Thursday, October 07, 2010

Lane Chaplin and I Discuss Amyraldianism

In the video embedded below (sorry, it's just audio + still images), Lane Chaplin and I discuss Amyraldianism. It's about an hour long. I hope it's helpful!
- TurretinFan


ChaferDTS said...

Hi TF. Thank you very much for that very intresting program you were on. A good folllow up to it for people would be a reading of Dr. Charles Hodge systematic theology which deals with historical Amyraldianism. It is very difficult to to find any works on historical Amyraldianism from their perspective these days. Most often their older works are out of print or old copies of it. What I know of it comes from second hand from what B.B. Warfield, Charles Hodge and John Owen on what they said regarding it in their writings.

natamllc said...


I suppose the hinge swings on who one views God to be and what He does and why?

I think one can understand it with this verse? Maybe not?:

Jas 2:19 You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe--and shudder!

Clearly the demons have a view of Our Creator and theirs that produces shuddering when viewing some quality of Who God is and what He does and why He does it when it relates to them and what they have done and become already.

"What was before Genesis 1:1?" Obviously, at least to me, the Elect Angels, Satan and those fallen creatures, [demons], who turned away from Our Creator.

The First Commandment is an Eternal Truth!

It is as though the priority for God is to establish the Eternal Purpose through the Church which brings Him glory. Everything created for this purpose establishes a proper relationship with the First Commandment.

Adam was formed from the dust of the earth, formed in the image of God. Everything created from or of this creation was created very good up and until that moment in time when Adam rebelled against the First Commandment of God. Then God's prophecy was fulfilled. Adam's sin effected the creation's curse from God upon it. Death is an unnatural being empowered by the rebellion of Adam.

Eve came from Adam the first Federal Head of humanity. As the first created being out of Adam, she was to pass onto his posterity through child bearing a Federal headship who is to establish the First Commandment. Being created in the image and likeness of Adam of God she reflects God's proper order of authority among mankind when exercised and upheld.


Now the Church comes from Christ in like manner as Eve comes from Adam. She comes into being by virtue of Her predestination and foreknowledge in Christ. All that Christ is She is as She represents God's covenant promised through inheritance.

Faith is that gift and substance and force that comes from God to guide the Elect into the "good works" prepared. One's new birth is by prior "election" predetermined and manifested by one's being born again.

Each Church member is brought into the predetermined eternal Inheritance by the same Grace, Faith and Truth; hence the eye cannot say to the hand, "I have no need of you" and so on.

When I view this line of reasoning this way I am able to embrace the idea or understanding of the devastation that followed Lucifer's "fall" from Grace, his turning against and away from God's First Commandment; and the following of those who also turned away from God to suffer the same fate in their future as Lucifer, eternal damnation. Their turning away from and against God's First Commandment, according to God, I suppose, is the unforgivable action Christ could not Mediate and therefore it brings an utter eternal damnation and destruction upon their error.

Where it breaks down for me is how that reflects upon Adam's "unelected" heritage, those who come into this world born of a woman?

Faith is a gift unmerited when given and if God does not give His creature that gift, they certainly would not have the view that Christ is their Mediator. It is not a natural virtue to view Christ as He is. It is a supernatural virtue that comes to those who are born again of water and the Spirit.

You and I and countless many others believe Christ is our Mediator only because God has elected us before the foundation of the world was laid. We can be reassured by that fact, that God has given us the "same" Faith so that we can and do believe Christ is our Mediator.

This is the issue picked up and argued, it seems to me, that the Amyraldian faith argues.

Here is something that did not come out clearly when listening to this conversation between you and Lane about Amyraldianism. So I would ask:

"does Amyraldianism embrace monergism"?

ChaferDTS said...

"does Amyraldianism embrace monergism"?

Yes they do. They in general agree with total depravity, uncondititional election and perservane of the saints. Though historical Amyraldianism had other problems besides their understanding and explaining the extent of the atonement. Some of them also had a problem related to the doctrine of imputation and possible problems with how they explain total depravity as well according to what I read in Dr. Charles Hodge Systematic Theology. To my knowledge there were some differences between the four point Calvinist ( Amyraldianism ) in England and those in France.

Andrew Suttles said...

Is it possible to download audio from the discussion. I don't want to sit in front of the computer for an hour, but I'd like to listen to it on my IPod.

Turretinfan said...

I was thinking the same thing. But I don't know of any audio file, sorry!

Godismyjudge said...

Nice program although I thought the part about the WCF could have been a bit more balanced. At lest, my understanding is that Baxter had some influence in the WCF's omission of statements such as "Christ died only for the elect" or "Christ did not die for the reporobate".

But that said, I did enjoy the discussion.

God be with you,

Anonymous said...

I converted the audio of this YouTube video into MP3 using so that I could listen to it on my iPod.

Anonymous said...

The MP3 version can be downloaded from

Turretinfan said...


I'm not aware of anyone who lists Baxter as being among the Westminster divines.