Norm Geisler teaches Pelagianism?

[Van]

Which council of Calvinism declared the charge of semipelagianism could be used to slander any and all non-Calvinists, such as Dr. Geisler?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

According to The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (2nd edn), the semi-Pelagianism of the 4th and 5th centuries “maintained that the first steps toward the Christian life were ordinarily taken by the human will and that Grace supervened only later.”

Ohhhhhh Boy

 

[Van]

If God's grace of illumination comes before men of flesh respond in faith, why would a Calvinist make a charge of semi-pelagianism except for the purpose of slander?

Still waiting for the quote where Geisler says man can redeem himself. Perhaps like the King's Speech, we may have to wait a long time.

 

[preacher4truth]

Pelagianism teaches that man and his free will has the capability of redeeming himself and doing good apart from the work of the Holy Spirit. Man's nature is good. I am not sure exactly if Geisler teaches this, but based on some comments in CBF it would appear he may teach that or he may teach semi-Pelagianism. He basically says in the book that man can redeem himself and faith is not a gift given to the elect. These commets are very different than what John MacArthur teaches, and even what David Jeremiah teaches.

In Jeremiah's book God in You he says "The new birth has to happen to you from a force outside of you." He also makes other comments in his Born of the Spirit Chapter to indicate he believes that man cannot choose salvation apart from Divine aide. Also John MacArthur in Ashamed of the Gospel clearly saith faith is given to the elect. Very very different than what Geisler teaches.

So what say you?

I've never been a fan of David Jeremiah. His affiliation with TBN is telltale.

The Spirit is tantamount in salvation and it is He who initiates the process and quickens. Free will is a misnomer and has caused much trouble in 'the church' as freewill has absolutely nothing to do with soteriology. All glory is to God in salvation.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I've never been a fan of David Jeremiah. His affiliation with TBN is telltale.

The Spirit is tantamount in salvation and it is He who initiates the process and quickens. Free will is a misnomer and has caused much trouble in 'the church' as freewill has absolutely nothing to do with soteriology. All glory is to God in salvation.

Amen:applause:

 

[preacher4truth]

According to The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (2nd edn), the semi-Pelagianism of the 4th and 5th centuries “maintained that the first steps toward the Christian life were ordinarily taken by the human will and that Grace supervened only later.”

And there is much of your theological demise in a nutshell.

 

[quantumfaith]

I rather like the following for its simplicity and clarity.

http://marccortez.com/2010/11/20/synergism-is-not-semi-pelagianism/

 

[evangelist6589]

Please provide the quote of Dr. Geisler which says man can redeem himself, and faith is not a gift given to the elect.

P.196 second edition
Nowhere does the Bible teach that saving faith is a special gift of God only to a select few.

P.188
Along with the other elements of the extreme Calvinist tulip is a belief that faith is a gift of God given only a select group of people the elect.

p.188
A dead person cannot believe they insist he must first be made alive by God and given the faith to believe.

Oh looks like what he writes on p.193 in response to Acts 16:14 means that he is not what I claimed he was, so I was mistaken. Geisler thinks that the Holy Spirit convicts the entire world of sin, and this is true, however it is also true that only the elect will respond to the call to salvation and this Geisler does not agree. I am not sure if he read the passage because it says that the LORD opened her heart which indicates God changed her heart as she is of the elect.

 

[quantumfaith]

Oh looks like what he writes on p.193 in response to Acts 16:14 means that he is not what I claimed he was, so I was mistaken. Geisler thinks that the Holy Spirit convicts the entire world of sin, and this is true, however it is also true that only the elect will respond to the call to salvation and this Geisler does not agree. I am not sure if he read the passage because it says that the LORD opened her heart which indicates God changed her heart as she is of the elect.

So does this mean he, in your estimation is not now a SP, but simply has a different understanding of election than you?

 

[evangelist6589]

I've never been a fan of David Jeremiah. His affiliation with TBN is telltale.

The Spirit is tantamount in salvation and it is He who initiates the process and quickens. Free will is a misnomer and has caused much trouble in 'the church' as freewill has absolutely nothing to do with soteriology. All glory is to God in salvation.

You cant just take one instance in 2012 and say that he constantly fellowships with TBN as he does not, nor does he preach a prosperity or health and wealth message. Granted I am not sure why David went on TBN with Paul Crouch but he simply made a mistake as we all do.

If you doubt what he teaches then I suggest you read his book I Never thought I'd see the day. He in no way preaches a prosperity gospel message that you may claim. If you have any hard evidence of David preaching a WOF type of message then please post it.

 

[evangelist6589]

So does this mean he, in your estimation is not now a SP, but simply has a different understanding of election than you?

Yes.... indeed I was wrong.

 

[quantumfaith]

Yes.... indeed I was wrong.

That is quite "big" of you. Thanks for your honesty.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I truly fail to understand why any of this matters. In the street, in your work environment, amongst your family, you areto try to emulate Christ in your behavior & when you teach, its that Jesus saves. Now I happen to believe that the Holy Spirit has much to do with the transformation process---more than many care to admit but does that make me a believer in extra biblical teachings by men with opinions...nope. I'm keeping my nose in the Bible and my faith in the HS to guide me...everything else is just conversation.

 

[preacher4truth]

You cant just take one instance in 2012 and say that he constantly fellowships with TBN as he does not, nor does he preach a prosperity or health and wealth message. Granted I am not sure why David went on TBN with Paul Crouch but he simply made a mistake as we all do.

Sure I can. I can get a whole lot out of his one visit and endoresement of TBN and Crouch. But the thing is I never stated 'constantly'. Those are your words and you taking this to the extreme.

If you doubt what he teaches then I suggest you read his book I Never thought I'd see the day. He in no way preaches a prosperity gospel message that you may claim. If you have any hard evidence of David preaching a WOF type of message then please post it.

Why would I read one of his books when I don't care for his preaching?

By the way I haven't made claim that he preaches a prosperity Gospel. I do know that he has plagiarized though -- when I saw that I lost much respect for him.

I am not enthralled with his teaching, sorry to you, but I just don't get into him. Perhaps it's his past ties to IFB, I don't know (something I found out about him later). Nothing against him as a person, I just don't get into his preaching although I do happen to listen to him almost daily. I know you're a huge fan of his and that is great but not everyone is as big a fan.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Sure I can. I can get a whole lot out of his one visit and endoresement of TBN and Crouch. But the thing is I never stated 'constantly'. Those are your words and you taking this to the extreme.



Why would I read one of his books when I don't care for his preaching?

By the way I haven't made claim that he preaches a prosperity Gospel. I do know that he has plagiarized though -- when I saw that I lost much respect for him.

I am not enthralled with his teaching, sorry to you, but I just don't get into him. Perhaps it's his past ties to IFB, I don't know (something I found out about him later). Nothing against him as a person, I just don't get into his preaching although I do happen to listen to him almost daily. I know you're a huge fan of his and that is great but not everyone is as big a fan.

Do you feel he is a false teacher?

 

[Yeshua1]

No he doesn't. He doesn't teach anything remotely close to Pelagianism or Semi-Pelagianism.

Per Theopedia:
"He rejects the classical Calvinist tenets of unconditional election, limited atonement and irresistible grace, yet retains modified versions of total depravity and perseverance of the saints. "

So he would indeed fit a semi pel view!

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Per Theopedia:
"He rejects the classical Calvinist tenets of unconditional election, limited atonement and irresistible grace, yet retains modified versions of total depravity and perseverance of the saints. "

So he would indeed fit a semi pel view!

I wonder if he ever declaired his stance in total. Personally have stayed away from him sencing his demeanor.

 

[Revmitchell]

Per Theopedia:
"He rejects the classical Calvinist tenets of unconditional election, limited atonement and irresistible grace, yet retains modified versions of total depravity and perseverance of the saints. "

So he would indeed fit a semi pel view!

You guys need to make up your minds. Either the opposite of being a cal is arminian or pelagian. It cant be both. Or how about stop trying to define everyone by your personal system of theology and avoid all the confusion altogether.

 

[preachinjesus]

So he would indeed fit a semi pel view!

You have no clue what you're talking about.

Just because someone disagrees with the 5 points of Calvinism doesn't make them a semipelagian by default. If you believe that it does you are wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong.

There are more options than Calvinism or Arminianism.

 

[Yeshua1]

You have no clue what you're talking about.

Just because someone disagrees with the 5 points of Calvinism doesn't make them a semipelagian by default. If you believe that it does you are wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong.

There are more options than Calvinism or Arminianism.

he seems to hold to a view that makes it that we still have a aprt in our salvation, that we in the ultimate sense do make the decision to accept/reject jesus, so yes, semi pel!