Reformed individuals believe in radical corruption.
We acknowledge that man has a creaturely free will that is constrained by his fallen nature. He freely sins because he is a sinner by nature.
Some free-willers believe in partial depravity, but others don't believe in depravity at all. They do not believe man's nature was corrupted by the Fall.
This fringe would be called Pelagianism.
I'm not sure why you are framing the discussion in terms of "free will", though. I would focus on the degree of curruption. You seem to deny that the Fall has affected mankind in terms of his nature.
Do you believe the Fall caused a corruption of man's nature? Or, perhaps, do you believe that man sins as a result of the bad example of his ancestors?
If the former, this is proper original sin, and is orthodox. If the latter, this is Pelagianism, and is unorthodox.
If you believe the Fall caused a partial corruption of man's nature, but the person can, without regeneration, exercise faith and repentance in order to come into a right relationship with God, this is semi-Pelagianism.
So, I would frame the discussion in terms of radical corruption, partial corruption, or no corruption. Which option do you believe in?
We acknowledge that man has a creaturely free will that is constrained by his fallen nature. He freely sins because he is a sinner by nature.
Some free-willers believe in partial depravity, but others don't believe in depravity at all. They do not believe man's nature was corrupted by the Fall.
This fringe would be called Pelagianism.
I'm not sure why you are framing the discussion in terms of "free will", though. I would focus on the degree of curruption. You seem to deny that the Fall has affected mankind in terms of his nature.
Do you believe the Fall caused a corruption of man's nature? Or, perhaps, do you believe that man sins as a result of the bad example of his ancestors?
If the former, this is proper original sin, and is orthodox. If the latter, this is Pelagianism, and is unorthodox.
If you believe the Fall caused a partial corruption of man's nature, but the person can, without regeneration, exercise faith and repentance in order to come into a right relationship with God, this is semi-Pelagianism.
So, I would frame the discussion in terms of radical corruption, partial corruption, or no corruption. Which option do you believe in?
That shows me they have no clue the depths of sin and how corrupted the heart of the lost person is. Yet, they think it shouldn’t be that hard to be saved? How can ppl who don’t seek God be saved? How?!?!?