Which cal Are You, Supralapsarianism or infralapsarianism?

[glfredrick]

Are we dealing strictly with the decree to save some and the decree to allow the fall issues?

The discussions of the "sarians" supra, lap, infra, etc., are all derived from the study of the ordo salutis -- the logical order of salvation -- as decreed by God. That is a closely soteriological issue, not a broad eccesiological or escatological issue.

So, yes, if we are speaking of supralapsarian, infralapsarian, etc., we are indeed speaking only of soteriological doctrines.

Additionally, taking NO stand as is the practice of some -- seemingly more pious than others who actually find themselves in some position -- is neither more pious nor more accurate. Everyone actually has a stand, some either don't know they have a stand or are unwilling to express their stand, for virtually every potential position in the order of salvation is covered by one of the positions already defined and in existence.

The continuum runs from hyper-Calvinism -- a purely deterministic view of God's sovereignty to Pelagian -- a purely anthropocentric view of man's ability. Between those two poles are hyper-Calvinism, supralapsarian, infralapsarian, Arminian, Amyraldism, Semi-Pelagianism, and Pelagianism.

 

[DaChaser1]

The discussions of the "sarians" supra, lap, infra, etc., are all derived from the study of the ordo salutis -- the logical order of salvation -- as decreed by God. That is a closely soteriological issue, not a broad eccesiological or escatological issue.

So, yes, if we are speaking of supralapsarian, infralapsarian, etc., we are indeed speaking only of soteriological doctrines.

Additionally, taking NO stand as is the practice of some -- seemingly more pious than others who actually find themselves in some position -- is neither more pious nor more accurate. Everyone actually has a stand, some either don't know they have a stand or are unwilling to express their stand, for virtually every potential position in the order of salvation is covered by one of the positions already defined and in existence.

The continuum runs from hyper-Calvinism -- a purely deterministic view of God's sovereignty to Pelagian -- a purely anthropocentric view of man's ability. Between those two poles are hyper-Calvinism, supralapsarian, infralapsarian, Arminian, Amyraldism, Semi-Pelagianism, and Pelagianism.

just curious as to why Amyraldism listed after Arminianism, as wouldn't it proceed it based upon the decrees ordering by God?

 

[glfredrick]

just curious as to why Amyraldism listed after Arminianism, as wouldn't it proceed it based upon the decrees ordering by God?

No, it is a degree more anthropocentrically oriented than true Arminianism, which still agrees that God is the author and finisher of faith.

Some here argue a strawman version of Arminianism that places it as either Pelagian or semi-Pelagian. That is not true if one reads the 5 Articles as offered at the Synod of Dort. Unfortunately, as actually practiced, a good many who identify with the Arminian doctrinal stance are in fact semi- or full Pelagian in their actual practice, but that is different than where the actual doctrines stand on the continuum.

 

[DaChaser1]

No, it is a degree more anthropocentrically oriented than true Arminianism, which still agrees that God is the author and finisher of faith.

Some here argue a strawman version of Arminianism that places it as either Pelagian or semi-Pelagian. That is not true if one reads the 5 Articles as offered at the Synod of Dort. Unfortunately, as actually practiced, a good many who identify with the Arminian doctrinal stance are in fact semi- or full Pelagian in their actual practice, but that is different than where the actual doctrines stand on the continuum.

Doesn't it though postulate and hold to god election based TOTALLY upon his will to save us, that he will chose some out to be saved, as Arms still hold that ALL might be saved, for certain non will be?

 

[glfredrick]

Doesn't it though postulate and hold to god election based TOTALLY upon his will to save us, that he will chose some out to be saved, as Arms still hold that ALL might be saved, for certain non will be?

I recommend looking up and reading the 5 Articles.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

No, it is a degree more anthropocentrically oriented than true Arminianism, which still agrees that God is the author and finisher of faith.

Some here argue a strawman version of Arminianism that places it as either Pelagian or semi-Pelagian. That is not true if one reads the 5 Articles as offered at the Synod of Dort. Unfortunately, as actually practiced, a good many who identify with the Arminian doctrinal stance are in fact semi- or full Pelagian in their actual practice, but that is different than where the actual doctrines stand on the continuum.

in other words you ether submit to the will of God or you pursue your own will. In the anthropocentric perspective, man becomes his own authority & point of reference. Do you DC feel this is an accurate portrait of your stance as a Amyraldist? (isnt that a Christmas flower?) Just pullin your leg! :laugh: