Mr. McGrew, I so appreciate you as an interviewer asking Dr. Bonner succinct and pertinent questions and allowing her to answer uninterrupted. Although I appreciate Dr. Flowers' work, I wish he, among others, on UA-cam didn't use interviews for his own opportunity for simultaneously extended lectures. Thank you.
My question regarding all of this is... How can we view Augustine in a positive light when all 14 of his arguments against Pelagius were so false to Pelagius's actual beliefs? Even worse that Augustine stated he didn't care if those points were accurate to Pelagius's actual beliefs or not... So slandering and false accusations against a brother in Christ to destroy his life, make a caricature of his views and ultimately create a boogeyman to further his own new theology onto the church should... what? Be looked over? Be defended even? The only thing I can logically conclude is that Augustine was a manipulative theological tyrant who ultimately changed the course of Christian orthodoxy for the worse... supposedly for God's glory...
@@IdolKiller I'm beginning to wonder if bible scholars/historians who decide to publicly go against Augustine would be treated like actors are who publicly come out as conservative in Hollywood... Get canceled, watch their professional careers get destroyed, not be allowed a seat at the table, get publicly ridiculed and smeared as a heretic...
@@Mazinga I have a lot of reason to believe he fell from orthodoxy and knowingly lied and manipulated to corrupt the Church. Thus I see validation for including him among those we were warned of in passages like Acts 20:28-30
@@IdolKiller Hi Warren, thank you for the quick reply. I have to chew on this one. Do you have a list or link me to one that sums his "apostasies" up? Thank you.
Great guest, Warren. Now, I must say, you are probably one of, or possibly, THE best interviewer I have ever observed. Perfect restraint, excellent input and guidance. So glad I found your channel. New sub.
I’m thrilled to have found your channel through Dr Flowers’ channel. Your testimony is revelatory to mine recently. Gen 3 has been revolutionary for me to see how the knowledge of good and evil and eternal life are the reason Adam was kicked out of the garden. Ever since, man has been mortal and will die. Mortality was given to mankind since we don’t have access to God’s tree of life. Eternal life is available only through faith in Jesus so that we can be presented to the Father blameless. This also ties in tightly to the age at which a child understands good and evil. If a fetus is aborted or an infant dies or a mentally disabled person dies while they don’t know good and evil, they are still innocent and I believe are acceptable to God and are in heaven.
I thought that the interview with Dr Bonner and Leighton Flowers was slightly better. The important thing is the definition of original sin and ' *Absolute* prevenient grace'. The question is not whether original sin has had an effect on mankind but whether that has affected man's ability to even respond to God's offer and call to salvation. Whether God acts first and then man has to repent and believe as the traditional view was, or whether God has to save and regenerate man before man can do anything.
This was an incredibly interesting and helpful discussion, and you did a great job leading the interview. Thanks for sharing this! I'm going to have to go look at those books.
It’s so nice not listening to an emotionally charged polemic. What I have found is real academic facts about a subject tend to much more in the middle in terms of what we actually know. Much less binary and n terms of for or against. It certainly doesn’t raise my blood pressure the same way debate normally does. Thanks for this calm thoughtful discussion on a controversial topic! I want more :)
True but that’s because of much less shared prior beliefs so it naturally doesn’t come to hard conclusions often, but very useful and enjoyable. Both have their important places
What an amazing piece of history and something I have never heard before. I have heard the phrase Pelagian and semi Pelagian along with heresy but never heard such a clear historical explanation why as shown here.
An absolutely fascinating discussion and terrific interview. I only wish I could have understood more of what Dr. Bonner was saying, but my poor hearing simply didn’t permit me to understand everything she said because I couldn’t make out what she was saying with her British accent. I’ll need to listen to this interview multiple times to catch some of what she says, but I plan to purchase her book. Thank you for sharing this interview with us.
Wow, brother this was great quite exquisite and a must see for anyone who wants to know more on this issue. She is very humble. And she did her best to stay unbiased and just give us the facts. Great show.
You said it perfectly, that in Christiam debate we often don't consider why the other person believes what they believe and is there any merit behind it. Also, that it's just "I'm going to defend my side no matter" and generally lacking empathy. I am not due any more credit than the next man, but what separates my position from others is the ability to ask those questions "Why did the believe that? Is there any merit? Where are they coming from?"... This stance has allowed me to learn an incredible amount that I otherwise wouldn't have. The only downside is facing some Truths you may be more comfortable not recognizing, but this is not about comfortabolity, and we must seek Truth no matter our feelings. Thanks Warren for this great interview!
PLEASE!!! Do more stuff on Julian of Eclanum. He seems like such a fascinating character and I am very pleased to hear him brought up in this interview. Thank you to Dr. Ali, what a pleasure of a conversation!
@@metnasopar8861 he was labeled a Pelagian because he would not submit to condemnation of the Pelagians. You can learn more about him by reading this book. I highly recommend it.
@@AA-by7xc i tried to look for him or her in youtube. I cannot find anyone discussing julian of eclanum;) I am tempted to contact warren to contact Dr ali bonner and to say if she can talk more about julian of eclanum but i am shy. Hahaaha;) I need to wait to have a money for the book;)..
@@chriswoods7328 I don't know whether or not this will be helpful, but under the "more info" section at the top, there's an option to show an auto-generated transcript. It may not be perfect, since I think it's done the same way as closed captions, but perhaps you'd be able to copy the text from there into a document or something. (I'd test that out for you, but I'm currently using the mobile app.)
Absolutely agree with the comment by Jonathan M just before mine. I would add that this the BEST video of any kind I have ever seen. I just want to be involved in lining up guests for the host. Thank you.
Pelagius made Augustine's sexual perversion, Augustine's own problem. How could Augustine continue doing what he loved with Pelagius around? Had Pelagius continued his influence with nobility, Augustine would have lost his power.
Luther excommunicated and get famous, but this pelagian is different. I think we should research more about this man. An Objective point of view r really needed...
Corrected table of contents, orginally by @noelenliva2670 18:05 - Orthodoxy of Man's innate goodness 20:39 - The changing definitions of Pelagianism 22:01 - Grace given acc to merit - Evagrius, Jerome, Basil, Athanasius 22:29 - Perfection achievable - Palladius, Jerome. Not Pel 29:47 - Adam created mortal. Rufinus. Not Pelagius 32:27 - Cooperation of Grace and Free Will 33:13 - Pelagius "Free will always requires God's grace" 33:52 - 7 or so categories of Grace - trnsln to Latin cnnttns 37:20 - Pelagius at Synods - acquitted 3 times 41:21 - Pelagius condemned through lobbying 59:58 - MSS no & whitewashing Pelagius with Jerome 01:05:10 - Writings of Pel in qty next only to Aug & transmitted as works of Jerome or councils of Nicaea 01:16:36 - Rowan Greer's "Fear of Freedom" on Ambrose
Excellent interview! I've been linking to it in the comments sections of some videos on other channels that repeat the Augustinian myths about "Pelagianism". The more people watch this, the better!
@@jordandthornburg I am not the sharpest tool in the box. To have a transcript to read through, re-read and study would simply be easier to walk through than listening to the interview 75 times to get the same information. There is SO much information here, I'd like to take it in bit by bit.
I have watched this video several times and love it. This is the true definition of approaching the Bible with good hermeneutics. We have to approach the Bible with a true understanding of culture, politics, politics of the ruling governance, & politics of the early church. To deny that many of the 3rd-4th century writers and those called the early fathers of the church were not influenced by the politics within the church and politics of the ruling class did not influence them, is a denial of history. It's so important to approach a true bible study, not a reading as you would get a small group or a sermon, with an understanding of culture, politics, and historical events happening at the time. To do otherwise is to rely on one's own understanding ( modern think).
I intend to buy Ali's book, but I would suggest that Ali buy Dr. Ken Wilson's book: Augustine's Conversion from Traditional Free Choice to "Non-free Free Will" He is the Premier Augustinian scholar to read the whole corpus of Augustine and in the original language, and in chronological order. He gives precise details about everything Augustine said that is extant. It clears up some of what is being supposed or not known for certain according to what is said in this video. Enjoyed the video, much appreciated.
In this interview Dr Bonner noted her familiarity with Dr Wilson's work. They both have interesting insights into these events which changed the course of Western Christianity
At 1:15 the comment about neo orthodoxy perfectly applies to our current societal and political changes. The new presents itself as the old and the mainstream as the innovation
Absolutely brilliant interview on such an important and obscured subject! In this spirit, perhaps you might consider interviewing Dr. Ilaria Ramelli. You will find her credentials to be most impeccable. And here, if you'll please forgive me, perhaps I can somewhat appeal to your emotions, as she does have some important insights into Gregory of Nazianzus, who I know you said you are quite fond of in one of your videos. I too share your sentiment. The other Cappadocian fathers, Gregory of Nyssa and St. Basil the Great, held to Christian universalism, and although it is perhaps not as explicit with Gregory of Nazianzus, there's no reason to assume he didn't well. In any case though, even from just an historical perspective, I think if you familiarized yourself with the work of Dr. Ilaria Ramelli, you will find it to be just as important as Dr. Bonner's here presented.
Going by the timeline given, maybe the change in opinion, the pressure on the Bishop of Rome, was caused by a threat of death from the Emperor. They already got a decree for the "Donatists" to be condemned to death as heretics. Maybe the enforcement of that law led to a change of heart for purposes of self-preservation?
It was interesting to revisit your debate with JD Martin after listening to this eye opening interview, basically showing that JD was either being very dishonest or misinformed regarding Church history. Well done for getting the Dr on the show!
I am quite open to the idea that Pelagius himself was misunderstood (as it also happened to his contemporary Nestorius) and thus "Pelagianism" a misnomer. However, both the interview and the thesis are quite questionable, at least if I go by how it is presented in the video: 1. Dr. Bonner claims that "Man's innate goodness" was a mainstream opinion/orthodox in early Christianity. (18:05) But then she immediately switches over to the position that man had "free will to do not only bad but also good". In other words that Man is able to do good.* But that is not quite the same thing. She uses the same trick several times during the interview. She has to because "man's innate goodness" (after the Fall) is flat out contradicted by Scripture. (*Not going into the distinction between doing good deeds and doing things that would merit salvation before God.) 2. The video is permeated by a ongoing conspiracy-mongering painting Augustinus as this villain creating villfying strawmen to push through his views 3. In doing so she is doing what she herself accuses others of: making the issue one of binary opposition, of an either/or choice. Either you agree with the older Augustinus's very bleak picture of human nature and his idea of double Predestination. If you don't, you are said to basically agree with Pelagius. It is not that simple. 3. It is simply not accurate to say that Pelagius was acquitted three times before he was condemned. This picture neatly leaves out that the African bishops condemned him and his views in the beginning. At Diospolis he was only acquitted (of holding such views) when he had gone to the east. (And of course, that was due to Pelagius saying he did not hold the views called Pelagianism - the views themselves were not condoned.) True, she says that this just "a account" that there is "nothing that isn't contested" but she goes on to use that impression anyway. 5. She also briefly talks about "grace given according to merits" but that's only looking at the surface. What do these authors mean by that? Is is initial saving grace (in which case those not given the grace simply did not deserve to be saved) or is it about an ongoing supply of grace? The interviewer, with his own biases, does not challenge her to make these issues clear. Calling "fear of freedom" a good title - it is actually an ultra-polemical lowblow that is fashionable these days.
That's certainly an interesting question about what ought to develope and what ought not to. I think there's probably is some things that should and some that should not. This tension is also healthy
An image I think helpful regarding the latter conversation about whence ethics in the creeds? is to evoke the notion of "how one wears their doctrine." For some, their doctrine seems quite comfortable on them and they wear it gracefully; for others it is an official tight-fitting uniform that is worn impeccably that makes observers uncomfortable just looking at them. How often over the decades have I watched the tomahawk-chop motion with the hand as a proud adherent of Reformed Calvinism refers to the need to "rightly dividing the Word, brother."
I really did not understand that part. Can you explain it more. Does it mean that the writings of pelaguis are quoted in nicene creed?. And how did it happen. Thanks.
@@jordandthornburg (some word may be wrong because I'm using Google translator) but is the Pelagianism talking in the video about what was contrary to the Theology of Saint Augustine?
18:05 - Orthodoxy of Man's innate goodness 20:39 - The changing definitions of Pelagianism 22:01 - Grace given acc to merit - Evagrius, Jerome, Basil, Athanasius 22:29 - Perfection achievable - Palladius, Jerome. Not Pelagius. 29:47 - Adam created mortal. Rufinus. Not Pelagius 32:27 - Cooperation of Grace and Free Will 33:13 - Pelagius "Free will always requires God's grace" 33:52 - 7 or so categories of Grace - trnsln to Latin connotations 37:20 - Pelagius at Synods - acquitted 3 times 41:21 - Pelagius condemned through lobbying 59:58 - MSS no & whitewashing Pelagius with Jerome 01:05:10 - Writings of Pel in qty next only to Aug & transmitted as works of Jerome or councils of Nicaea 01:16:36 - Rowan Greer's "Fear of Freedom" on Ambrose
Dr. Bonner is much nicer than I will ever be. Augustine may have been very “genuine and passionate about his beliefs concerning the Pauline epistles”, but he was also genuinely wrong, and his Manichaean teachings caused a great many in the western church to depart from the original orthodox faith once delivered to the saints after the resurrection of Christ Jesus. ✝️📖🙏🏼
The reformed community prides itself on being the "historical" faith. The reality is though that they have an incredibly shallow understanding of church history and perhaps a shallower understanding of how to even use church history and what it means to be a historical church. It's like if an infant making a painting. They are trying their hardest, but they simply don't understand what it means.
So of the Council of Carthage do you have a list of everyone who sat on the council? Were they all just a bunch of buddies who all believed the same thing? Was it just a group of dudes who were followers of Augustine who banded together and then decided to call Pelagius a heretic? My point is anyone even myself right now can go and round up a bunch of dudes who all believe the same thing as me and then decide together to call Calvinism heresy. So the point is “who cares?” My point is what authority did this so-called council have? It definitely wasn’t an authority given by God but rather a self-proclaimed authority. Anyone can do that. “I’m proclaiming right now that I’m the authority and deem you all as heretics and well, since I’m the authority then that means I’m right.” 🤦♂️ I’d like to see the list of guys and what they all actually believed and it wouldn’t surprise me if they were all actually heretics themselves rather than Pelagius.
I am dyslexic and can not find an audio version of her book. Which I am sad about. I do want to check it out. Also, I do want to comment that some would reject Pelagianism just on the idea that Paleguis was a catholic. A lot of people reject any doctrine supported by the catholic church.
@Fred Seeking Bible TRuth, I really can't understand why Pelagius is a Catholic when Pelagius rejected the original sin doctrine that Catholic is teaching... Please enlighten me.. Thanks...
I thought Pelagian said believing was a work, and Augustine to argue against that he formed this doctrine of election that we see today in Calvinism. Is that true or am I way off?
@@IdolKiller I thought I heard Kevin Thompson say that. I might have misheard him cause I was working while listening. But after watching this I'm thinking Augustine might have been forming a strawman. IDK just a thought.
@@jantz01 From all that I have understood Pelagius wasn’t a “Pelagian”. His beliefs were in step with the early church (and scripture). To me it is sad he was acquitted twice and then finally by golly Augustine got his vindictive way. What is sadder is how current Bible teachers throw around the word “Pelagian” and know absolutely nothing about him or the circumstances that led to his “condemnation”.
I think Warren's statement at the beginning of this interview is too strong. Pelagius, as Ali Bonner describes him does not discount original sin in general only that version of it from Augustine and Calvin etc that even the will and understanding of man is so corrupted that God has to regenerate people before they can come to believe and repent. What Pelagius was against was what Ali Bonner describes as ' *absolute* prevenient grace'. 'Absolute prevenient grace' is not that God has to be drawing all people to himself before man/woman can freely accept or resist God's grace, but 'Absolute prevenient grace' is the Augustinian idea that God has to do everything before man does anything. I recently watched another interview with Dr Bonner and Leighton Flowers that I think began with a more clearer introduction. The outcome in the end is that it is a cooperative process. Neither does man (male and female) initiate and save himself through his own strength and nature nor does God do everything and reverse the order of salvation. Calvinism ends up reversing the order of salvation basically saying that you have to be saved and regenerated before you can repent or believe. Much of Ali Bonner's material is the same in both interviews but I still enjoyed listening to it again and the details that I didn't get in that first interview.
Original Sin is an Augustinian doctrine which didn't exist prior to his formulation of it. Adam's sin and subsequent consequences is a Biblical truth. Pelagius didn't deny the latter, the former most certainly.
@@IdolKiller Thank you for your response but I still disagree with your conclusion. You admit that Adams sin has consequences for us all - as far as I am concerned that IS original sin. It is very very different from the Augustinian and Calvinistic redefining of it but it is still the original sin of Adam that has affected us all. We all, by our own nature without God's grace, have the tendency to commit sin. I agree with you that Augustine and Calvin gave a false definition of the effects of original sin but in general terms Adam's was still the original sin that has weakened all human nature so we are no longer able to avoid falling into sin. Anyway I am still much more in line with your general message, and especially with the work of Leighton Flowers though I am not convinced that we do not need prevenient grace from God that we must accept instead of resisting in order to come to repentance, faith and salvation. May God bless you and your ministry 🙏. In Jesus's name amen.
@@oprophetisfake9482 i understand and appreciate the comments. Just keep in mind Original Sin is a term describing a specific Augustinian doctrine. When we try to redefine this term we blur the lines and inject unnecessary confusion. We can discuss Adam's sin and its consequences apart from that specific term and its associated concepts.
The grace of God is begun in us at conversion. (Acts 2:38) In this we can be cleansed of our past sins. Then we receive the Spirit of the holy one (Christ) who assists us to guide us and strengthens us to overcome every temptation brought by the devil - keeping ourselves clean. (1 Corinthians 10:13) Because every one of us will be judged by our deeds of which will determine where we each will spend our eternity. (Romans 2:5-10)
Book discredited by a large part of the bench where it was presented. The myth here would be her own, trying to come out in defense of Pelagius who was condemned in Church Councils, and it is clear that she participates in a movement of "historical revisionism" that is only accepted by themselves! Marcos Lopez - USA
The book was not fully accepted by the Orford panel, due to some problems. -see link - en-m-wikipedia-org.translate.goog/wiki/The_Myth_of_Pelagianism?_x_tr_sl=en&_x_tr_tl=pt&_x_tr_hl=pt-BR&_x_tr_pto=sc
It's a very easy thing that even 12-year-olds can do. Just click on Wikipedia and see her thesis at Oxford, it was not fully accepted by the committee. Now in the name of truth, it's better to lie, isn't it, in other words, a woman writes a thesis in 2018 and wants to annul all the semi-Pelagianism that Pelagius taught, it's time to put an end to it! It's as if there are no documents that present what he actually creates. All in the name of denying yourself the obvious, that is, predestination as it is in the Bible, that is, it is God who chooses from the womb, simple as that (Isaiah 49.1 - Galatians 1.15 etc). Marcos Lopez - Naugatuck - USA
Just because Pelagius may not have held these doctrines, doesn't mean that what is called Pelagianism isn't heretical. This is where the interviewee says a mistake: heresy does exist and doctrine itself does not develop. Yes we can work through the points of doctrine, but after something is defined, it clarifies and does a decision, if necessary. Excellent discussion on Pelagius, the man, however. Thanks, @idolkiller The creeds served a simple function; ethics were discussed and defined elsewhere and by councils as well. But for clarity to keep ethics on track, not only personal "niceness charity", but to keep broad ethics on track, heresy definition is extremely important, since policy flows from philosophical errors. For example: ua-cam.com/video/PYNxwNjVcL0/v-deo.html
The issue is that no one held to Pelagianism. It was cobbled together from various groups and heresies (some of which men like Jerome actually affirmed). It was a smear campaign. Pelagianism just doesn't exist. There are no Pelagians, nor were there any.
Are you saying that Augustine used a conscious debating tactic to advance his views? That he intentionally used a straw man to get the church to paint itself into a corner and agree with his new conception of grace? I think a corollary is that the church had not ruled on this issue before, it may have only been on Augustine's radar. But do you agree that it was an intentional gambit?
It was certainly intentional. He was trained in rhetoric and politic. The church had previously and unanimously affirmed man's innocence and free will... including Augustine when he converted. It was only later that he reversed course, dragging the State Church with him.
I don't think you are being 100% fair to Augustine. As I think about this I realize that what he articulated was a paradigm shift. It incorporated so many things. Baptismal regeneration. An official church. Sacramentalism--the shift from the Love Feast to the Mass, in the late 300's. An active role by the Emperor in church affairs (i.e. he called the cops on the Donatists). And a merit-based theology that was highly compatible with all of the above. It wasn't restricted to one man's rivalry. It was a sea change, a reevaluation of where we stood as a church. At the same time, Augustine was the spokesman for experientialism. "Take and read." He planted the seed for the Moravians, for the Lutheran Reformation, even Wesley and Finney. Pelagius, by my recollection of what I've read of his, was weak on experientialism. It was probably the dialectical flaw that needed addressing during those times. But Augustine had these two contradictory currents in his thought. They were reconciled in the institutional church. It was the only church in town (in the West), and so it was at the same time the City of God and the City of Man.
@@Thrusce he is not solely responsible for the corruption and paradigm shift, but certainly played a significant role. In many ways he was a victim of his age, and in many more he was an active source of corruption.
@@ThrusceAugustine didn't invent any of those things. The doctrine of the One Visble Church was always believed. So was baptismal regeneration. This can be easily seen because the Orthodox Church, which doesn't even recognize Augustine as a saint, also agrees with those doctrines. It is only the Roman Catholic Church that accepted Augustinian doctrines, and the Protestants inherited them from Catholicism. The Church was never corrupted by Augustine, only Roman Catholicism and Protestantism were.
@@IdolKiller Augustine influenced Luther and Calvin, especially Calvin in his writings, problem is Augustine like Calvin and many others, we're never consistent in their writings, like the admirers of Friedrich Nietzsche and Karl mark's aphorisms.
By far the best exposition of Pelagius I've come across on UA-cam. A brilliant scholar questioned by a fantastic interviewer. Thanks so much.
Ken Wilson's book "Foundations of augustinian-calvinism" has clear connection to this.
Mr. McGrew, I so appreciate you as an interviewer asking Dr. Bonner succinct and pertinent questions and allowing her to answer uninterrupted. Although I appreciate Dr. Flowers' work, I wish he, among others, on UA-cam didn't use interviews for his own opportunity for simultaneously extended lectures. Thank you.
Came here via Soteriology 101. Good stuff.
Nothing like going back to school for history lesson... and it was free
My question regarding all of this is... How can we view Augustine in a positive light when all 14 of his arguments against Pelagius were so false to Pelagius's actual beliefs? Even worse that Augustine stated he didn't care if those points were accurate to Pelagius's actual beliefs or not...
So slandering and false accusations against a brother in Christ to destroy his life, make a caricature of his views and ultimately create a boogeyman to further his own new theology onto the church should... what? Be looked over? Be defended even?
The only thing I can logically conclude is that Augustine was a manipulative theological tyrant who ultimately changed the course of Christian orthodoxy for the worse... supposedly for God's glory...
I try to give him the benefit of the doubt whenever possible, but I hold a low view of him and believe he was likely apostate
@@IdolKiller
I'm beginning to wonder if bible scholars/historians who decide to publicly go against Augustine would be treated like actors are who publicly come out as conservative in Hollywood...
Get canceled, watch their professional careers get destroyed, not be allowed a seat at the table, get publicly ridiculed and smeared as a heretic...
@@IdolKiller Thinking that Augustine was likely an apostate is some heavy allegation/thought
@@Mazinga I have a lot of reason to believe he fell from orthodoxy and knowingly lied and manipulated to corrupt the Church. Thus I see validation for including him among those we were warned of in passages like Acts 20:28-30
@@IdolKiller Hi Warren, thank you for the quick reply. I have to chew on this one. Do you have a list or link me to one that sums his "apostasies" up? Thank you.
Great guest, Warren. Now, I must say, you are probably one of, or possibly, THE best interviewer I have ever observed. Perfect restraint, excellent input and guidance. So glad I found your channel. New sub.
Thank you!
Agreed. Excellent interviewer.
I’m thrilled to have found your channel through Dr Flowers’ channel. Your testimony is revelatory to mine recently. Gen 3 has been revolutionary for me to see how the knowledge of good and evil and eternal life are the reason Adam was kicked out of the garden. Ever since, man has been mortal and will die. Mortality was given to mankind since we don’t have access to God’s tree of life. Eternal life is available only through faith in Jesus so that we can be presented to the Father blameless. This also ties in tightly to the age at which a child understands good and evil. If a fetus is aborted or an infant dies or a mentally disabled person dies while they don’t know good and evil, they are still innocent and I believe are acceptable to God and are in heaven.
I thought that the interview with Dr Bonner and Leighton Flowers was slightly better. The important thing is the definition of original sin and ' *Absolute* prevenient grace'. The question is not whether original sin has had an effect on mankind but whether that has affected man's ability to even respond to God's offer and call to salvation. Whether God acts first and then man has to repent and believe as the traditional view was, or whether God has to save and regenerate man before man can do anything.
This was an incredibly interesting and helpful discussion, and you did a great job leading the interview. Thanks for sharing this! I'm going to have to go look at those books.
It’s so nice not listening to an emotionally charged polemic. What I have found is real academic facts about a subject tend to much more in the middle in terms of what we actually know. Much less binary and n terms of for or against. It certainly doesn’t raise my blood pressure the same way debate normally does. Thanks for this calm thoughtful discussion on a controversial topic! I want more :)
True but that’s because of much less shared prior beliefs so it naturally doesn’t come to hard conclusions often, but very useful and enjoyable. Both have their important places
What an amazing piece of history and something I have never heard before. I have heard the phrase Pelagian and semi Pelagian along with heresy but never heard such a clear historical explanation why as shown here.
Thanks! Dr Bonner is great
An absolutely fascinating discussion and terrific interview. I only wish I could have understood more of what Dr. Bonner was saying, but my poor hearing simply didn’t permit me to understand everything she said because I couldn’t make out what she was saying with her British accent. I’ll need to listen to this interview multiple times to catch some of what she says, but I plan to purchase her book. Thank you for sharing this interview with us.
Have you tried using closed captions? It's the little box on the video screen that has CC inside it, if you click it you should get subtitles :)
@@Tom-sd9jb Thank you, it works! The CCs are small but still readable.
Very interesting, thank you for sharing this discussion.
Wow, brother this was great quite exquisite and a must see for anyone who wants to know more on this issue. She is very humble. And she did her best to stay unbiased and just give us the facts. Great show.
A wonderful scholar Dr Ali Bonner
Thanks
Thank you!
Thank you
Thanks!
First time hearing from Dr Ali Bonner and I really thoroughly enjoyed this.
You said it perfectly, that in Christiam debate we often don't consider why the other person believes what they believe and is there any merit behind it. Also, that it's just "I'm going to defend my side no matter" and generally lacking empathy. I am not due any more credit than the next man, but what separates my position from others is the ability to ask those questions "Why did the believe that? Is there any merit? Where are they coming from?"... This stance has allowed me to learn an incredible amount that I otherwise wouldn't have. The only downside is facing some Truths you may be more comfortable not recognizing, but this is not about comfortabolity, and we must seek Truth no matter our feelings.
Thanks Warren for this great interview!
I found you because it's soteriology 101 you popped up in my suggestions really pleased so far with the channel keep doing the great work.
Thanks!!
I love panning & coin collecting, btw
So helpful-thank you Dr. Bonner and Warren!
thanks Warren. Yes the title 'Fear of Freedom' caught my attention as well.
It was very nice being introduced to Ali... kudos!!!
This interview has unraveled so much for me! I need her book ASAP!
Excellent interview
Yet another top drawer production. Keep them coming.
PLEASE!!! Do more stuff on Julian of Eclanum. He seems like such a fascinating character and I am very pleased to hear him brought up in this interview. Thank you to Dr. Ali, what a pleasure of a conversation!
Can you recomend a video where i can watch about julian of eclanum?. Ive heared she or he is a pelagian. I want to know more about him;)
@@metnasopar8861 he was labeled a Pelagian because he would not submit to condemnation of the Pelagians. You can learn more about him by reading this book. I highly recommend it.
@@AA-by7xc i tried to look for him or her in youtube. I cannot find anyone discussing julian of eclanum;)
I am tempted to contact warren to contact Dr ali bonner and to say if she can talk more about julian of eclanum but i am shy. Hahaaha;)
I need to wait to have a money for the book;)..
@@AA-by7xc i also wanted to know if julian also has a writings that tells what pelaguis really taught.. ;). That would be great:)
This is all a fascinating interview. Would love to have, if possible, a transcript of it.
Did you ever get a transcript and how could I get it. Thanks
@@chriswoods7328 I don't know whether or not this will be helpful, but under the "more info" section at the top, there's an option to show an auto-generated transcript. It may not be perfect, since I think it's done the same way as closed captions, but perhaps you'd be able to copy the text from there into a document or something. (I'd test that out for you, but I'm currently using the mobile app.)
Looking forward to hearing this
I know this video is older, but Oxford Press is having a huge sale right now, so I finally ordered! Thank you for this video!
Absolutely agree with the comment by Jonathan M just before mine. I would add that this the BEST video of any kind I have ever seen. I just want to be involved in lining up guests for the host. Thank you.
In general I am very glad to see the idols of Monica, Augustine and Calvin all pulled down.
This is my third time watching this video. It is very fascinating. So much to learn on Pelagius and his times.
This is gold!
Excellent interview all the way through.
I wish you can interview Her again for aditional infos if possible;).:)
loved this!!! The last few minutes were just stellar. the balance of orthodoxy and orthpraxy.
My understanding of why Augustine went after Pelagius in the first place is because Pelagius preached against his immorality.
Didn't Augustine himself publish his immoral deeds in his confession? Perhaps Augustine understood the necessity of grace better than Pelagius did.
Pelagius made Augustine's sexual perversion, Augustine's own problem. How could Augustine continue doing what he loved with Pelagius around? Had Pelagius continued his influence with nobility, Augustine would have lost his power.
@@orangeswell1469 bingo
Luther excommunicated and get famous, but this pelagian is different. I think we should research more about this man. An Objective point of view r really needed...
Corrected table of contents, orginally by @noelenliva2670
18:05 - Orthodoxy of Man's innate goodness
20:39 - The changing definitions of Pelagianism
22:01 - Grace given acc to merit - Evagrius, Jerome, Basil, Athanasius
22:29 - Perfection achievable - Palladius, Jerome. Not Pel
29:47 - Adam created mortal. Rufinus. Not Pelagius
32:27 - Cooperation of Grace and Free Will
33:13 - Pelagius "Free will always requires God's grace"
33:52 - 7 or so categories of Grace - trnsln to Latin cnnttns
37:20 - Pelagius at Synods - acquitted 3 times
41:21 - Pelagius condemned through lobbying
59:58 - MSS no & whitewashing Pelagius with Jerome
01:05:10 - Writings of Pel in qty next only to Aug & transmitted as works of Jerome or councils of Nicaea
01:16:36 - Rowan Greer's "Fear of Freedom" on Ambrose
Great interview Warren!
Fantastic interview!
Excellent interview! I've been linking to it in the comments sections of some videos on other channels that repeat the Augustinian myths about "Pelagianism". The more people watch this, the better!
Warren, is it possible to get a transcript of this important interview?
I could hire someone to do it. Let me see
@@IdolKiller Hey, that transcript available?
Was a transcript made or available
@@BillyMenno can I ask what you’d use it for?
@@jordandthornburg I am not the sharpest tool in the box. To have a transcript to read through, re-read and study would simply be easier to walk through than listening to the interview 75 times to get the same information.
There is SO much information here, I'd like to take it in bit by bit.
so so good
Thanks! Dr Bonner was a terrific guest. I thoroughly enjoyed it
I have watched this video several times and love it. This is the true definition of approaching the Bible with good hermeneutics. We have to approach the Bible with a true understanding of culture, politics, politics of the ruling governance, & politics of the early church. To deny that many of the 3rd-4th century writers and those called the early fathers of the church were not influenced by the politics within the church and politics of the ruling class did not influence them, is a denial of history. It's so important to approach a true bible study, not a reading as you would get a small group or a sermon, with an understanding of culture, politics, and historical events happening at the time. To do otherwise is to rely on one's own understanding ( modern think).
I intend to buy Ali's book, but I would suggest that Ali buy Dr. Ken Wilson's book: Augustine's Conversion from Traditional Free Choice to "Non-free Free Will"
He is the Premier Augustinian scholar to read the whole corpus of Augustine and in the original language, and in chronological order. He gives precise details about everything Augustine said that is extant. It clears up some of what is being supposed or not known for certain according to what is said in this video. Enjoyed the video, much appreciated.
In this interview Dr Bonner noted her familiarity with Dr Wilson's work. They both have interesting insights into these events which changed the course of Western Christianity
At 1:15 the comment about neo orthodoxy perfectly applies to our current societal and political changes. The new presents itself as the old and the mainstream as the innovation
This was an excellent, insightful, and informative talk on Pelagius within his historical context.
Fascinating
She's got the best accent.
Well done!
This is fascinating, thanks so much.
Wow, myth busters for sure!!
Did you get the “Free of Freedom” book? Was it good?
I see James White and Jeff Durbin gave this a thumbs down. I kid I kid 😜. Dr. Bonner blew my mind 🤯🤯
Lol... Dr Bonner was great
Absolutely brilliant interview on such an important and obscured subject! In this spirit, perhaps you might consider interviewing Dr. Ilaria Ramelli. You will find her credentials to be most impeccable. And here, if you'll please forgive me, perhaps I can somewhat appeal to your emotions, as she does have some important insights into Gregory of Nazianzus, who I know you said you are quite fond of in one of your videos. I too share your sentiment. The other Cappadocian fathers, Gregory of Nyssa and St. Basil the Great, held to Christian universalism, and although it is perhaps not as explicit with Gregory of Nazianzus, there's no reason to assume he didn't well. In any case though, even from just an historical perspective, I think if you familiarized yourself with the work of Dr. Ilaria Ramelli, you will find it to be just as important as Dr. Bonner's here presented.
Going by the timeline given, maybe the change in opinion, the pressure on the Bishop of Rome, was caused by a threat of death from the Emperor. They already got a decree for the "Donatists" to be condemned to death as heretics. Maybe the enforcement of that law led to a change of heart for purposes of self-preservation?
Love the Polo Warren!
It was interesting to revisit your debate with JD Martin after listening to this eye opening interview, basically showing that JD was either being very dishonest or misinformed regarding Church history. Well done for getting the Dr on the show!
JD was just misinformed
What is her book called?
The Myth of Pelagianism.
By Ali Bonner
There should be an affiliate link in the description that takes you to the Amazon listing.
@@IdolKiller if you are also interested. I just bought "Pelagiaus's commentary on St. Paul epistle to the romans "
Translated by Theodore De Bruyn
She's so right. The creeds have no ethics. But the gospels and the Didache and the early church were all about living out Jesus' ethics.
Amazon lists the book at 105$ is that correct?
Yes, it's pretty expensive.
@@IdolKiller Ok, but worth saving for!
Worth every penny.
I am quite open to the idea that Pelagius himself was misunderstood (as it also happened to his contemporary Nestorius) and thus "Pelagianism" a misnomer. However, both the interview and the thesis are quite questionable, at least if I go by how it is presented in the video:
1. Dr. Bonner claims that "Man's innate goodness" was a mainstream opinion/orthodox in early Christianity. (18:05) But then she immediately switches over to the position that man had "free will to do not only bad but also good". In other words that Man is able to do good.* But that is not quite the same thing. She uses the same trick several times during the interview. She has to because "man's innate goodness" (after the Fall) is flat out contradicted by Scripture.
(*Not going into the distinction between doing good deeds and doing things that would merit salvation before God.)
2. The video is permeated by a ongoing conspiracy-mongering painting Augustinus as this villain creating villfying strawmen to push through his views
3. In doing so she is doing what she herself accuses others of: making the issue one of binary opposition, of an either/or choice. Either you agree with the older Augustinus's very bleak picture of human nature and his idea of double Predestination. If you don't, you are said to basically agree with Pelagius. It is not that simple.
3. It is simply not accurate to say that Pelagius was acquitted three times before he was condemned. This picture neatly leaves out that the African bishops condemned him and his views in the beginning. At Diospolis he was only acquitted (of holding such views) when he had gone to the east. (And of course, that was due to Pelagius saying he did not hold the views called Pelagianism - the views themselves were not condoned.) True, she says that this just "a account" that there is "nothing that isn't contested" but she goes on to use that impression anyway.
5. She also briefly talks about "grace given according to merits" but that's only looking at the surface. What do these authors mean by that? Is is initial saving grace (in which case those not given the grace simply did not deserve to be saved) or is it about an ongoing supply of grace?
The interviewer, with his own biases, does not challenge her to make these issues clear. Calling "fear of freedom" a good title - it is actually an ultra-polemical lowblow that is fashionable these days.
That's certainly an interesting question about what ought to develope and what ought not to. I think there's probably is some things that should and some that should not. This tension is also healthy
An image I think helpful regarding the latter conversation about whence ethics in the creeds? is to evoke the notion of "how one wears their doctrine." For some, their doctrine seems quite comfortable on them and they wear it gracefully; for others it is an official tight-fitting uniform that is worn impeccably that makes observers uncomfortable just looking at them. How often over the decades have I watched the tomahawk-chop motion with the hand as a proud adherent of Reformed Calvinism refers to the need to "rightly dividing the Word, brother."
Fascinating! And to think that Pelagius’s work may have been used to develop the Nicene Creed! Oh! The irony!
I really did not understand that part. Can you explain it more. Does it mean that the writings of pelaguis are quoted in nicene creed?. And how did it happen. Thanks.
@@metnasopar8861 - I think they meant his theology from his writings were used to develop that creed.
@@yvonnedoulos8873 i wish there are quotations:)
@@metnasopar8861 - You could buy her book which may have the information you’re looking for.
@@yvonnedoulos8873 its not cheap;)
I can’t help but have the serpent’s words ring in my head … “ did God really say..?”
I think that's appropriate, as the entire debate over anthropology centers around what occured in Eden when the serpent lied & deceived man.
Dr Alister mcgraths book history of the doctrine of justification in pages 54 to 60 calls into question this theisis. Can you adresss his arguments
Rowan A. Greer - The Fear of Freedom 1989
Where do you get the book? There’s only an expensive monograph on amazon
Yes that's the one
i've been called a "semi-pelagian" so many times by calvinists. I tried to find some info and the web seems lacking. Thanks for this info.
Also, be sure to check out our video review the 14 points Augustine charged Pelagius with
Alguém pode me falar o que aconteceu na vídeo? não entendo inglês, só português
@@DAN_23_03 probably not man. It’s quite long. . Are you interested in Pelagius?
@@jordandthornburg I'm sorry if any words are wrong as I'm using Google translate, but I just wanted to know what they're talking about Pelagianism?
@@jordandthornburg (some word may be wrong because I'm using Google translator) but is the Pelagianism talking in the video about what was contrary to the Theology of Saint Augustine?
Where did Augustine say he didn't care if he was accurately portraying Pelagius or not?
18:05 - Orthodoxy of Man's innate goodness
20:39 - The changing definitions of Pelagianism
22:01 - Grace given acc to merit - Evagrius, Jerome, Basil, Athanasius
22:29 - Perfection achievable - Palladius, Jerome. Not Pelagius.
29:47 - Adam created mortal. Rufinus. Not Pelagius
32:27 - Cooperation of Grace and Free Will
33:13 - Pelagius "Free will always requires God's grace"
33:52 - 7 or so categories of Grace - trnsln to Latin connotations
37:20 - Pelagius at Synods - acquitted 3 times
41:21 - Pelagius condemned through lobbying
59:58 - MSS no & whitewashing Pelagius with Jerome
01:05:10 - Writings of Pel in qty next only to Aug & transmitted as works of Jerome or councils of Nicaea
01:16:36 - Rowan Greer's "Fear of Freedom" on Ambrose
I'm grateful to " @str.77 " for pointing out the error in my earlier post and I have made the change accordingly.
Very objective presentation. Great job!
Thank you! Dr Bonner is brilliant. By far one of my favorite interviews
You need to do a video on Romans 7. It's a watershed text.
Dr. Bonner is much nicer than I will ever be. Augustine may have been very “genuine and passionate about his beliefs concerning the Pauline epistles”, but he was also genuinely wrong, and his Manichaean teachings caused a great many in the western church to depart from the original orthodox faith once delivered to the saints after the resurrection of Christ Jesus.
✝️📖🙏🏼
He was also heavily influenced by the Encratites and Messalians, as well as the Manichaeans. The man was in profound error.
@@IdolKiller
Good to know. I have never heard of them.
The Orthodox Faith delivered to the saints never excepted Aigustinian views. Only Rome and Protestantism did.
@@bad_covfefe
Thank you for the correction. I have revised my original comment to be more historically accurate.
☦️🙏🏼😇
why dont those of the reformed community engage with the academic information on pelagianism?
It would require they give up something they've weaponized with good effect.
The reformed community prides itself on being the "historical" faith. The reality is though that they have an incredibly shallow understanding of church history and perhaps a shallower understanding of how to even use church history and what it means to be a historical church. It's like if an infant making a painting. They are trying their hardest, but they simply don't understand what it means.
👍👍👍❤️❤️❤️🙏🙏🙏 Praise the Lord.
Nice to see someone other than Leighton Flowers and Brian Wagner beating the drum for orthodoxy!!!
Thank you!
So of the Council of Carthage do you have a list of everyone who sat on the council?
Were they all just a bunch of buddies who all believed the same thing?
Was it just a group of dudes who were followers of Augustine who banded together and then decided to call Pelagius a heretic?
My point is anyone even myself right now can go and round up a bunch of dudes who all believe the same thing as me and then decide together to call Calvinism heresy.
So the point is “who cares?”
My point is what authority did this so-called council have?
It definitely wasn’t an authority given by God but rather a self-proclaimed authority.
Anyone can do that.
“I’m proclaiming right now that I’m the authority and deem you all as heretics and well, since I’m the authority then that means I’m right.” 🤦♂️
I’d like to see the list of guys and what they all actually believed and it wouldn’t surprise me if they were all actually heretics themselves rather than Pelagius.
The Roman Church at the council of Trent is in effect semi Pelagian.
So basically it's an imaginary heresy because they needed a straw man to demolish. The more things change the more they stay the same.
In hindsight, and emphasize hindsight, it's hard to believe Augustine's motives were neutral or pure.
So they destroyed Pelagius's work back in the dark ages....and they are still destroying it today. Mark of a great man.
I am dyslexic and can not find an audio version of her book. Which I am sad about. I do want to check it out. Also, I do want to comment that some would reject Pelagianism just on the idea that Paleguis was a catholic. A lot of people reject any doctrine supported by the catholic church.
@Fred Seeking Bible TRuth, I really can't understand why Pelagius is a Catholic when Pelagius rejected the original sin doctrine that Catholic is teaching... Please enlighten me.. Thanks...
@@reynaldodavid2913Jo I was just going by what was mentioned in the video.
@@fredseekingbibleturth, Thank you...
By that standard, they really must reject Augustine since he was a Catholic Bishop.
@@benjaminmeyer2564 yep there are people like that. There are even people that reject paul's teaching.
I thought Pelagian said believing was a work, and Augustine to argue against that he formed this doctrine of election that we see today in Calvinism. Is that true or am I way off?
I'd have to see the quote. Likely it dealt with belief as necessary but not meritorious.
@@IdolKiller I thought I heard Kevin Thompson say that. I might have misheard him cause I was working while listening. But after watching this I'm thinking Augustine might have been forming a strawman. IDK just a thought.
@@jantz01 From all that I have understood Pelagius wasn’t a “Pelagian”. His beliefs were in step with the early church (and scripture). To me it is sad he was acquitted twice and then finally by golly Augustine got his vindictive way. What is sadder is how current Bible teachers throw around the word “Pelagian” and know absolutely nothing about him or the circumstances that led to his “condemnation”.
I think Warren's statement at the beginning of this interview is too strong. Pelagius, as Ali Bonner describes him does not discount original sin in general only that version of it from Augustine and Calvin etc that even the will and understanding of man is so corrupted that God has to regenerate people before they can come to believe and repent. What Pelagius was against was what Ali Bonner describes as ' *absolute* prevenient grace'. 'Absolute prevenient grace' is not that God has to be drawing all people to himself before man/woman can freely accept or resist God's grace, but 'Absolute prevenient grace' is the Augustinian idea that God has to do everything before man does anything.
I recently watched another interview with Dr Bonner and Leighton Flowers that I think began with a more clearer introduction.
The outcome in the end is that it is a cooperative process. Neither does man (male and female) initiate and save himself through his own strength and nature nor does God do everything and reverse the order of salvation.
Calvinism ends up reversing the order of salvation basically saying that you have to be saved and regenerated before you can repent or believe.
Much of Ali Bonner's material is the same in both interviews but I still enjoyed listening to it again and the details that I didn't get in that first interview.
Original Sin is an Augustinian doctrine which didn't exist prior to his formulation of it. Adam's sin and subsequent consequences is a Biblical truth. Pelagius didn't deny the latter, the former most certainly.
@@IdolKiller Thank you for your response but I still disagree with your conclusion. You admit that Adams sin has consequences for us all - as far as I am concerned that IS original sin. It is very very different from the Augustinian and Calvinistic redefining of it but it is still the original sin of Adam that has affected us all. We all, by our own nature without God's grace, have the tendency to commit sin. I agree with you that Augustine and Calvin gave a false definition of the effects of original sin but in general terms Adam's was still the original sin that has weakened all human nature so we are no longer able to avoid falling into sin.
Anyway I am still much more in line with your general message, and especially with the work of Leighton Flowers though I am not convinced that we do not need prevenient grace from God that we must accept instead of resisting in order to come to repentance, faith and salvation.
May God bless you and your ministry 🙏. In Jesus's name amen.
@@oprophetisfake9482 i understand and appreciate the comments. Just keep in mind Original Sin is a term describing a specific Augustinian doctrine. When we try to redefine this term we blur the lines and inject unnecessary confusion. We can discuss Adam's sin and its consequences apart from that specific term and its associated concepts.
@@oprophetisfake9482Get Adam Harwood's Christian theology. The best 1 vol. systematic, also goes deep on original sin.
In the game Skyrim there is a character called Pelagius the tormented.
He also happens to be a Breton lol.
The grace of God is begun in us at conversion. (Acts 2:38) In this we can be cleansed of our past sins.
Then we receive the Spirit of the holy one (Christ) who assists us to guide us and strengthens us to overcome every temptation brought by the devil - keeping ourselves clean. (1 Corinthians 10:13)
Because every one of us will be judged by our deeds of which will determine where we each will spend our eternity. (Romans 2:5-10)
Karen Leigh King
Book discredited by a large part of the bench where it was presented. The myth here would be her own, trying to come out in defense of Pelagius who was condemned in Church Councils, and it is clear that she participates in a movement of "historical revisionism" that is only accepted by themselves! Marcos Lopez - USA
If you wish to put forward such accusations, you need to present supporting evidence. Otherwise it's empty bluster.
The book was not fully accepted by the Orford panel, due to some problems. -see link -
en-m-wikipedia-org.translate.goog/wiki/The_Myth_of_Pelagianism?_x_tr_sl=en&_x_tr_tl=pt&_x_tr_hl=pt-BR&_x_tr_pto=sc
It's a very easy thing that even 12-year-olds can do. Just click on Wikipedia and see her thesis at Oxford, it was not fully accepted by the committee. Now in the name of truth, it's better to lie, isn't it, in other words, a woman writes a thesis in 2018 and wants to annul all the semi-Pelagianism that Pelagius taught, it's time to put an end to it! It's as if there are no documents that present what he actually creates. All in the name of denying yourself the obvious, that is, predestination as it is in the Bible, that is, it is God who chooses from the womb, simple as that (Isaiah 49.1 - Galatians 1.15 etc). Marcos Lopez - Naugatuck - USA
He was a cymro
Just because Pelagius may not have held these doctrines, doesn't mean that what is called Pelagianism isn't heretical. This is where the interviewee says a mistake: heresy does exist and doctrine itself does not develop. Yes we can work through the points of doctrine, but after something is defined, it clarifies and does a decision, if necessary. Excellent discussion on Pelagius, the man, however. Thanks, @idolkiller The creeds served a simple function; ethics were discussed and defined elsewhere and by councils as well. But for clarity to keep ethics on track, not only personal "niceness charity", but to keep broad ethics on track, heresy definition is extremely important, since policy flows from philosophical errors. For example: ua-cam.com/video/PYNxwNjVcL0/v-deo.html
The issue is that no one held to Pelagianism. It was cobbled together from various groups and heresies (some of which men like Jerome actually affirmed). It was a smear campaign. Pelagianism just doesn't exist. There are no Pelagians, nor were there any.
Are you saying that Augustine used a conscious debating tactic to advance his views? That he intentionally used a straw man to get the church to paint itself into a corner and agree with his new conception of grace? I think a corollary is that the church had not ruled on this issue before, it may have only been on Augustine's radar. But do you agree that it was an intentional gambit?
It was certainly intentional. He was trained in rhetoric and politic. The church had previously and unanimously affirmed man's innocence and free will... including Augustine when he converted. It was only later that he reversed course, dragging the State Church with him.
I don't think you are being 100% fair to Augustine. As I think about this I realize that what he articulated was a paradigm shift. It incorporated so many things. Baptismal regeneration. An official church. Sacramentalism--the shift from the Love Feast to the Mass, in the late 300's. An active role by the Emperor in church affairs (i.e. he called the cops on the Donatists). And a merit-based theology that was highly compatible with all of the above. It wasn't restricted to one man's rivalry. It was a sea change, a reevaluation of where we stood as a church.
At the same time, Augustine was the spokesman for experientialism. "Take and read." He planted the seed for the Moravians, for the Lutheran Reformation, even Wesley and Finney. Pelagius, by my recollection of what I've read of his, was weak on experientialism. It was probably the dialectical flaw that needed addressing during those times. But Augustine had these two contradictory currents in his thought. They were reconciled in the institutional church. It was the only church in town (in the West), and so it was at the same time the City of God and the City of Man.
@@Thrusce he is not solely responsible for the corruption and paradigm shift, but certainly played a significant role. In many ways he was a victim of his age, and in many more he was an active source of corruption.
Thanks for the information. I hope you won't use it to tear people down, only to build them up.
@@ThrusceAugustine didn't invent any of those things. The doctrine of the One Visble Church was always believed. So was baptismal regeneration. This can be easily seen because the Orthodox Church, which doesn't even recognize Augustine as a saint, also agrees with those doctrines. It is only the Roman Catholic Church that accepted Augustinian doctrines, and the Protestants inherited them from Catholicism. The Church was never corrupted by Augustine, only Roman Catholicism and Protestantism were.
There is a cult like following of Augustine trough out history because he is a cult leader.
it looks san agustin was a liar too.
Follow me and I will make you fishers of men. Matthew 4:19 You following Jesus?
Accent I’m out
People become lazy and depend on these professors. Seek and you shall find is not practised.
Uhhh... Augustinians mostly bury their heads in the sand and ignore the facts presented by people like this Professor.
@@IdolKiller Augustine influenced Luther and Calvin, especially Calvin in his writings, problem is Augustine like Calvin and many others, we're never consistent in their writings, like the admirers of Friedrich Nietzsche and Karl mark's aphorisms.