Rewriting the Tulip

[Van]

The TULIP should be a beautiful flower of God, spreading the points of its pedals above the bedrock of scripture from which it arose.

“T” should stand for Totally in Adam; totally separated from God by our corrupted and unholy spiritual nature.

“U” should stand for Unlimited Reconciliation; God is reconciling fallen humanity to Himself one believer at a time because the sacrifice of Jesus provided the means of salvation for the sin of humanity.

“L” should stand for Limited Redemption; All mankind has been purchased for God, the ransom for all has been paid in full, but not all men have received (or will receive) the reconciliation provided by Christ. When we are individually chosen (elected) we are then made “at one with God” when we are spiritually baptized into Christ based on God accepting our faith in Christ as sufficient for His purpose, thus crediting our faith as righteousness.

“I” should stand for In Christ; when we are spiritually baptized into Christ by the Holy Spirit, we are converted, given a new heart with our faith hard wired into our soul, and with a clear conscience such that we arise from the baptism into Christ’s death a new spiritual creature in Christ, created for good works and then after our spiritual purification, indwelt with the Holy Spirit as a helper and as God's pledge to our bodily redemption at Christ's second coming.

“P” should stand for Protected Faith; those set apart and converted have their faith protected by God such that will always love Jesus, and anyone who says they were saved but no longer loves Jesus was never saved. But once a person is saved, therefore “In Christ” nothing can snatch him or her out of God’s hand, and because their faith is protected, they would never want to leave the faith. Once saved, always saved.

It is time to proclaim the TULIP of Scripture.

 

[Van]

1 Corinthians 15:22
For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive.

Humans are all conceived in a sinful state, separated from our Holy God by our unholiness, as we were made sinners. This separated state is called being dead in our sins. So in Adam we are spiritually dead, but when we are transferred spiritually into Christ, we are made alive (regenerated).

Thus In Adam = Spiritually Dead but in Christ = Spiritually Alive

Everyone not belonging to Christ is spiritually located "in Adam" thus totally separated from God, totally located in the domain of Darkness, rather than the Kingdom of His marvelous light.

 

[canadyjd]

Since some have no problem rewriting scripture to make it fit their bias, why shouldn’t they rewrite a man made explanation of what scripture teaches?

Keep trying. Maybe one day the dream of convincing everyone on the planet that the doctrines of grace are not biblical will become a reality.

peace to you

 

[Van]

Once again a poster insinuates the rewrite of the Tulip does not reflect God"s word.

However, everyone is conceived in Adam and remains spiritually dead, separated from God by their unholiness as sinners unless transferred into Christ. This of course reflects God's word, 1 Corinthians 15:22.

Such persons, as we all were, are totally incapable of transferring themselves into Christ, as the action is totally by the grace of God alone.

However, while in Adam, they can desire and strive to be transferred, but salvation does not depend on these actions, salvation depends on the one who transfers them into Christ. Romans 9:16

Only when God credits the faith of a spiritually dead person as righteousness, does the person get called into the Kingdom of Him marvelous light. When a person obtains mercy does not mean they earned mercy but just the opposite. Mercy means not getting what you earned or deserved.

 

[canadyjd]

Once again a poster insinuates the rewrite of the Tulip does not reflect God"s word.

However, everyone is conceived in Adam and remains spiritually dead, separated from God by their unholiness as sinners unless transferred into Christ. This of course reflects God's word, 1 Corinthians 15:22.

You can “rewrite” anyone’s explanation of scripture to fit your beliefs. Better to come up with your own, imo.

You are OBSESSED with this crusade against “Calvinism”.

You just keep starting the same threads with the same arguments over and over over and over.

I’ll bow out.

Please stay out of my threads if you cannot actually address the question of the OP

peace to you

 

[Van]

You are OBSESSED with this crusade against “Calvinism”.
You just keep starting the same threads with the same arguments over and over over and over.
I’ll bow out.
Please stay out of my threads if you cannot actually address the question of the OP
peace to you

Ever meet someone who claims to be a mind reader with the same result, they claim the mind's motivations are sinful?
I have!

But nary a word about 1 Corinthians 15:22, Romans 9:16, Isaiah 59:2 Colossians 1:13 or 1 Peter 2:9-10.

 

[tyndale1946]

Ever meet someone who claims to be a mind reader with the same result, they claim the mind's motivations are sinful?
I have!

But nary a word about 1 Corinthians 15:22, Romans 9:16, Isaiah 59:2 Colossians 1:13 or 1 Peter 2:9-10.

Figures, Van hiding out in the Baptist Theology & Bible Study Forum and doesn't have the stones to post this on the C/A Forum and had turned the TULIP into a weed... I shall bow out also... Brother Glen

 

[Silverhair]

Ever meet someone who claims to be a mind reader with the same result, they claim the mind's motivations are sinful?
I have!

But nary a word about 1 Corinthians 15:22, Romans 9:16, Isaiah 59:2 Colossians 1:13 or 1 Peter 2:9-10.

Have you noticed that those that claim the TULIP/DoG is the gospel do not stay around to defend their false philosophy.

 

[David Lamb]

The TULIP should be a beautiful flower of God, spreading the points of its pedals above the bedrock of scripture from which it arose.

“T” should stand for Totally in Adam; totally separated from God by our corrupted and unholy spiritual nature.

“U” should stand for Unlimited Reconciliation; God is reconciling fallen humanity to Himself one believer at a time because the sacrifice of Jesus provided the means of salvation for the sin of humanity.

“L” should stand for Limited Redemption; All mankind has been purchased for God, the ransom for all has been paid in full, but not all men have received (or will receive) the reconciliation provided by Christ. When we are individually chosen (elected) we are then made “at one with God” when we are spiritually baptized into Christ based on God accepting our faith in Christ as sufficient for His purpose, thus crediting our faith as righteousness.

“I” should stand for In Christ; when we are spiritually baptized into Christ by the Holy Spirit, we are converted, given a new heart with our faith hard wired into our soul, and with a clear conscience such that we arise from the baptism into Christ’s death a new spiritual creature in Christ, created for good works and then after our spiritual purification, indwelt with the Holy Spirit as a helper and as God's pledge to our bodily redemption at Christ's second coming.

“P” should stand for Protected Faith; those set apart and converted have their faith protected by God such that will always love Jesus, and anyone who says they were saved but no longer loves Jesus was never saved. But once a person is saved, therefore “In Christ” nothing can snatch him or her out of God’s hand, and because their faith is protected, they would never want to leave the faith. Once saved, always saved.

It is time to proclaim the TULIP of Scripture.

I agree that the acronym "TULIP" to illustrate the so-called doctrines of grace is far from perfect. I wouldn't rewrite it in the wholesale manner you suggest, but I find the "L", standing for "Limited atonement" is open to misinterpretation, giving the mistaken idea that people such as me who believe such doctrines somehow imagine that the number of saved people eventually going to heaven is comparatively small, in spite of what the bible says about an innumerable company that no man can number. I prefer the term "particular redemption", but of course "TUPIP", is not a word, as far as I know.

 

[kyredneck]

Have you noticed that those that claim the TULIP/DoG is the gospel do not stay around to defend their false philosophy.

It gets wearisome arguing with a bunch of obsessed nut jobs.

 

[Silverhair]

It gets wearisome arguing with a bunch of obsessed nut jobs.

You should not refer to yourself as a nut job KY. Granted it is wearisome arguing with those that hold to the DoG/TULIP but we do it because we see the value in turning them to a correct understanding of biblical salvation.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

You should not refer to yourself as a nut job KY. Granted it is wearisome arguing with those that hold to the DoG/TULIP but we do it because we see the value in turning them to a correct understanding of biblical salvation.

As we say in NJ, Forgetaboutit… your pissing in the wind.

 

[canadyjd]

As we say in NJ, Forgetaboutit… your pissing in the wind.

I think I remember a song about that. It went “posts in the wind….all we are are posts in the wind”

peace to you

 

[Van]

Figures, Van hiding out in the Baptist Theology & Bible Study Forum and doesn't have the stones to post this on the C/A Forum and had turned the TULIP into a weed... I shall bow out also... Brother Glen

Yet another Calvinist addressing me and my character, rather than the topic.

But nary a word about 1 Corinthians 15:22, Romans 9:16, Isaiah 59:2 Colossians 1:13 or 1 Peter 2:9-10.

 

[Silverhair]

As we say in NJ, Forgetaboutit… your pissing in the wind.

Vulgar language not required EFW. But pointing out theological errors is necessary even though it is wearisome arguing with those that hold to a man made philosophy.

 

[kyredneck]

As we say in NJ, Forgetaboutit… your pissing in the wind.

Vulgar language not required EFW. .

???

27 But Rabshakeh said unto them, Hath my master sent me to thy master, and to thee, to speak these words? hath he not sent me to the men which sit on the wall, that they may eat their own dung, and drink their own piss with you? 2 Ki 18

12 But Rabshakeh said, Hath my master sent me to thy master and to thee to speak these words? hath he not sent me to the men that sit upon the wall, that they may eat their own dung, and drink their own piss with you? Isa 36

(see also hell, damn, and ass )

 

[Silverhair]

???

27 But Rabshakeh said unto them, Hath my master sent me to thy master, and to thee, to speak these words? hath he not sent me to the men which sit on the wall, that they may eat their own dung, and drink their own piss with you? 2 Ki 18

12 But Rabshakeh said, Hath my master sent me to thy master and to thee to speak these words? hath he not sent me to the men that sit upon the wall, that they may eat their own dung, and drink their own piss with you? Isa 36

(see also hell, damn, and ass )

It is still vulgar and unnecessary language KY. Being acceptable in 1769 does not mean it is now.

 

[kyredneck]

It is still vulgar and unnecessary language KY. Being acceptable in 1769 does not mean it is now.

I'll betcha if it was one of your Pelagian/semi-Pelagian anti-Cal buddies you wouldn't have said anything. It's the attitude behind such words that makes it wrong or ok, you know like, THOU FOOL, Matthew 5:22

I didn't know you were so easily offended Silv.

 

[Silverhair]

I'll betcha if it was one of your Pelagian/semi-Pelagian anti-Cal buddies you wouldn't have said anything. It's the attitude behind such words that makes it wrong or ok, you know like, THOU FOOL, Matthew 5:22

I didn't know you were so easily offended Silv.

Vulgar language is vulgar no matter who uses it. But I am not surprised by your attempt at deflection.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Vulgar language is vulgar no matter who uses it. But I am not surprised by your attempt at deflection.

You are being both petty, easily offended and obtuse Shiv. The word piss in that sentence is commonly used… even in polite society.