What is Pelagianism?
January 21st, 2009 by Amanda NelsonTheophilux has challenged my beliefs by helping me either strengthen or reconstruct them. In doing so it has made me aware of others belief systems. A term that has been tossed around from time to time on this site is “Pelagianism”. Unlike many on this site, I am not a seminary student, and this concept was not thoroughly addressed in my undergrad classes as a Christian Ministries student. This lead me to a brief exploration into Pelagianism is and why its a heresy.
What is Pelagiamism?
Pelagianism derives its name from Pelagius a British Monk who lived in Rome in the 5th century A.D. He emphasized the innocence of man and free will. He believed that if God gave men commands then he also gave them the ability to work those commands. He and his followers framed six doctrines.
1. Adam would have died even if he had not sin.
2. The sin of Adam injured himself alone, not the human race.
3. Newborn children are in the same condition as Adam was before the Fall; corollary; that infants, though unbaptized, have eternal life.
4. The Old Testament Law, as well as the New Testament Gospel, gives entrance to heaven.
5. There were some before the time of Christ who lived without sin.
6. The whole human race does not die because of Adam’s death or sin, nor will it rise again because of Christ’s resurrection.
Coelestius, Pelagius’ main disciple added three additional points.
1. If we will, we can live without sin
2. Unbaptized infants attain unto eternal life.
3. The rich who are baptized will have no merit, nor will they inherit the Kingdom of God, if they do not renounce their possessions.
Admittedly this is a short summary of Pelagianism, but I believe this highlights the concepts that Pelagius taught.
Why is Pelagianism heresy?
Pelagianism seems to contradict a number of Biblical teachings. These teachings include:
We are sinful from the moment of conception (Psalm 51:5)
We die as a result of sin (Ezekiel 18:20, Romans 6:23)
We are born with a natural inclination towards sin (Romans 3:10-18).
Adam’s sin is the reason that sin infects us (Romans 5:12)
January 21st, 2009 at 12:30 PM
Hey!
I won’t defend Pelagianism because I haven’t studied it in detail. But I will comment on one thing.
“Why is Pelagianism heresy?
Pelagianism seems to contradict a number of Biblical teachings. These teachings include:
We are sinful from the moment of conception (Psalm 51:5)”
First I think we should be careful throwing around the words “heresy” or “blasphemy”. Scripture must be the authority on this and not church leaders. If something is clear in Scripture and involves something like someone denying Jesus as God or stating that Jesus was possessed or something like that, maybe we can use those terms. But let’s be careful to preserve unity. “Heresy” and “blasphemy” are words that when used too quickly only bring division or elitism.
With that said, Psalm 51:5 doesn’t say that we are sinful from the moment of conception. Maybe other verses do, but that one doesn’t (except in the NIV and the Message). It says, “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me.” The sin is about the conception not the birth. It is saying that the conception process was sin. It is likely that David’s mother had been previously married to Nahash an Ammonite king. And thus when David was conceived later with his mom and Jesse that was sin. She had been married to a non Jew.
The verse speaks of the condition of David’s mom and not David – certainly not all of humanity.
January 21st, 2009 at 1:10 PM
Hey Micah!
I really appreciate your comments. It is certainly not my intention to create division. On the contrary, I wanted to help others who have not gone to seminary or have not studied Pelagianism understand this belief system that is refered to from time to time on this website.
As I wrote this article I attempted to have an objective outlook on pelagianism. I actually found myself respecting Pelagius as he tried to combat maichism, an extreemly warped view of God. Yet I cannot help but pitty him as he too seems to have gotten it wrong.
You are right. I should have found another scripture to defend this statement. I was attempting to add a little variety to the subject since the verses in Romans that pertain to original sin have been quoted numerous times. I appreciate you calling me out on this. But here are several more verses that I have found:
Romans 5:12-21
1 Corinthians 15:22
Romans 3:23
Aditionally, I believe that hersey is the only word appropriate for this belief system. Pelagius believed that people are capable of salvation apart from Christ. He believed that people could be sinless. If this is true then God would have been wicked, unmerciful, and unjust when He sent His only son to be tortured and killed on the cross. Since God cannot be wicked, unmerciful, and unjust any belief system that states that He can is hersey.
I really do appreciate your comments and I welcome any other comments you may have.
January 21st, 2009 at 2:26 PM
Amanda: I’m so happy to see this post. We can learn much from those who erred as well as those who got it right. This is the most important part of your argument:
Pelagius believed that people are capable of salvation apart from Christ. He believed that people could be sinless. If this is true then God would have been wicked, unmerciful, and unjust when He sent His only son to be tortured and killed on the cross. Since God cannot be wicked, unmerciful, and unjust any belief system that states that He can is heresy.
Micah: I agree with your premise that labels divide us. However, when the labels are big and fancy, we can get away with it. Unfortunately, Amanda has blown the cover of the “pelagian” label for those who want to use it to defame, at least here on Theophilux. :)
I do want to challenge you on something just a bit, in a more serious way. Regarding the assessment of heresy/blasphemy, you say that “Scripture must be the authority on this and not church leaders”. As I try to break this down, I am having trouble figuring out exactly how it would work, as you describe it.
At some point a person has to evaluate a statement, philosophy, action, or whatever and decide whether it is heretical/blasphemous. The standard by which the thing would be examined is, of course, Scripture. But a person is integral to the equation.
Or perhaps your emphasis is on “the authority”. That gives it a different spin.
I am not averse to applying the labels of heresy & blasphemy, but let me please make a distinction. If a matter is debatable, we should give grace to others. However, if it is not, we should hold firm to what is true and warn our brothers & sisters of error.
When I was being discipled, I held to a few heretical beliefs. All through the process my pastor never called me a heretic. I was a modalist, but had no clue what it was. He did, once, tell me that modalism was a heresy, and when he explained it I wanted to understand the orthodox belief. I do think the label was a positive thing in that it pushed me to understand the Truth.