Supralapsarian Resources

[Machaira]

I'm sure this topic has been covered here, so forgive me.

Can someone direct me to some good supralapsarian resources? Books, articles, web pages, mp3's, posts on this board?

[MCoving]

I'm sure this topic has been covered here, so forgive me.

Can someone direct me to some good supralapsarian resources? Books, articles, web pages, mp3's, posts on this board?

I like this thread on the forum: http://www.predestinarian.net/showthread.php?t=3048.

This is where I first asked questions about supra' stuff, like does God cause people to sin, and such. I'm sure they'll be some good reading in there for you. Also just continue to read through Scripture, maybe doing some searches on words such as evil, sin, God moved, etc.

Here's another article on supralapsarian: http://www.5solas.org/media.php?id=553. It has some great bible references in it as well. I love when articles point you towards Scripture, and cause you to have to study the Bible more! hehe

Here's a good article written by Brandan... there's some others on his site too. If you use the search option you can find some very good information: http://www.pristinegrace.org/media.php?id=400.

Also there's a search button in the forums so you can go there and type in "supralapsarian" and get all the threads that use that word. I love the resources here! They are just kind of hidden sometimes. And feel free to jump in and ask questions after reading through some things. Have a great day.

Mary

[katoikei]

Hi Machiara,

INFRALAPSARIANISM AND SUPRALAPSARIANISM by Dr Loraine Boettner

What exactly are your thoughts on preterism ?

In Christ,
Katoikei

[Machaira]

Mary & Katoikei,

Thanks. The reason I ask is that the only info on the supralapsarian position I've looked at up to this point is from an infralapsarian point of view. Probably not the best way to make an informed decision.

Katoikei,

I'll get back to you later on preterism. Time to get back to work.

[Machaira]

What exactly are your thoughts on preterism ?

Many years ago I would have called myself a "full preterist" but have since abandoned the position and put eschatology on the back burner. I spent a few years on a couple of preterist message boards and became disillusioned with the strange personalities and teachings they attracted. Things like "comprehensive grace," (universalism), "heaven now," no more baptism, communion, elders, teachers, or churches. No thanks.

[lionovjudah]

"heaven now," no more baptism, communion, elders, teachers, or churches. No thanks.

You obviously have not searched the threads here!!!! You may find yourself in the same boat

[Machaira]

You obviously have not searched the threads here!!!! You may find yourself in the same boat

I sure hope I don't have to abandon ship!

[katoikei]

Many years ago I would have called myself a "full preterist" but have since abandoned the position and put eschatology on the back burner. I spent a few years on a couple of preterist message boards and became disillusioned with the strange personalities and teachings they attracted. Things like "comprehensive grace," (universalism), "heaven now," no more baptism, communion, elders, teachers, or churches. No thanks.

Thanks for being open and direct. I am sure you will be right at home here. It seems like you have studied and researched you position well. I am currently off site and working feverishly on a new book and will hopefully find time to post from time to time. (You will find the links to two of what are probably milestone works on 'Books on Predestination' by John Calvin and John Knox - they are both free and in mp3 format, the Lord richly bless you as you drink deep into the river of God.)

In Christ,
Katoikei
Matthew 4:4

[Machaira]

Thanks for being open and direct. I am sure you will be right at home here. It seems like you have studied and researched you position well. I am currently off site and working feverishly on a new book and will hopefully find time to post from time to time. (You will find the links to two of what are probably milestone works on 'Books on Predestination' by John Calvin and John Knox - they are both free and in mp3 format, the Lord richly bless you as you drink deep into the river of God.)

In Christ,
Katoikei
Matthew 4:4

Thanks again for the links. I looked at Loraine Boettner's and Herman Bavinck's treatment of Supralapsarianism. I remain unconvinced at this point of the supra position. I never say never though. I think the following comment by Bavinck is valid:

5. Both are one-sided: supra emphasizing God's sovereignty; Infra, God's righteousness, holiness, and mercy.

"The author's conclusion in regard to the whole matter: “God's decree should not be exclusively described . . . as a straight line to indicate a relation merely of before and after, cause and effect, means and goal; but it should also be viewed as a system the several elements of which are coordinately related to one another. . . . As in an organism all the members are dependent upon one another and in a reciprocal manner determine one another, so also the universe is God's work of art, the several parts of which are organically related.”

http://www.the-highway.com/Bavinck_predestination2.html

[jmgipson]

Thanks again for the links. I looked at Loraine Boettner's and Herman Bavinck's treatment of Supralapsarianism. I remain unconvinced at this point of the supra position. I never say never though. I think the following comment by Bavinck is valid:

5. Both are one-sided: supra emphasizing God's sovereignty; Infra, God's righteousness, holiness, and mercy.

"The author's conclusion in regard to the whole matter: “God's decree should not be exclusively described . . . as a straight line to indicate a relation merely of before and after, cause and effect, means and goal; but it should also be viewed as a system the several elements of which are coordinately related to one another. . . . As in an organism all the members are dependent upon one another and in a reciprocal manner determine one another, so also the universe is God's work of art, the several parts of which are organically related.”

http://www.the-highway.com/Bavinck_predestination2.html

I declare the end from the beginning.

So what you are not convinced of is:

The person building a building starts right at the beginning and builds until he is finished not knowing exactly what will be the end product. (Infra)

(Supra) I have designed and have in complete view the end product and then everything leading up to that design is the means to accomplish it.

John

[Machaira]

I declare the end from the beginning.

So what you are not convinced of is:

The person building a building starts right at the beginning and builds until he is finished not knowing exactly what will be the end product. (Infra)

This of course is a misrepresentation of the infra position and nothing more than a straw man. Infralapsarians certainly do believe that God knows the end from the beginning.

My point of contention with the supra position lies in the idea that God predestines to election and reprobation completely without reference to the fall. I can find no Biblical support for this. The infra position, on the other hand, posits that predestination to election or reprobation is based on God's foreknowledge that Adam would fall.

[Brandan Kraft]

This of course is a misrepresentation of the infra position and nothing more than a straw man. Infralapsarians certainly do believe that God knows the end from the beginning.

My point of contention with the supra position lies in the idea that God predestines to election and reprobation completely without reference to the fall. I can find no Biblical support for this. The infra position, on the other hand, posits that predestination to election or reprobation is based on God's foreknowledge that Adam would fall.

How could God know that Adam would fall unless of course He determined it? And why would He determine the fall? So that He could save those that He determined would be glorified in Christ.

[jmgipson]

This of course is a misrepresentation of the infra position and nothing more than a straw man. Infralapsarians certainly do believe that God knows the end from the beginning.

My point of contention with the supra position lies in the idea that God predestines to election and reprobation completely without reference to the fall. I can find no Biblical support for this. The infra position, on the other hand, posits that predestination to election or reprobation is based on God's foreknowledge that Adam would fall.

Christ is laid to be chosen from out of the People (Psalm 89:19.). Now, as he was considered pure in his Election, to be an Head to the Church, it is not unreasonable to conceive that those, from among whom he was chosen, were also so considered. Moreover, it is manifest, that Esau and Jacob were not considered as having contracted any Guilt in God’s eternal Decree; when the latter was chosen to everlasting Life, and an Act of Preterition was passed upon the former: For the Children being not yet born, neither having done any Good or Evil, that the Purpose of God according to Election might stand, not of Works, but of him that calleth (Romans 9:11.). John Brine on Supralapsarian

John Gill commentary on Psalm 89:19

Ver. 19. Then thou spakest in vision to thy Holy One,.... Samuel the prophet, that holy man of God, to whom the Lord spoke in vision, or by a spirit of prophecy, concerning David, the choice and exaltation of him to the kingdom, and his unction for it, 1Sa 16:1. The Vulgate Latin version reads it "to thy Holy Ones": and so the Targum, with which agree the Septuagint and Arabic versions, which render it "thy sons"; and the Syriac version "his righteous ones", and so takes in Nathan also, to whom the Lord spake in a vision, by night, concerning the settlement and perpetuity of the kingdom in David's family, 2Sa 7:4, &c. Aben Ezra interprets it of the singers, Heman, Ethan, and others; and Jarchi of Gad and Nathan: but the whole is rather to be understood of David's son, the Messiah; and it may be rendered "concerning thy Holy One" {i} as he is called, Ps 16:10, concerning whom in vision, that is, in prophecy, see Isa 1:1. The Lord said, by the mouth of his holy prophets, from the beginning of the world, the following things:

and saidst, I have laid help upon one that is mighty; this "mighty" One is the Messiah, the mighty God, the mighty Man, the mighty Mediator and Redeemer; who was mighty to save to the uttermost, and was every way fit for and equal to the work of a Redeemer; for which reason the Lord "laid help" upon him, not for himself; for this is not to be understood of help promised or given him as man and Mediator: this is after spoken of, Ps 89:21, but for others; and so the Targum adds, "for my people": laying it on him is no other than ordering or enjoining him, to which he agreed, to help his people out of that miserable condition they were fallen into, through Adam's transgression, and their own sins, out of which they could not help themselves: the work assigned to Christ, and devolved on him in council and covenant, was to help them out of this estate by price and power; and to help them on in their way to heaven, through all difficulties, trials, and temptations; and to help them to heaven itself, and introduce them there: and being thus laid upon him, according to his Father's will and purpose, and with his own consent, it was found in him, and exercised by him, Ho 13:9.

I have exalted one chosen out of the people; the same as before, the Messiah, God's elect, his chosen One, Isa 42:1 "chosen" to be the head of the church, to be the Mediator between God and man, and to be the Saviour and Redeemer of lost sinners; to be the foundation and corner stone in the spiritual building, and to be the Judge of quick and dead: and he was "chosen out of the people"; out of the vast number of the individuals of human nature God determined to create, there was a certain number which he selected for himself, for his own glory, and to be eternally happy with him; and out of these he singled one "individuum" of human nature, to be united to the eternal Word, the second Person in the Trinity; and which may be truly said to be the "chiefest among", or, as the Septuagint version has it, "chosen out of ten thousand", So 5:10, this the Lord "exalted" to the grace of union to the Son of God, whereby it became higher than angels and men, and to have a more excellent name than either of them, it bearing the name of him to whom it is united, Heb 1:4, and he has exalted him to the offices of Prophet, Priest, and King, for which he is

anointed above his fellows; and he has also, having done his work, highly exalted him at his right hand; angels, principalities, and powers, being subject to him.

John

[Machaira]

How could God know that Adam would fall unless of course He determined it? And why would He determine the fall? So that He could save those that He determined would be glorified in Christ.

How God is omniscient is irrelevant to my objection. The supra scheme places God's purpose in election and reprobation logically at the head of the list, so to speak, and completely without reference to the fall. This is my objection.


The Apostle Paul says that it was Adam's transgression that brought death and condemnation to man, (Rom. 5:12, 18). This contradicts the supra idea that God considered man as merely creatable and unfallen when He predestined to election and reprobation. Biblically speaking then, election and reprobation presuppose creation and the fall. I maintain that supras have this backward.

[jmgipson]

How God is omniscient is irrelevant to my objection. The supra scheme places God's purpose in election and reprobation logically at the head of the list, so to speak, and completely without reference to the fall. This is my objection.


The Apostle Paul says that it was Adam's transgression that brought death and condemnation to man, (Rom. 5:12, 18). This contradicts the supra idea that God considered man as merely creatable and unfallen when He predestined to election and reprobation. Biblically speaking then, election and reprobation presuppose creation and the fall. I maintain that supras have this backward.

I don't see your reasoning but I offer the following on your low-grace thinking:

Rom 9:21

21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? (KJV)


Making both vessels out of the same lump. Two vessels are being formed instead of making one and leaving the other as it is fallen.

of the same lump, to make one vessel to honour, and another to dishonour. The apostle seems to design hereby, to point out to us the object of predestination to be man, as yet not made, but as lying in the mere mass of creatureship, signified by the unformed clay, before put into any shape; and is an allusion to the first creation of man, out of the clay, or dust of the earth, Ge 2:7; for such a consideration of man best agrees with the clay, lump, or mass, not yet formed, than as already made, and much less as fallen and corrupted: for if men, in predestination, were considered in the corrupt mass, or as fallen creatures, they could not be so well said to be made out of it, both to honour and dishonour; but rather since they were all dishonourable, that some were left in that dishonour, and others removed from it unto honour: besides, if this is not the case, God must create man without an end, which is contrary to the principle of reason and wisdom; the end is the cause, for which a thing is what it is; and it is a known rule, that what is first in intention, is last in execution, and "vice versa": the end is first fixed, and then the means; for God to create man, and then to fix the end of his creation, is to do what no wise potter would do, first make his pots, and then think of the end of making them, and the use they are to be put unto. To make one vessel to honour, and another to dishonour, is for God to appoint creatures, which are to be made out of the same mass and lump, for his own glory; which end, his own glory, he determines to bring about by different means, as these following: with respect to the vessels of honour, whom he appoints for his glory, he determines to create them; to suffer them to fall into sin, whereby they become polluted and guilty; to raise and recover them, by the obedience, sufferings, and death of his Son; to regenerate, renew, and sanctify them, by his Spirit and grace, and to bring them to eternal happiness; and hereby compass the aforesaid end, his own glory, the glorifying of his grace and mercy, in a way consistent with justice and holiness: with respect to the vessels of dishonour, whom he also appoints for the glorifying of himself, he determines to create them out of the same lump; to suffer them to fall into sin; to leave them in their sins, in the pollution and guilt of them, and to condemn them for them; and hereby gain his ultimate end, his own glory, glorifying the perfections of his power, justice, and holiness, without the least blemish to his goodness and mercy: now if a potter has power, for his own advantage and secular interest, to make out of the same clay what vessels he pleases; much more has God a power, out of the same mass and lump of creatureship, to appoint creatures he determines to make to his own glory; which he brings about by different methods, consistent with the perfections of his nature. (John Gill)

Also the following link is a sermon by Rev. Herman Hoeksema on the Potter and the Clay.

http://www.prca.org/articles/predest...ination_7.html


John

[Machaira]

Christ is laid to be chosen from out of the People (Psalm 89:19.). Now, as he was considered pure in his Election, to be an Head to the Church, it is not unreasonable to conceive that those, from among whom he was chosen, were also so considered. Moreover, it is manifest, that Esau and Jacob were not considered as having contracted any Guilt in God’s eternal Decree; when the latter was chosen to everlasting Life, and an Act of Preterition was passed upon the former: For the Children being not yet born, neither having done any Good or Evil, that the Purpose of God according to Election might stand, not of Works, but of him that calleth (Romans 9:11.). John Brine on Supralapsarian

Romans 9:11 clearly says that election is without reference to "works." This isn't the same as saying that God reckoned Jacob and Esau as unfallen before election. Mr. Brine must read that into the text.

[jmgipson]

Romans 9:11 clearly says that election is without reference to "works." This isn't the same as saying that God reckoned Jacob and Esau as unfallen before election. Mr. Brine must read that into the text.

You are ignoring the beginning of Brines work. Christ (man) was chosen out of this same group. Are you prepared to state that Christ (man) was chosen out of a lump of fallen clay?

John

[Machaira]

I don't see your reasoning but I offer the following on your low-grace thinking:

Well, you know what they John. . . sticks and stones. . .

Rom 9:21

21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? (KJV)

You seem to be missing the point of my low-grace thinking. Where does this verse say that the lump was considered as fallen or unfallen before election? It doesn't say either way. Again, you're reading into the text what isn't there.

[jmgipson]

Well, you know what they John. . . sticks and stones. . .





You seem to be missing the point of my low-grace thinking. Where does this verse say that the lump was considered as fallen or unfallen before election? It doesn't say either way. Again, you're reading into the text what isn't there.

I can see from the speed you have replied to these that you have not taken the time to view the documents I offered you and that you are only wanting to argue without considering all information so I won't offer any further info. By the way, Low-grace and High-grace thinking only states which view you take, infra verses supra. It is not name calling which also shows me you are not looking to dialog but to vent your view without looking honestly at what is sent to you.

John

[Jack Daw]

My point of contention with the supra position lies in the idea that God predestines to election and reprobation completely without reference to the fall. I can find no Biblical support for this. The infra position, on the other hand, posits that predestination to election or reprobation is based on God's foreknowledge that Adam would fall.

Essentially, God reacted to the fall, then. This goes against the Bible in that it says God('s will) is immutable. The infra position implies that God saw that an unplanned event would happen after creation; that is, something out of his hands would happen. This is unbiblical.