Resolving Problematic Interpretations of Scripture

[GWH]

The purpose of this thread is to promote Christian unity and resolve arguments by applying key Scriptures in wide (holistic) context, hoping that intra-Christian apologetics will convince many to adopt the better belief regarding divisive doctrines. Again, some doctrines that are controversial within the Christian community will be discussed in an effort to answer the prayer of Jesus (in John 17:20-23) for spiritual unity among his followers. Many pastors either avoid these issues or else mention only their viewpoint, but this thread will share both sides of the issue, trying to resolve conflict in accordance with what Paul wrote (in Phil. 3:15b-16), “…If on some point you think differently, that too God will make clear to you. Only let us live up to what we have already attained.”

Because the most divisive doctrine that causes the most argumentation on CC seems to be TULIP, this thread will begin by considering that topic in a way that does not duplicate other threads, but by politely presenting Scripture interpreted holistically or in context. TULIP is described as follows:

T – total depravity, meaning that all souls are unable to seek salvation.

U – unconditional election, meaning that souls cannot satisfy a divine condition (such as faith or repentance), but God elects to save some while damning the rest to hell.

L – limited atonement, meaning that Christ died to pay the penalty of sin only for the elect souls.

I – irresistible grace, meaning that elect souls cannot resist God’s will for them to believe and be saved.

P – perseverance of the saints, meaning that the elect cannot repudiate their salvation and commit apostasy.

Would anyone like to begin (politely presenting Scripture interpreted holistically or in context)?

Reposted for @brightfame and others.

 

[PaulThomson]

The purpose of this thread is to promote Christian unity and resolve arguments by applying key Scriptures in wide (holistic) context, hoping that intra-Christian apologetics will convince many to adopt the better belief regarding divisive doctrines. Again, some doctrines that are controversial within the Christian community will be discussed in an effort to answer the prayer of Jesus (in John 17:20-23) for spiritual unity among his followers. Many pastors either avoid these issues or else mention only their viewpoint, but this thread will share both sides of the issue, trying to resolve conflict in accordance with what Paul wrote (in Phil. 3:15b-16), “…If on some point you think differently, that too God will make clear to you. Only let us live up to what we have already attained.”

Because the most divisive doctrine that causes the most argumentation on CC seems to be TULIP, this thread will begin by considering that topic in a way that does not duplicate other threads, but by politely presenting Scripture interpreted holistically or in context. TULIP is described as follows:

T – total depravity, meaning that all souls are unable to seek salvation.

U – unconditional election, meaning that souls cannot satisfy a divine condition (such as faith or repentance), but God elects to save some while damning the rest to hell.

L – limited atonement, meaning that Christ died to pay the penalty of sin only for the elect souls.

I – irresistible grace, meaning that elect souls cannot resist God’s will for them to believe and be saved.

P – perseverance of the saints, meaning that the elect cannot repudiate their salvation and commit apostasy.

Would anyone like to begin (politely presenting Scripture interpreted holistically or in context)?

We don’t argue, but refuse to be contentious. Instead of arguing and aiming to beat an opponent, we humbly present the reasons we have for our own understanding of scripture, without trying to use emotional rhetoric, bullying and manipulation to coerce others to agree with us.

 

[GWH]

We don’t argue, but refuse to be contentious. Instead of arguing and aiming to beat an opponent, we humbly present the reasons we have for our own understanding of scripture, without trying to use emotional rhetoric, bullying and manipulation to coerce others to agree with us.

Amen!

And as truthseekers we remain open to learning we were wrong.
Guilt is good when wrong beliefs are amended.

 

[indenturedservant]

Because the most divisive doctrine that causes the most argumentation on CC seems to be TULIP

Most forums restrict topics that are this divisive. If this manmade (doctrine?) causes conflict, it should just be restricted.

When I hear this, I always picture some theologian drafting a memorable sermon outline that features a lot of philosophized theological terms, with alliteration that paints an attractive picture.

It's only purpose seems to be influencing believers to speak like a theologian. I'm not trying to violate your plea for polite conversation, but I must first be honest... This acronym, and it's full text, is the silliest thing to ever be referred to as "doctrine."

I've actually heard radio personalities convert to this overnight, and all they did was keep repeating this like a mantra on the radio .. no explanation, no takeaway for listeners, nothing. Which means, it doesn't even qualify as the "milk of the word" and seems to have an almost hypnotic effect on people.

Full disclosure: I feel similarly about all topics referred to as "The Doctrine of..."

I see all of this leading to differences of opinion which creates division...

To communicate politely, in a godly manner, with honesty and openness about God's Word, we should just use God's Word, not a summery based on well spun words that literally present "Scripture-based concepts" with alliteration, word cadence, and dogma, but without ever having to mention Scripture... Just sayin'.

 

[GWH]

Most forums restrict topics that are this divisive. If this manmade (doctrine?) causes conflict, it should just be restricted.

When I hear this, I always picture some theologian drafting a memorable sermon outline that features a lot of philosophized theological terms, with alliteration that paints an attractive picture.

It's only purpose seems to be influencing believers to speak like a theologian. I'm not trying to violate your plea for polite conversation, but I must first be honest... This acronym, and it's full text, is the silliest thing to ever be referred to as "doctrine."

I've actually heard radio personalities convert to this overnight, and all they did was keep repeating this like a mantra on the radio .. no explanation, no takeaway for listeners, nothing. Which means, it doesn't even qualify as the "milk of the word" and seems to have an almost hypnotic effect on people.

Full disclosure: I feel similarly about all topics referred to as "The Doctrine of..."

I see all of this leading to differences of opinion which creates division...

To communicate politely, in a godly manner, with honesty and openness about God's Word, we should just use God's Word, not a summery based on well spun words that literally present "Scripture-based concepts" with alliteration, word cadence, and dogma, but without ever having to mention Scripture... Just sayin'.

I appreciate CC not restricting topics because it gives Christians opportunities to practice apologetics,
which churches typically do not provide. However, I appreciate hateful posters being banned after being warned to repent.

On CC, we all are theologians discussing God and Bible doctrines. I would rather you speak as a Bible student than as a know-it-all preacher. Honesty is good, and acronyms used frequently can serve the good purpose of being succinct to save typing. TULIP goes beyond being silly to being heresy, so it behooves us to learn Bible doctrine/teaching that refutes it.

As different people, we will have differences of opinion, but I endeavor to create unity based on shared belief in the foundational doctrine called the Gospel. Yes, we should try to communicate politely, in a godly manner, with honesty and openness about God's Word, but you and I are not "just using GW" as we discuss this, so summaries such as a creed may be acceptable. Not sure what you think is wrong with "alliteration and word cadence", but I agree that "dogma" connotes a closed-mindedness, which is NOT good. And I agree that we should mention/cite Scripture as much as possible.

 

[indenturedservant]

learn Bible doctrine/teaching that refutes it.

I guess I'm old-school. I did used to have the mindset that false doctrines need to be refuted, but have found that refuting them is like fighting fire with fire.

( I see the odd devotion to this acronym to be similar to the devotion of Sabbath Keepers, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Flat Earthers have for their unique doctrine)

But I don't see this as a doctrine, not biblical anyway. I used to write sermon outlines, and this is a sermon outline. It's structured like an outline, it uses literary devices and others commonly used in professional oral speeches.

Knowing Scripture quite well, I just don't see this in Scripture, at all. I've heard fire and brimstone sermons that use this type of emotional language to engage people's hearts, with perhaps a little extra persuasion...

 

[GWH]

I guess I'm old-school. I did used to have the mindset that false doctrines need to be refuted, but have found that refuting them is like fighting fire with fire.

( I see the odd devotion to this acronym to be similar to the devotion of Sabbath Keepers, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Flat Earthers have for their unique doctrine)

But I don't see this as a doctrine, not biblical anyway. I used to write sermon outlines, and this is a sermon outline. It's structured like an outline, it uses literary devices and others commonly used in professional oral speeches.

Knowing Scripture quite well, I just don't see this in Scripture, at all. I've heard fire and brimstone sermons that use this type of emotional language to engage people's hearts, with perhaps a little extra persuasion...

You consider yourself old-school but say that you used to refute false doctrines, so which is it?

In my old Baptist Sunday School they did NOT teach much beyond the basic Gospel, leaving converts immature and susceptible to atheist arguments rather than able to refute them.

Fighting fire with fire is a proven good technique for fighting fire.

I agree that tulipism is not a biblical doctrine, but rather contradicts the Gospel.
Not sure what your reference to a sermon outline means.

Yes, emotion should be guided by right reason.

 

[GWH]

You consider yourself old-school but say that you used to refute false doctrines, so which is it?

In my old Baptist Sunday School they did NOT teach much beyond the basic Gospel, leaving converts immature and susceptible to atheist arguments rather than able to refute them.

Fighting fire with fire is a proven good technique for fighting fire.

I agree that tulipism is not a biblical doctrine, but rather contradicts the Gospel.
Not sure what your reference to a sermon outline means.

Yes, emotion should be guided by right reason.

Again, tulipism is not a biblical doctrine but rather it contradicts the Gospel.
Its adherents are guided by emotion because of brain-washing by false teachers
rather than by right reason derived from desire to learn--and harmonize--GW.

 

[GWH]

Scriptures sometimes cited in descriptions of the TULIP interpretation in light of Romans 1-11.

51. T – Mark 7:21-23 lists some evil thoughts in sinful hearts, but it does not teach that evil people cannot repent. Rather, Jesus states this truth in order to prick sinners’ hearts and lead them to repent of ignoring the commands of God in order to preserve the traditions of men (Mark 7:6-13, R#3&4).

>>>3. Romans 2:4 teaches that God’s kindness or patience with sinners is meant to lead them toward repentance, which implies that sinners are able to repent because of God’s leading.

>>>4. Romans 2:5 warns that those who do not repent but instead stubbornly resist God’s leading are storing up wrath against themselves for the day when God’s righteous judgment will be revealed, which implies that God enables sinners to repent–or not (cf. Deut. 30:19).

52. U – The only Scripture cited as specifically supporting this point is R#21, but only if universal salvation is also accepted as being taught by the reference to all/many, but Romans 5:17 limits the many to those who receive God’s grace, and Romans 4:16 & 5:1 teach that grace is received through faith, making it the condition for reception (s/e).

>>>21. Romans 5:12-21 describes s/e in corporate terms, saying that–like the first man–all (many?) men also sinned and died, and God’s grace comes to all (many?) because of Jesus Christ.

>>>17. Romans 4:1-25 presents Abraham as a Gentile who became the physical father of the Jews and the spiritual father of all who choose to have faith in God/Christ.

>>>18. Romans 5:1 echoes Eph. 2:8 by describing s/e as justification through faith, Eph. 1:5 & 7 by using the phrase “through Jesus Christ”, and Eph. 2:14 by describing s/e as having peace with God.

53. L – In Matthew 20:28 Jesus said that his life is given as a ransom for many (stated also in Hebrews 9:28), but this does not preclude anyone who has faith being included, and Scriptures such as 1Timothy 2:3-4 indicate God’s desire for all to become “many” (John 3:16, Acts 2:21, 1John 2:2), indicating that although Christ’s death atoned for the sins of all humanity only for those who accept Jesus as Messiah does it result in forgiveness (s/e, R#14&18).

>>>14. Romans 3:25a explains redemption as being “a sacrifice of atonement” for those who have faith in Christ’s work of dying in their place.

>>>18. Romans 5:1 echoes Eph. 2:8 by describing s/e as justification through faith, Eph. 1:5 & 7 by using the phrase “through Jesus Christ”, and Eph. 2:14 by describing s/e as having peace with God.

54. I – Phil. 2:13 says that God works in believers to will and act according to His good purpose, but this does not mean that believers do not willingly cooperate (R#23).

>>>23. Romans 6:15-23 describes s/e in terms of being slaves to whom one willingly obeys, whether to sin or to obedience of God’s teaching that leads to righteousness, which results in eternal life “in Christ Jesus our Lord” (cf. #10).

55. P – John 10:27-29 states that Jesus gives his sheep eternal life, and no one can snatch them, which is stated by Paul in Romans 8:35-39 as being separated from the love of God in Christ. However, there are numerous Scriptures indicating that a believer may not persevere (including John 8:31, Matt. 10:22& Heb. 10:36), so although God gives endurance per Romans 15:4-5, it too must be received through continued faith (2Cor. 5:7) “from first to last” (Romans 1:17).

>>>2. Romans 1:17 describes s/e as “righteousness from God” that is by faith “from first to last” or from creation until the end.

 

[GWH]

Again, tulipism is not a biblical doctrine but rather it contradicts the Gospel.
Its adherents are guided by emotion because of brain-washing by false teachers
rather than by right reason derived from desire to learn--and harmonize--GW.
I was once indoctrinated with OSAS but my hunger to know the truth freed me,
so why are many other folks unable or unwilling to be free to harmonize GW?

 

[GWH]

Again, tulipism is not a biblical doctrine but rather it contradicts the Gospel.
Its adherents are guided by emotion because of brain-washing by false teachers
rather than by right reason derived from desire to learn--and harmonize--GW.
I was once indoctrinated with OSAS but my hunger to know the truth freed me,
so why are many other folks unable or unwilling to be free to harmonize GW?

The answer was recently shared with me via 2Thes. 2:10-13.
Do y'all see what it indicates?

 

[GWH]

Just as Rom. 9:11-23 appears to be the foundational Scripture for the problematic and divisive doctrine of tulipists,
so also 2Thes. 2:10-13 may be viewed as the Scriptural fount of the unifying understanding of truthseekers,
because it indicates that those who love truth are on the right path regarding God's requirement for salvation/Gospel.

 

[GWH]

Just as Rom. 9:11-23 appears to be the foundational Scripture for the problematic and divisive doctrine of tulipists,
so also 2Thes. 2:10-13 may be viewed as the Scriptural fount of the unifying understanding of truthseekers,
because it indicates that those who love truth are on the right path regarding God's requirement for salvation/Gospel.

The right path being indicated in 1Tim. 2:3-4 & 2Tim. 3:14-17 (Truth = GRS/Gospel/Creed),
and the entire book of Romans.

 

[waleglory]

The purpose of this thread is to promote Christian unity and resolve arguments by applying key Scriptures in wide (holistic) context, hoping that intra-Christian apologetics will convince many to adopt the better belief regarding divisive doctrines. Again, some doctrines that are controversial within the Christian community will be discussed in an effort to answer the prayer of Jesus (in John 17:20-23) for spiritual unity among his followers. Many pastors either avoid these issues or else mention only their viewpoint, but this thread will share both sides of the issue, trying to resolve conflict in accordance with what Paul wrote (in Phil. 3:15b-16), “…If on some point you think differently, that too God will make clear to you. Only let us live up to what we have already attained.”

Because the most divisive doctrine that causes the most argumentation on CC seems to be TULIP, this thread will begin by considering that topic in a way that does not duplicate other threads, but by politely presenting Scripture interpreted holistically or in context. TULIP is described as follows:

T – total depravity, meaning that all souls are unable to seek salvation.

U – unconditional election, meaning that souls cannot satisfy a divine condition (such as faith or repentance), but God elects to save some while damning the rest to hell.

L – limited atonement, meaning that Christ died to pay the penalty of sin only for the elect souls.

I – irresistible grace, meaning that elect souls cannot resist God’s will for them to believe and be saved.

P – perseverance of the saints, meaning that the elect cannot repudiate their salvation and commit apostasy.

Would anyone like to begin (politely presenting Scripture interpreted holistically or in

Thank you for framing this discussion around Christian unity rather than merely winning arguments. Jesus prayed that His followers would be one (John 17:20–23), and Paul likewise urged believers to "make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace" (Ephesians 4:3).

As we discuss TULIP, I think it's important that we all agree on one principle: no doctrine should be built on a handful of isolated verses while ignoring the broader testimony of Scripture. We should allow the whole counsel of God to interpret individual passages.

For example, regarding Total Depravity, Scripture clearly teaches that humanity is fallen and cannot save itself (Romans 3:10–12; Ephesians 2:1–3). At the same time, Scripture repeatedly calls people to repent, believe, and seek God (Isaiah 55:6–7; Acts 17:30; John 3:16). The question is not whether humanity is sinful, but how God's grace enables people to respond to the gospel.

Likewise, with Election, we should examine passages such as Romans 9, Ephesians 1, John 6, 1 Timothy 2:3–4, 2 Peter 3:9, and others together rather than allowing one passage to silence another. Scripture presents both God's sovereign initiative and humanity's responsibility, and our task is to understand how these truths fit together without diminishing either.

If our goal is unity, we should be willing to let Scripture correct our traditions and acknowledge where faithful Christians have reached different conclusions while affirming the central truths we all share: salvation is by grace through faith, Christ alone saves, and all glory belongs to God.

 

[GWH]

Thank you for framing this discussion around Christian unity rather than merely winning arguments. Jesus prayed that His followers would be one (John 17:20–23), and Paul likewise urged believers to "make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace" (Ephesians 4:3).

As we discuss TULIP, I think it's important that we all agree on one principle: no doctrine should be built on a handful of isolated verses while ignoring the broader testimony of Scripture. We should allow the whole counsel of God to interpret individual passages.

For example, regarding Total Depravity, Scripture clearly teaches that humanity is fallen and cannot save itself (Romans 3:10–12; Ephesians 2:1–3). At the same time, Scripture repeatedly calls people to repent, believe, and seek God (Isaiah 55:6–7; Acts 17:30; John 3:16). The question is not whether humanity is sinful, but how God's grace enables people to respond to the gospel.

Likewise, with Election, we should examine passages such as Romans 9, Ephesians 1, John 6, 1 Timothy 2:3–4, 2 Peter 3:9, and others together rather than allowing one passage to silence another. Scripture presents both God's sovereign initiative and humanity's responsibility, and our task is to understand how these truths fit together without diminishing either.

If our goal is unity, we should be willing to let Scripture correct our traditions and acknowledge where faithful Christians have reached different conclusions while affirming the central truths we all share: salvation is by grace through faith, Christ alone saves, and all glory belongs to God.

Amen! Our goal should be spiritual/doctrinal unity (Eph. 4:3, John 17:20-23) via allowing truth/inspired Scripture to correct our traditions and thus acknowledging previous conclusions or beliefs were wrong (2Thes. 2:10).

A major heresy that ruins Christian unity (as is evident on CC) is the TULIP dogma, which fails to harmonize problematic prooftexts with Scriptures such as Matt. 4:17, 7:7, Acts 17:30, John 3:16 and 1Tim. 2:3-4 indicating souls have MFW enabling them to repent if they are willing (Matt. 23:37) and therefore precluding wrong interpretation of problematic passages such as Rom. 9:13-23 and Eph. 1:3-14. The choice should not be between divine sovereignty and divine love. God's election must not be divorced from God's justice.

Faithful Christians are on the Way to agreement regarding the central truths/Gospel: salvation is via God's grace through faith in Jesus as Christ and Lord. All glory is God's because saving faith is not meritorious.

 

[GWH]

Again, tulipism is not a biblical doctrine but rather it contradicts the Gospel.
Its adherents are guided by emotion because of brain-washing by false teachers
rather than by right reason derived from desire to learn--and harmonize--GW.
I was once indoctrinated with OSAS but my hunger to know the truth freed me,
so why are many other folks unable or unwilling to be free to harmonize GW?

Speaking of right reasoning, the reason souls can corrupt GW is because MFW violates the law of cause and effect.
God enables souls to negate influences and thus be responsible for what they choose to believe/do.

The enabling must be via giving souls logic or reasoning ability. The soul who reasons rightly will realize the need
for God's salvation per what I call the Propensity Principle (PP), repent of atheism and seek to satisfy God's condition
for being resurrected to heaven. The PP is derived by connecting GW teaching general revelation (Acts. 17:24-31, Rom. 1:20, 2:5-16)
with Scripture indicating God rewards truthseekers (Matt. 7:7, Heb. 11:6, 2Thes. 2:10, 1Tim. 2:3-4) which may be called the foreshadowed or proto-Gospel (Col. 2:17, Heb. 8:5, 10:1, Col. 1:23, Rom. 10:13-18, Gal. 3:8), and the condition is what we may refer to as the kerygma.

The soul whose right reasoning resulted in saving faith in the Gospel also is enabled to reason rightly regarding truth
that builds correctly on the Gospel without corrupting that foundational faith.

 

[GWH]

The next few posts will compare the TULIP creed with the NT creed.

1. The Sovereign and Discriminating Jehovah: There is one sovereign, holy, and just God (Deut 6:4), who does whatever pleases Him in heaven and on earth (Psa 115:3). His saving love is not a blanket, helpless wish, but a discriminating, covenantal love reserved for His elect remnant, whom He chose in Christ before the foundation of the world purely according to the good pleasure of His will (Eph 1:4-5, Rom 11:5-7).
2. Total Depravity and Inability: All human beings are born completely dead in trespasses and sins (Eph 2:1). The unregenerate mind is in total enmity against God, is not subject to His law, and possesses no spiritual free will or moral capacity to choose, seek, or please God (Rom 8:7-8, Rom 3:11). Left to themselves, all men justly deserve and willingly march toward eternal damnation.
3. Particular and Particular Redemption: Jesus Christ is the incarnate Son of God and the True Israel (Isa 49:3). His atoning death on the cross was a flawless, penal substitution that actually, legally, and permanently put away the iniquities of His people alone (Matt 1:21, Isa 53:5-6). He did not pay for a single sin of those who end up in hell; rather, He successfully purchased full, irreversible justification and eternal redemption for His chosen sheep (John 10:11, Heb 8:12).
4. Sovereign, Monergistic Regeneration: Because dead sinners cannot "decide" to believe (Rom 8:8), the Holy Spirit must first perform a sovereign, irresistible miracle of regeneration. God takes away the heart of stone and gives a heart of flesh (Ezek 36:26), making the elect completely willing in the day of His power (Psa 110:3). Faith and repentance are the immediate, inevitable fruits of this new birth, given exclusively to those ordained to eternal life (Acts 13:48, Eph 2:8).
5. Preservation and Perseverance of the Saints: Salvation does not depend on human cooperation or man's ability to maintain his faith. Those whom God has chosen, Christ has bought, and the Spirit has regenerated are kept securely by the power of God (1 Pet 1:5). Christ will lose none of those the Father gave Him (John 6:39). Their perseverance in holiness is guaranteed because God continuously works in them both to will and to do of His good pleasure (Phil 2:13).
6. The Ultimate Purpose: The Praise of His Grace: The gospel is not a human rescue plan centered around man's choices, but a divine theater designed exclusively to the praise of the glory of His sovereign grace (Eph 1:6). Any doctrine that suggests God is indebted to man, or that man's free will makes the ultimate decision in salvation, denies grace entirely, turns salvation into a debt (Rom 11:6, Rom 4:4), and presents a false, man-centered gospel.

 

[GWH]

The NT Creed:

1. There is a/one all-loving and just Lord or God (Deut. 6:4, John 3:16, 2Thes. 1:6), who is both able (2Tim. 1:12) and willing (1Tim. 2:3-4, Ezek. 33:11) to provide all morally accountable human beings salvation or heaven—a wonderful life full of love, joy and peace forever.

2. Human beings are selfish or sinful (Rom. 3:23, 2Tim. 3:2-4, Col. 3:5), miserable (Gal. 5:19-21), and hopeless (Eph. 2:12) or hell-bound at the judgment (Matt. 23:33 & 25:46) when they reject God’s salvation (John 3:18, Rom. 2:5-11).

3. Jesus is God’s Messiah/Christ and incarnate Son, the way that God has chosen (John 3:16, Acts 16:30-31, Phil. 2:9-11) of providing salvation by means of his atoning death on the cross for the payment of the penalty for the sins of humanity (Rom. 3:22-25 & 5:9-11), followed by his resurrection to reign in heaven (1Cor. 15:14-28).

4. Thus, every person who hears the NT Gospel needs to repent and accept God’s justification in Jesus as Christ/Messiah the Lord or Supreme Commander (Luke 2:11, John 14:6, Acts 16:31), which means trying to obey (Phil. 3:12, 1John 1:8) His commandment to love one another (Matt. 22:37-40, John 13:35, Rom. 13:9)—forever (Matt. 10:22, Psa. 113:2).

5. Then God’s Holy Spirit will establish a saving relationship with those who freely accept Him (Rev. 3:20) that will eventually achieve heaven when by means of persevering in learning Truth/God’s Word/sanctification everyone cooperates fully with His will (John 14:6, 17&26, Rom. 8:6-17, Gal. 6:7-9, Eph. 1:13-14, Heb. 10:36, 12:1, Jam. 1:2-4).

6. This creed summarizes revelation of the NT Gospel/Truth (Matt. 26:13, John 14:6), which fulfilled the OT revelation (Matt. 5:17, John 19:30, Heb. 7:11-10:10) and culminates the search for salvation by souls who know only general revelation (Rom. 1:20, 2:14-16, Matt. 7:12). Seeking begins when souls love truth/repent of false beliefs (2Thes. 2:10&13, Matt. 4:17, 7:7), which is the Way to eternal life God wills, who is the Lord Jesus (Matt. 7:14, John 1:14, 4:24, 14:6). Lacking this love leads to believing lies and debauchery (Matt. 7:6, Rom. 1:18&25-26, 2Thes. 2:11-12).

Analysis of the first two points of these creeds will be in my next posts.

 

[GWH]

Here are my comments comparing (C) the tulip (TU) creed with the NT creed:

TU-1. The Sovereign and Discriminating Jehovah: There is one sovereign, holy, and just God (Deut 6:4), who does whatever pleases Him in heaven and on earth (Psa 115:3). His saving love is not a blanket, helpless wish, but a discriminating, covenantal love reserved for His elect remnant, whom He chose in Christ before the foundation of the world purely according to the good pleasure of His will (Eph 1:4-5, Rom 11:5-7).

NT-1. There is a/one all-loving and just Lord or God (Deut. 6:4, John 3:16, 2Thes. 1:6), who is both able (2Tim. 1:12) and willing (1Tim. 2:3-4, Ezek. 33:11) to provide all morally accountable human beings salvation or heaven—a wonderful life full of love, joy and peace forever.

C-1. TU omits the NT teaching in John 3:16 & 1Tim. 2:3-4 that God is omniloving, and it views God as just even though He wills to save only a few who are favored with election, which contradicts 1Tim. 2:3-4 & Rom. 2:11. The creeds agree that God is sovereign, but the NT says God is pleased to save all who choose to repent (Matt. 4:17), seek God's salvation (Matt. 7:7) and believe in Christ (1Cor. 1:21-23).


TU-2. Total Depravity and Inability: All human beings are born completely dead in trespasses and sins (Eph 2:1). The unregenerate mind is in total enmity against God, is not subject to His law, and possesses no spiritual free will or moral capacity to choose, seek, or please God (Rom 8:7-8, Rom 3:11). Left to themselves, all men justly deserve and willingly march toward eternal damnation.

NT-2. Human beings are selfish or sinful (Rom. 3:23, 2Tim. 3:2-4, Col. 3:5), miserable (Gal. 5:19-21), and hopeless (Eph. 2:12) or hell-bound at the judgment (Matt. 23:33 & 25:46) when they reject God’s salvation (John 3:18, Rom. 2:5-11).

C-2. The TU and NT creeds agree that all have sinned, but they part ways regarding the capacity to choose aka moral free will.
TU claims that souls who are spiritually dead (per Eph. 2:1) cannot choose to repent, seek and believe in Christ's atonement, which contradicts (Matt. 2:17, 7:7 & Rom. 3:21-5:1. TU cites Rom. 8:7-8 as if it supports saying sinners cannot repent, apparently choosing to ignore Rom. 5:1-6:18, which teaches that souls are slaves to the spirit they willingly obey.

The third point will be analyzed in my next post.

 

[GWH]

TU-3. Jesus Christ is the incarnate Son of God and the True Israel (Isa 49:3). His atoning death on the cross was a flawless, penal substitution that actually, legally, and permanently put away the iniquities of His people alone (Matt 1:21, Isa 53:5-6). He did not pay for a single sin of those who end up in hell; rather, He successfully purchased full, irreversible justification and eternal redemption for His chosen sheep (John 10:11, Heb 8:12).

NT-3. Jesus is God’s Messiah/Christ and incarnate Son, the way that God has chosen (John 3:16, Acts 16:30-31, Phil. 2:9-11) of providing salvation by means of his atoning death on the cross for the payment of the penalty for the sins of humanity (Rom. 3:22-25 & 5:9-11), followed by his resurrection to reign in heaven (1Cor. 15:14-28).

C-3. The TU point about Isa. 49:3 is true but not necessary to know and believe in order to be saved. Isa. 53:6 says the Lord laid on "him" the iniquity of us all, without clarifying who "us" is. Matt. 1:21 says Jesus will save his people from their sins without clarifying who "his people" are. John 10:11 says the good shepherd (Jesus) lays down his life for "the sheep" without clarifying who "the" includes, either potentially or actually. Heb. 8:12 says God will remember their sins no more, apparently referring to Jews who believe/accept the new covenant.

TU's belief in limited atonement ignores John 3:16, 1John 4:7-12, Rom. 5:8, Matt. 5:44&48, Gal. 5:6&14, Eph. 3:17b-19, Eph. 5:2 and 1Tim. 2:3-4, which might be deemed the “7 pearls”. Christ died to show God’s love and the possible salvation of all; God is omnilove as well as omnipotent. The NT teaches that God loves the world/humanity, and whoever believes in Jesus will be saved.

In Acts 16:30-31 Paul says that GRFS is belief in the Lord Jesus, and Phil. 2:11 says that everyone should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord. Rom. 3:22-25 says that all have sinned and all are justified through faith in Christ's atonement. Rom. 5:9-11 says the same using the term reconciled. 1Cor. 15:14-19 says that faith is futile unless Christ is risen.