Once again it appears you know little of the subject.
Pelagianisms core view.. that which all the rest of the view stands upon:
That man has the capacity to seek God in and of himself apart from any movement of God or Divine aid, and therefore that salvation is effected by man's efforts. (a reward for his efforts)
You're not reading Allan.
I said this in the very post to which you are responding:
On the other hand you do believe very similarly to the semi-pelagians- I didn't say identically. A difference you nameless guys claim is that you believe in prevenient grace to help the sinner choose God.
Try to pay attention, OK?
From Theopedia on Semi-Pelagianism:
Semi-Pelagianism, a moderated form of Pelagianism, taught that man has retained the ability to seek God in and of himself apart from any movement of God's grace.
Yea, like I said- Try to pay attention.
From Monergism.com (from source: Differences between Semi-Pelagianism and Arminian Beliefs)
[Semi-Pelagianism]
While not denying the necessity of Grace for salvation, Semi-Pelagianism maintains that the first steps towards the Christian life are ordinarily taken by the human will and that Grace supervened only later
Yep, try to pay attention there, Allan. It would have saved you a lot of pointless typing and copying and pasting.
Carm on Semi-Pel
The semi-Pelagian teaches that man can make the first move toward God by seeking God out of his own free will and that man can cooperate with God's grace even to the keeping of his faith through human effort. This would mean that God responds to the initial effort of person and that God's grace is not absolutely necessary to maintain faith.
And yet more illustration of your need to read posts thoroughly before responding.
and others as well I can call up.. not to mention of course Wiki, but do I really need to bring that link up
Nor should you have wasted our time bringing up what you DID bring up.
All of these convey the same point. In short, man can seek after God apart from any divine influence or aid, but man needs grace in order to be saved, which God grants after man has initially come.
And that is the ONLY point at which you and the semi-pelagians disagree.
So you are for all practical purposes a semi-pelagian. That is what best describes you.
The only difference you ave cited is the one I had already cited for you- you adhere to prevenient grace.
So, the best thing we who actually HAVE a theology can call you people is "slightly modified semi-pelagians".
It is important ti understand the above this is what is meant by the commonly used statement - injured will, in that the will that is injured does cause him to stumble but he does not need God to aid him in his initial coming.. but since he is 'injured' he must be helped the rest of the way.
No. This is pretty darn near close to what you people keep saying here on bb.
You do not believe that man is so totally depraved that God has to do ALL the work.
You believe that he is damaged greatly by the fall and needs God's help.
That is semi-pelagianism and that is what you believe.
Just embrace it Allan. It's BASICALLY what you are.
The only difference is that you think he needs a little MORE help from God than the classical semi-pelagian believes he needs from God.
Thus the cooperation referred to here is man finishing his work to be saved. He needs God only to help him over the finish line -so-to-speak... but nothing more.
Nope. You made that up. But nice try.
It is of note that Calvinism or Reformed theology is 'exactly' the same as Arminianism and Non-Cal views regarding mans salvation.
Boy- you missed that one!
Look up the terms synergism and monergism. There could not hardly be more opposing soteriologies.
In that God not only will not but can not save any man, until that man chooses to allow God to. No matter how one wishes to cut this piece of pie, God saves man upon mans consent and never apart from it.
Well that's, not surprisingly, EXACTLY how the semi-pelagian cuts this "slice of pie".
The use of the term 'cooperation' is what muddies the waters there as it does not properly convey what Semi-Pel believes the cooperation entailed and what Cals and Arm believe it entails.
Yes it does. And it conveys EXACTLY what you believe. So embrace it.
To compare this view to Arminianism or Non-Cal theology.. is silly at best and willful slander at worst.
Not according to the research that you just did.
People who know better than you- people who are professional theologians say what I am saying.
Then there's what you are saying which basically NOBODY says.
You do realize that there are more variations of Calvinism than Baptist denominations.. it is hard to nail you all down as there is no specific statement of faith for you either. There are various ones for various versions and various interpretations of various views.
Bull. Prove this.
There are extraordinarily SLIGHT variations between true Calvinists.
Stuff as minor as lapsarian view points divide true Calvinists.
True Calvinists can ascribe to 90 percent or better of the Westminster Confession or the 1689 Baptist Confession.
What on EARTH do you people ascribe to???
