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.”
Ethics of Rhetoric in Times of War
What we say matters. And the way we say it matters. This is especially true in times…
How the State Failed Noelia Castillo
On March 26, Noelia Castillo, a twenty-five-year-old Spanish woman, was killed by her doctors at her own…
The Mind’s Profane and Sacred Loves
The teachers you have make all the difference in your life. That they happened to come into…