This post was written for a forum by Apologetic Warrior. The content is good, so good I thought I’d post it as a good introduction to the importance of understanding the sinfulness of man and the free-ness of grace.




Only one point of Calvinism need be true for the rest to fall into place. What I mean is, ULIP follows from the T. The Scriptural evidence and support for T is overwhelming, and many of the peeps in denial are biblical errantists and or deny Sola Scriptura. Though others could do a better job of demonstrating, I will attempt to bring attention to some of the connections between all of the five points.

U – necessary because of T. Election cannot depend on man, it must depend on God because man left to wallow in his nature, wills to sin in every choice.

L – necessary because of T. Because nobody is worthy, neither can anyone make their self worthy, salvation requires the sovereign grace of God, His merciful unconditional loving choice of particular individuals for His purpose, pleasure, and glory.

I – necessary because of T. On our own, without the unconditional particular monergistic regeneration graciously lavished on us, we could do nothing but resist the grace of God. As it is written, “for without me you can do nothing”.

P – necessary because of T (an extension of U, the logical conclusion of L, an extension of I). Left to our depravity, to our devices, we would all fail to persevere, if perseverance were conditionally dependent upon our choices, for in every Saint, there is still a sinner. If God has chosen out of mercy to save us, to give us a new heart and mind, then if follows that He will also give perseverance to His elect, His chosen ones, to those particular individuals whom can say “Christ died for me”, as opposed to the impersonal generic claim and notion of “Christ died for sin”. Christ died for me and it was necessary, because I was dead in sins, unworthy and unwilling. His precious blood paid for all of my sins because each one carries the same guilt and wage. Personally, I find no sense or support for the notion that God would choose to save, knowing we could and would “unsave” ourselves, that God would allow His choice to be trumped by the fickle choices of His creatures. He that began a good work will complete it, and that by unconditional love and grace.

Thank you for inspiring and opportunity to think these things through once again, as I am always in need of constant reminding and refreshing.

End quote.



  1. irishanglican ~ Fr. Robert · April 19, 2014

    This is fine and classic so-called Calvinism, “but” John Calvin simply did NOT teach or believe in any “Limit” to the Atonement! He taught and believed that the Death of Christ was quite “sufficient” for all men or mankind, but that the “efficacy” was alone efficacious for the Elect! Again, this is Calvin, and the essence of the Genevan Reformers! We simply must be historical to John Calvin and his given history at Geneva!

    • jm · April 19, 2014

      Calvinism doesn’t depend on Calvin…it was defined by the Reformed churches at Dort.

      • irishanglican ~ Fr. Robert · April 19, 2014

        Yes, I am quite aware of that! However, I would agree with Calvin, and the best of the Genevan Reformers: both Beza and Turretin, that the Death and Atonement of Christ is the great Satisfaction and Mediation before the Glory of God! (Heb. 9: 14, etc.)

      • jm · April 19, 2014

        Beza and Turretin…were they not both high calvinists?

      • irishanglican ~ Fr. Robert · April 19, 2014

        Note again the great Sufficiency, surely is also and always attached to the Person of Christ! “Behold (Look), the Lamb of God who takes away the sin (note the articles “the”) of the world.” (John 1: 29)

      • jm · April 19, 2014

        κόσμος has 7 or 8 different uses if I’m not mistaken. It may mean world in general or used to identify a group, location, etc.

      • irishanglican ~ Fr. Robert · April 19, 2014

        The TULIP is fine, generally, but I don’t think we can sustain it as THE Gospel itself. Again, “Christ Jesus” or perhaps better understood is Messiah Jesus/Yeshua, WHO is the masculine name of the Messiah! Biblical theology should press systematic theology, at least in my opinion! Thus Melanchthon’s classic statement: “To know Christ is to know His benefits.” Thus both the Person & Work of Christ are found together! 🙂

      • irishanglican ~ Fr. Robert · April 19, 2014

        Better would be “bound” together!

      • irishanglican ~ Fr. Robert · April 19, 2014

        I don’t think we can mistake the essence with/in John 1: 29, and all the articles in this one verse!

  2. irishanglican ~ Fr. Robert · April 19, 2014

    Yes, in some sense, both Beza and Turretin surely followed Calvin, but “Calvinism” had not really taken hold as it did later!

  3. shepherdguardian · April 19, 2014

    Reblogged this on The Shepherd/Guardian and commented:
    Profoundly simple.
    Why, even a child can understand it!


  4. Pingback: “ULIP” Follows from “T” | A Ruby In The Rough

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s