Featured How many here hold to the heresy of Pelagianism

rsr, based on the following definition of Pelagianism, can you identify which characteristics would apply to semiPelagianism? Additionally, where these groups of American Christians major denominations or splinter groups?

Being that this is a new concept to me, I am trying to be more informed.

Thanks for sharing.

Ministry and Music - Seeking the Old Paths: Definitions of terms
Pelagian/Pelagianism
Pelagius combatted the doctrine of original sin. He and his followers framed these six doctrines for example:
1. That Adam would have died even if he had not sinned
2. That the sin of Adam injured himself, not the human race
3. That newborn children are in the same condition as Adam was before the Fall; that infants have eternal life
4. That the whole human race does not die because of Adam's death or sin, nor will it rise again because of Christ's resurrection
5. That the Old Testament Law, as well as the New Testament Gospel, gives entrance to heaven
6. That even before the coming of Christ there were men who were entirely without sin.
(It should be noted that some present day “Arminians” are followers of Pelagius rather than Arminius on the ideas of original sin and depravity.)

 

5. Pelagius believed that the soul of man by creation is neither holy nor sinful.

According to Pelagius, Adam was not created holy. He was not constitutionally inclined either toward good or evil. He was morally indifferent or neutral. In this state of moral equilibrium, Adam was no more disposed to good than to evil. Pelagius argued that if Adam had possessed any moral character prior to moral action, his moral responsibility would be destroyed.

Because he was a creature, Adam's body was mortal. That is to say, it was Adam's destiny to die physically whether or not he ever sinned. Physical death, therefore, is not a penalty for sin passed on to Adam's posterity, but is rather an inevitable corollary to man's essential character as created.

6. Adam's fall was occasioned by the exercise of free will.

In Pelagius’s thinking, there was nothing in Adam's nature, either for good or ill, that inclined him in the decision he made. Furthermore, Adam's sin in no way affected his posterity except insofar as it set a bad example for them. Referring to Paul's statement in Romans 5:12, Pelagius insisted that "It is said we sinned in Adam, not because sin is innate, but because it comes from imitation [emphasis mine].”2

Consequently, all men come into being in the exact condition as was Adam before the fall. Pelagius believed each soul is created immediately by God and thus cannot come into the world contaminated or corrupted by the sin of Adam. The doctrine of transmitted sin (tradux peccati) or original sin (peccatum originis), says Pelagius, is blasphemous.:

"A sin propagated by generation is totally contrary to the catholic faith. Sin is not born with man, but is committed afterwards by man. It is not the fault of nature, but of free will."

10 Things You Should Know about Pelagius and Pelagianism

 

The specific issue however is the claim that infants are born sinless and/or neutral, which is a direct claim of Pelagian and therefore it makes the person at the Baptist Board who claims that specific view...a Pelagian.

 

It is a part of Pelagians belief, therefore it is Pelagian theology.
I understand that most evangelicals, probably you included, are semi-pelagian and synergists in your understanding. However, nearly every synergist/semi-pelagian I have met has confirmed humans being born with a sin nature. The person who I addressed on this board declares that humans are not born with a sin nature and thus are sinless at birth. That is a distinct Pelagian position not found in semi-pelagians that I have met.

 

Look at you the warmed over Catholic. Hehehehehehehe
MB

 

"Orthodoxy" changes, Jon, depending on who is asked.

I often find that "Orthodoxy" is defined rather broadly, and includes many things that I consider false.
In other words, to me what is orthodox is defined by the largest group of professing Christians.

As I see it, the very fact that orthodoxy contains varying views, shows that it is based on a range of opinions and not a definite set of truths.

Pelagianism is well-defined and that definition can be found anywhere, if one wants to study it.

However, I also recognize that God's children can be carried about with every wind of doctrine ( Ephesians 4 ), so those that hold to unbiblical beliefs will be guided into the truth of them at some point in their lives the more they study His word.

Having a certain set of beliefs about the Bible does not necessarily make a person unsaved.
But I would say that if they never grow beyond that, and continue all their lives in error, then to me that is an evidence of not having the Holy Spirit.

Agreed.

Pelagius taught many things, not just denying "original sin" ( The "Federal Headship" of Adam and the taint of sin passed on through our natures through birth process ).
His view of salvation put man at the center, and God as the servant.

I can't speak for Austin, but I'm often accused of fatalism by members on this board.
I'm also aware that accusations fly around all over the place, and that my best course of action would be to simply state what I believe from the Scriptures without trying to offend anyone.


But, going back to why I think I'm accused of fatalism, is because I take literally many of the statements that God makes, and accept them in my own thinking...
For example:

" A man's heart deviseth his way: but the LORD directeth his steps." ( Proverbs 16:9 ).
" [There are] many devices in a man's heart; nevertheless the counsel of the LORD, that shall stand." ( Proverbs 19:21 ).
" The preparations of the heart in man, and the answer of the tongue, [is] from the LORD." ( Proverbs 16:1 ).
" O LORD, I know that the way of man [is] not in himself: [it is] not in man that walketh to direct his steps." ( Jeremiah 10:23 ).

" And all the inhabitants of the earth [are] reputed as nothing: and he doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and [among] the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou?" ( Daniel 4:35 ).



As for Pelagianism versus Semi-Pelagianism, to me there is a fine line even though they differ in some respects...
But they are both in error, Scripturally.

 

I see many Scriptures that disagree with these points.
For example:

1) Adam would have died ( physically, not spiritually ) even if he had not sinned. I agree based on Genesis 3:22-23. Adam and Eve would have lived forever if they had eaten of the Tree of Life.

2) The sin of Adam injured everyone. I see this in Romans 5:12-14, where spiritual death was passed on to all men through Adam's sin, not physical death. I also see the effects of it in Psalms 58:3, and Romans 1:18-32 as well as John 3:18-19 and many other places.

3) Newborn children are dead in trespasses and sins as soon as they be born ( Psalms 58:3, Romans 3:10-18, Romans 3:23 ). There is none righteous, no not one.

4) The whole human race will die, physically, because Adam and Eve did not eat of the Tree of Life. The whole human race will rise again in two resurrections...the first unto eternal life, and the second to stand at the judgment. The second death is to be cast into the Lake of Fire ( Revelation 20:11-15 ).

5) The Old Testament Law was never intended to lead to God's grace in anything other than the earthly sense. It was given to a specific people and contained earthly blessings as well as earthly cursings. It was a covenant made between the Lord and His chosen nation of Israel ( and those Gentiles who joined themselves to Israel ). It's purpose for God's children was only ever to lead them to Jesus Christ and His sacrifice for them. It is the schoolmaster to show them their need for a Saviour, and nothing more.

6) There is none that does not sin among men ( Psalms 10:4, Romans 3:10-18, Romans 3:23, Ecclesiastes 7:20, etc. ). Therefore, there are no sinless persons except the Lord Jesus. He is the only Person who never sinned ( 2 Corinthians 5:21 ).


From my perspective, Pelagius had the answers right in front of him and didn't see them.

 

Again, Jon...I don't look at "orthodoxy" the way you seem to.

To me, it's not what's "under the umbrella", but what's in the light of God's truth, based on His every word.

Agreed, to an extent.

I see a big difference between what are known as "Calvinists" ( whether or not they believe the TULIP by tradition, or by their own independent reading of the Scriptures ) and "Fatalists":

With "Calvinism", God is sovereign and man is responsible;
God sovereignly elects, and man rebelliously rejects God's commands with all his being, even though completely responsible for our sins.
Until God works on the deadness within us, no man will ever seek God.
Plus, He does that only for His elect.

With "Fatalism", God is sovereign, and does whatever He wants to...whether it's just or unjust, and man's responsibility gets thrown "under the bus", so to speak.
The fatalist claims that everything, good or bad, happens as a direct result of God's sovereign decree, and men are puppets on the string.
They are unwilling objects that do His every whim and not responsible for their sins.


I see the Bible clearly teaching "Calvinism", at least in the TULIP.
Men are not "puppets", but responsible and rebellious creatures that have walked into the "barn door" of sin on our own, and love that "barn door".

We snuggle up to it because we are unwilling to let it go.
We are not unwilling objects.

 

I see "Pelagianism" and "Semi-Pelagianism" essentially like this:

Pelagius taught that man can approach God whenever, wherever.
We as men are "free moral agents" not tainted by sin, until we actually commit sin.

"Semi-Pelagianism" softens this by stating that only with God's grace are ALL ( not just the elect ) men made "free moral agents", and without it, we are rebellious sinners that will only ever choose evil.
With God's grace, we are then "released" and pop back to "neutral bouyancy" until we sink ourselves at the end of our lives with something known as "final rejection".
To me, "Semi-Pelagianism" literally permeates most of the visible churches.

I see neither of these in my reading of His word, and consider both to be the inventions of men.
Rather, I see that men are rebellious, and then after regeneration will be willing in our spirits to do the will of God and to seek Him.

Our filthy flesh is a problem until our physical deaths.

 

I agree with your statement.

One's beliefs as a Christian should never be stomped on ( and I say this having participated in some of that "stomping" in the past, and hopefully not ever again ), but rather investigated and lovingly corrected from a Scriptural standpoint.

Someone coming into an assembly with the intention of drawing away people after themselves with a false doctrine or set of doctrines, should be admonished twice and then rejected as being divisive ( Titus 3:9-11 ).
However, this is not a local assembly, it is a forum.
And, like it or not, there are going to be many views represented here.

In this respect, those that participate should do so while respecting the feelings of the other person, even while maintaining their own position.
This keeps things from becoming an angry free-for-all and a jungle, to boot.

The rules are different here than in a local assembly, like it or not...
And I knew that coming in.

But the reality of it took a while to sink in.