Well, Barth at least agrees that there is a nature/grace dualism implicit in the infralapsarian position. Strikingly, he points to the danger of anthropocentrism in supralapsarianism, arguing that by making the salvation of individual x and the damnation of individual y the primary purpose of the whole show, supras encouraged thoughts of God to immediately collapse into thoughts of man, and of self-interest. Infras avoided this by saying that there is a realm of creation and providence “supposedly independent” from the realm of redemption. And this promoted anthropocentrism even more than supra: “the more strongly the autonomy of that realm [of creation] was emphasised, the more surely was the foundation laid for a later proclamation of the self-glorification of the individual with divine help.”
Visiting an Armenian Archbishop in Prison
On February 3, I stood in a poorly lit meeting room in the National Security Services building…
Christians Are Reclaiming Marriage to Protect Children
Gay marriage did not merely redefine an institution. It created child victims. After ten years, a coalition…
Save the Fox, Kill the Fetus
Question: Why do babies in the womb have fewer rights than vermin? Answer: Because men can buy…