The Universalist TULIP

[MormonHero]

One of the most influential gatherings in the history of Christianity was the Synod of Dordt held in Dordrecht in 1618-1619, by the Dutch Reformed Church. This Synod was called to address the teaching of Jacob Arminius, famous for the soteriological theology we know as Arminiansm. One of the outcomes of the Synod was an acronym that has since come to define what we know today as the “Five Points of Calvinism.” The acronym is TULIP which stands for:

• Total depravity of man
• Unconditional election
• Limited atonement
• Irresistible grace
• Perseverance of the saints

Although there are parts of the acronym that have encouraged many believers over the years, there are other parts that have had a terrorizing effect. Think for a moment upon the implications of a person who at once recognizes their own depravity and at the same time accepts the limited atonement of Christ’s work on the cross. What hope is there for such a person?..

When the angel of the Lord announced the birth of Jesus he proclaimed the following: “Do not be afraid, for behold I bring you good news of great joy which will be to all people. For there is born to you this day in the city of David a Savior who is Christ the Lord.” (Luke 2:10,11). Did you get that? This message was not supposed to bring fear. It was Good News and it was for all people. Jesus later taught that this truth of the Gospel would be something that would set us free (John 8:32). The liberating truth of the Gospel is that Jesus Christ is the Lamb of God who took upon Himself and took away the sins of the world (2 Cor. 5:21, John 1:29) when He willingly went to the cross. That is why at the name of Jesus, every knee will bow and every tongue confess that Jesus is Lord to the glory of God. (Phil. 2:10,11).

Here then is another way to consider the beauty of the tulip:

• Total reconciliation
• Unlimited atonement
• LOVE
• Irresistible grace through the ages
• Perseverance of God

Admittedly, total reconciliation and unlimited atonement are two ways of saying the same thing. However, given the importance of this concept, it is worth reinforcing! The thought here is simple: Christ went to the cross to redeem humankind and He succeeded!

 

[SSTeacher]

One of the most influential gatherings in the history of Christianity was the Synod of Dordt held in Dordrecht in 1618-1619, by the Dutch Reformed Church. This Synod was called to address the teaching of Jacob Arminius, famous for the soteriological theology we know as Arminiansm. One of the outcomes of the Synod was an acronym that has since come to define what we know today as the “Five Points of Calvinism.” The acronym is TULIP which stands for:

• Total depravity of man
• Unconditional election
• Limited atonement
• Irresistible grace
• Perseverance of the saints

Although there are parts of the acronym that have encouraged many believers over the years, there are other parts that have had a terrorizing effect. Think for a moment upon the implications of a person who at once recognizes their own depravity and at the same time accepts the limited atonement of Christ’s work on the cross. What hope is there for such a person?..

When the angel of the Lord announced the birth of Jesus he proclaimed the following: “Do not be afraid, for behold I bring you good news of great joy which will be to all people. For there is born to you this day in the city of David a Savior who is Christ the Lord.” (Luke 2:10,11). Did you get that? This message was not supposed to bring fear. It was Good News and it was for all people. Jesus later taught that this truth of the Gospel would be something that would set us free (John 8:32). The liberating truth of the Gospel is that Jesus Christ is the Lamb of God who took upon Himself and took away the sins of the world (2 Cor. 5:21, John 1:29) when He willingly went to the cross. That is why at the name of Jesus, every knee will bow and every tongue confess that Jesus is Lord to the glory of God. (Phil. 2:10,11).

Here then is another way to consider the beauty of the tulip:

• Total reconciliation
• Unlimited atonement
• LOVE
• Irresistible grace through the ages
• Perseverance of God

Admittedly, total reconciliation and unlimited atonement are two ways of saying the same thing. However, given the importance of this concept, it is worth reinforcing! The thought here is simple: Christ went to the cross to redeem humankind and He succeeded!

I don’t understand your point. Can you enlarge, please?

Respectfully,
Mick

 

[twopekinguys]

Do you understand how discussion forums work?

You need to ask a question of some sort in order to discuss/debate.

What is it you want to discuss? What is your question?

 

[MormonHero]

I don’t understand your point. Can you enlarge, please?

Respectfully,
Mick

The Calvinists who lurk here know what I’m talking about.

For the non-Calvinists, TULIP is a common (though perhaps slightly misleading) description of what Calvinists believe. In particular, the “L” stands for “Limited Atonement”: Jesus only died for the Elect, not for All.

Universalism arose as a reaction against Calvinism, arguing that not only did Jesus die for All, Jesus actually saves All.

 

[SSTeacher]

SSTeacher;6905502:

I don’t understand your point. Can you enlarge, please?

Respectfully,
Mick

The Calvinists who lurk here know what I’m talking about.

How can you tell? Neither of them has posted a comment.

For the non-Calvinists, TULIP is a common (though perhaps slightly misleading) description of what Calvinists believe. In particular, the “L” stands for “Limited Atonement”: Jesus only died for the Elect, not for All.

Universalism arose as a reaction against Calvinism, arguing that not only did Jesus die for All, Jesus actually saves All.

I know. But what’s your point?

Cordially,
Mick

 

[UniversalistGuy]

MormonHero;6906049:

For the non-Calvinists, TULIP is a common (though perhaps slightly misleading) description of what Calvinists believe. In particular, the “L” stands for “Limited Atonement”: Jesus only died for the Elect, not for All.

Universalism arose as a reaction against Calvinism, arguing that not only did Jesus die for All, Jesus actually saves

All.I know. But what’s your point?

Cordially,
Mick

I think the point is that if Jesus died for the Elect and for nobody else then the Calvinist deity practices favoritism. Who might be people that aren’t elected and why does the Calvinist deity want them to be damned without even getting a shot at salvation?

 

[SSTeacher]

SSTeacher;6906123:

MormonHero;6906049:

For the non-Calvinists, TULIP is a common (though perhaps slightly misleading) description of what Calvinists believe. In particular, the “L” stands for “Limited Atonement”: Jesus only died for the Elect, not for All.

Universalism arose as a reaction against Calvinism, arguing that not only did Jesus die for All, Jesus actually saves

All.I know. But what’s your point?

Cordially,
Mick
:thumbsup:I think the point is that if Jesus died for the Elect and for nobody else then the Calvinist deity practices favoritism.

I won’t disagree. But, not surprisingly, Calvinists object to the word favoritism and instead perceive the arbitrary damnation of some by their God to be intrinsic to His sovereignty.

Who might be people that aren’t elected and why does the Calvinist deity want them to be damned without even getting a shot at salvation?

In practice, nobody knows who the Elect are and so nobody can know who the non–Elect are, either. The only thing about which one can be certain is that those who adopt this bleak and unsettling theology will all claim to be amongst the Elect.

Definitely,
Mick

 

[O.S.Luke]

My hunch is that even John Calvin wasn’t a strict 5-point Calvinist. Of course, I am a Methodist…

 

[Nine_Two]

Universalism arose as a reaction against Calvinism, arguing that not only did Jesus die for All, Jesus actually saves All.

I’m not sure I would agree. Universalism sort of grew out of antinomianism, and antinomianism itself grew out of taking Calvin’s doctrines to their logical conclusion. Universalism is certainly an outgrowth from Calvinism, but I’m not sure I’d call it a reaction against.