MY ALLEGIANCE IS NOT TO T.U.L.I.P. (PART I)

“Why I Affirm the Five Doctrines Without Making Calvin My Creed”

By Akin Ojumu

Yesterday’s commentary, “God or Satan? The False Contradiction in David’s Census,” answered one of two questions sent to me by a reader of the African Plume blog and YouTube channel.

The other question was this: Do you subscribe to TULIP? In other words: Are you a Calvinist?

My answer is simple. Yes. And also: Not quite.

If the question is whether I believe the five doctrines commonly summarized by the acronym TULIP, then yes, I do.

If the question is whether John Calvin is my theological Pope, whether the Synod of Dort is my Vatican, whether Westminster is my Jerusalem, or whether Geneva is my Mecca, then absolutely not.

I am a Christian. That is the label that matters. 

My allegiance is not to Calvin. It is not to Arminius (founder of Arminianism). It is not to Dort. It is not to Westminster. And it is certainly not to a botanical acronym invented long after the Apostles of Christ were dead.

My allegiance is to the Lord Jesus Christ. My authority is Scripture.

That distinction matters. Because theological tribalism has a bad habit of reversing the proper order.

First, people adopt a system. Then they put on the denominational spectacles. Then they march into Scripture searching for verses to baptize the system they already chose.

That is not how I approach theology. I do not put T-U-L-I-P on the table and then go Bible-hunting for five matching prooftexts.

That is theological ventriloquism. You decide what the Bible must say. Then you make the Bible say it.

No. I begin with Scripture. What does Scripture say about man? What does Scripture say about election? What did Christ actually accomplish at Calvary? How are sinners brought to faith? Are Christians kept to the end? Who keeps them to the end?

Where Scripture leads, I follow. If the destination happens to look Reformed, so be it. Calvin still does not get a vote.

T — TOTAL DEPRAVITY

The Bible’s diagnosis of fallen humanity is not flattering. Man is not spiritually neutral. He is not basically good but occasionally naughty. He is not a morally healthy person suffering from a temporary religious vitamin deficiency.

Scripture says he is fallen. Hostile. Blind. Enslaved. And spiritually dead.

Paul writes in:

Romans 3:10–12

“None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God.”

Not, many seek God. Not, most seek God. No one. NONE.

Romans 8:7–8 says the fleshly mind is hostile to God and cannot submit to Him.

Ephesians 2:1 does not describe fallen man as spiritually injured. Paul says he is: “Dead in the trespasses and sins.”

Dead. Not limping. Not coughing. Not spiritually under the weather. Dead.

Then Jesus says in: 

John 6:44

“No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him.”

Notice the words.

Not, “will not.” But, Cannot.

Total Depravity does not mean every sinner is maximally wicked. It means sin has invaded the whole person. Mind. Will. Desires. Affections. Reasoning.

Man’s problem is not merely that he needs information. He needs transformation. He does not need a motivational speech. He needs resurrection.

U — UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION

Now comes the doctrine that makes human pride break out in hives.

I believe God chooses whom He saves according to His own sovereign purpose and grace.

Not according to human merit. Not according to good works. Not according to spiritual potential. And not because God looked down the tunnel of history, saw who would make the correct decision, and rewarded their superior wisdom.

That would make election God’s applause for human foresight.

Scripture says otherwise.

Ephesians 1:4–5 

“He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world…”

And that He predestined us: “According to the purpose of his will.”

Romans 9 is even less accommodating to human boasting. Paul speaks of Jacob and Esau before either had been born. Before either had done anything good or bad.

Why?

“In order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls.”

Romans 9:10-12

“And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls— she was told, “The older will serve the younger.””

Then comes the hammer blow:

Romans 9:16

“So, then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy.”

That verse has ruined many sermons about autonomous free will.

Acts 13:48 is equally inconvenient:

Acts 13:48

“As many as were appointed to eternal life believed.”

Read that carefully.

It does not say: “As many as believed were appointed.”

It says: Those appointed believed.

Election does not trail behind faith holding a clipboard. Election precedes faith. Faith is not the cause of God’s choice. Faith is the fruit of God’s grace.

L — LIMITED ATONEMENT

And now we arrive at the petal that gives many people theological indigestion.

Limited Atonement, otherwise known as Particular Redemption.

The label itself creates unnecessary confusion. It does not mean Christ’s blood lacks value. It does not mean the Cross is weak. It does not mean the sacrifice of Christ is insufficient.

The issue is not the worth of Christ’s death. The issue is its design. What did Jesus actually accomplish?

Did Christ die merely to make salvation theoretically possible? Did He create a gigantic spiritual opportunity and then wait to see whether anybody would activate it? Did the Cross secure salvation? Or merely advertise it?

Scripture speaks in terms of accomplishment.

Matthew 1:21

“He will save His people from their sins.”

John 10:11

“The Good Shepherd lays down His life for the sheep.”

Ephesians 5:25

“Christ loved the Church and gave Himself up for her.”

Acts 20:28 speaks of:

Acts 20:28

“The Church of God, which He obtained with His own blood.”

Hebrews 9:12 says Christ entered the holy places by His blood:

Hebrews 9:12

“Thus securing an eternal redemption.”

Securing. Not attempting. Not offering. Not crossing His fingers. Securing.

Hebrews 10:14

“By a single offering He has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.”

The Cross accomplished something.

Christ redeemed. Christ purchased. Christ reconciled. Christ perfected. Christ saved.

Yes, there are passages such as John 3:16, 1 Timothy 2:4–6, Hebrews 2:9, and 1 John 2:2 that non-Reformed Christians interpret differently.

That debate is real. But the Reformed argument is not that Christ’s sacrifice is too small for the world. The argument is that Christ’s death had a definite saving purpose. 

The Cross was not God opening a spiritual supermarket and hoping customers would wander in.

Jesus came to save His people. And according to Scripture: He succeeded. That is why I affirm Total Depravity. That is why I affirm Unconditional Election. That is why I affirm Limited Atonement (Particular Redemption).

Not because Calvin whispered them into my ear. Not because Dort stamped them with ecclesiastical ink. And not because I have any emotional attachment to a Seventeenth-Century Dutch theological dispute.

I affirm them because I am persuaded that Scripture teaches them. And if Scripture teaches them, then the question is not whether Calvinism makes people uncomfortable.

The question is much simpler. What are you going to do with the text?

To be continued.