Following the great Reformation in under Martin Luther in the 1500's and others following later, including John Calvin a controversy erupted in the Netherlands in the 16^th Century. This controversy spread throughout Europe and around the world. It began within the theological faculty of a Dutch university that was committed to Calvinistic teaching. Some of the professors began to have second thoughts about issues relating to the doctrines of election and predestination. As this theological controversy spread across the country, it upset the churches and the theologians of the day. Finally, a synod was convened. Issues were aired and the views of certain people were rejected, including those of a man by the name of Jacobus Arminius.

The group that led the movement against orthodox Reformed theology was called the "Arminians" or the "Remonstrants". They were called "the Remonstrants" because they were 'remonstrating' or 'protesting' against certain doctrines within their own reformed theological heritage. There were basically five doctrines that were the core of the controversy. As a result of this debate, these five core theological issues became known in subsequent generations as the "five points of Calvinism." They are now known through the very popular acrostic "TULIP", which is a clever way to sum up the five articles that were in dispute. The five points, as they are stated in order to form the acrostic TULIP, are:

1. Total depravity,
2. Unconditional election,
3. Limited atonement,
4. Irresistible grace, and
5. Perseverance of the saints.

It would however be a serious mistake to understand the essence of Reformed faith simply in light of these five doctrines. The Reformed faith involves many other elements of theological and ecclesiastical confession as seen in the "Heidelberg Catechism" and the "Belgic Confession of Faith". Each of these other "forms of unity" complements each other and therefore must be read and understood in connection with each other. However, for our discussion these are the five contro­versial points of Reformed theology. They are the ones that are popularly seen as distinctive to the Reformed faith and of Calvinism in particular.

We are going to spend some time looking at these five points of Calvinism as they are spelled out in the acrostic TULIP.

T for Total Depravity.⤒🔗

The doctrine of total depravity reflects the Reformed viewpoint of original sin. Some people assume that the term original sin refers to the first sin — the original transgression that we've all copied in many different ways in our own lives, that is, the first sin of Adam and Eve. But that's not what original sin has historically been taught in the Reformed churches. Nor does the Bible teach that we merely copy sinfulness after our birth. Rather, the doctrine of original sin defines the consequences to the entire human race because of that first sin.

Total depravity doesn't mean that all human beings are as wicked as they can possibly be. It means that the fall was so serious that it affects the whole person. Being fallen captures and grips our human nature, and also affects our bodies; that's why we become ill and die. It affects our minds and our thinking; we still have the capacity to think, but the Bible says the mind has become darkened and weakened. The will of man is no longer in its original perfect state of freely serving God willingly and perfectly. The will, according to the New Testament, is now in bondage, in slavery to sin. We are enslaved to the evil impulses and desires of our hearts.

The body, the mind, the will, the spirit — indeed, the whole person — has been infected by the power of sin so that without the renewing work of the Holy Spirit none can, or even have the desire to turn to God. Rather man will hate God and the neighbour, unless God sovereignly comes to us with His grace.

U for Unconditional Election←⤒🔗

The Reformed view of election, known as uncondi­tional election, means that God does not foresee an action or condition on our part that induces Him to save us. Rather, election rests on God's sovereign decision to save whomever He is pleased to save.

In the book of Romans 9:10-13 we read that when Rebekah had carried twin boys, before their birth and had done nothing either good or bad — in order that God's purpose of election might continue, Rebecca was told, "'The older will serve the younger.' As it is written, 'Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.'" In the old days, it was customary for the firstborn son to receive the inheritance and the fathers blessing. However, in the case of these twins, God reversed the process and gave the blessing not to Esau, the elder but to Jacob the younger son. The point that the Apostle makes here is that God not only makes this decision prior to the twins' births, He does it without a view to anything they would do, either good or evil, so that the purposes of God might stand. Therefore, our election and salvation does not rest on us; it rests entirely on the grace and sovereign decree of God.

Is there something about this that seems unjust, unfair to us? If God chooses sovereignly to bestow His grace on some sinners and withhold His grace from other sinners, is there any injustice in this? Do those who do not receive His free grace, not already deserve the punishment for their sin? They receive the just judgement of God, no more no less than those whom God choses to save. If God allows these sinners to perish, is He treating them unjustly? Of course not. One group receives grace; the other receives justice. No one receives an injustice. Paul anticipates this protest: "Is there injustice on God's part?" (Rom. 9:14a). He answers it with the most emphatic: "God forbid" (v. 14b).

In discussing Election and Reprobation we do have some different thoughts within Reformed churches about God's decree of election and reprobation. We all agree that God sovereignly elects to save some. What about the others, the "reprobate"? Does God choose some and merely passes by the rest, leaving them aside so to speak? Or did God actively predestine some to life and actively predestine others to eternal condemnation? To put it simply; this view holds that God chose who would go to heaven, and who to hell, and that his decision will infallibly come to pass. This is often called "double predestination" because it holds that God chose both whom to save and whom to damn, as opposed to "single predestination" which contends that though he chose whom to save, he did not choose whom to damn, he just left them in their damnation wherein they plunged.

Our Tulip booklet holds the view that election is the act of God in which He sovereignly predestines some to eternal life, AND that he sovereignly predestines some to eternal hell. (Page 23).

The CoD does speak of the "Decree of Election" as well as the "Decree of Reprobation". God has indeed sovereignly decreed that some will be elected to eternal life, and similarly decreed some to eternal death. (Art 6, 15 CoD). The CoD emphasises indeed that God "passed by" yet it refers also that this act of "passing by" as His "decree of reprobation". (art 15). We with the CoD and God's Word do not agree that God created people in His image for the purpose of decreeing them to eternal hell. We do however agree that God in His sovereign act decreed some to life, (the elect) conversely likewise it was His sovereign act to decree that others (the reprobate) would not be saved.

L for Limited Atonement←⤒🔗

Of all the five points of Calvinism, limited atonement is the most controversial. This doctrine is chiefly concerned about the original purpose, or plan of God in sending Christ into the world to die on the cross. Did God simply send Christ to the cross to make salvation possible? Or did God, from all eternity, have a plan of salvation by which He designed and worked the salvation only of His people? Our view is that it was the will of God to save His people, accomplished by the atoning work of Christ.

This does not mean that a limit is placed on the value or the merit of the atonement of Jesus Christ. Yet it is scripturally correct to say that Christ's obedience and death is sufficient to cover the sins of all people. We maintain that whoever believes in the only Son of God and confesses that Jesus is Lord will be saved. Anyone, yes anyone who puts his or her trust in Jesus Christ will receive forgiveness of all their sins, and he or she will receive the Holy Spirit, and the full measure of salvation.

It is also important to understand that the gospel is to be preached universally. This is another controversial point, because on the one hand the gospel is offered universally to all who are within earshot of the preaching of it, but it's not universally offered in the sense that it's offered to anyone without any conditions. It's offered to anyone who believes. It's offered to anyone who repents. The merit of the atonement of Christ on the cross is given to all who believe and to all who repent of their sins.

I for Irresistible Grace←⤒🔗

The idea of irresistibility conjures up the idea that one cannot possibly offer any resistance to the grace of God. However, the history of the human race is the history of satanic and relentless resistance to the grace of God. So what does irresistible grace actually mean? Let's first see what it does not mean.

Irresistible grace does not mean that God's grace is incapable of being resisted. Indeed, we are capable of resisting God's grace, and if we are honest with ourselves we do indeed resist it daily. However the idea we are dealing with is this:

God's grace is so powerful that it has the capacity to overcome our natural resistance to it.

It is not that the Holy Spirit drags people kicking and screaming to Christ against their wills. The Holy Spirit changes the inclination and disposition of our wills, so that whereas we were previously unwilling even unable to embrace Christ, now through the Holy Spirit we are heartily willing, and yes, even more than willing, we are enthusiastic, excited about it.

Indeed, we aren't dragged to Christ. We run to Christ, being renewed by the Spirit, and we embrace Him joyfully because the Spirit has changed our hearts. They are no longer hearts of stone that are impervious to the commands of God and to the invitations of the gospel. God melts the hardness of our hearts when He makes us new creatures. The Holy Spirit resurrects us from spiritual death, so that we come to Christ because we want to come to Christ. The reason we want to come to Christ is because God has already done the work of grace in our souls. Without that work, we would never have any desire to come to Christ.

P for Perseverance of the Saints←⤒🔗

This last point; "perseverance of the saints" is dangerously misleading. It suggests that the perseverance is something that we do, perhaps in and of ourselves. To be clear: The saints do persevere in faith, and those who have been effectually called by God, and have been reborn by the power of the Holy Spirit, will most surely endure to the end.

However, they persevere not because they are so diligent in making use of the mercies of God. The only reason we can give why any of us continue on in the faith is because we have been preserved. So perhaps it is better to think of this as: the preservation of the saints, rather than the perseverance of the saints. The process by which we are kept in a state of grace is something that is accomplished by God and not by us. Our confidence in our preservation is not in our ability to persevere. Our confidence rests in the power of Christ to sustain me with His grace and by the power of His intercession.

For us all, myself included, this knowledge can provide us with great comfort and find forgiveness in times of personal turmoil and sin.

To conclude: I read somewhere this beautiful saying that sums it all up so well: "True Christians can have radical and even serious falls but never suffer total and final falls from grace."

Jesus Christ, who died for me, He, our dear saviour the Son of God, is going to bring us safely home. What a comfort this provides us! My comfort is that I belong not to myself, but to my dear saviour Jesus Christ! (LD1)