It's a TULIP Kind of World...(view, that is...)

[b]It’s a TULIP Kind of World…(view, that is…)

Or: “A Brief Attempt to Explain the Philosophical Necessity of the Doctrinal Distinctives of a Calvinistic System as Summarized by the TULIP Acronym.” [/b]

It would be wise of me to begin this essay by briefly highlighting my understanding of the universe. It will be generally agreed that I am a “Calvinist” and so the system I present will be one formed on the basis of Christianity as expounded on by Calvin. I admit that I have no formal education, nor have I read as much as I would like to on this subject, so please forgive me if what follows seems a bit presumptuous. With God’s blessing, my understanding will continue to grow and my metaphysical view will continue to evolve. However, I feel that circumstances in my life demand a brief attempt to explain myself, and so this will be a statement of my position as it currently stands.

If I were to draw a circle, and call that circle “God” it wouldn’t be sufficient. You see, the circle has shape. It has physical dimensions, and that means it has restrictions. To see the circle means that there are areas on the board where the circle does not exist. This cannot be the case when talking about God. God is infinite, He has no “shape” in that respect.

To adequately portray God via a drawing (if your conscience would allow such a thing) we would have to expand the circle until it covers the entire board. In fact, the circle would disappear all together, leaving nothing but the blank board. God has revealed Himself to man as just such an infinite being. He has no ontological “shape” since He is infinite.

There is nowhere that God does not exist. He is everywhere. In fact, if we were to speak of a “universe” it would be God Himself. One single being, existing eternally, fully satisfied in fellowship with Himself.

Now, God also Has revealed Himself as being all knowing. God does not think as men do, since God already has all of His thoughts. There are no new thoughts for God. He knows Himself, as well as all things, intimately and directly. He also knows (and loves) many concepts in His own mind, concepts like men and women, presidents and beggars, cops and robbers, etc. In His ultimate wisdom and glory, He decided to give life to His abstract thoughts so that we (humans) might ultimately glorify Him, and enjoy Him forever.

To do this God had to create man “out of nothing.” Creation is not a “part” of God. We are not “made out of” pieces of God. Rather, we were created by the sheer will of God, into nothing.

Using the chalk board illustration, all of creation would now be inside of that circle. For the sake of the illustration, we could continue to think of the circle as representing God, even though it ultimately fails to truly represent Him. So, inside this really big circle, we now have various particular things. There is now a distinction in the universe.

Where before, all that existed was God, now there exists something else as well. We have God, and we have creation…(this includes all the particular objects God chose to create.) These particular objects are now inside the circle. (Keep in mind that there is no “outside’ of the circle.)

God is completely sovereign over all that takes place among all of these particular objects He has created. Indeed, everything that exists, only exists by His good graces, and He maintains their existence from one moment to the next.

God has wisely chosen to bless certain particulars in His creation with rational thought and the ability to think His thoughts after Him. Certain particulars of creation, like plants or rocks, do not have the privilege to form thoughts. Those of us that do form thoughts, are conduits of the thoughts God wishes us to form.

Thus, the way rational creatures know, or form thoughts at all, is completely dependent on the sovereignty of God.

With this view in mind, what happens when someone claims that man is not “predestined?” (The P in the TULIP?)

No Christian wishes to claim that God is not completely sovereign, although there are many Christians who despise the idea that man is not autonomous (or self governing.) There are various ways that these men try to reconcile God’s sovereignty with their desire to claim complete freedom of their own will. While I’ll not get into the particulars of these various systems, I will submit that each attempt ultimately destroys the Christian God.

To return to the chalk board once more, by claiming that there is an area over which God is not in complete control, is to draw a tiny circle outside the big (God) circle. When we do this, we can now draw an even bigger circle around both. God and man are now two particulars living in an even bigger universe. This dethrones God, and makes Him at best, just the biggest and most powerful particular in the universe.

Thus, the P in the TULIP is absolutely necessary for a Christian worldview.

What of the I? This again ties into our observations about P. Is God’s grace irresistible? Can man decide not to respond to the grace of God? To say yes, is to say that God can be defied by His creation, which again, would dethrone God. We would need to draw a smaller (man) circle outside of the original (God) circle, and then draw an even bigger circle around both. (Keep in mind however, that it is obviously possible for God to decree that a man will decline a gospel invitation. That is consistent with the system. He would still be a particular object acting out the sovereign decree of the Creator.)

What about limited atonement? The L?

Here to, God is completely sovereign, and has decreed that some will have their sins atoned for, and some will not. To say otherwise, is to dethrone God. This is quite a different topic from the legal question surrounding atonement. Is the offer legally open to all? Is it only legally open to some? Such matters do not really play into the question of God’s sovereignty at this stage. The point is, that the L in the TULIP is a necessary doctrine that cannot be denied without making the Christian God impossible.

What of the U? Unconditional Election?

To claim that man is able to perform some work that will cause God to save Him, is again, to dethrone God. In keeping with the chalk board illustration, we would have to draw a little (man) circle, outside of the (God) circle, and then draw a larger (universe) circle around them both. Then we would have to claim that man, acting autonomously (on his own) performed some task that God, (a larger, more powerful particular in the universe) recognizes, and decides to reward. That line of thought seems blasphemous.

To recognize God as completely sovereign, it is necessary to realize that all events (including salvation) happen at His discretion. To say otherwise, is to posit a completely different metaphysical philosophy where God is only the most powerful particular in an even larger universe…a universe containing all things along side of God.

I saved the T, or “Total Depravity” for last, since its philosophical necessity deserves an entire essay to itself.

I am currently reading Thomas Boston’s “The Four-Fold State of Man” and I hope to clarify my thinking on the necessity of Total Depravity while reading this book. It is not an easy topic, and I’ll save it for later so as not to do it a disservice.