Thanks, Mr. Flynn for your clear explanation.Flynn schreef:Hey JVDG,jvdg schreef:Supra- or infralapsarian, it is a very difficult subject to be discussed.
In Dutch it is very difficult to me, but in English it's still more difficult to explain my opinion on/to this topic.
PLease, Mr. Flynn, will you be so kind to explain your opinion without only references to several (not known) theologicals.
My leading theology can be found in the Bible, the base for all our thoughts, delighted by the Holy Spirit.
Its a little hard for me to not engage the theologians because the theologians, some of them, invented this stuff.
Basically I have these criticisms.
1. Following Dabney the aim is not to to see the decrees of God in linear fashion, but as co-terminous, each referencing the other. Like this: think of a triangle. In order to think of a triangle, you have to think of all three points similtaneously. You cant think of 1 point, then the next, then the next, because then you cant think of the triangle. I believe this is Dabney's point.
2. The lapsarian schema is a trap in that it imagines one can obtain a divine vantage point on God's redemptive plan. And here Calvin is genius. We are to only focus on the revealed will, not the decretive. There are some analogies I can use to explain this.
3. I totally agree with Turretin that Paul's use of mercy and justice presuppose a NON-supralapsarian schema:
Romans 9:22-23 What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath-- prepared for destruction? 23 What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory--
Turretin points out that the objects of the decree are fallen, in misery and subject to punishment. In systematic theology, mercy presupposes misery. One gives mercy to the one in affliction. One gives wrath to the transgressor. Turretin points out, the objects in the divine contemplation are not objects in the pure mass, or pure creatable mass.
4. There is no supralapsarianism in Augustine down to Calvin. All of them have election out of a corrupt mass.
Those would be my comments.
Take care,
David
But at the end of the day, this subject, what our opinion ever will be, it never can be a barrier in the relationship with our Lord.
And yes indeed, generally seen, it are theories invented by people.
