Posted on 06/14/2002 7:52:48 AM PDT by Matchett-PI
"I give you hearty praise and commendation on this further account - that you alone, in contrast with all others, have attacked the real thing, that is, the essential issue. ... you, and you alone, have seen _____THE HINGE ON WHICH ALL TURNS____, and aimed for the vital spot.
If there is an election to salvation (and there most certainly is), then there must be a non-election. Those who are not-elected are, well, not-elected. Thus any understanding of election must include an election to reprobation if only on the basis of the fact that there are the elect and the non-elect. In other words, there is no predestination unless it is double.
Amen. "Mistress Reason" is a trap we all fall prey to. But God is God, and His reason is all that matters.
Something very clearly happened in Lutheran doctrine between 1546 and 1580.
Yep. It's the same thing that happened, little by little, to all the Protestant denominations, culminating in groups like the World Council of Churches, which have purposely diluted the truth of God's sovereignty in order that men might rule over other men and God, Himself.
Luther and every Calvinist would agree on at least one point: God's counsels nor purposes are never arbitrary.
TO CORIN AND ALL ARMINIANS: Please note the use of the phrase "God's counsels." It is a phrase used often to describe God's aid or intent; it is not "councils," as pertaining to a group of men, i.e. World Council of Churches.
TO ALL: A personal note this morning, tagged onto this appropriate thread. I'd like to thank you all for the commraderie, devotion and vast knowledge that have been offered on these religious posts. I've struggled with an important work project for months. I've worried and prayed; prayed and worried.
But first thing every morning I'd log onto Free Republic and be reminded of the comfort of God's grace.
As I've argued the side of God's authority in all things, I have become stronger in my faith. As I've told some of the Arminians, it's a sublime assurance, knowing that God is in charge of my destiny, and if it is His will, it will be my will. And I wish this comfort for them, as well.
So this morning, when I received the news I've been working and praying for, I wanted to share my happiness with you all. I'm sorry for the lack of details. But for now please know I thank you all for your good companionship, and for your devotion to Christ's eternal blessings.
Thank you, God, for my undeserved joy.
May discussion of this remain civil and peaceful. God bless.
I thought you didn't want to talk to me. That's okay. I'm being a passive smart@$$ (yeah, I can quote you) today, so I won't respond.
Testing my very limited knowledge of Calvinist arcana, does this quote mean that (according to the author) Luther was an "infralapsarian"?
Secondly, I've always wondered (well, not 'always' technically) if infralapsarians believe that the single or double decree (whichever) took place after the fall in Eden in time/space history or before? That is, did Adam have a free will or not? Just curious how the 'lapsarians' of various stripes handle Adam.
Infralapsarianism defines the view that God’s choice of the elect contemplated them as fallen in Adam.
What do you think? Read it again --- excerpted from above:
"The second objection regarding double predestination stems ultimately from a misunderstanding of it. Many caricatures of the doctrine see God as electing and reprobating men in eternity past, with no reference to man as sinner, but merely as creature. Thus, when God reprobated men from eternity, he had to then set His plan into action by then creating them sinful, (that is, create their sin afresh) and actively incline their hearts to wickedness so that he could punish them eternally. This particular doctrine is best called symmetrical predestination, in that God reprobated in the same active fashion as he elects. That is, as God must create a new, righteous, heart in the elect man, God must also create a new, wicked heart in the reprobate man. Very few theologians, especially Reformers, held this particular view.":
"The view that Luther maintains is also the view of the other major Reformers, including John Calvin, as well as earlier St. Augustine and Johann Staupitz.
"This view may be called asymmetrical predestination, as it pictures God electing and reprobating in eternity past with reference to man as sinner, not as creature."
"Therefore, when God had before him the entire human race, he viewed mankind as fallen."
And after all that, you inexplicably ask once more: "...did Adam have a free will or not?"
Erasmus ... is that you?
Well, I guess you are saying I am right as to question one, that Luther would be viewed as an 'infralapsarian'.
But I'm not sure about no. 2. Are you saying God viewed Adam as 'fallen' before he was created and therefore 'reprobated' him? Does that mean that, in your view (or Luther's if you wish), God predestined Adam to fall? So, Adam had no free will, is that true?
If so, that strikes me as circuitous. The Calvinist definition of sin (which in turn 'justifies' pre-selected damanation (whether or not by passed-over theory)) is based on imputation from the sin of Adam. So, in Calvinist theory, what was Adam's sin to impute to regard him as fallen and therefore justify being 'reprobated', all before he sinned?
He had as much free will as Judas and the Romans had.
You con't... "If so, that strikes me as circuitous. The Calvinist definition of sin (which in turn 'justifies' pre-selected damanation (whether or not by passed-over theory)) is based on imputation from the sin of Adam. So, in Calvinist theory, what was Adam's sin to impute to regard him as fallen and therefore justify being 'reprobated', all before he sinned?"
Why do you keep bringing Calvin's name up? This thread is about Luther who believed in double predestination.
And you keep asking questions that were answered in the paper about Luther's teachings that I posted above. Didn't you read it? If so, please re-read it and see if you can find your answer in what Luther taught.
Your comment: Why do you keep bringing Calvin's name up? This thread is about Luther who believed in double predestination. And you keep asking questions that were answered in the paper about Luther's teachings that I posted above. Didn't you read it? If so, please re-read it and see if you can find your answer in what Luther taught.
I see. There is no answer. As to the Luther/Calvin distinction, it is a distinction without a difference -- as your own article argues. Theological determinisim has, for better or worse, come to be known as "Calvinism". But you are free to call it "Lutherism" if you wish.
The point is, when confronted with Adam, the construct makers had a big problem. They couldn't say Adam had a free will without trying (unsuccessfully) to explain why God would give one man a free will and not all. But they couldn't say he was predestined for sin without God being the author of sin and evil -- and, of course, punishing him for the imputed sin he hadn't yet committed.
So, the answer: As usual when the construct makers aren't sure, punt it. Just as you did. Congratulations. You now qualify for your master's degree in Calvinist deception.
And the above can be condensed into one word: AMEN!
Are you kidding? - This is Free-for-all Republic ;o)
Robotdom is great, isn't it?
So glad to hear that God has blessed you in answering your prayers. He always does, we believe.
Now we only pray He will continue to bless you and open the eyes of your understaning to His truth regarding the Augustinian perversion of Biblical truth propagated by Luther, Augustine, and even Wesley.
Hank
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.