Review: Van Driel, Incarnation Anyway

I have a new book review up at the Center for Barth Studies on Edwin Chr. van Driel’s Incarnation Anyway: Arguments for Supralapsarian Christology. Here’s the opening paragraph of the review:
The debate between infralapsarianism and supralapsarianism is often treated as a matter of only historical interest. The perceived esotericism of the words and their connection to speculative flights of scholastic fancy have led many to believe that these positions are irrelevant to contemporary constructive theology. It is therefore much to Edwin van Driel’s credit that he demonstrates the significance of this debate for theological work today. The question raised by these two positions is whether “the incarnation is contingent upon sin” (4). Does the divine will to become incarnate logically precede or follow the will to allow sin? The majority report throughout Christian history has been the infralapsarian thesis that incarnation follows sin. That is, God would not have become incarnate had humanity not fallen into sin. Van Driel presents a case for the minority view that God would have become incarnate regardless.
Read the full review.


Bobby Grow said…
So Van Driel is a Scotist then.
Thanks for this, David. Very helpful.
B. Gilroy said…
Reading through your review (a lot of which went over my head) made me wonder if you had ever read C.S. Lewis's Perelandra?

In it Lewis gives a story form to supralapsarian speculation. He avoids as much as possible the difficulty of thinking about the possibility of humanity without sin by leaving human history as it has been and basing the speculations on a history of God's relationship with Venusians. At any rate it was a fun book.