wills, in the sense of purposing or intending, the salvation of all men. This cannot be true, first, because it contradicts the Scriptures. The Scriptures teach 1st, that the purposes of God are immutable, and that they cannot fail of their accomplishment. 2d. That all men are not to be saved. It is clearly taught that multitudes of the human race have perished, are now perishing, and will hereafter perish. That God intends and purposes what he knows is not to happen, is a contradiction. It contradicts the very idea of God, and is an impossibility, Secondly, this interpretation contradicts admitted facts as well as the explicit statements of the Bible.

1. It is a fact that God does not give saving grace to all men. 2. It is a fact that he does not and never has brought all men to the knowledge of the truth. Multitudes of men are destitute of that knowledge, and ever have been. By truth it is clear the apostle means saving truth, the truth as revealed in the gospel, and not merely the truth as revealed by things that are made. This interpretation therefore cannot be correct.

The second interpretation is that God desires the salvation of all men. This means 1st, just what is said when the Scriptures declare that God is good; that he is merciful and gracious, and ready to forgive; that he is good to all, and his tender mercies over all his works. He is kind to the unthankful and to the evil. This goodness or benevolence of God is not only declared but revealed in his works, in his providence, and in the work of redemption. 2d. It means what is said in Ezek. xxxiii. 11. “As I live, saith the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked,” and in Ezek. xviii. 23, “Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die, saith the Lord God, and not that he should return from his ways and live ?” Also Lam. iii. 33, “For he doth not afflict willingly nor grieve the children of men.” It means what Christ taught in the parable of the prodigal son, and of the lost sheep and the lost piece of money; and is taught by his lament over Jerusalem.

All these passages teach that God delights in the happiness of his creatures, and that when he permits them to perish, or inflicts evil upon them, it is from some inexorable necessity; that is, because it would be unwise and wrong to do otherwise. His relation is that of a benevolent sovereign in punishing crime, or of a tender judge in passing sentence on offenders, or, what is the familiar representation of Scripture, that of a father who deals with his children with tenderness, yet with wisdom and according to the dictates of right.

This is the meaning of the passage. That it is the correct one is plain, 1. Because it is agreeable to the meaning of the word thelein. In innumerable cases it means to love, delight in, to regard with satisfaction as a thing desirable. “Sacrifice and offerings thou wouldst not,” “neither hadst pleasure therein.” “Ye cannot do the things that ye would.” “For what I would, that do I not, but what I hate, that I do.” “We would see a sign from thee.” “Be it unto thee even as thou wilt.” ” If he delight in him” is ei thelei auton. 2. This passage thus interpreted teaches just what the Scriptures elsewhere teach of the goodness of God. 3. It does not contradict the Scriptures as the other does, or make God mutable or impotent. 4. It is accordant with all known facts. It agrees with the fact, that God is benevolent, as shown in his works, and yet that he permits many to perish.

This truth is of great importance, 1. Because all religion is founded on the knowledge of God and on the proper apprehensions of his character. We should err fatally if we conceived of God as malevolent.

2. The conviction that God is love, that he is a kind Father, is necessary to encourage sinners to repent. The prodigal hesitated because he doubted his father’s love. It was his hope that encouraged him to return.

3. This truth is necessary to our confidence in God. It is the source of gratitude and love.

4. It is to be held fast to under all circumstances. We are to believe though so much sin and misery are allowed to prevail. We are not to resort to false solutions of this difficulty, to assume that God cannot prevent sin, or that he wills it as a means to happiness. He allows it because it seems good in his sight to do so, and this is the highest and the last solution of the problem of evil.

Charles Hodge, “Who will have all men to be saved and to come unto the knowledge of the truth, 1 Tim. 2: 4” in, Conference Papers, (New York, Charles, Scribner’s Sons, 1879), 18-19.

Calvin:

Sermons:

1) Again, let us know that when the Gospel is preached unto us, it is to make us so much the more void of excuse. And why so? For the seeing that God had already showed us that he was ready to receive us to mercy, if we had come to him, our condemnation shall no doubt be increased, if we be so wicked as to draw back, when he calls so mildly and lovingly. Yet notwithstanding, (as we have here exhorted) let us not leave off, to pray for all men in general: For S. Paul shows us, that God will have all men be saved, that is to say all people and all nations. And therefore we must not settle ourselves in such sort upon the diversity which is seen amongst men, that we forget that God has made us all in his image and likeness, that we are his workmanship, that he may stretch forth his goodness over them which are at this day far from him, as we have a good proof of it. Calvin, Sermons on 1 Timothy, Sermon 13, 2:3-5, p., 160.

Commentaries:

1) Therefore Luke commendeth the rare efficacy and working of the Spirit of God, when he saith that these noblemen were no whit hindered by the dignity of the flesh, but that embracing the gospel, they prepared themselves to bear the cross, and preferred the reproach of Christ before the glory of the world. Secondly, Luke meant to make known the glory of the world. Secondly, Luke meant to make known unto us, that the grace of Christ stands open for all orders and degrees. In which sense Paul saith, that God would have all men saved, (1 Timothy 2:4;) lest he poor and those who are base do shut the gate against the rich, (though Christ did vouchsafe them the former place.) Therefore we see that noblemen, and those who are of the common sort, are gathered together, that those who are men of honor, and which are despised, grow together into one body of the Church, that all men, in general, may humble themselves, and extol the grace of God. Calvin, Acts 17:11.

2) Paul, however, does not say here, that there are none of the noble and mighty that have been called by God, but that there are few. He states the design of this—that the Lord might bring down the glory of the flesh, by preferring the contemptible before the great. God himself, however, by the mouth of David, exhorts kings to embrace Christ,  (Psalm 2:12,) and by the mouth of Paul, too, he declares, that he will have all men to be saved, and that is Christ is offered alike to small and great, alike to kings and their subjects, (1 Timothy 2:1-4.) He has himself furnished a token of this. Shepherds, in the first place, are called to Christ: then afterwards come philosophers: illiterate and despised fishermen hold the highest rank of honor; yet into their school there are received in process of time kings and their counselors, senators and orators. Calvin 1 Corinthians 1:26.

3) 4. “Who wishes that all men may be saved.” Here follows a confirmation of the second argument; and what is more reasonable than that all our prayers should be in conformity with this decree of God?

“And may come to the acknowledgment of the truth.” Lastly, he demonstrates that God has at heart the salvation of all, because he invites all to the acknowledgment of his truth. This belongs to that kind of argument in which the cause is: proved from the effect; for, if “the gospel is the power of God for salvation to every one that believeth,” (Romans 1:16,) it is certain that all those to whom the gospel is addressed are invited to the hope of eternal life. In short, as the calling is a proof of the secret election, so they whom God makes partakers of his gospel are admitted by him to possess salvation; because the gospel reveals to us the righteousness of God, which is a sure entrance into life. Hence we see the childish folly of those who represent this passage to be opposed to predestination. “If God” say they, “wishes all men indiscriminately to be saved, it is false that some are predestined by his eternal purpose to salvation, and others to perdition.” They might have had some ground for saying this, if Paul were speaking here about individual men; although even then we should not have wanted the means of replying to their argument; for, although the: will of God ought not to be judged from his secret decrees, when he reveals them to us by outward signs, yet it does not therefore follow that he has not determined with himself what he intends to do as to every individual man.

But I say nothing on that subject, because it has nothing to do with this passage; for the Apostle simply means, that there is no people and no rank in the world that is excluded from salvation; because God wishes that the gospel should be proclaimed to all without exception. Now the preaching of the gospel gives life; and hence he justly concludes that God invites all equally to partake salvation. But the present discourse relates to classes of men, and not to individual persons; for his sole object is, to include in this number princes and foreign nations. That God wishes the doctrine of salvation to be enjoyed by them as well as others, is evident from the passages already quoted, and from other passages of a similar nature. Not without good reason was it said, “Now, kings, understand,” and again, in the same Psalm, “I will give thee the Gentiles for an inheritance, and the ends of the earth for a possession.” (Psalm 2:8-10.) In a word, Paul intended to shew that it is our duty to consider, not what kind of persons the princes at that time were, but what God wished them to be. Now the duty arising: out of that love which we owe to our neighbor is, to be solicitous and to do our endeavor for the salvation of all whom God includes in his calling, and to testify this by godly prayers. With the same view does he call God our Savior; for whence do we obtain salvation but from the undeserved kindness of God? Now the same God who has already made us partakers of salvation may sometime extend his grace to them also. He who hath already drawn us to him may draw them along with us. The Apostle takes for granted that God will do so, because it had been thus foretold by the predictions of the prophets, concerning all ranks and all nations.

5. For there is one God. This argument might, at first sight, appear to be not very strong, that God wishes all men to be saved, because he is one; if a transition had not been made from God to men. Chrysostom–and, after him, others–view it in this sense, that there are not many gods, as idolaters imagine. But I think that Paul’s design was different, and that there is here an implied comparison of one God with the whole world and with various nations, out of which comparison arises a view of both, as they mutually regard each other. In like manner the Apostle says, “Is he the God of the Jews only? Is he not also of the Gentiles? Yea, it is one God who justifieth the circumcision by faith, and the uncircumcision through faith.’ Accordingly, whatever diversity might at that time exist among men, because many ranks and many nations were strangers to faith, Paul brings to the remembrance of believers the unity of God, that they may know that they are connected with all, because there is one God of all–that they may know that they who are under the power of the same God are not excluded for ever from the hope of salvation.

And one Mediator between God and men. This clause is of a similar import with the former; for, as there is one God, the Creator and Father of all, so he says that there is but one Mediator, through whom we have access to the Father; and that this Mediator was given, not only to one nation, or to a small number of persons of some particular rank, but to all; because the fruit of the sacrifice, by which he made atonement for sins, extends to all. More especially because a large portion of the world was at that time alienated from God, he expressly mentions the Mediator, through whom they that were afar off now approach. The universal term all must always be referred to classes: of men, and not to persons; as if he had said, that not only Jews, but Gentiles also, not only persons of humble rank, but princes also, were redeemed by the death of Christ. Since, therefore, he wishes the benefit of his death to be common to all, an insult is offered to him by those who, by their opinion, shut out any person from the hope of salvation.

The man Christ Jesus. When he declares that he is “a man,” the Apostle does not deny that the Mediator is God, but, intending to point out the bond of our union with God, he mentions the human nature rather than the divine. This ought to be carefully observed. From the beginning, men, by contriving for themselves this or that mediator, departed farther from God; and the reason was, that, being prejudiced in favor of this error, that God was at a great distance from them, they knew not to what hand to turn. Paul remedies this evil, when he represents God as present with us; for he has descended even to us, so that we do not need to seek him above the clouds. The same thing is said in Hebrews 4:15, “We have not a high priest who cannot sympathize within our infirmities, for in all things he was tempted.” And, indeed, if this were deeply impressed on the hearts of all, that the Son of God holds out to us the hand of a brother, and that we are united to him by the fellowship of our nature, in order that, out of our low condition, he may raise us to heaven; who would not choose to keep by this straight road, instead of wandering in uncertain and stormy paths! Accordingly, whenever we ought to pray to God, if we call to remembrance that exalted and unapproachable majesty, that we may not be driven back by the dread of it, let us, at the same time, remember “the man Christ,” who gently invites us, and takes us, as it were, by the hand, in order that the Father, who had been the object of terror and alarm, may be reconciled by him and rendered friendly to us. This is the only key to open for us the gate of the heavenly kingdom, that we may appear in the presence of God with confidence. Hence we see, that Satan has, in all ages, followed this course, for the purpose of leading men astray from the right path. I say nothing of the various devices by which, before the coming of Christ, he alienated the minds of men, to contrive methods of approaching to God. At the very commencement of the Christian Church, when Christ, with so excellent a pledge, was fresh in their remembrance, and while the earth was still ringing with that delightfully sweet word from his mouth, “Come to me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest,” (Matthew 11:28,) there were, nevertheless, some persons skilled in deception, who thrust angels into his room as mediators; which is evident from Colossians 2:18. But what Satan, at that time, contrived secretly, he carried to such a pitch, during the times of Popery, that scarcely one person in a thousand acknowledged Christ, even in words, to be the Mediator. And while the name was buried, still more was the reality unknown.

Now that God has raised up good and faithful teachers, who have labored to restore and bring to the remembrance of men what ought to have been one of the best–known principles of our faith, the sophists of the Church of Rome have resorted to every contrivance for darkening a point so clear. First, the name is so hateful to them, that, if any one mentions Christ as Mediator, without taking notice of the saints, he instantly falls under a suspicion of heresy. But, because they do not venture to reject altogether what Paul teaches in this passage, they evade it by a foolish exposition, that he is called “one Mediator,” not “the only Mediator.” As if the Apostle had mentioned God as one out of a vast multitude of gods; for the two clauses are closely connected, that “there is one God and one Mediator;” and therefore they who make Christ one out of many mediators must apply the same interpretation in speaking of God. Would they rise to such a height of impudence, if they were not impelled by blind rage to crush the glory of Christ?

There are others who think themselves more acute, and who lay down this distinction, that Christ is the only Mediator of redemption, while they pronounce the saints to be mediators of intercession. But the folly of these interpreters is reproved by the scope of the passage, in which the Apostle speaks expressly about prayer. The Holy Spirit commands us to pray for all, because our only Mediator admits all to come to him; just as by his death he reconciled all to the Father. And yet they who thus, with daring sacrilege, strip Christ of his honor, wish to be regarded as Christians. But it is objected that this has the appearance of contradiction; for in this very passage Paul enjoins us to intercede for others, while, in the Epistle to the Romans, he declares that intercession belongs to Christ alone. (Romans 8:34.) I reply, the intercessions of the saints, by which they aid each other in their addresses to God, do not contradict the doctrine, that all have but one Intercessor; for no man’s prayers are heard either in behalf of himself, or in behalf of another, unless he rely on Christ as his advocate. When we intercede for one another, this is so far from setting aside the intercession of Christ, as belonging to him alone, that the chief reliance is given, and the chief reference made, to that very intercession. Some person will perhaps think, that it will, therefore, be easy for us to come to an agreement with the Papists, if they place below the only intercession of Christ, all that they ascribe to the saints. This is not the case; for the reason why they transfer to the saints the office of interceding is, that they imagine that otherwise we are destitute of an advocate. It is a common opinion among them, that we need intercessors, because in ourselves we are unworthy of appearing in the presence of God. By speaking in this manner, they deprive Christ of his honor. Besides, it is a shocking blasphemy, to ascribe to saints such excellence as would procure for us the favor of God: and all the prophets, and apostles, and martyrs, and even the angels themselves–are so far from making any pretension to this, that they too have need of the same intercession as ourselves.

Again, it is a mere dream, originating in their own brain, that the dead intercede for us; and, therefore, to found our prayers on this is altogether to withdraw our trust from calling upon God. But Paul lays down, as the rule for calling on God in a proper manner, faith grounded on the word of God. (Romans 10:17.) Justly, therefore, everything that men contrive, in the exercise of their own thoughts, without the authority of the word of God, is rejected by us.

But not to dwell on this subject longer than the exposition of the passage demands, let it be summed up in this manner; that they who have actually learned the office of Christ will be satisfied with having him alone, and that none will make mediators at their own pleasure but those who neither know God nor Christ. Hence I conclude, that the doctrine of the Papists–which darkens, and almost buries, the intercession of Christ, and introduces pretended intercessors without any support from Scripture–is full of wicked distrust, and also of wicked rashness.

6. Who gave himself a ransom for all. The mention of redemption in this passage is not superfluous; for there is a necessary connection between the two things, the sacrifice of the death of Christ, and his continual intercession. (Romans 8:34.) These are the two parts of his priesthood; for, when Christ is called our priest, it is in this sense, that he once made atonement for our sins by his death, that he might reconcile us to God; and now having entered into the sanctuary of heaven, he appears in presence of the Father, in order to obtain grace for us, that we may be heard in his name. (Psalm 110:4; Hebrews 7:17.) So much the more does he expose the wicked sacrilege of the Papists, who, by making dead saints to be companions of Christ in this affair, transfer to them likewise the glory of the priesthood. Read the fourth chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews, towards the conclusion, and the beginning of the fifth chapter, and you will find what I maintain, that the intercession by which God is reconciled to us is founded on the sacrifice; which, indeed, is demonstrated by the whole system of the ancient priesthood. It follows, therefore, that it is impossible to take from Christ any part of the office of intercession, and bestow it on others, without stripping him of the title of priesthood.

Besides, when the Apostle calls him antilutron, “a ransom,” he overthrows all other satisfactions. Yet I am not ignorant of the injurious devices of the Papists, who pretend that the price of redemption, which Christ paid by his death, is applied to us in baptism, so that original sin is effaced, and that afterwards we are reconciled to God by satisfactions. In this way they limit to a small period of time, and to a single class, that benefit which was universal and perpetual. But a full illustration of this subject will be found in the Institutes.

That there might be a testimony in due time; that is, in order that this grace might be revealed at the appointed time. The phrase, for all, which the Apostle had used, might have given rise to the question, “Why then had God chosen a peculiar people, if he revealed himself as a reconciled Father to all without distinction, and if the one redemption through Christ was common to all?” He cuts off all ground for that question, by referring to the purpose of God the season for revealing his grace. For if we are not astonished that in winter, the trees are stripped of their foliage, the field are covered with snow, and the meadows are stiff with frost, and that, by the genial warmth of spring, what appeared for a time to be dead, begins to revive, because God appointed the seasons to follow in succession; why should we not allow the same authority to his providence in other: matters? Shall we accuse God of instability, because he brings forward, at the proper time, what he had always determined, and settled in his own mind?

Accordingly, although it came upon the world suddenly and was altogether unexpected, that Christ was revealed as a Redeemer to Jews and Gentiles, without distinction; let as not think that it was sudden with respect to God but, on the contrary, let us learn to subject all our sense to his wonderful providence. The consequence will be, that there will be nothing that comes from him which shall not appear to us to be highly seasonable. On that account this admonition frequently occurs in the writings of Paul and especially when he treats of the calling of the Gentiles, by which, at that time, on account of its novelty, many persons were startled and almost confounded. They who are not satisfied with this solution, that God, by his hidden wisdom, arranged the succession of the seasons, will one day feel, that, at the time when they think that he was idle, he was framing a hell for inquisitive persons. Calvin, 1 Timothy, 2:4-6.

Tracts:

1) Your hackneyed quotation from Paul, that God would have all men saved, I have, in my judgment, elsewhere sufficiently shown, lends no countenance to your error. For it is more certain than certainty itself, that Paul is not there speaking of individuals, but refers to orders and classes of employments. He had been enjoining prayers, in behalf of kings and other governors, and all who exercised the office of magistrate. But inasmuch as all who then bore the sword, were the professed enemies of the church, it might seem absurd that the church should pray for their salvation. To obviate the difficulty Paul extends the grace of God even to them. John Calvin, The Secret Providence of God, trans., by John Lillie (New York: Carter Brothers, 1840), 28-29.

2) The difficulty of another place (I Tim 2.4) is readily solved. Paul tells us that God wills all men to be saved, and also how He wills them to come to the knowledge of His truth. For he joins both together. Now I ask: Did the will of God remain the same from the beginning of the world? For if He willed that His truth be known to all, why did He not proclaim His law also to the Gentiles? Why did He confine the light of life within the narrow limits of Judaea? What does Moses mean when he says (Deut 4.8) : There is no nation which has statutes and laws by which to be ruled like this people, unless to praise the privilege of the race of Abraham? To this corresponds the enconium of David (Ps 147.20): He dealt so with no other people, nor manifested His judgments to them. Nor must we overlook the express reason: Because God loved the fathers, He chose their sons; not because they were more excellent, but because it seemed good to the Lord to choose them for His peculiar people (Deut 4.37, 7.8). What then? Did Paul not know that he was prohibited by the Spirit from preaching the word of Christ in Asia and from crossing over into Bithynia where he was proceeding? (Acts 16.6). But as a full treatment of this matter would be too prolix, I content myself with one word more. When He had lit the light of life for the Jews alone, God allowed the Gentiles to wander for many ages in darkness (Acts 14.16). Then this special gift was promised to the Church, that the Lord should rise upon it and His glory be conspicuous in it (Is 60.2). Now let Pighius asseverate that God wills all to be saved, when not even the external preaching of the doctrine, which is much inferior to the illumination of the Spirit is made common to all. That passage was long ago brought up by the Pelagians. What Augustine in many places replied, I refrain from stating at present, except one passage in which he shows clearly and briefly how unconcernedly he scorns the objection. When, he says,¹ our Lord complains that, for all His willingness to gather the children of Jerusalem, they would not have it, was the will of God overpowered by weak men, so that the Almighty was unable to do what He willed? Where then will be that omnipotence by which He did whatsoever pleased Him in heaven and on earth? Who will be so impiously foolish as to say that God cannot convert to good the evil wills of men when and where and in whatever cases He will? But when He does so, He does it in mercy, and when not, in judgment. But the difficulty is, I admit, not yet solved. Yet I have extorted this from Pighius, that no one unless deprived of sense and judgment can believe that salvation is ordained in the secret counsel of God equally for all. For the rest, the meaning of Paul is quite simple and clear to anyone not bent on contention. He bids solemn prayers be made for kings and princes in authority. Because in that age there were so many dangerous enemies of the Church, to prevent despair from hindering application to prayer, Paul anticipates their difficulties, declaring that God wills all men to be saved. Who does not see that the reference is to orders of men rather than individual men? Nor indeed does the distinction lack substantial ground: what is meant is not individuals of nations but nations of individuals.² At any rate, the context makes it clear that no other will of God is intended than that which appears in the external preaching of the Gospel. Thus Paul means that God wills the salvation of all whom He mercifully invites by preaching to Christ.³ John Calvin, The Eternal Predestination of God, 108-109.

____________________

¹Enchir. ad Laur., cap. 97 seq.
²The sentence is wanting in the French.
³French adds: If anyone retorts to the contrary, he must admit that God does not come to the end He desires or that all are saved without exception. To say that God wills what is in Himself, and at the same time leaves each man his freewill, is nonsense. For I ask once more why then He willed that the Gospel be preached from the beginning of the world to all nations. All amenable men will hold the exposition which I have given: God wills to make princes and magistrates participants of salvation as well as others.

[to be continued.]