libterm.com Amyraldism presents a unique approach within Reformed theology by emphasizing God's universal grace while maintaining the doctrine of election. It teaches that Christ's atonement is sufficient for all but efficient only for the elect, balancing God's justice and mercy. Explore the rest of the article to understand how Amyraldism shapes your perspective on salvation and divine sovereignty.
Table of Comparison
| Aspect | Amyraldism | Infralapsarianism |
|---|---|---|
| Theological Position | Hypothetical universalism within Reformed theology | Order of divine decree after the fall of humanity |
| Divine Decree Sequence | God wills salvation for all hypothetically, chooses elect specifically | God permits the fall first, then elects individuals to salvation |
| View on the Fall | Allows Christ's atonement to be offered to all, effective only for elect | Fall occurs before election, election follows God's permissive decree of sin |
| Atonement Scope | Universal atonement potential, limited in application | Particular atonement intended only for the elect |
| Theological Origin | Named after Moses Amyraut, 17th-century French Reformed theologian | Developed within classical Calvinism, emphasizes decree order |
| Impact on Election Doctrine | Frames election with a universal salvific will, but limited efficacy | Defines election as a predestination after the fall |
Introduction to Amyraldism and Infralapsarianism
Amyraldism and Infralapsarianism are distinct theological views within Reformed Calvinism regarding the order of God's decrees in salvation. Amyraldism, also known as hypothetical universalism, posits that God decreed to provide salvation universally through Christ's atonement, contingent on faith, emphasizing a conditional offer of grace. Infralapsarianism arranges God's decrees by placing the decree of the fall (lapsus) before election and reprobation, suggesting God permitted the fall before deciding who would be saved or condemned.
Historical Background of the Doctrines
Amyraldism emerged in the 17th century as a moderate Calvinist doctrine championed by Moise Amyraut at the University of Saumur, proposing a hypothetical universal atonement balanced with God's sovereign election. Infralapsarianism, rooted in Reformed scholasticism earlier in the 16th century, articulates God's decree of election occurring after the decree of the Fall (lapsus), positioning the order of divine decrees within Reformed theology. Both doctrines respond to the theological tension between divine sovereignty and human responsibility, shaping debates on predestination and atonement in post-Reformation Protestantism.
Key Figures and Theological Influences
Amyraldism, associated with theologians like Moise Amyraut, emphasizes a hypothetical universalism influenced by Reformed scholasticism and the desire to reconcile God's sovereignty with human responsibility. Infralapsarianism, endorsed by figures such as John Calvin and the Synod of Dort, positions God's decree of election logically after the permission of the fall, highlighting predestination within a fallen human condition. Theological influences on Amyraldism include covenant theology and Arminian challenges, whereas Infralapsarianism roots itself in Calvinist orthodoxy and the Augustinian tradition.
Core Beliefs of Amyraldism
Amyraldism asserts that God predestines salvation through a universal atonement available to all, emphasizing conditional election based on faith rather than unconditional election. It teaches that Christ's atonement is sufficient for everyone but effective only for believers, distinguishing it from strict Calvinist doctrines. This theological view maintains God's sovereignty while highlighting human responsibility in accepting salvation through faith.
Core Tenets of Infralapsarianism
Infralapsarianism posits that God's decree to allow the Fall precedes the election of some to salvation and the reprobation of others, emphasizing a logical order where the Fall is the basis for election and condemnation. This view holds that God first permits human sin, then elects individuals to salvation, thereby maintaining divine justice and sovereignty without compromising human responsibility. The core tenet centers on the divine decree sequence: creation, permission of the Fall, election, and then redemption through Christ.
Differences in the Divine Decree Order
Amyraldism posits a hypothetical universal atonement where God's decree to elect some individuals follows the decree to provide salvation through Christ for all, emphasizing conditional election based on foreseen faith. Infralapsarianism asserts a logical order where God's decree to allow the Fall precedes election and reprobation, situating election after God's permitting human sin. These differing perspectives reflect contrasting views on the sequence of God's decrees regarding creation, the Fall, Christ's work, and election, impacting theological interpretations of predestination and atonement.
View of the Extent of the Atonement
Amyraldism asserts a hypothetical universal atonement, teaching that Christ's sacrifice is sufficient for all humanity but efficient only for the elect, emphasizing God's universal intention to save all who believe. Infralapsarianism holds a particular atonement perspective, where God's decree to elect certain individuals for salvation occurs after the decree of the Fall, limiting the atonement's extent strictly to the elect. The contrast lies in Amyraldism's broader, conditional scope of atonement versus Infralapsarianism's narrower, definitive scope tied strictly to the elect from before the Fall.
Implications for Salvation and Election
Amyraldism posits a hypothetical universal atonement, asserting Christ's death is sufficient for all but effective only for the elect, emphasizing God's prevenient grace in salvation. Infralapsarianism maintains a logical order where God's election follows the decree to permit the Fall, highlighting God's sovereign choice to save some while passing over others. These theological frameworks shape divergent understandings of predestination, God's justice, and human responsibility in the doctrine of salvation and election.
Debates and Controversies in Reformed Theology
Amyraldism and Infralapsarianism represent distinct doctrinal positions within Reformed theology concerning the order of God's decrees in salvation, sparking significant debate over divine sovereignty and human responsibility. Amyraldism advocates a hypothetical universalism, positing that Christ's atonement is sufficient for all but efficient only for the elect, challenging strict particularism upheld by Infralapsarianism, which asserts God's decree of election follows the decree of the fall. These contrasting views fuel ongoing controversies on predestination, the extent of the atonement, and God's intentions in salvation history, influencing confessional formulations and denominational stances within the broader Reformed tradition.
Contemporary Relevance and Conclusion
Amyraldism and Infralapsarianism remain influential in contemporary theological debates regarding the order of God's decrees, particularly in discussions about divine sovereignty and human free will. Amyraldism's emphasis on conditional election offers a nuanced approach to grace that appeals to moderates seeking to reconcile predestination with universal atonement. Infralapsarianism maintains a traditional Calvinist framework, grounding God's election in His foreknowledge of the fall, which continues to shape Reformed confessional standards and pastoral teachings.
Amyraldism Infographic
