Christian Forums

I posted this on another forum a little while back. It's an interesting topic to me.

Is this point legitimate? Does Tulip change the way people approach Scripture?

From A.I.

The reverse engineering argument against TULIP

The starting point is the outcome, not the text: Critics argue that rather than beginning with the biblical text to form a theology, the TULIP framework starts with a perceived outcome—that not everyone is saved—and then interprets scripture to justify the five points.

The system is prioritized over the biblical context: From this perspective, passages are selected and interpreted to fit into the TULIP acronym, sometimes ignoring surrounding context or the author's original intent. The system becomes the primary lens for understanding the Gospel, rather than the other way around.

Focus on God's sovereignty over love: Another criticism is that the focus on God's absolute sovereignty, particularly in unconditional election, weakens the understanding of God's love for all people, which many see as a necessary component of free will.

Logical deduction vs. biblical induction: The reverse engineering argument suggests that TULIP is a logical deduction from certain premises rather than an inductive conclusion drawn from the entirety of biblical scripture. The argument is that while the deductions may be logically sound within the system, they don't necessarily reflect the full picture presented in the Bible.

The Calvinist perspective

From the perspective of Calvinists and Reformed theologians, TULIP is not reverse engineering but a coherent and faithful summary of what the Bible teaches about salvation.

A response to Arminianism: The five points were formulated by the Synod of Dort (1618–1619) as a direct response to the five points of the Remonstrance, a document outlining Arminian theology. The TULIP acronym itself is a much later invention (20th century), but the theological content arose from a specific theological debate.

Derived from Scripture: Adherents believe that each point is thoroughly rooted in Scripture, especially passages that emphasize God's sovereignty and role in salvation. From this viewpoint, the Bible's teaching on human sinfulness (total depravity) and God's initiative in election and grace naturally leads to the conclusions summarized by TULIP.

Defending against heresy: Many Calvinists view their theology not as a man-made construct but as a defense of scriptural truth against what they consider to be heretical teachings.

Clarifying the Gospel: Some Calvinists see the TULIP framework as a valuable teaching tool that clarifies the Gospel's message by focusing on God's complete power and initiative in redemption.
Conclusion

-------------------------

Whether TULIP is "reverse engineering" ultimately depends on one's theological starting point. The criticism views it as prioritizing a logical system over a holistic biblical account, while the defense views it as a biblically faithful and logical summary of the doctrines of grace.

I always wondered what the appeal of Calvinism was to the new Christian, as many new Christians are now turning to it and it's becoming the popular model of understanding Scripture. For me it was a combination of a hunger for understanding Scripture, and a foundation to understand from to help put things in order. Calvinism, or TULIP provided that. And on the surface, it appeared to have quite a bit of Scripture to support it. What solidified me to Calvinism was my backlash against the humanism that was rampant in the modern Christian churches, like Pentecostalism and Charismatics. Calvinism, which emphasized God's sovereignty was the antithesis to that humanism.

Funny, I still remember Alistair Begg, in his series "A Christian Manifesto", which I purchased on cassette tape as a new Christian, advising us to never enslave ourselves to a theological camp. To always be willing to think independently and always hold to Scripture. Good advise for a young Christian to hear.

I always had questions about Calvinism, I just brushed them aside as 'I'll get it when God shows me'. But the questions never went away. The clear Scripture that opposed the Calvinist understanding of Scripture began to pile up and weigh heavier. What probably bothered me the most was the missing historical context in Calvinism's interpretation of Scripture. That is not just a Calvinist problem, but applies to Calvinism today as well. Identifying that historical context and the differences in the way God deals with people from the OT to the NT should not be taken lightly. Calvinism turns a blind eye to that change in historical context and applies all Scripture to every dispensation as if the context simply doesn't matter. At some point in time the seasoned Calvinist sees that context, but begins to deliberately ignore it, and as a result, begins to interpret Scripture by the system rather than the other ways around.

Lets face it, the deeper truths in Scripture are hidden to the natural man because he cannot see context. We should not take any context lightly. Historical context is necessary to interpret Scripture accurately from the OT to the NT.

Anyways, I just recently ran into the phrase 'reverse engineering' and found it interesting that there truly is nothing new under the sun. This idea that in Calvinism the system of TULIP interprets Scripture has been discussed in the past. I though that it might be worth digging into.

Quote from: Dave... on Thu Nov 13, 2025 - 19:21:45I always wondered what the appeal of Calvinism was to the new Christian, as many new Christians are now turning to it and it's becoming the popular model of understanding Scripture. For me it was a combination of a hunger for understanding Scripture, and a foundation to understand from to help put things in order. Calvinism, or TULIP provided that. And on the surface, it appeared to have quite a bit of Scripture to support it. What solidified me to Calvinism was my backlash against the humanism that was rampant in the modern Christian churches, like Pentecostalism and Charismatics. Calvinism, which emphasized God's sovereignty was the antithesis to that humanism.

I would offer Pentecostalism and Charismatics. Called sign gifts. Simply the father of lies as the god of this world created idol images . n such thing as sign gift  I did it it proves it Christ proves himself strengthening us to do his good will. it is God who works in us to both (the key) hear his wiill and empower dying mankind do to it to his good pleasure.



 Calvinism, which emphasized God's sovereignty to Let there be id followed by He alone is good  Not served by human hands. He can use a unbeliever to preach the gospel just as easily as one that does have faith. Remember we can preach he alone is the infalible interpreter as the one good teaching Master spoken of .

 To show he does all the work of saving new creatures  He used a ceremonial parable. The unclean the un-redeemed the clean Lamb than which redeems the Ass.

Exodus 13:13And every firstling of an ass thou shalt redeem with a lamb; and if thou wilt not redeem it, then thou shalt break his neck: and all the firstborn of man among thy children shalt thou redeem.

The witness of the above ceremonial law as a parable. Our Holy Father put his living word in the mouth of the un-redeemed and that apostle  prophesied---  it stopped the madness of the false apostle Balaaam 

Numbers 22:28 And the Lord opened the mouth of the ass, and she said unto Balaam, What have I done unto thee, that thou hast smitten me these three times?

You could say the same way he shuts the mouth of all liars

Daniel 6:22My God hath sent his angel, and hath [b]shut the lions' mouths[/b], that they have not hurt me: forasmuch as before him innocency was found in me; and also before thee, O king, have I done no hurt.

Quote from: Dave... on Thu Nov 13, 2025 - 19:21:45I always wondered what the appeal of Calvinism was to the new Christian, as many new Christians are now turning to it and it's becoming the popular model of understanding Scripture.

I think the appeal of Calvinism to the new, and the old, Christian is that in Calvinism, nothing you do is your fault.  God has either saved you or He hasn't and there is nothing you can do about it.  Therefore, just live your life. Que sera, sera!

The general feeling is that if you want to be saved, then you are saved, because if you weren't saved, you couldn't even want to be saved. It takes all the impetus for salvation completely from you; it is only God.

But of course, that runs counter to everything scriptural.

Quote from: 4WD on Sat Nov 15, 2025 - 02:35:36I think the appeal of Calvinism to the new, and the old, Christian is that in Calvinism, nothing you do is your fault.  God has either saved you or He hasn't and there is nothing you can do about it.  Therefore, just live your life. Que sera, sera!

The general feeling is that if you want to be saved, then you are saved, because if you weren't saved, you couldn't even want to be saved. It takes all the impetus for salvation completely from you; it is only God.

But of course, that runs counter to everything scriptural.

 

Quote from: Dave... on Thu Nov 13, 2025 - 19:20:57I posted this on another forum a little while back. It's an interesting topic to me.

Is this point legitimate? Does Tulip change the way people approach Scripture?

From A.I.

The reverse engineering argument against TULIP

The starting point is the outcome, not the text: Critics argue that rather than beginning with the biblical text to form a theology, the TULIP framework starts with a perceived outcome—that not everyone is saved—and then interprets scripture to justify the five points.

The system is prioritized over the biblical context: From this perspective, passages are selected and interpreted to fit into the TULIP acronym, sometimes ignoring surrounding context or the author's original intent. The system becomes the primary lens for understanding the Gospel, rather than the other way around.

Focus on God's sovereignty over love: Another criticism is that the focus on God's absolute sovereignty, particularly in unconditional election, weakens the understanding of God's love for all people, which many see as a necessary component of free will.

Logical deduction vs. biblical induction: The reverse engineering argument suggests that TULIP is a logical deduction from certain premises rather than an inductive conclusion drawn from the entirety of biblical scripture. The argument is that while the deductions may be logically sound within the system, they don't necessarily reflect the full picture presented in the Bible.

The Calvinist perspective

From the perspective of Calvinists and Reformed theologians, TULIP is not reverse engineering but a coherent and faithful summary of what the Bible teaches about salvation.

A response to Arminianism: The five points were formulated by the Synod of Dort (1618–1619) as a direct response to the five points of the Remonstrance, a document outlining Arminian theology. The TULIP acronym itself is a much later invention (20th century), but the theological content arose from a specific theological debate.

Derived from Scripture: Adherents believe that each point is thoroughly rooted in Scripture, especially passages that emphasize God's sovereignty and role in salvation. From this viewpoint, the Bible's teaching on human sinfulness (total depravity) and God's initiative in election and grace naturally leads to the conclusions summarized by TULIP.

Defending against heresy: Many Calvinists view their theology not as a man-made construct but as a defense of scriptural truth against what they consider to be heretical teachings.

Clarifying the Gospel: Some Calvinists see the TULIP framework as a valuable teaching tool that clarifies the Gospel's message by focusing on God's complete power and initiative in redemption.
Conclusion

-------------------------

Whether TULIP is "reverse engineering" ultimately depends on one's theological starting point. The criticism views it as prioritizing a logical system over a holistic biblical account, while the defense views it as a biblically faithful and logical summary of the doctrines of grace.

https://letgodbetrue.com/sermons/index/year-2006/calvinism-arminianism-and-the-truth/

Quote from: 4WD on Sat Nov 15, 2025 - 02:35:36I think the appeal of Calvinism to the new, and the old, Christian is that in Calvinism, nothing you do is your fault.  God has either saved you or He hasn't and there is nothing you can do about it.  Therefore, just live your life. Que sera, sera!

The general feeling is that if you want to be saved, then you are saved, because if you weren't saved, you couldn't even want to be saved. It takes all the impetus for salvation completely from you; it is only God.

But of course, that runs counter to everything scriptural.