How many here hold to the heresy of Pelagianism

[Yeshua1]

Pelagius didn't believe this. Why are you naming this after him?

He agreed with that!
Pelagianism - Wikipedia
" Pelagianism, also called the Pelagian heresy, is the Christian theological position that the original sin did not taint human nature and that mortal will is still capable of choosing good or evil without special divine aid or assistance. This theological theory is named after the British monk Pelagius (c. AD 360 – 418),"

 

[MartyF]

He agreed with that!
Pelagianism - Wikipedia
" Pelagianism, also called the Pelagian heresy, is the Christian theological position that the original sin did not taint human nature and that mortal will is still capable of choosing good or evil without special divine aid or assistance. This theological theory is named after the British monk Pelagius (c. AD 360 – 418),"

Really?! Wikipedia! Where is John of Japan so that he can tell you how horrible you are for using Wikipedia?

Nope, Pelagius never agreed with that.

 

[Yeshua1]

Really?! Wikipedia! Where is John of Japan so that he can tell you how horrible you are for using Wikipedia?

Nope, Pelagius never agreed with that.

How about this source then?
https://www.theopedia.com/pelagianism

 

[rlvaughn]

How about this source then?
https://www.theopedia.com/pelagianism

Here is an encyclopedia article.
Pelagius and Pelagianism | Encyclopedia.com

 

[Yeshua1]

Here is an encyclopedia article.
Pelagius and Pelagianism | Encyclopedia.com

looks like he did indeed hold to heresy!

 

[MartyF]

Here is an encyclopedia article.
Pelagius and Pelagianism | Encyclopedia.com

How about this source then?
https://www.theopedia.com/pelagianism

I guess if you want to know about the lies that Augustine told, I guess these are tertiary sources for this.

I guess I can start a thread asking if anyone believes in

Spurgeonism - the belief that all Christians must participate in pyronecrobestiality.

Is it perfectly fine to smash some dead guy's name by attributing a belief to them they do not have?

Can you find any primary sources? Do you know what the difference between primary and tertiary sources?

 

[Yeshua1]

I guess if you want to know about the lies that Augustine told, I guess these are tertiary sources for this.

I guess I can start a thread asking if anyone believes in

Spurgeonism - the belief that all Christians must participate in pyronecrobestiality.

Is it perfectly fine to smash some dead guy's name by attributing a belief to them they do not have?

Can you find any primary sources? Do you know what the difference between primary and tertiary sources?

Why getting so intense in supporting a heretic though?

 

[MartyF]

Why getting so intense in supporting a heretic though?

Why are you so intense about supporting lies and injustice?

Exodus 23:1-3 NLT
“You must not pass along false rumors. You must not cooperate with evil people by lying on the witness stand. [2] “You must not follow the crowd in doing wrong. When you are called to testify in a dispute, do not be swayed by the crowd to twist justice. [3] And do not slant your testimony in favor of a person just because that person is poor.

 

[Yeshua1]

Why are you so intense about supporting lies and injustice?

Exodus 23:1-3 NLT
“You must not pass along false rumors. You must not cooperate with evil people by lying on the witness stand. [2] “You must not follow the crowd in doing wrong. When you are called to testify in a dispute, do not be swayed by the crowd to twist justice. [3] And do not slant your testimony in favor of a person just because that person is poor.

You are deny what every source could be listed that states this is what he believed then?

 

[Reynolds]

As the Historical Church always has condemned that view as being a heresy!

Within a strict definition of said, yes.

 

[Reformed1689]

Thus guilty as charged

"The term "semipelagianism", a 16th-century coinage, has been used as an accusation in theological disputes over salvation, divine grace and free will. Theologians have also used it retrospectively to refer to the original formulation, an anachronistic use that has been called inappropriate, ambiguous and unjust." (Wikipedia)​

Are you really quoting from Wikipedia as a source?

 

[MartyF]

You are deny what every source could be listed that states this is what he believed then?

You can go to the primary sources which are left of Pelagius' writings which you refuse to do.

You quote his enemy and say that that is the truth. It isn't. You quote the Rich and deny the Poor a voice.

If you really cared about what Pelagius had to say then read his books. You're worse than the Liberal media and Trump.

So no, I don't care what not-a-saint Augustine, the whore-man of Hippo, had to say about Pelagius.

 

[Yeshua1]

You can go to the primary sources which are left of Pelagius' writings which you refuse to do.

You quote his enemy and say that that is the truth. It isn't. You quote the Rich and deny the Poor a voice.

If you really cared about what Pelagius had to say then read his books. You're worse than the Liberal media and Trump.

So no, I don't care what not-a-saint Augustine, the whore-man of Hippo, had to say about Pelagius.

Even though Augustine was saved, and you pal was not?

 

[Van]

Are you really quoting from Wikipedia as a source?

Note the inability to address the topic? This is all the naysayers have. Change the subject to their opponent, and misrepresent the topic. Calvinism is well known for claiming opponents hold heretical view. It is a ploy.
This thread stands as testimony, and the OP was posted by a Calvinist.

 

[MartyF]

Even though Augustine was saved, and you pal was not?

My pal? Are you an insane nut? Why are you claiming that I am over 1700 years old?

Lemme think. Open well-known sins which Augustine did not repent from.

1. Divorcing his wife

2. After divorcing his wife starting an affair with another mistress after his "conversion".

3. Taking the son from the mother.

4. Sending the mother to a nunnery while he carried on an affair with another woman.

What are the sins of Pelagius?

1. Disagreeing with Augustine.

2. Not supporting infant baptism as salvific.

3. Saying that monogamous marriage is not a sin.

4. Not being good enough at Roman politics before the entire cesspool collapsed.

 

[Reformed1689]

Note the inability to address the topic? This is all the naysayers have. Change the subject to their opponent, and misrepresent the topic. Calvinism is well known for claiming opponents hold heretical view. It is a ploy.
This thread stands as testimony, and the OP was posted by a Calvinist.

Wow, I didn't actually take a position on the topic did I? No, I merely asked if you were seriously using wikipedia as a source. You actually turned the focus on me which is what you accused me of doing. All I did is ask if that is really what you were going to use. I addressed your post, not you.

 

[Noah Hirsch]

It would be well to define what you mean by Pelagianism. I have a description HERE, but perhaps you have your own elsewhere.

I consider Pelagianism a heresy. I have never met anyone who admits to holding such a view, though.

Yet, there are those who will not admit to being Pelagians that are in fact Pelagians. Those who hold to a modified version of Pelagianism, holding that we are all born with a sin nature, but denying that we all stand condemned, guilty before God, and in need of a Savior and being justified by Christ’s blood through faith. One example would be the National Association of Free Will Baptists according to their own confession on their website. They straight out and assert that we are born in need of a Savior, asserting that we only become in need of a Savior once we reach what they call an “age of accountability.”

I have met people who I would consider to be holding to Pelagian heresy. I have met those who say that those who die in infancy are covered by the blood of Christ without faith in Him. This is to deny that salvation is only by grace through faith in Christ alone.

 

[1689Dave]

As the Historical Church always has condemned that view as being a heresy!

Free will = Pelagianism.

 

[rsr]

Free will = Pelagianism.

No, that is not true. Belief in free will is NOT Pelagianism. (And it is quite possible that Pelagian did not subscribe to the heresies he's saddled with, just as Arminius did not exactly agree with the positions of the Remonstrants and Wesleyans. But that's the way things work.)

 

[1689Dave]

No, that is not true. Belief in free will is NOT Pelagianism. (And it is quite possible that Pelagian did not subscribe to the heresies he's saddled with, just as Arminius did not exactly agree with the positions of the Remonstrants and Wesleyans. But that's the way things work.)

Salvation based on free will = Pelagianism.