The U In The TULIP Doctrine

"Mercy" and "wrath" must not be assumed to have only eternal meanings. People suffer mercy and wrath all the time here on earth, having nothing to do with whether they wind up saved or damned in the end. Ultimately, everyone was stubborn and deserved hardening, but God obviously doesn't harden everyone who deserves it. (e.g. Every person who dabbles in perversion doesn't suffer what Romans 1 describes.) But it was their choice to be in that position in the first place. Still, there was nothing stopping individuals in Israel (the subject of the chapter), from eventually coming to faith. So this is the proper understanding of "vessels" and God "hardening or having mercy on whomever He will".

 

We really don't understand mercy if we think that we can initiate it by our own will or effort.We are hopelessly bound in the darkness of sin.If we are going to be saved,God will have to unconditionally take the initiative in our heart and irresistibly make us willing to submit to Him.(see Rom.11:7)

 

In John 15:16 Jesus told His apostles that HE HAD CHOSEN THEM and ordained them to bring forth fruit. After His ascension we remember that He sent them into all the world to proclaim His stupendous salvation. This was not intended as a proof-text to bolster up Calvin's alleged decrees. If Christ were going to say that He had elected the apostles unto salvation, He probably would have recorded this early in St. John. In the very next chapter, and only a few days before His crucifixion, in verse five and seven, He tells His disciples that He will be returning to Heaven.

Acts 1:2 corroborates the truth that Jesus chose His apostles for a special mission to the world. It may be that He told them where to personally go to proclaim His magnificent Good News. Nevertheless, Luke tells us that ‘Until the day in which He was taken up, after that He through the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the apostles whom HE HAD CHOSEN; to whom also He showed Himself alive after His passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.'

Reading the Word, contextually, always spurs us on to a discernible understanding of truth.

Respectfully,

Ray

 

Eph.1:3-6 is a powerful statement of the unconditionality of our election and predestination to sonship.And some interpreters will argue that this election before the foundation of the world was only an election of Christ,but not an election of which individuals would actually be in Christ.What this simply amounts to is saying that there is no unconditional election of individuals to salvation.Christ is put forward as the chosen one of God and the salvation of individuals is dependent on their own initiative to overcome their depravity and be united to Christ by faith.God does not choose them and therefore God cannot effectually convert them.He can only wait to see who will quicken themselves from the dead and choose Him.This interpretation does not square well with vs.11 where it says"we were predestined according to the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will."Neither does the literal wording of vs.4 fit this interpretation.The ordinary meaning of the word for"choose" in vs.4 is to select or pick out of a group(Lk.6:13;14:7;Jn.13:18;15:16,19).So the natural meaning of the verse is that God chooses His people from all humanity,before the foundation of the world by viewing them in relationship to Christ their redeemer.All election is in relation to Christ.There would be no election of sinners unto salvation if Christ were not appointed to die for their sins.So in that sense they are elect in Christ.But it is they,and not just Christ who are chosen out of the world.The wording of vs.5 suggests the election of people to be in Christ,and not just the election of Christ.Literally it says"having predestined us unto sonship through Jesus Christ."We are the ones predestined, not Christ.He is the one that makes the election of sinners possible,and so our election is"through Him",but there is no talk here about God having a view only to Christ in election.

 

Haha.. Tulpje means "little tulip" in dutch. I didn't realize the theological signifigance. I am Lutheran, and from what I read, we could not disagree more with the TULIP dictrine. Am I correct? I think I want a new nick name.

 

tulpje(tulip!);we certainly won't know if you're correct about completely disagreeing with us unless you put in type what it is that you exactly disagree with.

 

The Father initiated His plan of slavition.

The Son implemented the plan.

The Spirit empowered the plan.

 

TNelson,

We understand what you mean, but let's not divide the unity of the One God. Yes, there are three Persons in the one Triune Godhead.

Ray

 

Tulpje:
Well, you might try reading the book that Martin Luther (he founded the church named after him) called his most important book. He said you could throw the others away, but read this one. It is called "The Bondage of the Will." And you are right, Luther would be hard-pressed to find a modern-day "Lutheran" church that taught what he believed. I would imagine that if he sat in a ELCA church for about 15-minutes, he would bolt for the door and nail about 195 thesis to the front door. (ok, maybe only 95).
James2

 

Perhaps the most important text of all in relation to the teaching of unconditional election is Rom.8:28-33. Often this text is used to argue against unconditional election on the basis of verse 29,so some say that people are not chosen unconditionaly.They are chosen on the basis of their faith which they produce without the help of irresistable grace and which God sees beforehand.But this does not square with the context.Notice what Rom.8:30 says and then focus for a moment on the fact that all whom God calls He also justifies.This calling in verse 30 is not given to all people.The reason we know it's not is that all those who are called are also justified--but all men are not justified.So this calling in verse30 is not the general call to repentance that preachers give or that God gives through the glory of nature.Everybody receives that call.The call of verse 30 is given only to those whom God predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son(v.29).And it is a call that leads necessarily to justification:"Those whom He called He also justified."

 

Brother Glen;Rom.8:30"Moreover whom He did predestinate,them He also called:and whom He called,them He also justified:and whom He justified,them He also glorified."All men are not justified,so this calling in vs.30 is not a call to repentance(like that given by pastors in an invitation/nor God's call for all men to repent).This calling is given only to those whom God predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son in vs.29.It's a call that leads to justification:"those whom He called He also justified." We know that justification is by faith,Rom.5:1.What then is this call that is given to all those who are predestined and which leads to justification? It must be the call of irresistible grace.It is the call of 1Cor.1:24.Between the act of predestination and justification there is the act of calling.Since justification is only by faith the calling in view must be the act of God whereby He calls faith into being.And since it necessarily results in justification it must be irresistable.There are none called(in this sense! not the sense of Mt.22:14)who are not justified.So the calling of vs.30 is the sovereign work of God which brings a person to faith by which he is justified.Notice the implication this has for the meaning of foreknowledge in vs.29.When Paul says in vs.29,"Those whom He foreknew He also predestined,"he can't mean(as so many try to make him mean)that God knows in advance who will use their free will to come to faith,so that He can predestine them to sonship because they made that free choice on their own.It can't mean that because we have seen from vs.30 that people do not come to faith on their own.They are called irresistibly.God does not foreknow the free decisions of people to believe in Him because there aren't any such free decisions to know.If anyone comes to faith in Jesus,it is because they were quickened from the dead(Eph.2:5)by the creative spirit of God.That is,they are effectually called from darkness into light.So the foreknowledge of Rom.8:29 is not the mere awareness of something that will happen in the future apart from God's predetermination.Rather it is the kind of knowledge referred to in the O.T. texts like Gen.18:19"I have chosen[literally:known]Abraham so that he may charge his children...to keep the way of the Lord",and Jer.1:5" before I formed you in the womb,Iknew you,and before you were born I consecrated you;I appointed you a prophet to the nations",and Amos3:2"You only[Israel]have I known from all the families of the earth."As C.E.B.Cranfield says,the foreknowledge of Rom.8:29 is"that special taking knowledge of a person which is God's electing grace."Such foreknowledge is virtually the same as election:"Those whom He foreknew(i.e.chose)He predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son."Therefore what this magnificent text(Rom.8:28-33)teaches is that God really accomplishes the complete redemption of His people from start to finish.He foreknows,i.e.elects a people for Himself before the foundation of the world,He predestines this people to be conformed to the image of His Son,He calls them to Himself in faith,He justifies them through that faith,and He finally glorifies them--and nothing can separate them from the love of God in Christ for ever and ever(Rom.8:39)To Him be all praise and glory!Amen. Brother Glen I hope that this answers your question!

 

haha That's why I left elca for the wels-the most conservative, confessional Lutheran church in America today. I don't knwo what we believe concerning this doctrine. I am really confused about it to be honest. Do Lutherans beleive in TULIP?

I need to change my name.

 

Luther, and the Apostles sure did!! TULIP is just another way of saying the pure, simple gospel as taught by the Apostles and throughout the entire bible.

Try getting a copy of the following books. They may help you understand the gospel.

1. The five points of Calvinism, by David N. Steele
2. The Sovereignity of God, Arthur W Pink
3. The Reformed Docrine of Predestination, Loraine Boettner (really, really recommended).
And of course, Bondage of the Will, by Martin Luther. Those four books will keep you busy for awhile. The really good news is that there are many more to recommend.
James2

[ March 03, 2002, 03:49 PM: Message edited by: JAMES2 ]

 

But we don't believe in Calvinism!!!!!

 

tulpje:
So I guess you are saying that you don't believe in the gospel then? So what does your church teach about the Sovereignity of God, Justification by Faith, Divine Election, and man's totally depravity?
James2

 

Observation: Contrary to popular opinion, Calvinism is not the Gospel. It espouses an interpretation of the Gospel, which may be true or false in one degree or another, however, it is not in itself the Gospel.

The Gospel is that inspired message of salvation for all men as sinners clearly given in the New Testament, which is supported by the revelation found the Old Testament.

One may refuse to believe in Calvinism and still retain true, saving faith in the Gospel. To say that the one who does not believe in Calvinism does not believe in the Gospel is tantamount to (1) asserting what the Jehovah Witnesses and Mormons say regarding their teachings; and (2) implying that one who disbelieves Calvinism is not saved.

 

Okay....this is what I found in the WELS Q&A concerning TUPIP.

http://www.wels.net/sab/frm-qa.html
Three of the Five Points of Calvinism clearly distinguish Calvinism from Lutheranism and make them incompatible.

Lutherans agree with Calvinists that all people are born with total depravity (T), that is, that they are sinful by nature and unable to contribute to their own salvation. Lutherans also agree with Calvinists that salvation depends on the unconditional grace of God (U). Lutherans, however, reject the Calvinist doctrine of a limited atonement (L),the belief that Christ died only for the sins of the elect. We reject the related Calvinistic belief that God has predestined some people to damnation. Lutherans reject the Calvinistic belief in irresistible grace (I) since Scripture teaches that sinners are responsible for their rejection of God's grace. Lutherans reject the perseverance of the saints (P) held by Calvin. We believe that God does indeed protect and preserve his believers, but not in the Calvinistic sense of "once saved, always saved" since it is possible to fall from faith.

Another point that distinguishes Lutherans from Calvinists is their view of the sacraments. Calvinists do not believe that the sacraments are true means of grace. Although Calvinists speak of a "real presence" of Christ in the Lord's Supper, they do not believe that Christ's true body and blood are received by all the communicants along with the bread and the wine. That is why it would be wrong for Lutherans to enter Communion fellowship with Reformed churches.

In his Bondage of the Will Luther spoke very forcefully against Erasmus' idea that people have some free will to contribute to their salvation. Some of Luther's statements in this work can sound Calvinistic when detached from the whole context of his theology. But Luther's rejection of double predestination and limited atonement, as well as his view of the sacraments, sharply separate him from Calvinism. Although there are some common points in the theology of Luther and Calvin, I would not call Luther a Calvinist in any sense of the term.

 

Nelson and tulpje:
Contrary to popular belief, the gospel teaches over and over ALL 5-points of what has come to be referred to as Calvinism. All these points are repeatedly taught in the gospel and you CANNOT accept 3 points, or 2 points or 4 points and have a clue as to what the gospel even teaches.
Now, this subject has been discussed so much there is nothing I can add to or subtract from. Either God gives you the grace to understand the plain teachings of the bible (1 cor 2:14) or He hasn't. I feel really sorry for people who only understand part of what is plainly taught. The reason I feel sorry for them is because for years I was in the same boat. Then, by the grace of God, the full meaning of the Biblical teaching on the Doctrine of Grace, salvation, Justification by Faith, etc -- the full meaning of the Reformation -- was finally made clear to me. The result was the absolutely whole new way of looking at all those basic, and correct, doctrines. A whole new way of what it means to be free in Christ. I finally understood fully what Jesus meant when he said that the Truth will set you free.

You can prattle on and on about how man, somehow, in someway, can make "choices" or has "free-will" and it is up to depraved man to "accept" the atonement in order to make the atonement "effective" but it will only keep you in confusion and error.
Remember, God sustains you through every single moment of your life. If God, for one second stopped sustaining your or the universe, you and the universe would instantly evaporate into non-existence. So much for "free-will."

Hang on to man saving himself all you want, and if you insist on man having the ability to "choose" whether to be saved or not, join the vast majority of churches out there, including Rome, because that is where your theology will lead. Witness the almost fanatical effort to conform the modern-day churches so-called theology with that of Rome. Why do you think that is?

For me and my household, well, we will continue to believe the gospel as taught by the Apostles, the Reformers and the other great minds of the church. Salvation is from GOD ALONE plus NOTHING from man. After regeneration comes faith, and justification, and growth in the Christian life, and finally, glorification. Thank God salvation is ALL OF GRACE. (By the way, I'm sure I don't need to add that salvation is not even the main purpose of God in the first place. God's glory is what is important. Man's salvation is further down on the list).
Nelson, to I do not say that not believing in "Calvinsim" (by the way, you like most who don't understand the Reformer's concepts, continue to use the word term "Calvinism" like a dirty word. Obviously, you can't come with anything better, so let's try that useless tactic) means you are not saved. Further to compare what the Reformers taught with the JW's and Mormons really does border on the absurd, and I wasn't going to even respond to it, but it does show desperation.
You are right on one point. I also would not call Luther a Calvinist or Calvin a Lutheran. I would call both of them great men of God who restored the pure, simple teachings about the doctrines of Grace and Justification by Faith, election, salvation by God alone back into it's proper place.

Once again, you and your views are in the vast majority of what man has invented as their religions. EVERY single religion in the history of man, has man saving himself, in one way or another, by his "free will." Man-centered religion is the rule not the exception. Hang on to your free will all you want. Insist that man can save himself. Throw in some grace here and there, and ignore Romans 9 and the rest of the bible, and give man the glory. That's what man just can't give up. He has to be the captain of his ship, the master of his destiny. As long as you maintain that man HAS ANYTHING to do with his salvation you do not understand the gospel. Are you saved? Certainly, I never said you weren't. In error about the essentials of the gospel!! Without a doubt!!!! Go on thinking that your salvation was because you decided to accept Jesus. One question tho:

Since, according to you, the gospel is offered freely and unconditionally to EVERY SINGLE individual on the earth, WHY did you accept Jesus and others did not? Why did you accept the free offer and the others reject that exact same free offer? Was your "free will" freer that the others? Just what do you consider the GROUNDS of your salvation to be? Are you saying that the grounds and basis of your salvation was the fact that you made a CHOICE to accept Jesus and the others did not? Now, that is a major error that is being taught in the modern-day church. It's such a shame that they type of theology is being inflicted on people.

Here's a web site if you would like to find some basic information on what the Reformers' taught:
http://www.graceonlinelibrary.org/calvinism/

[ March 04, 2002, 04:14 PM: Message edited by: JAMES2 ]