Given the arguments I read on this board, I am tempted to ask the moderators to change the name of the section to Calvinism/Pelagianism, since may (but admittedly not all) of the pro-free-will arguments seem more Pelagian in nature than Arminian. Here is a question that may help you sort out where you really stand. This passage has been cited as part of an argument for the age of accountability: Isaiah 7 15 Curds and honey He shall eat, that He may know to refuse the evil and choose the good. 16 For before the Child shall know to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land that you dread will be forsaken by both her kings. My question is simply this: Given that there is a point at which most people learn how to refuse evil and choose good, does that also mean that they are capable - of their own free will, unassisted by grace or the Spirit of God - of refusing evil and choosing good? Are they able to know the difference but unable to do good unless assisted by grace? Are they able to know the difference but unable to do good unless first being regenerated by the Spirit? Given your answer, consider how it fits into these categories: 1. Pelagianism assumes that responsibility implies ability, and that if God commands a thing to be done, we are capable of doing it of our own free will. Grace may assist us in doing good, but it is not absolutely necessary. Man has the moral ability to do good without the assistance of grace. 2. Semi-Pelagianism assumes that man is fallen, but not totally. He has enough "good" ability left after the fall to move himself to willfully cooperate with grace. Grace is applied to every man in order to enable them to do good, but grace is only effective in producing good when men cooperate with grace by virtue of their own free will. 3. Arminianism assumes that man is totally fallen, and it is only by grace that they are able to do good. Grace is resistable, however, and man either chooses to cooperate with or resists grace of his own free will. The actual difference between Arminianism and Semi-Pelagianism on this point is mostly one of semantics. 4. Calvinism assumes that man does not of his own free will do any good. Calvinism also assumes that man is inherently under total bondage to sin and cannot possibly cooperate with grace of his own power. The only way man can cooperate with grace is if he is first liberated from his bondage to sin through regeneration by the Spirit. Once liberated, he is free from his slavery to sin and is able to cooperate with grace. (As a side note, his ability to cooperate with grace and do good is still impeded by the desires of the flesh, which is why men liberated from bondage to sin still commit sins.) So where do you really stand on this issue? Are you with the Pelagians, Semi-Pelagians, Arminians, or Calvinists?