What's the difference between all these historic groups?
Ever wonder what the differences between Pelagians, semi-Pelagians, Arminians, sub-lapsarians and supra-lapsarians are? These terms often get thrown around, and people sometimes get mad when they are labeled in one group or another. The best way I can explain these differences is through a little analogy. Imagine two guys, George and Matt, are in a boat. George represents God, and Matt represents man.
(Some people may have figured out that I used "G" & "M", because my memory is bad.)
Pelagians
George & Matt are rowing along. Matt falls out and goes under for a bit. He comes up and thrashes around, confused and scared. George calls out, I am over here. Matt sees George, swims over to the boat, and climbs in.
In Pelagianism, all that man needs in order to be saved is for God to call them through the Gospel. Then man is able on his own to respond and save himself.
Semi-Pelagians
George & Matt are rowing along. Matt falls out and goes under for a bit. He comes up and thrashes around, confused and scared. George calls out, I am over here. Matt sees George, calls for help and reaches out his hand. George grabs Matt's hand and they both struggle to get Matt into the boat.
The best catch phrase for semi-Pelagianism is that God helps those who help themselves. Unlike the Pelagians, semi-Pelagians realize that man needs God's help for salvation. But they think we start the process and God meets us half way in order to help. Then God and man work together for salvation.
Arminians
There's a little bit of variety in the Arminian view, so I will give two analogies.
George & Matt are rowing along. Matt falls out and goes under. Matt hits his head and falls unconscious. George dives in and gets Matt off the bottom. As Matt comes to the surface he gains consciousness, starts thrashing around, and sees George pulling him back into the boat. Matt grabs a hold of George, as George pulls Matt into the boat.
A different Arminian analogy:
George & Matt are rowing along. Matt falls out and goes under. Matt hits his head and falls unconscious. George dives in and gets Matt off the bottom. As Matt comes to the surface he gains consciousness, starts thrashing around, and sees George pulling him back into the boat. George pulls Matt onto the boat and Matt lets him.
Both Arminian views are different than the semi-Pelagian view, in that man is completely helpless and cannot initiate their salvation. But in the one view, man does something helpful. He works together with God, by grabbing hold. In the second view however, man doesn't do anything. Man can resist, but does not. Thus, man's role in salvation is non-action rather than action. Thus all the work is done by God.
Calvinist Sub-Lapsarianism
George & Matt are rowing along. Matt falls out and goes under. Matt hits his head and falls unconscious. George dives in and gets Matt off the bottom. As Matt comes to the surface he gains consciousness, starts thrashing around, and sees George pulling him back into the boat. If Matt starts to resist, George gives Matt a morphine shot to calm him down. George pulls Matt onto the boat.
The difference between Calvinism and Arminianism is that man can't resist God's saving them. If they start to put up a struggle, God causes them to change internally in such a way that they cannot resist.
Calvinist Supra-Lapsarianism
George is in the boat by himself. He says to himself, I want to rescue someone today. He goes to the shore and picks up Matt. George & Matt are rowing along. George pushes Matt out of the boat. Matt falls out of the boat, sinks to the bottom, hits his head on a rock and falls unconscious. George dives in and gets Matt off the bottom. As Matt comes to the surface he gains consciousness, starts thrashing around, and sees George pulling him back into the boat. If Matt starts to resist, George gives Matt a morphine shot to calm him down. George pulls Matt onto the boat.
The difference between supra and sub lapsarians is that in the supra lapsarian viewpoint, God chooses some people first, before He decrees the fall. Thus, some people were chosen for destruction, without having first been considered by God as sinners. The fall becomes just a means that God uses to accomplish His goal of saving some people. Sub-lapsarians on the other hand say God first permits the fall before He chooses who He will save. Thus God is choosing some people for salvation out of fallen and sinful mankind.
UPDATE
Theojunkie has provided a different analogy for supra-lapsarians. I like mine better, but thought I would provide his for some balance.
George and Matt are in the boat. George tells Matt, stay seated and keep your arms and legs in the vehicle at all times, else you will surely die. George paddles out to a floating dock where Damien is fishing. Damien comes aboard. George paddles on. Presently, Damien whispers to Matt, "Did George tell you to stay seated? How can you see the view if you are seated? George just wants to keep you in your place so that he can do all the paddling." So Matt, seeing that the view is better while standing, rises to his feet and stands on the point of the bow (a la that girl in Titanic)... the boat is rocking in the waves, and Matt falls in. Just like George warned him.You see, if George wanted Matt to stay ever safe, he could have done any number of things to keep him from falling... he might have not gone on the boat ride... he might have not commanded Matt to sit... he might have left Damien on the dock and not let him aboard...
For more, see TJ's comments below.
(Some people may have figured out that I used "G" & "M", because my memory is bad.)
Pelagians
George & Matt are rowing along. Matt falls out and goes under for a bit. He comes up and thrashes around, confused and scared. George calls out, I am over here. Matt sees George, swims over to the boat, and climbs in.
In Pelagianism, all that man needs in order to be saved is for God to call them through the Gospel. Then man is able on his own to respond and save himself.
Semi-Pelagians
George & Matt are rowing along. Matt falls out and goes under for a bit. He comes up and thrashes around, confused and scared. George calls out, I am over here. Matt sees George, calls for help and reaches out his hand. George grabs Matt's hand and they both struggle to get Matt into the boat.
The best catch phrase for semi-Pelagianism is that God helps those who help themselves. Unlike the Pelagians, semi-Pelagians realize that man needs God's help for salvation. But they think we start the process and God meets us half way in order to help. Then God and man work together for salvation.
Arminians
There's a little bit of variety in the Arminian view, so I will give two analogies.
George & Matt are rowing along. Matt falls out and goes under. Matt hits his head and falls unconscious. George dives in and gets Matt off the bottom. As Matt comes to the surface he gains consciousness, starts thrashing around, and sees George pulling him back into the boat. Matt grabs a hold of George, as George pulls Matt into the boat.
A different Arminian analogy:
George & Matt are rowing along. Matt falls out and goes under. Matt hits his head and falls unconscious. George dives in and gets Matt off the bottom. As Matt comes to the surface he gains consciousness, starts thrashing around, and sees George pulling him back into the boat. George pulls Matt onto the boat and Matt lets him.
Both Arminian views are different than the semi-Pelagian view, in that man is completely helpless and cannot initiate their salvation. But in the one view, man does something helpful. He works together with God, by grabbing hold. In the second view however, man doesn't do anything. Man can resist, but does not. Thus, man's role in salvation is non-action rather than action. Thus all the work is done by God.
Calvinist Sub-Lapsarianism
George & Matt are rowing along. Matt falls out and goes under. Matt hits his head and falls unconscious. George dives in and gets Matt off the bottom. As Matt comes to the surface he gains consciousness, starts thrashing around, and sees George pulling him back into the boat. If Matt starts to resist, George gives Matt a morphine shot to calm him down. George pulls Matt onto the boat.
The difference between Calvinism and Arminianism is that man can't resist God's saving them. If they start to put up a struggle, God causes them to change internally in such a way that they cannot resist.
Calvinist Supra-Lapsarianism
George is in the boat by himself. He says to himself, I want to rescue someone today. He goes to the shore and picks up Matt. George & Matt are rowing along. George pushes Matt out of the boat. Matt falls out of the boat, sinks to the bottom, hits his head on a rock and falls unconscious. George dives in and gets Matt off the bottom. As Matt comes to the surface he gains consciousness, starts thrashing around, and sees George pulling him back into the boat. If Matt starts to resist, George gives Matt a morphine shot to calm him down. George pulls Matt onto the boat.
The difference between supra and sub lapsarians is that in the supra lapsarian viewpoint, God chooses some people first, before He decrees the fall. Thus, some people were chosen for destruction, without having first been considered by God as sinners. The fall becomes just a means that God uses to accomplish His goal of saving some people. Sub-lapsarians on the other hand say God first permits the fall before He chooses who He will save. Thus God is choosing some people for salvation out of fallen and sinful mankind.
UPDATE
Theojunkie has provided a different analogy for supra-lapsarians. I like mine better, but thought I would provide his for some balance.
George and Matt are in the boat. George tells Matt, stay seated and keep your arms and legs in the vehicle at all times, else you will surely die. George paddles out to a floating dock where Damien is fishing. Damien comes aboard. George paddles on. Presently, Damien whispers to Matt, "Did George tell you to stay seated? How can you see the view if you are seated? George just wants to keep you in your place so that he can do all the paddling." So Matt, seeing that the view is better while standing, rises to his feet and stands on the point of the bow (a la that girl in Titanic)... the boat is rocking in the waves, and Matt falls in. Just like George warned him.You see, if George wanted Matt to stay ever safe, he could have done any number of things to keep him from falling... he might have not gone on the boat ride... he might have not commanded Matt to sit... he might have left Damien on the dock and not let him aboard...
For more, see TJ's comments below.
Comments
I'm disappointed in your supralapsarian analogy.
God does not damage man, even in supralapsarianism.
The following would be closer to supralapsarianism:
George is in the boat. He is presently by himself. However, he intends to go over to the shore and pick up Matt and Mike. Further, he knows that both Matt and Mike will have a tragic accident and fall over board during the trip. George knows that both of them will crack their head on a rock, go unconcious, and drown after they fall. George plans to only rescue Matt, and not Mike.
... George goes and picks them up and the voyage begins. As expected, Matt and Mike both fall overboard (on their own)... George rescues Matt, and does not rescue Mike.
Have a merry Christmas, Dan.
I am open to revising the analogy. I like the George is in the boat alone aspect, as I think that captures the "pre-creation" aspect. I do recall turretinfan once defending the justice of a supra-lapsarian decree by saying God isn't dealing with men as men, but as pre-created. There's no one there to be unjust to.
But I don't know if your analogy captures an aspect that I find important. Namely, God's causing the fall. Supra-lapsarians, as I understand them, don't think God sort of gazes into a crystal ball and sees the future fall. Rather, He actively determines that the fall happens. He's starts the sequence of causes with the effect that the fall happens and can't not happen.
So by your saying "Matt and Mike fall overboard (on their own)", I don't think you mean "on their own" in the sense that Matt is the causal source of the fall. It not as if determinists agreed with me that no prior causes determine our choices. I was once told that that would be free wheeling, not freewill. :-)
As for God not damaging man, I am puzzled by the comment. Before the fall, man was good. I don't have to tell you the devastating effects of the fall. So if God causes the fall, he caused them to go from good to damaged goods. I realized supra-lapsarians themselves don't go around saying (or even thinking) this sort of thing. But I don't see why not.
So how about this?
George is in the boat by himself. He says to himself, I want to rescue someone today. He goes to the shore and picks up Matt. George & Matt are rowing along. George pushes Matt out of the boat. Matt falls out of the boat, sinks to the bottom, hits his head on a rock and falls unconscious. George dives in and gets Matt off the bottom. As Matt comes to the surface he gains consciousness, starts thrashing around, and sees George pulling him back into the boat. If Matt starts to resist, George gives Matt a morphine shot to calm him down. George pulls Matt onto the boat.
Merry Christmas to you too TJ.
I did not mean to imply "simple foreknowledge" on God's part.
Indeed God does ordain the fall, and indeed He orchestrates everything such that man shall be presented with the opportunity to disobey.
However, God does not "puppet" man into the act of disobedience. God does not disobey FOR man. Rather, man disobeys willingly on his own.
So, in the boat, God neither hits man on the head with an oar, nor pushes him out the boat.
Actually, the "boat accident" analogy is incorrect in the first place, because it suggests that the fall was some sort of unintentional tragedy. But the truth is, man intended to disobey and that is why man disobeyed. He didn't slip on a banana peel in the garden and smack his face into the forbidden fruit, swallowing it before he knew what he was doing... no, man walked up to the fruit, reached out his hand, took it, moved it to his mouth, and ate.
So... how about another tweak to the boat analogy...
George and Matt are in the boat. George tells Matt, stay seated and keep your arms and legs in the vehicle at all times, else you will surely die. George paddles out to a floating dock where Damien is fishing. Damien comes aboard. George paddles on. Presently, Damien whispers to Matt, "Did George tell you to stay seated? How can you see the view if you are seated? George just wants to keep you in your place so that he can do all the paddling." So Matt, seeing that the view is better while standing, rises to his feet and stands on the point of the bow (a la that girl in Titanic)... the boat is rocking in the waves, and Matt falls in. Just like George warned him.
You see, if George wanted Matt to stay ever safe, he could have done any number of things to keep him from falling... he might have not gone on the boat ride... he might have not commanded Matt to sit... he might have left Damien on the dock and not let him aboard...
But other than orchestrating the environment, George did not "make" Matt fall (or even stand up in the first place).
It's like if I made a sandwich and put it on the kitchen counter, and then commanded my dog to not eat the sandwich. Dog waits till my back is turned, then hops up and steals the sandwich... and I knew he would. I caused the environment-- but I did not cause the dog to take advantage of the environment.
God is the ultimate cause of the fall, but not the proximate cause of the fall. Man is the proximate cause. There is nothing wrong with going on a boat ride, or making a sandwich and putting on the counter. Matt's falling would not have happened if he had stayed seated... and the dog would not have been in trouble if he had stayed on the floor.
By the way, the "morphine" thing is also a little off.
God transforms the will, such that the Christian wills to assist and be assisted. The "morphine" analogy suggests that God merely tranquilizes a rebellion (as though the person is still unwilling (still resisting mentally), but unable to act on his will.
I understand that the morphine isn't a perfect analogy. It works, in that is overcomes our resistance and in some sense works from the inside out. But it doesn’t work in every respect. The problem is that there’s nothing analogous. God’s work in man is a one of a kind masterpiece. But the fact that it’s unique fuels the C/A debate, regarding understanding what‘s going on.
People don’t go around predetermining another persons actions or regenerating them. But perhaps we could come up with something a little closer than morphine. Hypnosis?
God bless,
Dan
But other than orchestrating the environment, George did not "make" Matt fall (or even stand up in the first place).
If Adam’s fall was predetermined, something causally determined the fall. It might have been something inside Adam (I.e. the way God created him), or it might have been the environment (i.e. the circumstance God made for him). Maybe it was the combination of the two. The way Adam was made, plus the environment he was in was sufficient to make him fall. So whether George makes the environment that causes Matt to fall out, or he makes Matt in such a way that Matt falls out, or some combination thereof, George makes Matt fall out.
If on the other hand, your really think that George didn’t make Matt fall and that Matt falls on his own, well… your LFW fan club card arrive in 7-10 business days (or 3 months during the holiday season).
Merry Christmas,
Dan
LFW is not the only option. You speak as though it is EITHER puppetry OR libertarian free will.
But Matt could have fallen out of the boat entirely on his own volition, and yet still not have been able "to do otherwise".
This also need not be the result of God creating Matt in such away such that "Matt" is somehow defective.
Consider that it is simply inherent to "being a creature" (as in, "simply being not God")... that the creature will fall away from God when given the opportunity.
This will be all 'till after Santa arrives. :)
My daughter pleasantly surprised me with this thought on Christmas: God gave, so we give. Pretty profound for a 10 year old...
I added your analogy into the orginal post.
I will be offline till the new year.
God be with you,
Dan
God be with you,
Dan
Therein lies the problem with Arminianism - they don't view man as being dead in his sins despite the clear testimony of Scripture.
But man is dead in his sins. He is unable to believe, he doesn't have eternal life and he is under the sentence of death. The difference between Arminians and Calvinists is not total depravity, but rather resistible vs. irresistible grace.
God be with you,
Dan
God be with you,
Dan