Reading what you wrote, I'd say you're infra.
I always considered myself leaning towards infra until I thought about some more in light of scripture. To me, infra and supra are the same, in light of the bigger questions that we are seeking the answers to. The order of events have no significance to God who is not bound by time. He is not reacting in time, making it up as time goes on. "From the foundations of the world" is just another way of saying that. Everything was made part of His decree at one time, even though we see these things play out in time. To illustrate... to me, the question being asked in the OP is... which came first, the chicken or the egg? My answer, in light of the bigger questions that we are seeking the answers to, is that it doesn't matter, because for God, from the foundations of the world, both were made part of His perfect plan at the same time. One is not a reaction to the other. Does that make sense? Maybe not the best illustration, but on short notice, that's the best I got.
:
Think about it this way...in your trying to determine the order of events "in time", per the question in the OP, what you are really asking is which event was decreed first, and then which decree was a reaction to the first event decreed, and so on. And in that way we can answer the tough questions easily. But God is not bound by time, see what I mean? Everything was decreed before the foundations of the world at one time.
Augustine taught double predestination:
[God] used the very will of the creature which was working in opposition to the Creator’s will as an instrument for carrying out His will, the supremely Good thus turning to good account even what is evil, to the condemnation of those whom in His justice he has predestined to punishment.
[The human] race we have distributed into two parts, the one consisting of those who live according to man, the other of those who live according to God. And these we also mystically call the two cities, or the two communities of men, of which the one is predestined to reign eternally with God, and the other to suffer eternal punishment with the devil.
Augustine uses the term "
predestined" (where I italicized it in his quote), incorrectly. I'd be willing to bet that there is an error in translation. The term that should have been used, which would have lined up perfectly with what he had just finished saying, is "ordained". Clearly, the message by Augustine is not of double predestination when we consider the whole context, but just the opposite. I would check the translation.
In looking at his statement closer, the "whom in His justice" really changes the context. Do you see it? In other words, the predestine is after the fact of sin and just judgment. Whether or not the sin was effectual or permissive does not appear to be included in the context of the statement.
It's like saying God, being all knowing, from the foundations of the world, justly judged the sin that He knew would happen and not be overcome in Him. From that point forward, these are rightly judged (from the foundations of the world) and from that point "predestined to suffer eternal punishment". The predestine doesn't deal with the cause of sin. The context is smaller.
Martin Luther taught double predestination:
"All things whatever arise from, and depend on, the divine appointment; whereby it was foreordained who should receive the word of life, and who should disbelieve it; who should be delivered from their sins, and who should be hardened in them; and who should be justified and who should be condemned."
Ordained, or foreordained, allows for both God's effectual and permissive will. Unless I don't understand the term correctly.
As Scripture, then, clearly shows, we say that God once established by his eternal and unchangeable counsel . . . those whom he had determined once for all to receive into salvation, and those whom, on the other hand, he would devote to destruction. We assert that, with respect to the elect, this counsel was founded upon his freely given mercy, without regard to human worth; but by his just and irreprehensible but incomprhensible judgement [sic] he has barred the door of life to those whom he has given over to damnation. Now among the elect we regard the call as a testimony of election. Then we hold justification another sign of its manifestation, until they come into the glory in which the fulfillment of election lies. But as the Lord seals his elect by call and justification, so, by shutting off the reprobate from knowledge of his name or from the sanctification of his Spirit, he, as it were, reveals by these marks what sort of judgment awaits them. (Richard A. Muller, “Christ And The Decree: Christology And Predestination In Reformed Theology From Calvin To Perkins,†22 quoting John Calvin, Institutio christianae religionis II (Geneva, 1559).
I think that you may be reading into this statement more than what is being said.
"
but by his just and irreprehensible but incomprhensible judgement [sic] he has barred the door of life to those whom he has given over to damnation."
A just action, not a meritless punishment. What is the source of man's bondage to sin? It can be traced back to Adam, we all sinned in Adam, who we also know was not bound by any sinful nature before he fell, therefore we must assume a free choice. To assume that God effectually caused Adam to sin, and thus the fall, would be reading more into scripture than it says, and in many way contrary to the plain teaching of scripture, that God is perfectly just, righteous, and Holy, Who cannot even be in the presence of sin. If God caused Adams sin, He would then be none of these, right?
BTW, just so people don't misunderstand what i'm saying. This free will argument i'm making from Adam, does not apply to all mankind. That's easy enough to see, right?
If everything God willed was effectual, then I would start with Genesis 50:20 and ask, did not God mean it for both evil and good?
If everything God willed was effectual, the Arminians would have a valid argument when they claim that this would then make man a robot.
Ultimately, when we ask from scripture to reveal when and where evil began and then snowballed from, scripture takes us to Satan, who we also have no valid reason from scripture to believe that he was effectually made to do these evil things. Satan is where evil and sin began. There is no proof in scripture to say that God effectually caused Satan to sin. In fact, as I already stated, this would be contrary to the simple truths of scripture, that God is perfectly Holy, just and righteous.
Likewise, the question of who is responsible for man's state of bondage to sin by nature? The answer can be traced back to Adam and no further. Adam who freely sinned. To assume God caused Adam to sin effectually would be contrary to scripture. God justly created man in bondage to sin by nature as a result of Adam's sin which He did not effectually cause.
If i'm not making any sense, tell me. It won't be the first time.
