Written by Cornelis P. Venema |
Monday, December 18, 2023
Of the five points of doctrine summarized in the canons, the second is given the briefest treatment. In the opening articles of this second point, the canons affirm that the only possible way for sinful human beings to escape the condemnation and death that their sins deserve lies in the atoning work of Jesus Christ on their behalf (article 2). Christ’s substitutionary work of atonement is the only way that God’s justice can be satisfied and fallen sinners can be restored to favor with Him. After emphasizing the need for Christ’s atoning work on the cross, the canons affirm the infinite value and worth of Christ’s satisfaction.

The year of our Lord 2023–24 marks the 405th anniversary of the meeting of the Synod of Dort in Dordrecht, the Netherlands. The synod was convened to settle the ongoing controversy in the Dutch churches regarding the teaching of Jacobus Arminius and his followers on the topic of election. The document produced by the synod, the Canons of Dort, affirmed five main points of doctrine in response to the errors of the Arminians. These five points are often described today as the “doctrines of grace.” They are also frequently associated with the acronym TULIP (total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace, perseverance of the saints), even though this acronym alters the sequence of the points adopted and in some cases may offer a misleading impression of the canons’ teaching.
This article will follow the sequence of the canons. Though it is often forgotten, this sequence was already established by the time the Synod of Dort convened in 1618. Before the meeting of the synod, the Arminians had presented their teaching in the form of five opinions. The five points of the Canons of Dort were written, therefore, as a direct reply to the errors of Arminius and his followers. They were written not to offer a complete statement of the Reformed faith but to settle the controversy regarding Calvinist soteriology provoked by the teaching of Arminius.
In the course of its deliberations, the Synod of Dort judged the five Arminian articles to be contrary to the Word of God. Against the Arminian teachings of divine election based on foreseen faith, universal atonement, resistible or ineffectual grace, and the possibility of a fall from grace, the canons set forth the biblical doctrines of unconditional election, definite atonement (or particular redemption), radical depravity, effectual grace, and the perseverance of the saints. On each of these points, the canons first present a positive statement of the scriptural teaching and then conclude with a rejection of the corresponding Arminian errors.
First Point: Unconditional Election
In the opening articles of the first main point of doctrine, the canons summarize the most important aspects of the biblical gospel. These include the fact that “all people have sinned in Adam and have come under the sentence of the curse and eternal death” (article 1), that God has manifested His love in the sending of His only begotten Son (article 2), and that God’s anger continues to rest on those who do not believe the gospel of Jesus Christ (article 3). Within the framework of these truths, the canons address the fundamental question to which the biblical doctrine of election is addressed: Why do some believe and repent at the preaching of the gospel but others remain in their sins and under the just condemnation of God? The answer to this question at its deepest level is found in God’s unconditional election in Christ of some persons to salvation:
The fact that some receive from God the gift of faith within time, and that others do not, stems from [God’s] eternal decision. For all His works are known to God from eternity (Acts 15:18; Eph. 1:11). In accordance with this decision He graciously softens the hearts, however hard, of His chosen ones and inclines them to believe, but by His just judgment He leaves in their wickedness and hardness of heart those who have not been chosen. And in this especially is disclosed to us His act—unfathomable, and as merciful as it is just—of distinguishing between people equally lost. (Article 6)
Because God’s sovereign and gracious purpose of election is the source of faith, the canons go on to assert that it cannot therefore be based on faith. God does not elect to save anyone “on the basis of foreseen faith, of the obedience of faith, of holiness, or of any other good quality and disposition, as though it were based on a prerequisite cause or condition in the person to be chosen” (article 8). Faith is not a meritorious work but is itself a gracious gift that God grants to those whom He calls according to His purpose (Acts 13:48; Eph. 2:8–9; Phil. 1:29).
Read More
Related Posts:

Written by Cornelis P. Venema |
Wednesday, December 28, 2022
The risen and ascended Christ has “all authority in heaven and on earth” (Matthew 28:18). People from every tribe, tongue, and nation are being redeemed by the blood of the Lamb. The risen Christ will reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet, including the last enemy, death itself (1 Corinthians 15:25–26). As the Gospels remind us, Christ came to bind and plunder the strong man’s house (Matthew 12:29; see Luke 10:17–18). In the words of Christ Himself, “Now is the judgment of this world; now will the ruler of this world be cast out. And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself” (John 12:31–32).

The topic of the millennial reign of Christ often provokes intense debate among contemporary Christians. When the subject is broached, it doesn’t take long for the debate to degenerate into arguments about the three predominant views: premillennialism (in both its historic and dispensational forms), amillennialism, and postmillennialism. The unfortunate feature of these debates is that they fixate on questions regarding the exact timing of the millennium. Does the millennium occur before or after the second coming of Christ at the end of the present age in redemptive history? Does the resurrection of believers occur before or after the millennium? Though these questions are important, they can easily detract from the main point of the vision in Revelation 20. They also tend to encourage an interpretation of Revelation 20 that is isolated from the testimony of the New Testament as a whole.
Yet when we approach the vision of the millennium of Revelation 20 within the framework of the book of Revelation in particular and the New Testament in general, we are able to capture the grand theme that Christ’s reign has already commenced and will ultimately triumph when Christ comes to receive His bride, the church, in its glorified state (Rev. 21–22). To borrow the title of Dennis Johnson’s fine commentary on the book of Revelation, the present and future aspects of the story of redemption involve nothing less than the triumph of the Lamb of God, who is also the “Lion of the tribe of Judah” (Rev. 5:5–6).
To appreciate the significance of the vision of the millennium in Revelation 20, it is important to remember the purpose and structure of the book of Revelation as a whole. Revelation’s purpose is to comfort and encourage the seven churches of Asia Minor (Rev. 2–3), its original recipients, and all the churches of Jesus Christ throughout subsequent history whom these churches represent. This means that all the visions of the book, including the vision of the millennium, should be viewed from the standpoint of this question: How would this vision encourage the original recipients of the book?
Read More
Related Posts:

Written by Cornelis P. Venema |
Friday, November 19, 2021
Several of the most distinctive features of the Reformed doctrine of the church and sacraments receive special notice in this Confession. The holy catholic church is the “assembly of those who are saved, and outside of it there is no salvation” (Art. 28). The “marks of the true church” are identified as the preaching of the pure doctrine of the gospel, the pure administration of the sacraments instituted by Christ, and the exercise of church discipline. The government of the church is based upon the teaching of Scripture and requires the appointment of three kinds of church officers: ministers of the Word, elders, and deacons, who together comprise the “council” of the church.

Philip Schaff, the venerable historian of the church and her confessions, once observed that the Belgic Confession is “upon the whole, the best symbolical statement of the Calvinistic system of doctrine, with the exception of the Westminster Confession.” This Confession is known most commonly as the “Belgic” confession because it emerged from the French-speaking Reformed churches in the southern “Lowlands” or “Nether-lands” (now Belgium). It has served historically as one of the three confessional symbols of the Dutch Reformed churches. Affection for this confession among these churches stems as much from the poignant circumstances suffered by its original author and subscribers as from its rich statement of the Reformed faith.
Background and Setting
The Belgic Confession was originally written by a French-speaking, Reformed pastor, Guido de Bres (pronounced Gee-doe de Bray), who had been a student of Calvin’s in Geneva. Though the principal author of the Belgic Confession, other Reformed pastors and theologians, including Francis Junius, who was later to become a well-known Reformed professor at the University of Leiden, contributed to the final, received form of the Confession. First written in 1561, copies of the Confession were sent to Geneva and other Reformed churches for approval. The present form of the Confession stems from the time of the great Synod of Dort in 1618-19, when the text was revised and officially approved in four languages (the original French, Latin, Dutch and German).
In the face of intense persecution by Phillip II of Spain, Guido de Bres and Reformed believers in the Netherlands were eager to show that their faith was in accord with the teaching of Holy Scripture and the ancient consensus of the holy catholic church and her councils. Consequently, the Belgic Confession has an irenic tone throughout, especially in its careful demonstration of the Reformed faith’s commitment to the great biblical doctrines of the Trinity, as well as the Person and work of Christ. Roman Catholic teaching is rejected at critical points, but the aim of the Confession is to persuade its readers that the Reformed faith is nothing other than the historic faith of the Christian church.
Another purpose of the confession, which distinguishes it from the French or Gallican Confession of 1559 with which the Belgic Confession shares many striking similarities, was to demonstrate that the Reformed faith was distinct from that of the “Anabaptists.” Among the Anabaptists, who had considerable influence in the Netherlands in the early period of the Reformation, there were those who not only rejected the practice of infant baptism but also the legitimacy of the civil magistrate as a servant of God. The Anabaptists sharply distinguished Christ’s spiritual kingdom, the church, from the civil order, and advocated a strict separation from the world, which required a refusal of military service, the taking of oaths and the paying of taxes. The Belgic Confession was also written, therefore, to defend the Reformed faith against the suspicion that it embraced these features of the radical Reformation.
Read More