Was there ever a historical group rallying under the name Semi-Pelagians, though, or was that term always more of an accusatory name from opponents?
Semi Pelagianism
Discussion in 'Calvinism & Arminianism Debate' started by glad4mercy, Oct 13, 2016.
Page 2 of 7
-
-
It first appeared (negatively) in the Lutheran Formula of Concord (1577), though the beliefs it describes go back to the fourth century.
-
-
Martin Marprelate Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
And what does Hebrews 1:3 have to do with it? -
-
a. A person who is left to themselves is completely and hopelessly enslaved to sin. But the Gospel and the convicting ministry of the Spirit has the power to break all chains. When a person hears the Gospel and is drawn by the Father through the Spirit, they can respond by believing or they can resist the offer of pardon and release.
b. It differs from irresistable grace, because it can be rejected.
c. It is not synergistic because you are not adding anything to your salvation. You are receiving a gift. You are not adding any work or effectual power to your salvation. God did all the work and He provides all the power. Therefore, it is monergistic.
d. As far as Hebrews 1:3, Jesus did all the work in the cleansing of our sins. There is no work that we can do to cleanse ourselves. It is all His work -
-
The very thing which happens in the inner man of believers, will happen to every nan bodily. That's what Romans 5 is talking about, and why it has a universal ring to it in verse 18
That's the sense in which Jesus died for all men. -
As you wrote further, Jesus did all the work in cleansing our sins. That's the merit which we can't add to.
However, scripture also condemns works access. We access grace through faith (Rom 5:1). And it is contrasted against works in Galatians 3 - did you receive the Spirit by the works of the Law or by believing what you heard? Also in Romans 4:4-5 to the one who works, it is not counted as a gift but wages. But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness.
Those in Galatia weren't trying to say they didn't need Christ, they acknowledged the merit of His death but were falling into the view of access by works. Paul told them "you have fallen from grace, and Christ has become no benefit to you"
If you're trying to reach out and take the gift, you're working to access the gift, according to scripture.
The analogy of an organ transplant works better, imo.
The surgeon is doing all the work to implat the organ. The body doesn't work to accept the organ. If it matches, it's simply a seamless fit. But the body might reject the organ.
Now, some might see that as working at not rejecting, but it's not. -
Along this thought.
1 Cor 15:26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed (abolished, eliminated, done away) is death.
Will the death of Abel be destroyed?
Cain? -
-
I say all of that simply to point out that we agree insofar as trusting God and allowing some “mystery” to exist in election. While I believe Scripture repeatedly confirms unconditional election, I also know that the mind of God in choosing is far beyond anything I can truly grasp. Our goal should not be to understand the thoughts of God (they are beyond us) but to have that mind in us that is in Christ. Still, reading what God has revealed in Scripture, I cannot help but see both unconditional election and prevailing grace (I can’t see one without the other). Perhaps this is something of my own making, and perhaps the only way that I can understand the topic in my ignorance. If so, I wouldn’t be surprised for I’ve stood firmly on ground in the past that I now reject (I never claimed to be the sharpest tool).
But I keep coming back to election because I believe it the root of the disagreement (at least for me). The reason I believe in prevailing grace is because I believe election is unconditional (I rely quite a bit on immutability and God's words to Israel in Ezekiel 36 for support). So while I would never disagree that man must accept God’s grace in order for that grace to be effective, my argument remains that God works within the will of some men in such a way that the do accept that grace. -
Beza's Bible of 1556:
Library of Geneva
‘Semipelagianism’: The Origins of the Term -
seemed a lot of planning going on, but still inultimate sense God not even sure who would get saved! -
I am concerned that I am among the elect. I am concerned about what God has to say to the elect (both individually and corporately). I am less concerned about the opportunity that may or may not have existed for those who reject Christ. I certainly am not so concerned about the inner-workings of God's election that I would let it come between me and my brothers. That is not my job.But, like you, years of study has led me away from a belief in conditional election and a grace unto salvation that can be overcome by men.
That said, I am not sure that it is correct to ascribe to Arminianism the idea that God seeks man's permission to save them, or that man somehow nullified God's plans. I see this sometimes attributed to their belief (on this board we have seen this), and this is the ultimate "logical" conclusion that I would arrive at. But when I read the works of John Wesley this does not seem to be where he lands (at least not so easily). -
-
-
Who said anything about reaching out and taking the gift?
The Scripture says “DO NOT SAY IN YOUR HEART, ‘WHO WILLASCEND INTO HEAVEN?’ (that is, to bring Christ down), 7or ‘WHO WILL DESCEND INTO THEABYSS?’ (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead).” 8But what does it say? “THE WORD IS NEAR YOU,IN YOUR MOUTH AND IN YOUR HEART”—that is, the word of faith which we are preaching, 9that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved;
I don't see any works here. God did all the work by bringing Christ down from heaven, Christ died on the cross, and the Triune God raised Christ from the dead. SO we don't have to reach up into heaven, or reach down into the abyss, all we have to do is receive the FINISHED WORK OF GOD.
The surgeon/transplant analogy is pretty good there. Receiving the new nature from God is not working at not resisting. It is just a response. Not a work, not some sort of meritorious or efficacious striving, simply humbing yourself under the mighty hand of God. -
b. The sinner cannot accept apart from preceding grace, so the answer to the second part is no. This is because it leaves too much in the sinners hand. It is up to the sinner to accept or reject BASED UPON THE GRACE OF GOD that is working and drawing them. -
Page 2 of 7