Despre bioterapie

[delia31]

În prealabil postat de ioanna

sa ne facem incalzirea intre timp :)

Calvinistic predestination is sometimes referred to as "double predestination." This is the view that God chose who would go to heaven, and who to hell, and that his decision will infallibly come to pass. The difference between elect and reprobate is not in themselves, all being equally unworthy, but in God's sovereign decision to show mercy to some, to save some and not others. However, an important note is made that human free will is still in effect, therefore the reprobate is still rightly responsible for any sins committed. It is called double predestination because it holds that God chose both whom to save and whom to damn, as opposed to single predestination which contends that though he chose whom to save, he did not choose whom to damn.

Reformed Calvinists emphasise the active nature of God's decree to choose those foreordained to eternal wrath, yet at the same time the passive nature of that foreordination. This is possible because most Reformed Calvinists hold to an Infralapsarianism view of God’s decree. In that view, God, before Creation, in His mind, first decreed that the Fall would take place, before decreeing election and reprobation. So God actively chooses whom to condemn, but because He knows they will have a sinful nature , the way He foreordains them is to simply let them be (He doesn't need to do anything) - this is sometimes called "preterition." Therefore this foreordination to wrath is passive in nature (unlike God's active predestination of His elect where He needs to overcome their sinful nature).

sursa: http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/top...on_(Calvinism))

Mersi Ioana, dar sa-l lasam mai bine pe Scot sa ne explice el all the whys and wherefores.

@Scot
Scot, please enlighten me!
Te-as ruga, sa integrezi in explicatiile tale, cand crezi tu ca e momentul potrivit (pana atunci nu), si ce anume inseamna infralapsarianism.

Inteleg ca acest concept exista in opozitie cu supralapsarianismul si e legat de timing, adica de succesiunea momentelor: alegere-creatie-cadere sau altfel.

Nedumerirea mea e: ce criterii au sustinatorii acestor teorii pt. a determina succesiunea evenimentelor in metafizicul transcendent nesupus timpului in care e Dumnezeu? Ce criterii au folosit in elaborarea acestor concepte, pt.
a-L integra pe Cel Neintegrabil in categoriile noastre temporale "inainte" si "dupa", ce instrumente de sondat Insondabilul au avut la indemana?
Cum se impaca intre ei sustinatorii infralapsarianismului cu cei ai supralapsarianismului?


Mersi si scuze daca e o intrebare tampita si daca am facut supozitii nefondate.