Log in to check your private messages 
Username: Password:   
  Reformed Theology Institute
  RTI, founded July 2008, is a venue for Reformed theology, education, training, and discussion.
Index  FAQ  Search  Memberlist  Usergroups  Profile Scroll to Bottom  RTI Portal New Posts Since Last Visit
Recent Posts    
    Join! (free)   
 

Log in
   Username:
   Password:
   Log me on automatically each visit
  
Welcome
Guest

IP Address: 54.80.248.78


Useful Resources

RTI Main Menu
Home Page
Forums
How-To FAQs
Membership Central
Photo/Doc Gallery
Private Messages
Smilies
Bible Encyclopedia
Bible Tool

RTI Announcements
Crowdfunding for RTI Web Site Server Administrators
TNARS Degree Study Discussion Forums Closed
Help RTI Grow
Hotmail Email Domain No Longer Supported for Members
Adopt a Smiley $$ Campaign
Welcome New Members!
RTI Standards of Conduct
Before You Post: Review The SoF and Rules of Conduct
RTI Statement of Faith
About RTI

RTI Latest Topics
Peter Jones
Serious medical concern

RTI Popular Topics
How to refute Landmark Baptists?
Preferences On NA28 or UBS 5th editions
Should we base theology on end of Mark's Gospel?
Greek Grammar In Light of Historical Research
The New Jerusalem and Righteousness
2 Peter 3:9 and word "all"
What book is good for those new to the faith?
NKJV Bible search
Indwelling versus Infilling of the Holy Spirit
What is difference perservation of saints/eternal security?



 
Jump to:  
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Reformed Theology Institute Forum Index » Supralapsarianism - Infralapsarianism » Are you either a Supralapsarian or Infralapsarian? Page Previous  1, 2
Author Message

DrWhofan1


RTI Guru



Joined: 20 Oct 2014
postcomment
postcomment
Posts: 861
Rep Level: 4
Rep Points: 25
Rep Hits: 7


Rep This Post

PostPosted: 08-16-2015 11:04 am
Post Number: 22689
 Reply with quote

orchardman wrote:
I am a supralapsarian.

The reason is because I have to be consistent in my interpretation and exposition of the overall biblical kerygma in my own conscience.  I do realize that a lot of scholars want to be 'supralapsarian' on the matter of Grace and 'infralapsarian' on the matter of wrath, however, I cannot do this and be consistent with scriptural teaching. The issue for me is the immutability of God.

I am not a hyper-Calvinist as I understand the definition of the term, I affirm the free proclamation of the grace of God in the gospel.

orchardman


Not all who hold to that view would be Hyper calvinists, but it is interesting that all of the major confessions would seem to be under the Infra viewpoint!

View user's profile Send private message Find all posts by user

Cedarbay


Leading Member



Joined: 27 May 2014
postcomment
postcomment
Posts: 413
Rep Level: 5
Rep Points: 40
Rep Hits: 8


Rep This Post

PostPosted: 08-16-2015 2:40 pm
Post Number: 22700
Reply with quote

DrWhofan1 wrote:
orchardman wrote:
I am a supralapsarian.

The reason is because I have to be consistent in my interpretation and exposition of the overall biblical kerygma in my own conscience.  I do realize that a lot of scholars want to be 'supralapsarian' on the matter of Grace and 'infralapsarian' on the matter of wrath, however, I cannot do this and be consistent with scriptural teaching. The issue for me is the immutability of God.

I am not a hyper-Calvinist as I understand the definition of the term, I affirm the free proclamation of the grace of God in the gospel.

orchardman


Not all who hold to that view would be Hyper calvinists, but it is interesting that all of the major confessions would seem to be under the Infra viewpoint!
I read over Zanchius again, his account of predestination and reprobation, and he is as solid and biblical as one can be.  I would consider him supra - although I am a beginner at distinguishing the viewpoints.

View user's profile Send private message Find all posts by user

DrWhofan1


RTI Guru



Joined: 20 Oct 2014
postcomment
postcomment
Posts: 861
Rep Level: 4
Rep Points: 25
Rep Hits: 7


Rep This Post

PostPosted: 08-17-2015 7:39 am
Post Number: 22705
Reply with quote

SoftandStrong wrote:
DrWhofan1 wrote:
orchardman wrote:
I am a supralapsarian.

The reason is because I have to be consistent in my interpretation and exposition of the overall biblical kerygma in my own conscience.  I do realize that a lot of scholars want to be 'supralapsarian' on the matter of Grace and 'infralapsarian' on the matter of wrath, however, I cannot do this and be consistent with scriptural teaching. The issue for me is the immutability of God.

I am not a hyper-Calvinist as I understand the definition of the term, I affirm the free proclamation of the grace of God in the gospel.

orchardman


Not all who hold to that view would be Hyper calvinists, but it is interesting that all of the major confessions would seem to be under the Infra viewpoint!
I read over Zanchius again, his account of predestination and reprobation, and he is as solid and biblical as one can be.  I would consider him supra - although I am a beginner at distinguishing the viewpoints.


Both Infra and supra are valid positions regarding election of God and his soveregnity, its just when one goes to the extremes of there being no need to have a public call, nor missionaries/evangelists, as the elect are already eternally justified regardless, that errors creep in!

View user's profile Send private message Find all posts by user

Cedarbay


Leading Member



Joined: 27 May 2014
postcomment
postcomment
Posts: 413
Rep Level: 5
Rep Points: 40
Rep Hits: 8


Rep This Post

PostPosted: 08-17-2015 8:02 am
Post Number: 22708
Reply with quote

DrWhofan1 wrote:
SoftandStrong wrote:
DrWhofan1 wrote:
orchardman wrote:
I am a supralapsarian.

The reason is because I have to be consistent in my interpretation and exposition of the overall biblical kerygma in my own conscience.  I do realize that a lot of scholars want to be 'supralapsarian' on the matter of Grace and 'infralapsarian' on the matter of wrath, however, I cannot do this and be consistent with scriptural teaching. The issue for me is the immutability of God.

I am not a hyper-Calvinist as I understand the definition of the term, I affirm the free proclamation of the grace of God in the gospel.

orchardman


Not all who hold to that view would be Hyper calvinists, but it is interesting that all of the major confessions would seem to be under the Infra viewpoint!
I read over Zanchius again, his account of predestination and reprobation, and he is as solid and biblical as one can be.  I would consider him supra - although I am a beginner at distinguishing the viewpoints.


Both Infra and supra are valid positions regarding election of God and his soveregnity, its just when one goes to the extremes of there being no need to have a public call, nor missionaries/evangelists, as the elect are already eternally justified regardless, that errors creep in!
I've not read a single Supra view that would suggest no missions, no public giving of the Gospel to all.  Perhaps there are a few nut cases that would say that, but it would not be consistent with the Word of God.

In fact, Zanchius is quite adamant about preaching the Gospel to all, because we never knew who the elect are and when the Lord will open their heart, mind and will.

View user's profile Send private message Find all posts by user

DrWhofan1


RTI Guru



Joined: 20 Oct 2014
postcomment
postcomment
Posts: 861
Rep Level: 4
Rep Points: 25
Rep Hits: 7


Rep This Post

PostPosted: 08-17-2015 11:42 am
Post Number: 22717
Reply with quote

That view is consistent with the Bible, but the Hyper view is not....

View user's profile Send private message Find all posts by user

orchardman


Invested Member



Joined: 19 Mar 2015
postcomment
postcomment
Posts: 166
Rep Level: 5
Rep Points: 20
Rep Hits: 4

Location: Southern California
Rep This Post

PostPosted: 08-20-2015 5:05 pm
Post Number: 22769
Reply with quote

I think we need clear definitions of 'Infra' and 'Supra' lapsarianism before this discussion can continue with profit.

Orchardman
_________________
Standing for a point of truth is mere flight and disgrace if you ignore the broader truths God is presently launching upon the world.

View user's profile Send private message Find all posts by user

Ask Mr. Religion


Admin



Joined: 28 Jul 2008
postcomment
postcomment
Posts: 4767
Rep Level: 5
Rep Points: 211
Rep Hits: 44

Location: Chandler, AZ
Rep This Post

PostPosted: 08-20-2015 6:59 pm
Post Number: 22771
Reply with quote

orchardman wrote:
I think we need clear definitions of 'Infra' and 'Supra' lapsarianism before this discussion can continue with profit.

Orchardman


Start here.
_________________
AMR (a.k.a. Patrick)
Arizona Arizona, it's a dry heat!

Do You Confess?
Faculty PRBS
My Randomata Blog


View user's profile Send private message Find all posts by user Visit poster's website

DrWhofan1


RTI Guru



Joined: 20 Oct 2014
postcomment
postcomment
Posts: 861
Rep Level: 4
Rep Points: 25
Rep Hits: 7


Rep This Post

PostPosted: 08-23-2015 5:13 pm
Post Number: 22803
Reply with quote

Just a clarification question here...

Do both teach and hold to double predestination, or is that just for those in the Supra position then?

View user's profile Send private message Find all posts by user

Ask Mr. Religion


Admin



Joined: 28 Jul 2008
postcomment
postcomment
Posts: 4767
Rep Level: 5
Rep Points: 211
Rep Hits: 44

Location: Chandler, AZ
Rep This Post

PostPosted: 08-23-2015 9:11 pm
Post Number: 22811
Reply with quote

DrWhofan1 wrote:
Just a clarification question here...

Do both teach and hold to double predestination, or is that just for those in the Supra position then?
Both would teach double predestination, but not in the sense of equal ultimacy.

"The much greater issue of “double” predestination is the issue over the relationship between election and reprobation with respect to the nature of the decrees and the nature of the divine outworking of the decrees. If “double” predestination means a symmetrical view of predestination, then we must reject the notion. But such a view of “double” predestination would be a caricature and a serious distortion of the Reformed doctrine of predestination."

See more here:
http://www.ligonier.org/learn/articles/double-predestination/
_________________
AMR (a.k.a. Patrick)
Arizona Arizona, it's a dry heat!

Do You Confess?
Faculty PRBS
My Randomata Blog


View user's profile Send private message Find all posts by user Visit poster's website

DrWhofan1


RTI Guru



Joined: 20 Oct 2014
postcomment
postcomment
Posts: 861
Rep Level: 4
Rep Points: 25
Rep Hits: 7


Rep This Post

PostPosted: 08-25-2015 5:49 am
Post Number: 22814
Reply with quote

Are there not Reformed though who would hold that God durectly determined to predestinate His elect unto salvation and final stages, as in Romans 8, but that he indirectlt by passed and permitted the lost to stay lost, as they would will to be foing?

That Double predestination teaches that the lost was determined by God to go to Hell in the end, but that those not holding to that would see him as determining what the end result would be of their permiited renellion state?

View user's profile Send private message Find all posts by user

DrWhofan1


RTI Guru



Joined: 20 Oct 2014
postcomment
postcomment
Posts: 861
Rep Level: 4
Rep Points: 25
Rep Hits: 7


Rep This Post

PostPosted: 08-31-2015 5:58 am
Post Number: 22849
Reply with quote

Both position have been held and promoted by Christians in  the reformed tradition, but Hyper Calvinistic viewpoints go beyond what has been seen as being consistant with scriptures!

As that view point negates the  need to follow the great commission, and tend to support something akin to eternal justification!

View user's profile Send private message Find all posts by user

Reformed Baptist


Leading Member



Joined: 20 Nov 2015
postcomment
postcomment
Posts: 488
Rep Level: 4
Rep Points: 35
Rep Hits: 8

Location: England
Rep This Post

PostPosted: 11-23-2015 2:50 pm
Post Number: 23482
Reply with quote

I tend towards supralapsarianism but I am anything but a hyper-Calvinist (though some might call me a high Calvinist) however to my mind the whole debate is rather artificial. It is a discussion of the logical order of God's decrees and which came first in his mind.

For me, the issues with that are:

1) The decrees of God are eternal - God has never sat down ordered logically the steps he needs to take to bring about his purposes - his decrees have just 'always' been.

2) The decrees themselves are somewhat arbitrarily defined rather the explicitly stated in Scripture in my opinion

3) the order tends be based on how we might work back from our end goal - but is our mind God's mind?

Just consider my supra position, basically it as follows:

God's goal is his glory which he achieves through sovereign grace and righteous judgment. To that end there there is a need for sinners; to achieve that there must be a fall - to make that possible there must be a world created in righteousness.

However it would be equally logical to suggest other orders and that is the problem - it is a question of how we make sense something that I wonder sometimes if we even should be trying to make sense of at all and maybe that is why those who formed our confessions steered clear of a discussion of lapsarianism in their thoughtfully put together statements of faith - which do not go beyond Scripture.
_________________
"George Whitefield said, "We are all born Arminians." It is grace that turns us into Calvinists." Spurgeon

View user's profile Send private message Find all posts by user

DrWhofan1


RTI Guru



Joined: 20 Oct 2014
postcomment
postcomment
Posts: 861
Rep Level: 4
Rep Points: 25
Rep Hits: 7


Rep This Post

PostPosted: 11-30-2015 10:30 am
Post Number: 23567
Reply with quote

Do think that is one of the hardest things to het a hold on concerning this discussion, that the decrees of God were/are all eternal, and not done in  a strict linear time fashion as we tend to have to see them as being done in!

I have no problem with either viewpoint, just as long as one does not venture into the idea that God determined and directly caused satan and adam to sin and Fall, as they both did their wicked deeds in "free will" ...

View user's profile Send private message Find all posts by user

Reformed Baptist


Leading Member



Joined: 20 Nov 2015
postcomment
postcomment
Posts: 488
Rep Level: 4
Rep Points: 35
Rep Hits: 8

Location: England
Rep This Post

PostPosted: 11-30-2015 11:04 am
Post Number: 23577
Reply with quote

DrWhofan1 wrote:
Do think that is one of the hardest things to het a hold on concerning this discussion, that the decrees of God were/are all eternal, and not done in  a strict linear time fashion as we tend to have to see them as being done in!


The discussion is not 'a time order' but a 'logical order'

Quote:
I have no problem with either viewpoint, just as long as one does not venture into the idea that God determined and directly caused satan and adam to sin and Fall, as they both did their wicked deeds in "free will" ...


However both views directly assert that God is the first cause of everything that happens (and that includes every sin committed), and both views also emphasis the 'liberty/ contingency of secondary causes', for example the Westminster confession states:

3.1. God from all eternity did by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby neither is God the author of sin; nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures, nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.

Similar the baptist confession asserts:

3.1 God hath decreed in himself, from all eternity, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably, all things, whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby is God neither the author of sin nor hath fellowship with any therein; nor is violence offered to the will of the creature, nor yet is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established; in which appears his wisdom in disposing all things, and power and faithfulness in accomplishing his decree.

Of course we see this truth played out in Scripture, and even explicitly detailed in Scripture, consider the death of the Lord Jesus Christ - the greatest sin of mankind in our whole histroy - and what do we read of it?

Acts 2:23 "Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken1 by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death; (NKJ)

We read that it happened according the determined purpose of God - ie God decreed it, but at the same time the guilt of that sin is laid at the door of the men who performed it.

What you have presented in a false dichotomy that actually does nothing to address the issue you feel needs to be addressed which is God's relationship to evil. Unless you are an open theist all you actually do is push the cause back in your thinking, because God still caused the fall and every sin commited by his act of creation (if nothing else). It is actually far more preferable to allow the bible to answer the question, God is sovereign over sin, but we commit the sin!
_________________
"George Whitefield said, "We are all born Arminians." It is grace that turns us into Calvinists." Spurgeon

View user's profile Send private message Find all posts by user

Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Reformed Theology Institute Forum Index » Supralapsarianism - Infralapsarianism Page Previous  1, 2


 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Back to top




Welcome To RTI Guest!