Dan Chapa

This post is a response to Scott Christensen’s article “Prevenient Grace and Semi-Pelagianism”. ( link ) One of the main aspects of Mr. Christensen’s article is calling Arminians Semi-Pelagian. Pelagius was a heretic condemned by the early church for teaching man does not need God’s grace to repent and believe. Semi-Pelagianism (a watered down form of Pelagianism which might be characterized as God helps those who help themselves) was likewise condemned by the early church. So calling someone Semi-Pelagian is serious and unwelcome. It’s the mirror image of calling someone a hyper-Calvinist. Both “Semi-Pelagian” and “hyper-Calvinist” are pejorative terms. Worse real Semi-Pelagians and hyper-Calvinists exist, so one does not want to get lumped in with those crowds. So this post will defend Arminianism from the charge by defining Semi-Pelagianism, addressing arguments that Total Depravity is undone by Prevenient Grace, that free will procures God’s grace, that Libertarian Free will acts...

Article two of the traditional understanding of the SBC view of God's plan of salvation ( link ) has been called Semi-Pelagian   here ,  here  and  here .  What is semi-Pelagianism?  The short answer is the denial that we need grace in order to believe in Christ.  The longer answer is that semi-Pelagianism is probably best defined in the Cannons of Orange (529AD) that condemned the view. ( link )  Here's the article that gets accused of Semi-Pelagianism: Article Two: The Sinfulness of Man We affirm that, because of the fall of Adam, every person inherits a nature and environment inclined toward sin and that every person who is capable of moral action will sin. Each person’s sin alone brings the wrath of a holy God, broken fellowship with Him, ever-worsening selfishness and destructiveness, death, and condemnation to an eternity in hell. We deny that Adam’s sin resulted in the incapacitation of any person’s free will or rendered any perso...

Article two of the traditional understanding of the SBC view of God's plan of salvation ( link ) has been called Semi-Pelagian   here ,  here ,  here  and here . Here's the article: Article Two: The Sinfulness of Man We affirm that, because of the fall of Adam, every person inherits a nature and environment inclined toward sin and that every person who is capable of moral action will sin. Each person’s sin alone brings the wrath of a holy God, broken fellowship with Him, ever-worsening selfishness and destructiveness, death, and condemnation to an eternity in hell. We deny that Adam’s sin resulted in the incapacitation of any person’s free will or rendered any person guilty before he has personally sinned. While no sinner is remotely capable of achieving salvation through his own effort, we deny that any sinner is saved apart from a free response to the Holy Spirit’s drawing through the Gospel. The most criticised phrase is the denial of incapacitation of anyone's fr...

Here’s J. I. Packer’s misrepresentation of Arminianism . First, it should be observed that the “five points of Calvinism,” so-called, are simply the Calvinistic answer to a five-point manifesto (the Remonstrance) put out by certain “ Belgic semi- Pelagians ” in the early seventeenth century. The theology which it contained (known to history as Arminianism ) stemmed from two philosophical principles: first, that divine sovereignty is not compatible with human freedom, nor therefore with human responsibility; second, that ability limits obligation. (The charge of semi- Pelagianism was thus fully justified.) From these principles, the Arminians drew two deductions: first that since the Bible regards faith as a free and responsible human act, it cannot be caused by God, but is exercised independently of Him; second, that since the Bible regards faith as obligatory on the part of all who hear the gospel, ability to believe must be universal. Hence, they maintained, Scripture must be in...

This post is part of a series started here , to counter Owen’s charge that Arminians are Pelagians and Packer’s that Arminians are semi-Pelagians. All quotations from the Canons of Orange taken from here . I didn’t provide comments, because I thought Arminius’ agreement with the Canons was straightforward. I you disagree, please comment. The Canon’s will be in red , quotations from Arminius’ will be in blue . CANON 21. Concerning nature and grace. As the Apostle most truly says to those who would be justified by the law and have fallen from grace, "If justification were through the law, then Christ died to no purpose" ( Gal. 2:21 ), so it is most truly declared to those who imagine that grace, which faith in Christ advocates and lays hold of, is nature: "If justification were through nature, then Christ died to no purpose." Now there was indeed the law, but it did not justify, and there was indeed nature, but it did not justify. Not in vain did Christ therefore...

This post is part of a series started here , to counter Owen’s charge that Arminians are Pelagians and Packer’s that Arminians are semi-Pelagians. All quotations from the Canons of Orange taken from here . I didn’t provide comments, because I thought Arminius’ agreement with the Canons was straightforward. I you disagree, please comment. The Canon’s will be in red , quotations from Arminius’ will be in blue . CANON 16. No man shall be honored by his seeming attainment, as though it were not a gift, or suppose that he has received it because a missive from without stated it in writing or in speech. For the Apostle speaks thus, "For if justification were through the law, then Christ died to no purpose" ( Gal. 2:21 ); and "When he ascended on high he led a host of captives, and he gave gifts to men" ( Eph.4:8 , quoting Ps.68:18 ). It is from this source that any man has what he does; but whoever denies that he has it from this source either does not truly have it,...

This post is part of a series started here , to counter Owen’s charge that Arminians are Pelagians and Packer’s that Arminians are semi-Pelagians. All quotations from the Canons of Orange taken from here . I didn’t provide comments, because I thought Arminius’ agreement with the Canons was straightforward. I you disagree, please comment. The Canon’s will be in red , quotations from Arminius' will be in blue . CANON 11. Concerning the duty to pray. None would make any true prayer to the Lord had he not received from him the object of his prayer, as it is written, "Of thy own have we given thee" ( 1 Chron. 29:14 ). ...let us by prayer and supplication implore his present aid, in the name of Jesus Christ our great High Priest. "Do thou, therefore, O holy and merciful God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Fountain of all grace and truth, vouchsafe to grant thy favourable presence to us who are a great congregation assembled together in thy holy name. Spri...

This post is part of a series started here , to counter Owen’s charge that Arminians are Pelagians and Packer’s that Arminians are semi-Pelagians. All quotations from the Canons of Orange taken from here . I didn’t provide comments, because I thought Arminius’ agreement with the Canons was straightforward. I you disagree, please comment. The Canon’s will be in red , quotations from Arminius' will be in blue . CANON 6. If anyone says that God has mercy upon us when, apart from his grace, we believe, will, desire, strive, labor, pray, watch, study, seek, ask, or knock, but does not confess that it is by the infusion and inspiration of the Holy Spirit within us that we have the faith, the will, or the strength to do all these things as we ought; or if anyone makes the assistance of grace depend on the humility or obedience of man and does not agree that it is a gift of grace itself that we are obedient and humble, he contradicts the Apostle who says, "What have you that y...