The Highway Forums General Discussion Devotional Quotes TULIP

Total Depravity

When man first sinned he died (Genesis 2:17). Now man is spiritually dead, not well, not sick, not even terminally ill, but dead in trespasses and sins (Ephesians 2:1). His depravity pertaining to all aspects of his personality is total. This is not to be confused with UTTER depravity, for there is room for deprovement. Consequently this slave of sin (John 8:34), exploits every opportunity to sin in every area of his being: in thought, word and deed, by commission and omission, and even his good works are bad (Genesis 6:5). Total depravity is our one original contribution to TULIP. We are the dirty soil in which God plants His flower, and from our filth, produces a thing of divine beauty. Those who have eyes to see will notice that the TULIP is an infralapsarian plant.

Unconditional Election

If man is as depraved as the Bible says he is, his divine election to salvation would have to be as unconditional as the Bible says it is. Romans 9:15 How could a totally depraved person exercise faith in a God they hate, or behave virtuously, while obverse to virtue? If it were a matter of foreseeing, what would God foresee but sin and unbelief, unless He elected to rescue some of the deservedly perishing? The election to salvation is absolutely unconditional, but the salvation is not—faith being its prerequisite and good works its post requisite.

Limited Atonement

The atonement is the means by which God brings totally depraved, but unconditionally elect persons to Himself, without violence to His own inexorable holiness. His mercy constrains Him to save and His holiness restrains Him from saving unjustly. So God became man in Christ that He could pay the price for sin and remain God, He did not empty Himself of deity when He became incarnate, so that the purchase was infinite in value. That the atonement was unlimited in its sufficiency as in its offer and limited only in its specific design for those who believe (John 3:16). Those who believe are the elect (Romans 8:30). I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy at once explains the unconditional character of election and the limitedness of the atonement.

Irresistible Grace

The infinitely precious atonement would be of no value because totally depraved persons even though elect are utterly hostile to God unless something was done to them in grace that corresponded to what was done for them in the atonement. Saving grace need not only be provided but applied by means of union with Christ in regeneration. This divine grace is irresistible or efficacious because it mercifully changes the depraved soul. When a person is born again from above by the Spirit, he as a new creature finds it as natural, irresistible to come to Christ, as in his depravity he finds it natural, irresistible to flee from Him (John 3:3-8) Grace is irresistible not by being against man's will but by recreating his will.

Perseverance of the Saints

The purpose of God would fail if the last of Christ's sheep who were not brought and kept within His fold (John 17:20,21; 2 Peter 3:9) So the saints must be persevering. And this could only be possible or certain by God's preserving. Having put his hand to the plow God never turns back Philippians 1:6 Because He does not, neither do His saints (Philippians 2:11,12). Perseverance by the saints is a consequence of the preservation of the saints. Let us keep our eyes fixed on Jesus on whom our faith depends from beginning to end (Hebrews 12:2).

~ John Gerstner

This great acronym never gets old, especially with the theological mishandling of the truths of God's Word, the history of the rebuttal from whence its derived and its importance for the future generation of the church with the younger members, its a rich truth that I love and I'm so happy and blessed to be a member of a church that proclaims its truth in the 21st century ... Thank you for reminding us of the points!

The sad truth though is that there would be more professing Christians against all 5 points than for them...
Know many who consider themselves 4 pointers, as they disagree with limited atonement...

I have seen this to be a truism in my encounter with others who say they are biblical Christians,.. they will reject all five points, not really on the truth of the statements but by the term Calvinism in general, without doing a proper investigation of the origin and the history of the faith,... And as you shared with your last comment, there are many who hold to being a 4 pointer because of their understanding or lack thereof of limited atonement and proudly hold to less then all the truths as given from the rejection by the Synod of Dort,.. I remember reading a comment regarding those who make the claim of being a 4 point Calvinist as thus ''So-called four-point Calvinism fails the test of biblical Christocentricity and, as such, tends to view TULIP as an abstraction rather than centering on Christ. The TULIP only makes sense when Christ is found at its center. Consider the TULIP as a chiasm with the "L" at the top of the pyramid. All grace has its source in Jesus Christ, from whom all redemptive blessings flow. The other doctrines have no power apart from Christ.''
John Hendryx

I would tend to agree that the majority of professing Christians would reject 4 of the 5 points, but I'm incline to think that the majority would affirm the perseverance part, especially using the phrase 'once saved, always saved'.

They may agree with the phrase ''once saved, always saved'' but the problem with that term is the what they mean by it,.. I don't see the relation when ask for a more clearer definition .. I have heard that it means that despite what you may do, and that relates to falling back towards our sin nature and to practice as such, you still are not liable to lose your salvation, which excuses the sin that they maybe committing at the time, with the excuse that ''once saved, always saved'',.. so I do not like using it, and feel the more prone to the accept the above explanation as it put God as the author and finisher of the faith given as a gift.... They no longer have a struggle with sin, they give in and hold to the OSAS mantra,.. here's a quote from Michael Horton, briefly on the term,.. not fully agreed to the degree, it could have been fleshed out more, but here it goes.. ''When we speak of “once saved, always saved,” we are not taking into account the full scope of salvation. We have been saved (justification), was are being saved (sanctified), and we will one day be saved (glorified). You cannot claim to have been “saved” (justified) unless you are being sanctified. Jesus Christ is Savior and Lord.
Michael Horton from Putting the Amazing Back into Grace (pg. 171)

Think most, especially among Baptist Christians, would accept 4 of the 5, as limited/unlimited atonement is where they err, and think that is due to them still not quite grasping that free will salvation is a myth!

Think that a lot of this depends on just how the person views OSAS, as those who hold to the eternal security of the Christian, as many Baptists do, would see this as the verses that support that God will keep in Christ all whom he saves, that it is His work to keep us saved, and NOT meaning they can still freely sin upon grace of God. The ones who hold to once saved always saved and think a one time profession of faith saves is another issue here!

That makes no sense (nonsense) whatsoever.

1. "most" Baptists accept 4 of the 5 [Points of Calvinism]? Not in the western hemisphere and I would venture to say nowhere else in the world is that factual.

2. How can one "accept" the doctrine of "Total Depravity" and "Irresistible Grace" and "Unconditional Election" yet not quite grasp that free-will salvation is a myth? All 5 Points are antithetical to "free-will salvation". This forces me to ask you, Do you REALLY understand Calvinism as a whole and the infamous "Five Points of Calvinism"?

Yes I do, and will stand by that statement on 4 points, as many at say Dallas theological are Baptist, and deny just limited atonement!


And do agree with you that unless one holds to all of them, not really understanding calvinism, as they all link together!

Really? Either you are woefully naive or you have some silly idea that the majority of Baptists reside at Dallas Theological Seminary. Are you not aware that within the Southern Baptist Convention alone, Calvinists are a very small minority and they are typically despised? The OVERWHELMING majority of Baptists throughout the world are semi-Pelagians or worse. Ask any of the African pastors who are members here about the spiritual condition and theological position of most of the churches in Africa. Calvinists are a very small minority within the visible church in its broadest sense.

And just to relate a personal experience, which is NOT intended to be a paradigm in support of my contention that the majority of Baptists categorically do not embrace 4 out of the 5 Points of Calvinism.

When I was at WTS in Philly, back in 1979, I sat beside a young man who told me he came from DTS. I asked why he enrolled at WTS when the theology taught between the two were diametrically opposed? He affirmed that this was true. When he affirmed biblical Calvinism as the truth he was denied his MDiv at his final oral examination. So, he hoped to finish his desire for the MDiv at WTS. He also affirmed my assessment of Sperry Chafer's Systematic Theology as NOT teaching Calvinism at all, but rather a distortion of Calvinism by redefining terms, etc., etc., ad nauseam.

Only those who embrace the true Biblical gospel can be called Christians. So, I don't understand your statement. Why call someone who trusts in another gospel a Christian? They are not. It is not that they are not "grasping" the fallacy of free will, they actually deny the doctrine of total depravity to the extent that they think they have something in an of themselves by which they can exercise faith or belief in Christ. Unless they reach a point where they are fully convinced that they are vile sinners and therefore dead in their sins can they ever look to Christ and that comes through being born from above.

I think that at this point, it would really be helpful for you to read a lecture that was given at a PCRT conference back in 1978 that was made available here in December 2015. It is called TULIP and is where this quote was taken. Here is a link to TULIP

I do hope that you will read it and then share some of your thoughts if you wish.

I stand corrected! I was just referring to those at DTS, but would also agree with you that in the SBC, there are indeed more who hold to a more free will approach than a Calvinistic one!

I do understand your point, and would like to say that there are some Calvinists are more "tolerant" in regards to this very issoe...