What Is TULIP? - by Robert Rothwell

Found here. Our comments in bold.

-----------------------

We have previously commented on this author's articles here and here. We are not surprised, therefore, that he does not quote Scripture today, because he didn't before. Well, in fairness, we must concede he quote a snippet of a verse, but it does not document any of the points he makes.

Over 1600 words, nine of which are Scripture. Really, how can a "Bible" teacher teach the Bible without quoting it? It continually mystifies us.

The biggest problem Calvinists have is their need to create complicated explanations in order to harmonize Scripture with their doctrines. Invariably this means to take verses out of context and insert themselves into them. 

This is what happens when doctrines are used to interpret Scripture.

But ultimately, our issue is the irrelevance of these doctrines. TULIP does not change any aspect of Christian living. These doctrines do not change any privilege or obligation we have. None of them speak to generosity, worship, obedience, holiness, or fellowship. A lost person still needs repentance and salvation, regardless of the truth of Calvinism.

As such, these doctrines are diversions, intellectual exercises that have no practical purpose. Aside from their repugnance, these doctrines are irrelevant.

-------------------------

What do tulips, the love of God, and a centuries-old understanding of salvation have in common? They are all reflected in what has come to be known as the five points of Calvinism.

How are these things interconnected? The word tulip forms an acrostic that summarizes a particular understanding of salvation that has at its center the love of God. Let’s see how this works.

Total Depravity

T stands for total depravity, which describes how sin affects human beings. But to understand this, we have to start before sin entered the world. Our triune God from all eternity has existed as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, equal in power and glory, enjoying a never-beginning and never-ending relationship of holy love. This holy love motivated God’s free decision to create the universe and to create man and woman in His own image to love Him and each other. However, Adam chose to reject our Creator, and, through Adam’s disobedience, humanity fell into sin (Gen. 3; Rom. 5:12–21). (We won't quote the entire Romans passage, but here are some excerpts:

in this way death came to all men [vs. 12]

For if the many died by the trespass of the one man [vs.15]

The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation [vs. 16] 

by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man [vs. 17]

So to correct the author, through Adam’s disobedience, humanity fell into "death," not "sin." Sin is what dead people do.)

Total depravity says that sin has so twisted us that apart from grace, we love other things more than we love God. Our minds, our bodies, our affections, our spirits—every part of us has been affected by sin, and of our own accord, we cannot escape this predicament. God has not stopped loving His creation, however (John 3:16). And in His love, He restrains sin, keeping us from being as bad as we possibly could be. (??? Not "total depravity" then?)

Thus, even those who do not know Christ can do things that are outwardly good. They can be good neighbors, love their children, and so on. (??? Not "total depravity" then?)

However, outside of grace, none of us does these things with the right motivation to love and glorify God. (So it's about "right motivation," not total depravity?)

Unconditional Election

U stands for unconditional election, which is part of God’s solution to our total depravity. The fall into sin, of course, did not surprise God. He knows the end from the beginning and has ordained history as part of the outworking of His plan and purposes for all things (Isa. 46:8–11; Eph. 1:11). (The Isaiah passage is about God's total power and transcendence, but there is nothing here about "election," unconditional or otherwise. 

Let's go ahead and quote the Ephesians verse: 

Ep. 1:11 In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will... 

 

A careful Bible student would ask, "who is 'we'?" Well, Paul answered that question in the very next verse: 

Ep. 1:12 in order that we, who were the first to hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory.

Paul's "we" are those who were the first to hope in Christ. This is not you and me. We were not alive in the first century to be this. Therefore, we are not predestined. 

So, then, what about us? Well, we simply need to read the next verse:

Ep. 1:13 And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth...

Ahh. We got saved when we believed. We are not the elect, we were included when we were saved.)

The Lord would have been just to keep us in our state of sin and estrangement from Him, but He decided to set His special love (??) on His people, choosing to redeem them and restore to them their status as God’s children. Unconditional election is God’s loving choice of specific sinners for salvation without respect to any good in them (Rom. 9:1–29). (The author appears to be confused. Paul was expounding on Israel and its special status as God's chosen people: 

Theirs is the adoption as sons [vs.4]
For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. [vs 6]
it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham’s offspring [vs. 8]

Then Paul distinguished between the gentiles and the children of the promise [vs. 9]:

the objects of his wrath — prepared for destruction [vs. 22]

the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory [vs. 23]

God's chosen is the remnant of Israel, and we gentiles were predestined for destruction. This changed, however:

I will call them "my people" who are not my people [vs. 25]

Therefore, the context is very specific, Israel vs. the gentiles. It has nothing to do with individual "unconditional election.")

His saving love for us is not conditioned on our intelligence, our looks, our kindness, our social status, or anything else. He loves His people not because they are less sinful than others. Every descendant of Adam and Eve (except for Christ) is a sinner. Unconditional election says that God chooses to save some people and to pass over others. (An innocuous way of putting it. In actual fact, if unconditional election is true, God didn't "pass over" these people, He predestined them for hell.)

He has a love for some people that He does not have for others. (??? Where does the Bible say this?)

If you are a Christian, it is because in eternity past, long before you were born, God chose to love you with His saving love. (Where is this "saving love" concept found in the Bible?)

He did not choose you because you were better than others. He did not choose you because He knew you would choose Him if He gave you the chance. He simply chose to love you, and since His love is not conditioned on anything in you, He will never stop loving you.

Limited Atonement

L stands for limited atonement, which describes God’s intent behind the death of Christ in providing salvation. The question is, Did Christ intend to atone for the sins of all people who have ever lived, or did He intend to atone for the sins of the elect only? Another way of putting it: Did God love people generally, without reference at all to them as individuals, and send Christ to die to provide a possibility of salvation? Or did God love specific individuals, sending His Son to die for them specifically, perfectly atoning for their sin such that the death of Christ actually guarantees the salvation of a particular people?

Limited atonement is necessitated by God’s justice. If sin has been atoned for, it has been judged and God no longer holds it against us. But unbelief is a sin, so if Christ died for all sinners, how could God hold unbelief against anyone? Christ atoned for it, after all. But God sends unbelievers to hell, and if their sin has been atoned for, this is unjust. He is holding sin against them that cannot be held against them because Christ atoned for it. (The author wrestles with a false binary choice. These are the kinds of problems Calvinism causes. However, God sits above His creation, apart from time, and is not subject to our logic. Thus He offers salvation, not as a quantity but as an attribute of His eternal nature. Atonement doesn't have a "size" or a number, it simply exists as part of God's existence.

By way of analogy, A venue might advertise a music concert. Many people see the advertisement. We might purchase tickets to this event and thus gain admission. This in no way speaks to the number of tickets, the size of the venue, or how many people buy tickets. 

Similarly, God offers advertisement to an event, salvation. Some buy tickets, some do not. This does not speak to the magnitude of salvation in any way.) 

Limited atonement is also taught explicitly in Scripture. ("Explicitly?" We wait with bated breath.)

Under the old covenant, on the Day of Atonement, the high priest of Israel offered an atoning sacrifice only for the people of Israel, not for everyone on the planet (Lev. 16). (Sigh. Why would the priest offer sacrifices to those he believe could not be saved. Salvation was only for Israel. Only Jews could enter the temple. This is just dumb.

Further, the author completely misses the status of Israel as His chosen people and how the gentiles come into play, as Paul was describing in Romans chapter 9. 

We are no longer convinced the author is a competent Bible teacher.

In addition, the author doesn't understand that "atonement" was uniquely Israel. "Atonement" means something else, because in the OT to atone  (kaphar) means to cover over. In fact, the first use of kaphar is here:

Ge. 6:14 So make yourself an ark of cypress wood; make rooms in it and coat it with pitch inside and out.

So atonement merely hides or "coats" sin. 

Jesus didn't atone for our sins, He "propitiated."  Propitiation is not atonement. The Greek word is hilastérion, the turning away or satisfaction of wrath. The KJV properly translates the word:

Ro. 3:25 Whom God hath set forth [to be] a propitiation through faith in his blood...

while other versions unfortunately translate it "atonement." "Propitiation" turns away and satisfies God's wrath completely, while "atonement" merely covers it over. The two words are not the same.)

In the new covenant, Jesus tells us that He lays His life down for His sheep and only for His sheep (John 10:1–18). (Sigh again. "His sheep" is Israel: 

Mt. 15:24 He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.” 

In John chapter 10 Jesus was confronting His accusers. They as Jews would clearly understand what He was talking about. They were steeped in these teachings from childhood. They well knew they were the chosen people of God, His sheep:

Ezekiel 34:30-31 Thus shall they know that I the LORD their God am with them, and that they, even the House of Israel are my people, says the LORD God. And you my flock, the flock of my pasture, are men, and I am your God, says the LORD God.

Ps. 100:3 Know that the LORD is God. It is he who made us, and we are his; we are his people, the sheep of his pasture.

We are not Israel. This Scripture is not about us. We were "objects of His wrath" [Romans 9:22], but we were grafted in [Romans 11:17] by faith [Romans 9:30]. Instead, we are the other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. [John 10:16]. 

These are groups of people, not individuals. Jesus was speaking of two kinds of people. It isn't about you.)

Some people are not His sheep but are goats. Jesus died not for the goats but for the sheep—His people. We should note that some people have objected to limited atonement because of texts such as 1 John 2:2, which says Jesus is the propitiation not for our sins only but “for the sins of the whole world.” (Wow. Actual words from the Bible!)

Yet, that text is not talking about the intent of the atonement; rather, it refers to the way of salvation more generally. (This is a nonsense statement. The author distinguishes between the intent of the atonement and the way of salvation generally. But this is the matter under debate, a distinction the John does not indicate. The author must presuppose it in order to hold to his doctrine.

A person unacquainted with Calvinism would read the verse

1Jn. 2:2 He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

and take it for its plain, clear meaning. Jesus atoned for the sins of the saved and also for everyone else. Again, Calvinists need to invent complicated and sometimes ridiculous explanations to make the Bible conform to their doctrines. It may be one of the reasons Calvinists are so reluctant to quote the Bible.)

God has provided only one way of salvation—through Christ (John 14:6). If anyone in the world is going to be saved, it is going to be through Him. There is no other way. The point of 1 John 2:2 is that Christ is the only atonement that can save anyone, not that He has atoned for the sins of every individual. (Wow. Notice how the author flatly denies the very thing the verse clearly tells us.)

Irresistible Grace

I stands for irresistible grace, which refers to God’s loving power in salvation. Essentially, it says that if God loves you and wants you in His family, He is going to get you. He loves you so much that He will ensure that you come to faith, and He is powerful enough to guarantee your faith. (It's irresistible. You have no choice. You are predestined. Whether or not it is because of love is irrelevant, because those who are not predestined for salvation are predestined for hell. Did God hate the ones He chose for hell? If both the saved and the lost were chosen, love has nothing to do with it.)

So often in life, we see people we love going down the wrong path and we cannot convince them to turn from it. We are powerless to ensure that they make the right choice. God’s love is powerful enough to ensure that we make the right choice. (A choice that is predestined is not a choice.)

He can overcome all resistance we might offer and He never fails to persuade the elect to trust in Him. Certainly, we may resist Christ for a time. (No, we will not. If our salvation is predestined, that moment is when we get saved. What we do or don't do before [or even after] is irrelevant.)

We might reject the gospel for years before we believe it. That’s why it might be better to speak of finally irresistible grace or of effectual grace. Yet, when all is said and done, God will bring all of His children to faith.

You can probably see how this is required by unconditional election. If God chooses some for salvation and this will cannot be thwarted, then His grace must be finally irresistible. It must be effectual to bring us to faith. But we also find evidence for it in texts such as John 6:37–40, where we are told that everyone given to Christ by the Father for salvation actually comes to Him. (Sigh... Jesus, again, was talking to Jews about Jews. The children of the promise [Romans 9:8], His people, are the chosen remnant: 

Jeremiah 23:3 “I myself will gather the remnant of my flock out of all the countries where I have driven them and will bring them back to their pasture, where they will be fruitful and increase in number.  

None of the children of the promise will fail to be saved. That is God's purpose for His chosen people. It is not us.)

Ephesians 2:1–10 also tells us that God makes people who are dead in sin alive. Resurrection requires an effectual power because dead people cannot respond in faith. God must act effectually to give us new hearts before we believe because we cannot cooperate with Him while dead in sin. (Whoa. That came out of left field. We are born again before we are saved? This odd little irrelevancy is part of the Reformed Ordo Salutis [order of salvation]. Yes, there is actually a step-by-step description of the exact steps God takes to save a person. 

According to the ordo, born again precedes salvation. Apparently, the sinful state prohibits faith, so we need to be born again in order to be able to be saved. But if grace is irresistible, then why would it matter? Indeed, why is this important to know? Unknown.)

Other texts that point to God’s finally irresistible grace include Genesis 12:1–3, where God commands Abram to go up out of Ur and the patriarch does not at all hesitate to leave. God decreed it and it happens. (Ho-boy. Abraham did what God commanded. Period. End of story. Now the author is grasping at straws, where simple obedience to God becomes compelled by God.

At this point we are suspecting spiritual deception. It isn't that the author isn't competent, the reason for his errant doctrine is spiritual. He cannot see for he is blind.)

In sum, irresistible grace preserves the truth that God is not just all-loving (?? But He seems to only love the elect enough to save them. He certainly must have other feelings for those he predestined to eternal torment.)

but He is all-powerful. His love is strong enough to guarantee the salvation of all those He wants to save. His love for His people is omnipotent.

Perseverance of the Saints

P refers to the perseverance of the saints, which teaches God’s permanent saving love for His people. The Lord never stops loving His people with a saving, effectual love; consequently, all those who have truly believed in Him will not finally fall away from faith. True believers in Christ might seem to abandon Him for a time, but if they have truly believed in Him, they will always come back to Him. Those who profess faith but then fall away finally never actually believed in Christ in the first place. They go out from us because they were never truly of us (1 John 2:19). (The distinction is arbitrary. The author want us to think that someone who falls away was never was saved, while the other side of the issue is that salvation is something that can be abandoned. 

In either case, the true status of the person is unknowable by anyone other than God. Whether the person walked away or was never saved is therefore irrelevant.) 

Again, other theological points such as unconditional election require perseverance. If God chooses to save the elect, the elect must persevere. We also find the teaching explicitly stated in Scripture. ("Explicitly?")

Christ says that no one can snatch us out of the Father’s hand (John 10:28). “No one” includes even us—even we cannot snatch ourselves out of His hand. (We are growing weary of these false proclamations. Invariably when we go to the actual Scripture and read it in context we find the author is deceiving us about its contents. Let's quote: 

Jn. 10:26-28 but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. 27 My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28 I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no-one can snatch them out of my hand.

We are back to John chapter 10, where once again we find Jesus was answering His accusers. Yet again we must point out that Jesus was talking to Jews about Jewish things. Only the remnant of Jews are predestined. We are not.)

Romans 8:28–30 says that everyone whom God justifies He also glorifies. Since justification comes by faith alone (Rom. 4), if God glorifies all whom He justifies, He glorifies all who come to saving faith. (By now the reader is likely consulting his Bible and noticing a trend, that many of these Scriptures are not about us. Once you see it you can't unsee it. Let's quote: 

Romans 8:29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.

Jesus as a Jew considered His fellow Jews like any Jew would, as brothers. But He took it a step farther, that those who believed on Him were brothers:

Lk. 22:32 But I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers. 

 

Jn. 20:17 Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet returned to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, `I am returning to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’“

So for Jews like Jesus, fellow Jews were brothers, but specifically those who believed were truly His brothers.

In addition, Peter spoke to his fellow Jews who had come to the city to celebrate Pentecost. They were not Christians, they were Jews, but he called them brothers:

Ac. 2:29 Brothers, I can tell you confidently that the patriarch David died and was buried, and his tomb is here to this day.

Interestingly, the crowd responded to Peter's sermon: 

Ac. 2:37 When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?”

This simply means that we must be careful to ascertain who is the audience, particularly in verses like Romans 8:29. Let's requote it:

For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.

Jesus was the first of many Jewish brothers. These brothers were predestined, they were the children of the promise.)

In short, God loves us too much to let us fall out of His grace. He simply will not let us. (The author keeps appealing to God's love as if in his Calvinistic theology it would have any meaning. It really doesn't. If God's motivation for predestining the saved is love, then what is His motivation for those He predestines for hell?)

As you can see, TULIP, or the five points of Calvinism, summarizes God’s work of salvation, and it highlights the omnipotent love of God. Christians can rest assured that if they believe, it is because of the work of God, and that work cannot fail because His love cannot fail.