Thread: What does infralapsarianism & supralapsarianism means ?

Can some explain me please what that means, and what the difference is ?

Thanks,

Ralph

SUPRALAPSARIANISM is the view that God, contemplating man as yet unfallen, chose some to receive eternal life and rejected all others.

INFRALAPSARIANISM (also known sometimes as "sublapsarianism&quot suggests that God's decree to permit the fall logically preceded His decree of election.

Both definitions taken from someone who can clear-cutly "say" it better than myself, Phil Johnson at

http://www.gty.org/~phil/articles/sup_infr.htm

Reena,
Use the board search function. There are tons of threads on this subject.

[quote:d3b5cb5dec][i:d3b5cb5dec]Originally posted by Scott Bushey[/i:d3b5cb5dec]
Reena,
Use the board search function. There are tons of threads on this subject. [/quote:d3b5cb5dec]

But if they did that I and possibly others would not have even thought of the question and or subject. Becausre they asked I am eager t learn more.

Are you guys running low on hard drive space? Not trying to be a smart alec. I just thought if people only searched out the answers they may never raise the question.

Roger,
When we aministrators _suggest_ using the boards search function, it is because the topic has already been dealt with. There is no reason to again go over the theology and doctrine. Read what has already been said in regards to your questions.

IIt's nothing personal. When I became reformed, I learned all these things through search engines and alot of endeavored reading.

A suggestion: if someone does a search and finds something of interest, they should post a topic like this:

Question on Infra and Supralapsarianism.

I had a question about that and found the following thread:

{provide link}

I'm still curious about this aspect...


The search function is most useful and necessary when a topic has been long and hotly debated. What happens typically is about every few months new people come on board and ask something like: "are you credo or paedo" ?

And then the same people rehash the same arguments over again.

as a "newer" Reformed person like myself can attest to, even when we go to a lot of the previously-done threads, it's still not clear. Usually the threads are "high level" discussions or arguments by those who are already comfortable with the material, and don't start off with basic definitions, basic implications, or what the sides are. (I'm thinking of things like the Clark/Van-Til thing, Supra-Infra, Theonomic vs. Non-Theonomic Amillenialism, etc.)...it's hard for a newcomer to really sort out what the debate really is, and what the different "camps" are and what the implication of their views are. It's really only after knowing those foundational things that the debate itself is valuable for edification.
Just my :wr50:

Good point. maybe we could set up some FAQs regarding some of these matters.

I guarantee that a FAQ would be extremely appreciated by "us", and also would slow down the "what does x mean" questions. Maybe list the book resources in the answers (there are a billion of those types of "repeat" answers on the forum too).

Thanks, Fred!
Brian:bs2:

The FAQ idea sounds pretty nice.

[Edited on 5-22-2004 by Ianterrell]

[quote:c8dcf5fe16][i:c8dcf5fe16]Originally posted by Scott Bushey[/i:c8dcf5fe16]
Roger,
When we aministrators _suggest_ using the boards search function, it is because the topic has already been dealt with. There is no reason to again go over the theology and doctrine. Read what has already been said in regards to your questions.

IIt's nothing personal. When I became reformed, I learned all these things through search engines and alot of endeavored reading. [/quote:c8dcf5fe16]

Cool. I probably took it the wrong way.