Could someone please give me succint definitions of supra- and infralapsarianism and the reason for the debate between the two views?

__________________
Ben Castaneda
member of Faith Presbyterian Church (PCA)
San Antonio, TX
MDiv student at WSC
Escondido, CA

"Not all prison bars are made from metal, And not all prisoners walk about in chains." -Lysander from Weatherby, Earl of Gloucester

Here's a link. Theopedia is very helpful

Order of God's decrees - Theopedia

__________________
Jonathan
College Student
Grace Family Fellowship {SBC}
Kentucky

... yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live.

1 Corinthians 8:6

Since the above user already posted a link to the definitions, I'll take up the reason for the debate. Bear in mind, the great divines of Reformed orthodoxy were not agreed up on these things, and both were present at Westminster. The confessions do not exclude the possibility of either view. This is a logical debate only.

The reasons why many (actually, most) have been reluctant to hold a supralapsarian view are the following:
1.) It seems to state that God reprobates creature before they have actually sinned. Most avoid this issue by stating that God elected his people before the fall, but only pretermitted the rest; then, upon sin entering, those who were passed over in the decree of election are reprobated.
2.) It has the potential of subordinating Christ to the decree of predestination. In decreeing the elect to glory, then upon occasion of the fall it was necessary in keeping with this decree to reconcile them to God, and the only method by which this could be done is the God-man, Jesus Christ. Thus God acts, not freely, but by constraint.
3.) Many have attempted to assert that this view assigns to God a much more awful role in the fall of man (which, however, is what non "Calvinists" charge against "Calvinists," as well...)
4. Infralapsarianism, according to its proponents, is much more faithful to the plan of scripture--creation, fall, setting apart a people.

The supralapsarianists claim the following against infralapsarianism:
1.) It is simply not logically consistent enough, and has the potential of making the decree of God dependent upon man. God does not receive as much glory.
2.) Many biblical passages, such as Romans 9 where Paul speaks of God as having the right to form the clay however he should desire. God is not simply restoring deformed pots, but is creating pots either for goodness or for destruction.

There are obviously many more objections against both, and, of course, actual reasons for adhering to both. These are simply some of the causes of debate, as you have asked for.

For explanation of a supralapsarian position, I would highly recommend Thomas Goodwin's treatise on election (it's long, though, so you may simply wish to jump to the book on the order of the decree); also, Perkins and John Gill. For a classic defense of the infralapsarian position, I could not recommend Turretin's treatment enough in his Institutes of Elenctic Theology.

Also, be careful: both sides will always claim Calvin for themselves.

Ultimately, the vast majority of the reformed tradition has been infralapsarian, but the supras always put up a good fight and raise many points which cannot be ignored.

Hope this helps a little.

__________________
Paul Korte
OPC
Flint, MI

They who perceive in themselves discoveries of the divine goodness, so full and absolutely perfect, and who make them the subject of earnest meditation, will never embrace new doctrines, by which the very grace they feel so powerfully in themselves is thrown into the shade. --John Calvin

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

I noticed in the Puritan Board search function there have been some good threads on this topic. I realize you are considering it now, lots of people contemplating things for the first time here. The search function is a very helpful resource, especially for some standard topics. Somehow, "infra" and "supra" is one of those topics that regularly comes up here.

You may find this thread helpful:
What does infralapsarianism & supralapsarianism means ?

One observation on the arguments for this: While the divines of the Confessions leaned "infra" (but certainly not all of them), the arguments tend to become circular as one is essentially trying to define time (temporal) against a background of (God's) infinity.

here is a great link that shows all the major views, infra, supra, amyraldianism, and arminianism Notes on Supralapsarianism & Infralapsarianism

Infra was the most common among the westminster divines with a few super supras
I personally am Infra, its important to remember that its about God contemplating the fall before and then choosing the elect out of the world(infra), or that he picked both the reprobate and the elect before contemplating the fall(supra) Supra is gaining ground in Reformed circles recently.

__________________
~ Charles Stephen Barribeau ~
Christ Presbyterian Church , OPC (They sing alot of Psalms!)
Original Westminster Standards (I need to study more...)
The Puritans were best! Also... I NEED TO READ MORE!!!
Philipians1:29(KJV) For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake;

Janesville, Wisconsin (In the fellowship of Bob Vigneault and Matt+Megan Meisberger)

This might be helpful : Where are you on the Calvinism Chart?

__________________
Conscience may lash us, but it cannot replenish a languishing life. Conscience may be God's word and minister to you, telling you of your faults and your follies and your destitution. It may point out, but it will never supply you. Christ must give you new life. Hart has well expressed it: "He to the feeble and the faint, His mighty aid makes known; and when their languid life is spent, supplies it with His own." - J. K. Popham

Neither infra nor supra however (even though I consider my theology supra) take into consideration that God is eternal, and not bound by the creation of time and sequence. Thus, the logical sequence we humans place on God's decrees....

__________________
Bert Mulder
Elder of the First Protestant Reformed Church of Edmonton
Edmonton Alberta Canada

This is my position. I have real difficulty with the use of language in describing God's "thoughts" that come up in this debate. As if God is literally writing down or drafting a plan and he has some future thought that he must blind himself from in order to think about the Fall and sin. As Augustine put it, "all of time is spread out before God" there is no past, present, future in God. At least, not how us finite creatures think about time (which God is outside of / transcends).

__________________
Chris
Presbyterian Reformed Church of Charlotte (PRC)
Student, Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary
SC

...hope is nothing but the nourishment and strength of faith.
~ Calvin's Institutes III.ii.43

Most of the reformed divines treat it as a subject that explains the logical order of understanding God's decrees from the human perspective, and not as God is in Himself.

__________________
Yours sincerely,


"Illum oportet crescere me autem minui."

Romans 8:28 - Supra - all the way...

__________________
-JD

JD, when I look at your avatar why do I get the feeling you're in the middle of receiving divine revelation?

__________________
Bill Brown
Elder
Reformed Baptist
Maryland

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?
Visit my BLOG Theology for the Rest of Us

I am! - It's an open Bible up there!

__________________
Carlos Eduardo de Oliveira
Member
Presbyterian Church in Aluminio
Mairinque, São Paulo, Brazil

post tenebras lux!