Announcement

Collapse

Ecclesiology 201 Guidelines

Discussion on matters of general mainstream Christian churches. What are the differences between Catholics and protestants? How has the charismatic movement affected the church? Are Southern baptists different from fundamentalist baptists? It is also for discussions about the nature of the church.

This forum is primarily for Christians to discuss matters of Christian doctrine, and is not the area for debate between atheists (or those opposing orthodox Christianity) and theists. Inquiring atheists (or sincere seekers/doubters/unorthodox) seeking only Christian participation and having demonstrated a manner that does not seek to undermine the orthodox Christian faith of others are also welcome, but must seek Moderator permission first. When defining “Christian” for purposes of this section, we mean persons holding to the core essentials of the historic Christian faith such as the Trinity, the Creatorship of God, the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Christ, the atonement, the future bodily return of Christ, the future bodily resurrection of the just and the unjust, and the final judgment. Persons not holding to these core doctrines are welcome to participate in the Comparative Religions section without restriction, in Theology 201 as regards to the nature of God and salvation with limited restrictions, and in Christology for issues surrounding the person of Christ and the Trinity. Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions. Additionally, there may be some topics that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream orthodox doctrine that may be more appropriately placed within Comparative Religions 101.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

If Pelagianism = Heresy, Then Calvinists = Anathema?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • If Pelagianism = Heresy, Then Calvinists = Anathema?

    For anyone, especially Calvinists, condemning Pelagianism as heresy, I would ask that they reconsider using the term "heresy" so quickly based on a single council ruling, without considering what other things the council has also condemned. After all, "in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you." (Matthew 7:2)

    Taken from The Canons of the Council of Orange 529 AD:
    "According to the catholic faith we also believe that after grace has been received through baptism, all baptized persons have the ability and responsibility, if they desire to labor faithfully, to perform with the aid and cooperation of Christ what is of essential importance in regard to the salvation of their soul. We not only do not believe that any are foreordained to evil by the power of God, but even state with utter abhorrence that if there are those who want to believe so evil a thing, they are anathema."
    The fact that science cannot make any pronouncement about ethical principles has been misinterpreted as indicating that there are no such principles; while in fact the search for truth presupposes ethics. - Karl Popper, 1987

  • #2
    "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Dante View Post
      For anyone, especially Calvinists, condemning Pelagianism as heresy, I would ask that they reconsider using the term "heresy" so quickly based on a single council ruling, without considering what other things the council has also condemned. After all, "in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you." (Matthew 7:2)

      Taken from The Canons of the Council of Orange 529 AD:
      "According to the catholic faith we also believe that after grace has been received through baptism, all baptized persons have the ability and responsibility, if they desire to labor faithfully, to perform with the aid and cooperation of Christ what is of essential importance in regard to the salvation of their soul. We not only do not believe that any are foreordained to evil by the power of God, but even state with utter abhorrence that if there are those who want to believe so evil a thing, they are anathema."
      Considering that Calvinism has also been declared a heresy, this is not really a problem.
      Better to illuminate than merely to shine, to deliver to others contemplated truths than merely to contemplate.

      -Thomas Aquinas

      I love to travel, But hate to arrive.

      -Hernando Cortez

      What is the good of experience if you do not reflect?

      -Frederick 2, Holy Roman Emperor

      Comment


      • #4
        Protestants who accept any rulings from church councils tend to pick and choose which rulings they accept based on their own beliefs. The Council of Orange of 529 is not considered ecumenical, however, so by itself it is of limited utility.
        Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

        Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
        sigpic
        I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
          Protestants who accept any rulings from church councils tend to pick and choose which rulings they accept based on their own beliefs. The Council of Orange of 529 is not considered ecumenical, however, so by itself it is of limited utility.
          Is Dante a protestant?
          Better to illuminate than merely to shine, to deliver to others contemplated truths than merely to contemplate.

          -Thomas Aquinas

          I love to travel, But hate to arrive.

          -Hernando Cortez

          What is the good of experience if you do not reflect?

          -Frederick 2, Holy Roman Emperor

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by TimelessTheist View Post
            Is Dante a protestant?
            Regardless, Calvinists are.

            I forgot to add earlier, Calvinists and Pelagians are really flip sides of the same coin; both are monergist.
            Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

            Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
            sigpic
            I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by TimelessTheist View Post
              Is Dante a protestant?
              I'm an Arminian, and while I defend Pelagianism from the heresy label, I am by no means Pelagian myself.

              Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
              Regardless, Calvinists are.

              I forgot to add earlier, Calvinists and Pelagians are really flip sides of the same coin; both are monergist.
              I know Calvinists are monergists in that they believe God does all the work in a person's salvation, but Pelagianism would be synergistic at best since Pelagianism teaches that moral perfection is attainable in life without the assistance of divine grace, meaning it is possible that one does not need God at all in getting to God's kingdom.
              The fact that science cannot make any pronouncement about ethical principles has been misinterpreted as indicating that there are no such principles; while in fact the search for truth presupposes ethics. - Karl Popper, 1987

              Comment


              • #8
                I was accused of "flirting with Pelagianism" in another thread because I believe Satan and eventually his demons are the cause of all temptation starting with Adam, and once they go to the Lake of Fire, there is no more temptation and no more sin in Heaven/New Jerusalem. However I believe that Jesus is always required to fight temptation and ultimately get rid of Satan. Can anyone go into more detail about how my views may border on Pelagianism, if they do? I honestly don't see it.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Because you believe that there is nothing inherent in man that causes him to sin.
                  The fact that science cannot make any pronouncement about ethical principles has been misinterpreted as indicating that there are no such principles; while in fact the search for truth presupposes ethics. - Karl Popper, 1987

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Dante View Post
                    Because you believe that there is nothing inherent in man that causes him to sin.
                    Biblically there was nothing to cause Adam to sin until the external influence of the Serpent appeared. Anything else is add-on fairy tales speculating he would have sinned anyway even without Satan. This position is not Pelagianism, it's biblical.

                    Further, Adam could have chosen to avoid the Serpent with God's help, as all of humanity can do. Jesus proved that, being fully human and tempted as we are, but sought the Father's help perfectly and didn't sin. If we say man is totally depraved and bound to sin no matter what, we either deny Jesus was ever fully human, or we must admit Jesus sinned at some point.

                    This is also not Pelagianism, which suggests humans can of free will choose not to sin, without God. So I think my position is simply misunderstood.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by TimelessTheist View Post
                      Is Dante a protestant?

                      Originally posted by JohnnyP View Post
                      Biblically there was nothing to cause Adam to sin until the external influence of the Serpent appeared. Anything else is add-on fairy tales speculating he would have sinned anyway even without Satan. This position is not Pelagianism, it's biblical.


                      Further, Adam could have chosen to avoid the Serpent with God's help, as all of humanity can do. Jesus proved that, being fully human and tempted as we are, but sought the Father's help perfectly and didn't sin. If we say man is totally depraved and bound to sin no matter what, we either deny Jesus was ever fully human, or we must admit Jesus sinned at some point.


                      This is also not Pelagianism, which suggests humans can of free will choose not to sin, without God. So I think my position is simply misunderstood.

                      13 Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am being tempted by God,” for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one. 14 But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. 15 Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death.
                      James 1:13-15

                      Are you telling me that Adam was made without desire?
                      The fact that science cannot make any pronouncement about ethical principles has been misinterpreted as indicating that there are no such principles; while in fact the search for truth presupposes ethics. - Karl Popper, 1987

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Dante View Post
                        13 Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am being tempted by God,” for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one. 14 But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. 15 Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death.
                        James 1:13-15

                        Are you telling me that Adam was made without desire?
                        If you read ahead from your cite:

                        James 4:7 Submit therefore to God. Resist the devil and he will flee from you.
                        As far as the desire to sin, that's exactly what the Bible says. Nothing in the Bible says Adam desired the Tree of Knowledge all by himself, prior to influence by Satan. He may even have trusted Eve that it was from the Tree of Life or other permissible trees. If you read the text it doesn't say Eve said, "This is from the Tree of Knowledge but go ahead and eat it" and Adam complied. He just trusted her that it was ok to eat.

                        Adam's problem according to the text is that he didn't check things out for himself with God. And that was his disobedience, he trusted humans more than he trusted God to ask Him what was what. Continued on and on as some trust false prophets, secularism, human governments, etc. even today.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Dante View Post
                          I know Calvinists are monergists in that they believe God does all the work in a person's salvation, but Pelagianism would be synergistic at best since Pelagianism teaches that moral perfection is attainable in life without the assistance of divine grace, meaning it is possible that one does not need God at all in getting to God's kingdom.
                          I'm not sure you grasp the difference between monergism and synergism. Because Pelagianists teach that moral perfection is attainable in life and thus it is possible that one does not need God at all in getting to God's kingdom, they are monergists.
                          Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                          Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                          sigpic
                          I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by JohnnyP View Post
                            If you read ahead from your cite:
                            The desire is still one's own. The responsibility of sin still lies with us, not the devil.

                            Originally posted by JohnnyP View Post
                            As far as the desire to sin, that's exactly what the Bible says. Nothing in the Bible says Adam desired the Tree of Knowledge all by himself, prior to influence by Satan. He may even have trusted Eve that it was from the Tree of Life or other permissible trees. If you read the text it doesn't say Eve said, "This is from the Tree of Knowledge but go ahead and eat it" and Adam complied. He just trusted her that it was ok to eat.

                            Adam's problem according to the text is that he didn't check things out for himself with God. And that was his disobedience, he trusted humans more than he trusted God to ask Him what was what. Continued on and on as some trust false prophets, secularism, human governments, etc. even today.
                            All that is just nothing more than arguments from silence.
                            The fact that science cannot make any pronouncement about ethical principles has been misinterpreted as indicating that there are no such principles; while in fact the search for truth presupposes ethics. - Karl Popper, 1987

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                              I'm not sure you grasp the difference between monergism and synergism. Because Pelagianists teach that moral perfection is attainable in life and thus it is possible that one does not need God at all in getting to God's kingdom, they are monergists.
                              If that is how you want to define monergism...
                              The fact that science cannot make any pronouncement about ethical principles has been misinterpreted as indicating that there are no such principles; while in fact the search for truth presupposes ethics. - Karl Popper, 1987

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by Physiocrat, 10-16-2017, 09:55 AM
                              58 responses
                              28,568 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Rushing Jaws  
                              Working...
                              X