Semi-Pelagianism

[Moriah]

That leaves me with SBC and Anglican. Nearest conservative Anglican church is an hour's drive. So, I guess that leaves only SBC. But I don't know if I can abide the teachings on depravity, OSAS, penal substitution, and women's subjugation. These things drove me away from Baptists and almost from Christianity. Thus my dilemma.

Michael,

I have been reading posts of yours for a while now, and you seem to be very knowledgeable about many different denominations.

There was a time when I searched for the perfect church to attend. I have since realized that a true believer does not have to attend a church. Being a Christian is about a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, the Spirit of God and Jesus living inside our heart all the time, every moment of the day and night.

It is a blessing to live in times where we can get Bibles easily. We have a Bible, so we can study the Word of God anywhere we go. We can also go on the Internet and debate with others, which really gets us motivated to study and prove our beliefs.

We can all day everyday commune with God and Jesus by living through the Spirit. By getting Jesus’ teachings, and obeying what he says.

I just wanted to say that to you.
God bless.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

I believe it is the truth concerning Augustine. You can answer your own questions in any manner you so choose in regard to anyone else. :thumbs:

 

[Michael Wrenn]

Michael,

I have been reading posts of yours for a while now, and you seem to be very knowledgeable about many different denominations.

There was a time when I searched for the perfect church to attend. I have since realized that a true believer does not have to attend a church. Being a Christian is about a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, the Spirit of God and Jesus living inside our heart all the time, every moment of the day and night.

It is a blessing to live in times where we can get Bibles easily. We have a Bible, so we can study the Word of God anywhere we go. We can also go on the Internet and debate with others, which really gets us motivated to study and prove our beliefs.

We can all day everyday commune with God and Jesus by living through the Spirit. By getting Jesus’ teachings, and obeying what he says.

I just wanted to say that to you.
God bless.

I appreciate your post, and I agree with what you have said. Thank you for writing it to me.

It's just that I miss in-person fellowship with other believers.

Yes, I am thoroughly familiar with many denominations -- from many years of studying them, and visiting their churches.

 

[Michael Wrenn]

HP: If man is a sinner due to the lack of ability, he might be pitied but never blamed. God blames men for their sin.

Why would you find this statement so disagreeable to what you must believe? Can you show us from Scripture where sin is said to be the results of inability, and if so, can one justly be punished for simply acting in accordance to irresistible influences of fate?

Is man to be blamed and punished eternally for doing something even God cannot do, i.e., act contrary to necessitated fate?

You make good points.

However, I believe that the human will is weakened and damaged, and thus not only can we not live a sinless life by a matter of using our human will, I don't believe we can live a sinless life even with the help and grace of God -- not because we are totally depraved but because we cannot be restored in this life to the state of Adam's will before the Fall. That's why I don't believe in entire sanctification in this life. Our wills and our spirits are damaged and won't be completely restored until we reach heaven. Further, our spirits are united with imperfect bodies, residing in a fallen world.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Michael, what does God require of thee?

 

[DHK]

Michael, what does God require of thee?

What does God require of you, HP?

 

[The Biblicist]

Michael, what does God require of thee?

That question from the biblical perspective was not directed to lost people but to professing people of God.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK: What does God require of you, HP?

HP: Are you spamming the list?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Biblicist: That question from the biblical perspective was not directed to lost people but to professing people of God.

HP: I fully recognize Michael as being saved. Relax Biblicist. Michael is well capable of answering my question without anyones help or instruction.

 

[The Biblicist]

That question from the biblical perspective was not directed to lost people but to professing people of God.

This thread confuses the basics of salvation. First, identify who the Savior is. Second identify who is the object of salvation. Third, consider if your soteriology demands a "co-savior"?

Both Pelagianism and semi-peleganism require a "co-savior" soteriology as they both make salvation co-dependent upon both God and man thus making God and man - co-saviors.

What needs to be saved in man is his will as it is his will that alone stands in the way. If the will is in reality the immediate object of salvation then it is neither he that runneth or he that willeth but God that sheweth mercy and thus God alone is Savior and there is no co-partnership saviors.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Biblicist: Both Pelagianism and semi-peleganism require a "co-savior" soteriology as they both make salvation co-dependent upon both God and man thus making God and man - co-saviors.

HP: That is simply a lie, without the slightest shred of truth to it.

Michael, do you see how those either Calvinisitic or leaning hard towards Calvinism twist the truth in relationship to the beliefs of others? Pelagius was a victim of the same abuse.

Biblicist's clear inability to see the truth does not necessitate a 'co-savior' on my part.

 

[The Biblicist]

HP: That is simply a lie, without the slightest shred of truth to it.

Michael, do you see how those either Calvinisitic or leaning hard towards Calvinism twist the truth in relationship to the beliefs of others? Pelagius was a victim of the same abuse.

Biblicist's clear inability to see the truth does not necessitate a 'co-savior' on my part.

Is unbelief a sin? Did not Jesus come to save his people from their sins? Isn't unbelief the inclination of the will to resist and reject the truth? Doesn't your position require the will of man as a co-partner in salvation? Doesn't your position really define the human will as the real Savior as neither God or others can affect salvation apart from the will's permission?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Biblicist: Is unbelief a sin?

HP: Certainly it can be, but only AFTER ones receives clear light.

Biblicist: Did not Jesus come to save his people from their sins?

HP: Not according to the Calvinists and those leaning har towards Calvinism on this list. God saves them in their sins, not from their sins. Their own testimonies as to sinning everyday is living proof of their belief that God saves them in their sins, not from their sins.

Biblicist: Isn't unbelief the inclination of the will to resist and reject the truth?

HP: If unbelief is sin, is certainly is a willful product of the will.

Biblicist: Doesn't your position require the will of man as a co-partner in salvation?

HP: Nothing man does in any way is meritorious in nature. Something meritorious had to have been accomplished for God to set aside the penalty of sin. Although man is indeed involved in gaining salvation, man is not involved in any manner to merit the remarks by you as being "co-saviors" as you falsely suggest. Obeying the conditions God mandates for one to be saved is in no wise being a "co-savior" by any stretch of the imagination. There is only ONE Mediator between God and man, that is the Man Christ Jesus.

Biblicist: Doesn't your position really define the human will as the real Savior as neither God or others can affect salvation apart from the will's permission?

HP: No it does not. That is a false notion (a paper duck) you are setting up to shoot at without the least justification for it. Nothing new about that. Calvinists and those leaning hard towards Calvinism are the masters of false implications of others beliefs.

 

[Moriah]

This thread confuses the basics of salvation. First, identify who the Savior is. Second identify who is the object of salvation. Third, consider if your soteriology demands a "co-savior"? Both Pelagianism and semi-peleganism require a "co-savior" soteriology as they both make salvation co-dependent upon both God and man thus making God and man - co-saviors.

People can get the teachings of Buddha, and they can live their lives following the ways of Buddha.

People can get the teachings of Pagan Witches, and they can live their lives following the teachings of witches.

Any employer for any job can hire people, and the employees can follow the rules of their Company.

However, Biblicists wants us to believe that NNE can get the teachings of Jesus Christ and follow them. That is nonsense. WE HAVE TBEY GOD.

The Bible tells us that faith comes from hearing, from being taught, persuaded, and convinced.

What needs to be saved in man is his will as it is his will that alone stands in the way. If the will is in reality the immediate object of salvation then it is neither he that runneth or he that willeth but God that sheweth mercy and thus God alone is Savior and there is no co-partnership saviors.

When you quote the Bible and say, “but God that sheweth mercy…” that is an explanation of why God let the Gentiles be saved, even though the Gentiles did NOT RUN or even look for God, but they were found by God BECAUSE GOD HAD MERCY ON THE GENTILES.

Isaiah 65:1 "I revealed myself to those who did not ask for me; I was found by those who did not seek me. To a nation that did not call on my name, I said, 'Here am I, here am I.'

Romans 10:16 But not all the Israelites accepted the good news. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed our message?” 17 Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ. 18 But I ask: Did they not hear? Of course they did:
“Their voice has gone out into all the earth,
their words to the ends of the world.”
19 Again I ask: Did Israel not understand? First, Moses says,
“I will make you envious by those who are not a nation;
I will make you angry by a nation that has no understanding.”
20 And Isaiah boldly says,
“I was found by those who did not seek me;
I revealed myself to those who did not ask for me.”
21 But concerning Israel he says,
“All day long I have held out my hands
to a disobedient and obstinate people.”

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

In the prisoner illustration I have given concerning a pardon, the will of the prisoner is indeed involved, without which no pardon can be safely granted. Does that mean that the one receiving a pardon is a 'co-governor' in granting the pardon because the will of the prisoner is involved in certain conditions necessary for a pardon to be granted?

Some on this list need to start thinking right about religion again.

 

[Amy.G]

I have since realized that a true believer does not have to attend a church.

Hebrews 10:25
not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as is the manner of some, but exhorting one another, and so much the more as you see the Day approaching.

 

[The Biblicist]

In the prisoner illustration I have given concerning a pardon, the will of the prisoner is indeed involved, without which no pardon can be safely granted. Does that mean that the one receiving a pardon is a 'co-governor' in granting the pardon because the will of the prisoner is involved in certain conditions necessary for a pardon to be granted?

Some on this list need to start thinking right about religion again.

Personally I don't like "religion." I prefer a "relationship" to any "religion." I like "fellowship" and "fellowship" is not with a "religion" but with a Person. In addition, I need "fellowship" with someone who will never leave me or forsake me, that is, One who is committed to my salvation based upon unconditional love and in spite of myself.

You can have your "religion." Your whole analogy hinges upon a complete falsehood. The falsehood is that any sinner is seeking a pardon. Paul was not seeking a pardon on the road to Damascus but seeking to persecute Christ. That is not my view but that is Christ's own evaluation of what Paul was seeking. Salvation is a revelation of Christ based upon God's timing and good pleasure rather than our timing or pleasure and it is effectual in calling the sinner out of spiritual darkness into light (Gal. 1:15-16).

15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called me by his grace,
16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:


As far as Christ coming to save his people from their sins. That is his ultimate objective as the term salvation covers far more ground than merely a past tense "saved" but also "save"and the future tense "shall save" and so to say that simply because we don't believe in the silly position that one is immediately saved from sin in all of its consequences, power and presence is to seriously pervert not only our position but a complete perversion of the scriptures.

 

[The Biblicist]

However, Biblicists wants us to believe that NNE can get the teachings of Jesus Christ and follow them. That is nonsense. WE HAVE TBEY GOD.

It is hardly worth responding to you, because your presuppositions are based upon nothing better than budhism, hinduism, Catholicism which all are faith plus works salvation type religions. Yours is no different.

The Bible tells us that faith comes from hearing, from being taught, persuaded, and convinced.

Romans 10:17 says no such thing. The term used is "rhema" rather than "logos." Logos is the normal term for simply the "word" but rhema is distinguished from "logos" in that it incoporates the idea of the word expressed as a COMMAND. That "command" in regard to the gospel when it comes to a person in saving power is clearly stated by Paul in 2 Cor. 4:6 and likened unto Genesis 1:3 where God commanded light out of darkness. However, that is above your comprehension level so no need to say anything more.

When you quote the Bible and say, “but God that sheweth mercy…” that is an explanation of why God let the Gentiles be saved,

What an absolute falsehood! What a complete jerking a text out of its immediate context and forcing it into another text two chapters later. In context Paul is applying this EQUALLY to both Jews and Gentiles (v. 24). In context this is referring to all whom God will save as the potter over fallen mankind whether Jew or Gentile (v. 24).

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Michael, I could have asked you if you believe that God requires an impossibility from you, and if not what command is it that you do not believe you can follow and why? What is entire sanctification about other than simply obedience to the known will of God in a consistent manner?

I have never heard one person in my lifetime say that it is impossible for one to sin, even if they are entirely sanctified. Should it not be, as our normal Christian walk, a walk of consistent obedience? Do you honestly feel that is impossible to achieve? if so, why? Why is that not a sanctified walk?

Will we allow the naysayers and the accusers of the brethren try to intimidate us into confessing that God is not able and willing to help us walk holy before Him? Will we defy that God is able and willing to succor obedience in those that will yield their hearts in faith for Him to accomplish in us a consistent life of being an over comer? Will we be found guilty of having a form of godliness but denying the power thereof?


Are we not aware by now how the Calvinist and those leaning hard towards Calvinism will falsely accuse and malign any and all that would suggest God is able and willing to grant us a holy walk with Him if we will by faith trust Him? Is not a consistent holy walk by faith nothing less than living a sanctified life? Certainly if one claims they cannot sin, I would find issue with such a statement, but again I have only heard of one person that I have known (among hundreds if not thousands of believers who believe in total sanctification) and that person was not one that had seriously thought through the statement they had made. Perfectionism, in that one never does or never will sin, is nothing more than an accusation to paint one believing in walking in a holy manner in the worse possible light, again suggesting that it is impossible for one to sin, when that in reality is not the case.

FWIW, I am aware of the verse in John saying that one 'cannot' sin. That is yet another discussion in and of itself.

 

[Moriah]

Hebrews 10:25
not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as is the manner of some, but exhorting one another, and so much the more as you see the Day approaching.

Do you go to a church building every day to encourage other Christians?

Hebrews 3:13 But encourage one another daily, as long as it is called Today, so that none of you may be hardened by sin’s deceitfulness.

Hebrews 10:25 Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another—and all the more as you see the Day approaching.