Supra vs Infra

[Jon_]

a question. how, if God decreed the fall, did Adam really have free-will?

Adam did not have (truly) free will. No one but God does.

if God had decreed that it would happen, then Adam had no choice in the matter.

Precisely.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

 

[lmnop9876]

Adam did not have (truly) free will. No one but God does.

i still don't get it. why would God make people for the sole purpose of giving them no choice in anything and decreeing that they would fall into sin and misery?

 

[Jon_]

i still don't get it. why would God make people for the sole purpose of giving them no choice in anything and decreeing that they would fall into sin and misery?

Men do indeed make choices. But these choices are contigent upon the will of God and foreordained by him. I also disagree with the idea that God's "sole purpose" was that men should fall into sin and misery. God's purpose was that all men would fall into sin and misery, so that he might show mercy to some. And he did all this to his own glory for his own reasons.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

 

[cygnusx1]

here is some excellent work , if you get the time read the entire page , you will want to keep this page trust me :





Supralapsarianism:

Some have dismissed supralapsarianism as mere logic. Some believe it ascribes sinfulness to God. Typically, these are the same arguments used by Arminians against the doctrine of predestination. Sadly, there are far too many who profess predestination yet are not supralapsarian. Well-known theologian, R.C. Sproul has adopted the infralapsarian position. He struggles to present his case in his book, Chosen By God. Because of the stature of Sproul many are turning to the Arminian position of infralapsarianism. Their justification is that they believe supralapsarianism makes God evil.​

First, I would like to present a totally Biblical argument for the supralapsarian position. Second, I will desperately try to not use any extra-biblical logic since this has aroused so many infralapsarians. However, I will confess that to profess that God is omniscient and omnipotent and yet deny the supralapsarian position is philosophically illogical and impossible. Nevertheless, to satisfy those such as myself who have a tendency to refuse all logic against Scripture (which is actually quite a nice thing to do), I will simply expound the Scriptures. For those of you who want the philosophically logical and inevitable defense of supralapsarianism, just let me know.​

The first and foremost part of my proposition is that God is intrinsically holy. This holiness cannot be changed nor does it have an end or a beginning. The second part of my proposition is that God, in His holiness, has an immutable decree for all events in time and outside of time. This decree is as immutable and eternal as His holiness. This decree providentially permeates, and by God's infinite power is the causal factor of, every facet of all events in time and outside of time.​

The third but less significant part of my proposition is that the knowledge of the supralapsarian position is an extremely important part of the Christian life and the worship of God. Within this part of the proposition we should note that we are strongly admonished through examples and commands in Scripture to praise God for the good and the bad that He brings. Ultimately this is because they all work together for good to them that love God and are the called according to His purpose. Therefore, I assert that the active, ineffable power of God over good and evil, righteousness and sin, to fulfill His decree, is to be praised by the Christian. God's power is not merely an attribute.​

..............

Infralapsarianism can be technically defined as God decreeing salvation because of the fall. Supralapsarianism is defined as God decreeing both the fall and salvation based upon no condition whatsoever. In essence infralapsarianism is here seen to closely parallel the Arminian doctrine of conditional election. Infralapsarianism must end with that conclusion. For if God decreed salvation because of the fall, for God to be consistent in His decree He must have decreed election because of the activity of the one who had fallen. This is not logic supporting supralapsarianism; rather this is the logic of infralapsarianism. There are many more logical conclusions to which infralapsarianism leads, however, we will examine the Biblical position of supralapsarianism.

......................

Though this may seem extreme, infralapsarianism leads to the same deviation when taken to its logical conclusion. I fully confess that just about every doctrine we hold could lead to deviation from Scripture if we scrutinized every possible result from any given doctrine. However, because this involves such enormous and clear attributes of God, and because it involves such obvious reproach against Jesus Christ we must review our presuppositions and make sure they are in conformity with Scripture. In doing so we will not only have a far greater appreciation for the absolute sovereignty of God over righteousness and sin; we will also present God as He is to the fallen world and to professing Christians: namely, a God who is actively (not permissively) involved with each event transpiring in time and eternity from the salvation of the soul to the sparrow that falls to the ground, from a corrupt murderer of millions of Russian peasants to those who crucified the Lord of glory.​

In this examination I will make brief comments concerning the following passages:​

Isaiah 46:9-11 Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me, {10} Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure: {11} Calling a ravenous bird from the east, the man that executeth my counsel from a far country: yea, I have spoken it, I will also bring it to pass; I have purposed it, I will also do it.​

God has declared the end from the beginning. Nothing was left undone. Nothing was decreed after an event. To say otherwise would be to deny the omniscience of God. Not only did God declare the end from the beginning, He also promised to bring it to pass and to do it. "Do it" is not an act of permission but commission.​

Proverbs 16:4 The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.​

God created all things, sin and righteousness for Himself. This is the purpose of all creation: to bring glory to God. God created the wicked to be damned.​

Jude 1:4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.​

This passage clearly teaches they were ordained for condemnation. God planned or decreed that certain men would be damned for eternity.​

Romans 9:22-23 What if God, willing to show his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: {23} And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,​

There are some who have correctly analyzed the use of the passive voice for the word "fitted" and the active voice for the word "prepared." A faulty analysis of the "passive" voice is made when associating the "passiveness" with God. The truth that the phrase is conveying is diametrically opposed to that imagination. The passive voice is used to describe the passiveness of the vessel of destruction. That is, the vessel of destruction is passively having to receive the decree and hardening of God upon their hearts. Otherwise, vv. 18,19 would not make any sense in the context:​

Romans 9:18-19 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. {19} Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?​

The whole context deals with the discussion of the will of God to harden some and save others. If it were some sort of discourse concerning some imaginary passive attribute of God then the questions of the earthly opponent would be completely out of place. The whole reason the earthly opponent responds with hatred toward God is that they are confronted with the inevitable reality that an omnipotent, omniscient God has just declared that He hardens whom He wills. "Hardeneth" is a present tense verb in the active voice. Literally the passage reads, "Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he is continually hardening." There is so much force behind this statement for the supralapsarian position that only the angriest mentality would find ways to ignore the clear implication of the verse.​

Incidentally, the command to Pharaoh was, "Let my people go." Sin is disobedience to God. To disobey God's command would be sin. For Pharaoh to not hearken to the command of God to let the children of Israel go would be to sin and rebel against God. There is no contention here among all positions. The issue is clarified in God's explicit statement to Moses:​

Exodus 4:21-23 And the LORD said unto Moses, When thou goest to return into Egypt, see that thou do all those wonders before Pharaoh, which I have put in thine hand: but I will harden his heart, that he shall not let the people go. {22} And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the LORD, Israel is my son, even my firstborn: {23} And I say unto thee, Let my son go, that he may serve me: and if thou refuse to let him go, behold, I will slay thy son, even thy firstborn.​

There is no mistaking the fact that God caused Pharaoh to sin. But before we ascribe evil to God, we must ask two essential questions: Does God have the right and does God have a purpose? No true Christian would deny the fact that God has a right to do whatever He pleases. This is certainly Scriptural:​

Psalms 115:3 But our God is in the heavens: he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased.
Psalms 135:6 Whatsoever the LORD pleased, that did he in heaven, and in earth, in the seas, and all deep places.
Daniel 4:35 And all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing: and he doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou?​

The problem is that far too many professing Christians are not even saying, "What doest thou?" They are simply saying, "Thou wouldst not do it!" Yet, "He doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand…"Or as the opponent exclaims, "…Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?" Romans 9:19. God's purpose is that He would be glorified and His power would be made known.​

The response of the atheist to the imagined passive side of God is, "God could not be passive if He is omniscient and omnipresent." If we presented the truth of God's active sovereignty over good and evil, the atheist's reply would be much more similar to that of the opponent in Romans. "How can He find fault if He is the one hardening and His will cannot be resisted?" Paul gives the most hated reply:​

Romans 9:20-21 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? {21} Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?



.....................................
​

The argument presented here was virtually without any extra-biblical logic. I have not found any infralapsarian who can refute the Scriptures presented here. In fact, it is the infralapsarian who attempts to impose faulty human logic upon the Scripture. I have been accused of just using logic. I welcome anyone to show me that the supralapsarian position is unbiblical. You weigh the positions. Let your conscience examine the Scriptures. May those of you who have previously disagreed be humbled at the Scriptures presented and boldly admit and proclaim the God who is able to save and to destroy; the God who has created all things for His purpose, yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.​

http://www.eschatology.com/supralapsarianism.html

 

[Imblessed]

Men do indeed make choices. But these choices are contigent upon the will of God and foreordained by him. I also disagree with the idea that God's "sole purpose" was that men should fall into sin and misery. God's purpose was that all men would fall into sin and misery, so that he might show mercy to some. And he did all this to his own glory for his own reasons.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

I have come to this view also. It seems only logical(that darn word again ) to me.

I don't worry about it. Much more important things for me to understand right now. God is soveriegn, He has a perfectly good "reason" to have things the way they are, and I'm just in awe that He would choose me, being the person I know myself to be.

I don't feel edified by arguing over this issue. Just getting a person to understand the Doctrines of Grace is hard enough, let alone something like infra vs supra!

I think it's one of those things we have no right trying to figure out....maybe it's more damaging than edifying....

my .02 worth.......

 

[cygnusx1]

for more on this subject ............ http://www.christianforums.com/t2053711-single-or-double-predestination.html

 

[Rolf Ernst]

CygnusX1--Thanks for your post, #64. That is very good preaching. You know, those who are not supralapsarian are saying in effect that God did not purpose from everlasting to make His name known (and so receive glory) through the wicked that He made for Himself.