I read something about Supralapsarianism from Loraine Boettner. He says, "One of the leading motives in the supralapsarian scheme is to emphasize the idea of discrimination and to push this idea into the whole of God’s dealings with men. We believe, however, that supralapsarianism over-emphasizes this idea. In the very nature of the case this idea cannot be consistently carried out, e.g., in creation, and especially in the fall. It was not merely some of the members of the human race who were objects of the decree to create, but all mankind, and that with the same nature. And it was not merely some men, but the entire race, which was permitted to fall. Supralapsarianism goes to as great an extreme on the one side as does universalism on the other. Only the infralapsarian scheme is self-consistent or consistent with other facts."
Found Here: http://www.the-highway.com/election4_Boettner.html
He calls discrimination one of the leading motives in Supralapsarianism. I am not sure exactly what he means by this. I would have thought that Infralapsarianism also held to some sort of discrimination. Both do it seems like. However, he says Supralapsarians over-emphasis this idea. My question is how do we overemphasis this idea? He proclaims this idea (of discrimination?) cannot be carried out in creation or the fall... Of course one of the points of Supralapsarian is the fact that God has elected and reprobated apart from man's goodness or badness apart from any works found in the creature. And that then God created both the elect and reprobate together in Adam (the head of the human race) so that by his fall - all in Him fell.
God did not create individual people but rather he created a species of Mankind. The fall of Mankind (In Adam) meant that the whole lump was now deprived.
This statement of Loraine Boettner makes no sense. Hopefully, he will say some sort of substance later in this Article.
No comments:
Post a Comment