Calvin against Definite Atonement?

[Poimen]

Here is a quote that I am sure the Federal Vision men would love. It's from Calvin's commentary on Jude 4:

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 asthey can that incomparable price. That Christ, then, may retain us as his peculiar treasure, me must remember that he died and rose again for us, that he might have dominion over our life and death.

Does this mean that Dr. Calvin denied a definite atonement? It seems that he did, at least here. Are we to give him charity and conclude otherwise because of our basic assessment of his views (as per Roger Nicole)

http://tinyurl.com/bkt8o

or do we admit the fact that Calvin did teach it here and say that he is wrong?

 

[RamistThomist]

I haven't seen any of the FV use it. Geisler used stuff like this to say that Calvin was a four point Calvinist. I heard many at DTS use it as well.

 

[Robin]

The FV guys are much more interested in reinterpreting Paul -- and are bound by their faithless, over-reactions to the lack of moral stability in our culture.

Robin