Chat responds to my inquiry, “What you’re referring to comes out of the Pelagian controversy, especially in works by Augustine of Hippo, such as On Nature and Grace, On the Proceedings of Pelagius, and Against Two Letters of the Pelagians. Augustine never gives a single, tidy “numbered list of 14” in one place the way a modern outline would; rather, he gathers and restates what he believes are the core Pelagian claims—sometimes summarizing them into a set (often counted later by scholars as 14 based on overlapping passages and conciliar material, especially around the Council of Carthage (418)).
Below is a clear reconstruction of the 14 teachings Augustine attributes to Pelagius, along with what he means by calling them “errors”:
- Adam’s sin harmed only himself
- Pelagian claim: Adam’s fall affected only Adam, not the human race. Augustine’s concern: This denies inherited corruption; for Augustine, all humanity fell “in Adam.”
- Human beings are born morally neutral, like Adam.
- Claim: Every person is born in the same condition as Adam before the fall. Augustine rejects this as a denial of original sin.
- Infants are not born guilty or in need of cleansing. Claim: Babies have no sin.
Augustine: Uses infant baptism as proof that even infants need forgiveness. - Death is natural, not a result of sin
- Claim: Humans would die whether Adam sinned or not. Augustine: Death is a penalty introduced by sin. The whole human race does not die because of Adam’s sin
- Claim: No inherited death condition tied to Adam.
Augustine: Death spreads to all because all sinned in Adam.” - The law (Torah) gives salvation just like the gospel
- Claim: The Mosaic law is sufficient for righteousness.
Augustine: The law reveals sin but cannot save without grace. - There were sinless people before Christ. Claim: Some individuals lived entirely without sin.
Augustine: Denies this (except Christ), citing universal sinfulness. - Humans can be without sin if they choose. Claim: Sinlessness is achievable by human willpower. Augustine: Sees this as undermining the necessity of grace.
- Grace is not necessary for every good act. Claim: Humans can initiate good without divine help. Augustine: Grace is absolutely necessary even to will the good. Grace is given according to merit. Claim: God gives grace because we deserve it. Augustine: Grace must be unmerited, or it is no longer grace. God’s grace is mainly external (law, teaching, example). Claim: Grace consists in instruction (e.g., Christ’s example). Augustine: True grace transforms the will internally. The will is naturally capable of choosing good without inner renewal. Claim: Free will alone is sufficient for righteousness. Augustine: The will is “bound” by sin without grace.
- Forgiveness is not essential for every sin (or sin is avoidable entirely). Claim: Humans can live needing little or no forgiveness. Augustine: The Lord’s Prayer (“forgive us…”) shows ongoing need. Christ’s role is primarily moral example, not redeemer from inherited sin. Claim: Christ shows how to live rather than rescuing a fallen nature. Augustine: This empties the cross of its saving necessity.
What was Augustine really pushing back against?
If you step back, Augustine sees all 14 supposed heresies as variations on one central problem:
- Pelagius holds that human nature is fundamentally capable (able to do what God commands);
- Augustine insists that it is fundamentally dependent on grace and incapable of doing so.
For much more detail on this false view by Augustine, see my book, When Lies Become Truth, chapters 1 and 2. There are many other articles on my website as well.
At the beginning of his Christian life, Augustine believed in historic Christian doctrine espoused by the early church fathers. But notice that Augustine later changed his views and came to believe that we were all born sinners and needed grace just to be able to obey God in the first place.
He came to believe that we are not able to do anything good, including believing in God and repenting of our sins. He believed that without the grace of God, we could not obey God even if we wanted to. Here is one of his greatest errors. If this is true, then ability is not an act of unmerited and undeserved grace; it is basic justice. He convinced the Christian world almost universally that grace consisted of God giving us the ability to obey Him. He saw no problem with believing that a holy and just God would command what His children were naturally unable to comply with. He also saw no problem believing that God would then rightfully send the unbelieving and disobedient to hell.
You will notice this in that even Arminian theology, which claims that God gives us prevenient grace so that we can obey God, and the inability we inherit from Adam can be overcome. But again, this is not grace at all. It is justice. To get Christians to think that the ability to do as God commands is grace is a grand deception. Tell a lie long enough, often enough, and loud enough, and everyone will believe it. So, it is today. Calvinism is not about the grace of God at all.
For Pelagius, the core issue is choice and ability, just like the early church all believed before Augustine: people sin because they choose to. For Augustine, the core issue is a condition: people sin because their nature is either wounded or totally depraved or nearly so, and in need of healing.
Important nuance
It’s worth noting that Pelagius himself often denied holding these views in the extreme forms that Augustine presents them. Much of the controversy centers on how to interpret Pelagius’s language and how far his followers (such as Celestius) carried his ideas.
So, the “14 errors” are best understood as Augustine’s theological framing of Pelagianism, not a verbatim confession from Pelagius. But what can be said of a man of God lying or intentionally misrepresenting the views of another man of God and having him run out of the church by his false accusations?
Let me remind you that Pelagius denied that he believed these false claims. Even so, that was not good enough for Augustine. He demanded that the church condemn Pelagius and his views. Let us look at that more closely.
📜 Council of Carthage (418): Primary Canons, per ChatGPT
(From the Council of Carthage (418))
These are the formal rulings against what were understood as Pelagian teachings.
Canon 1 — Death is not natural but due to sin
“If anyone says that Adam… was created mortal, so that whether he sinned or not he would have died… let him be anathema.”
Meaning: The Council rejects the Pelagian claim that death is natural. Affirms Augustine’s view: death entered through the sin of Adam.
(Pelagius denied believing this, so the straw man was created by Augustine.)
Canon 2 — Infants and original sin
“If anyone says that newborn children… have nothing of original sin… and that baptism for the remission of sins is not to be understood literally… let him be anathema.”
Meaning: Infants do need baptism because they inherit sin from Adam.
(Please note that the early church fathers all rejected this idea, along with Pelagius, but not the practice of infant baptism. As I have mentioned already, infant baptismal regeneration was rejected by many genuine believers, and many of them paid for their refusal with their lives over the centuries.)
Canon 3 — Grace is necessary, not optional
“If anyone says that the grace of God… is given only for the remission of sins already committed, and not also for aid in avoiding sin… let him be anathema.”
Meaning: Grace is not just forgiveness—it actively helps us not sin.
(Again, the early church believed we are naturally able to do as God commanded, but that we need God’s help in actually doing what we are able to do. Grace persuades us to be willing to do what God commands. Grace convinces us to use our ability to say no to sin and yes to God.)
Canon 4 — Grace enables obedience
“If anyone says that the grace of God… helps us only in that it reveals what we ought to do… but does not give us the power to do it… let him be anathema.”
Meaning: Rejects the idea that grace is merely instruction (law, teaching).
(This is what the early church believed, along with Pelagius. Titus 2 makes this point most clearly, affirming inner transformation as a result of instruction in the truth. Grace does not give us the ability, for it is impossible for a just God to condemn us for doing or not doing what is naturally beyond our power. Grace makes us willing to use our ability as God commands.)
Canon 5 — Without grace, we can do nothing truly good
“Without the grace of God, we can do no good thing.”
Meaning: Direct rejection of the idea that human will alone can produce righteousness.
(I have discussed this Augustinian error in other articles. We all know non-Christians who do good things and repent of evil. Think of those Christians and non-Christians who rescued the Jews from the Nazi in World War 2 at great personal risk. Greater love has no man than he lays down his life for another. Think of those non-Christians today who are morally upright and exceed the righteousness of many professing Christians.)
Canon 6 — Even the righteous need forgiveness
“If anyone says that the saints do not say ‘forgive us our trespasses’ sincerely… let him be anathema.”
Meaning: Even holy people still need ongoing forgiveness.
(This is another error of Augustine. So-called Christians who live in unrepentant sin are not holy until they clean up their act and repent of their sins. Holy people do not need ongoing forgiveness because they have already repented and received forgiveness. If a Christian sins, they need to repent.
But Augustine and most of his followers think Christian’s sin daily. That is not at all what the Bible teaches. A holy person is a person who has repented of all known sin. They do not need to repent unless they sin. And it is not something they need to do daily. If a so-called Christian needs to repent of sin every day, then they have not yet repented of sin.)
Canon 7 — Good works are God’s gift
“If anyone says that we are able… to do good without God’s grace… let him be anathema.”
Meaning: Good works ultimately come from grace, not independent human effort.
(This is much like Canon 5, and it is also false.)
Canon 8 — Grace is not given according to merit
“If anyone says that grace is given according to our merits… let him be anathema.”
Meaning: Grace is unearned, not a reward.
(But that doesn’t mean it is unconditional, as Augustine would have us believe. The word of God claims that those who confess and forsake their sins will find mercy, and only those who meet these two conditions will receive the grace of God. There are many such passages in scripture.)
📘 Augustine: Primary Source Excerpts
From On the Proceedings of Pelagius and related writings.
1. On condemned teachings (even if denied)
“Whether Pelagius or Caelestius held these things… it has been made quite clear that these things were condemned.”
Meaning: Augustine emphasizes that the doctrines themselves are rejected, regardless of Pelagius’s denials that he actually taught these things.
(How magnanimous of Augustine, who basically destroyed Pelagius’s reputation and got him excommunicated from the church.)
2. On grace vs. human ability
From On Nature and Grace: “We do not by free will do good works unless assisted by divine grace.” That is according to Augustine.
Meaning: Direct contradiction of the Pelagian idea of self-sufficient moral ability.
(This Augustinian falsehood has already been addressed in this and other articles.)
3. On infant sin and baptism
“The whole Church practices infant baptism… which would certainly be pointless if there were no original sin.”
Meaning: Augustine treats universal church practice as evidence for inherited sin.
(But universal practice was not actually universal because many Christians refused infant baptismal regeneration and were martyred for it. And just because many, even the majority, practice something does not make it true. Refer to my opening comments in the very first article on Original Sin. That is akin to saying that might makes right. Think of the worldwide flood when just a few followed God, and God destroyed the rest of the world. Also, think of the many times that most of Israel became apostate and were judged accordingly.)
4. On the necessity of grace for every act
“It is certain that we will do nothing good without God working in us.”
Meaning: Grace is required not just for action, but even for the will itself.
(This lie has already been exposed. Augustine’s false idea of grace was that it was irresistible. That makes God responsible for the evil that men do, because unless God irresistibly gives them grace, they cannot do anything good and can’t stop sinning.)
5. On human inability apart from grace
“Free will is indeed present… but it is not sufficient for righteousness unless healed by grace.”
Meaning: Augustine does not deny free will, but says it is wounded and insufficient.
(But how is that any different than saying we are unable to obey God or do anything good? Inability nullifies free will and is the best excuse for sin ever devised by the serpent and man.
Think about that for a moment. Augustine says we still have free will, but this free will is unable to do anything good unless God irresistibly gives the Christian grace. This Augustinian free will is a non-free, free will. This is the beginning of redefining Biblical words and ideas. It is the beginning of theological sophistry, all thanks to Augustine.)
🔍 How the Council and Augustine Fit Together
- The council gives the official rulings (short, legal, condemnations).
- Augustine provides the theological reasoning behind them.
Together, they target the same core ideas:
| Pelagian idea | Council response | Augustine’s reasoning |
| Humans born neutral | Canon 2 | Humanity fell in Adam |
| Grace is optional | Canons 3–5 | Grace needed for will and action |
| The law is enough | Canon 4 | Instruction ≠ transformation |
| Sinless perfection possible | Canon 6 | Even saints need forgiveness |
| Grace is earned | Canon 8 | Grace must be unmerited |
⚖️ Key Takeaway
What later comes to be summarized as “the 14 errors” is essentially this: The Church (heavily guided by Augustine) rejected the idea that humans can live righteously by natural ability alone and affirmed that grace is absolutely necessary from beginning to end.
(And why must all this error of Augustine, which was contrary to the early church, be assumed to be true and biblical? Because Augustine believed Christians sin all the time. Was that because he himself could not get a handle on his own sin? Therefore, because of Adam, we must all be born sinners. And we must be saved in our sins, not from them, because being saved from sinning is impossible, according to Augustine.)
This is where the discussion becomes much clearer when you can see all three voices side by side:
- What Pelagius actually said,
- How Augustine of Hippo interpreted and opposed him, and
- How key Eastern Fathers approached the same issues.
_______________________________________________________________________
📘 1. Pelagius — What he actually says (primary sources)
Pelagius’s own writings survive (especially his Letter to Demetrias and commentary on Romans). He is often more cautious than his later reputation suggests.
From Letter to Demetrias, “We distinguish three things: ability, will, and action. The ability is from God; the will and action are ours.”
Meaning: Pelagius does affirm grace, but defines it mainly as:
- the gift of free will,
- plus instruction (law, gospel, example of Christ).
On human ability
“Nothing impossible has been commanded by God.”
Meaning: If God commands something, humans must be capable of doing it.
(And this is what all the early church fathers universally believed, and the Bible clearly teaches. Yet Augustine wants us to believe something very different. They want us to believe that God is just in commanding us to do the impossible. I trust Pelagius more than I do Augustine. How about you?)
On sinlessness, “A man can, if he wishes, be without sin.”
Meaning: Sinlessness is possible, though not necessarily common, because we have free will that must choose between good and evil.
(The way ChatGPT describes it, one might assume that Pelagius taught sinless perfection. That is not the case. Pelagius was simply repeating what Jesus and the apostles taught. Sin is not inevitable, especially in the life of a Christian. We can go and sin no more, just as we are commanded by Jesus.
That doesn’t mean we irresistibly stop sinning, only that we can stop sinning as God commands. And that is why we are guilty and blameworthy for our sinning. If we were unable to stop sinning, we would not be responsible for sin and would not be blameworthy.
Who doesn’t honestly know that the thief can stop stealing? Who doesn’t know that the fornicator, adulterer, and homosexual can stop their sexual sinning? Can murderers stop their killing? Even non-Christians stop certain sins of their own free will because they are motivated to do so. They are able to do so, and that is what makes these sins crimes against God and man. Does this not make perfect sense?)
On grace
“Grace assists us… in that we are instructed by God’s law and Christ’s example.”
Meaning: Grace is primarily external guidance, not inner transformation of the will.
(In other articles, I have addressed this false teaching. Grace, according to Titus 2, teaches and instructs us to deny ungodliness and to live soberly and righteously in this present evil age. Pelagius, like most genuine believers, knew that until God’s teachings transform the mind and heart inwardly, the true grace is not operative and effectual. True grace starts as instruction but never ends until it has transformed the mind and heart.
Note the irony here. Augustinian Calvinism and most evangelicals talk a great deal about the need for the grace of God, and at the same time deny it out of the other side of their mouths. How so? They teach that we are saved by the grace of God through faith, even though they continue to sin in direct opposition to the purpose of that grace, as expressed by Titus. Unbelievable. Grace to them is not being held accountable for their sins. It is not an internal transformation in their lives as they pretend to believe and teach. How so? They profess that Christians actually never stop sinning in this life.)
📘 2. Augustine — His direct response
From On Nature and Grace and related works.
On human ability. “The law was given that grace might be sought; grace was given that the law might be fulfilled.”
Meaning: Law alone cannot produce righteousness—it exposes our need.
(Not true. The law, if obeyed, does produce righteousness. The problem is that we do not obey God because we are voluntarily and presumptuously selfish. We are not born that way; we choose to be that way to gratify our flesh. That makes us guilty and blameworthy. But being born unable to do as commanded makes us victims, not criminals.
And might I add that they may claim that “grace was given that the law might be fulfilled,” but they actually do not teach or believe it. Augustine and many others teach that Christians sin daily in thought, word, and deed. And they want us to think that this is the fulfillment of the law? They speak out of both sides of their mouths, both bitter and sweet lies.)
Against “we can if we choose.”
“It is not therefore in our power to do good works… unless God’s grace assists us.”
Direct clash with Pelagius: Pelagius → “You can if you will.” Augustine → “You cannot even rightly will without grace.”
(We have covered this error before. Let me make mention of the truth that many Calvinists believe that God decrees whatsoever comes to pass, both all the good and all the evil. Augustinian Calvinists do not believe our will has anything to do with it. It is all the result of God’s decrees, not our will. We will do well if God decrees it; it has nothing to do with grace or our will.)
On internal grace
“God works in us to will and to do.”
Meaning: Grace is internal and transformative, not merely instructional.
(Refer to my earlier comments. It is only when instructional grace transforms the heart and mind through the proper teaching of the truth that salvation is real. I simply do not believe that Pelagius or any other non-Calvinist thinks that the mere teaching of facts and opinions amounts to a hill of beans. Learning more facts is not what any true believer has in mind. This seems to be another straw man by those in the school of Augustine.
Let us not forget that Augustinian Calvinists may say grace is internal and transformative, not merely instructional, but that is meaningless rhetoric on their part. Why? Because they believe Christians sin daily until they die. That is not transformative because that is the state of the old man who should have been crucified in coming to Christ.)
On original sin
“All sinned in Adam… therefore all are born under sin.”
Meaning: Human nature is not neutral—it is fallen and wounded.
(But it is actually much worse than this for the Augustinian Calvinist. It is a total depravity and total inability to obey God, not just a bent toward sin, an inclination toward sin, or a fallen and wounded will.
Augustine took Jerome’s false Latin interpretation/translation of Romans 5:12, “in whom (Adam) all have sinned,” to be the foundation for Original Sin. But Romans 5:12 does not say this. It says that death reigns because all have sinned, not in Adam, but personally. See my other articles for more on this subject.)
📘 3. Eastern Fathers — A different emphasis
Key figures like:
- John Chrysostom
- Basil the Great
- Gregory of Nyssa
They don’t line up cleanly with either extreme, according to ChatGPT.
(Again, I must disagree with ChatGPT and the Eastern Orthodox. Orthodoxy lines up with a partial depravity or partial inability, which is not as bad as Calvinism’s total inability and total depravity, but is not much better. I have written extensively on this subject. Please see the articles on my website.
Did Jesus have any of this as the incarnate Son of God?
All attempts to make us totally or partially unable to do as God commands provide a ready-made excuse and justification for our ongoing sins. Consequently, it can’t be of God.)
John Chrysostom
“All depends indeed on God, but not so that our free will is hindered.”
Meaning: Strong synergy: God acts + we cooperate.
(Doesn’t this clearly state that we are not born in any way, even partially, unable to obey God? I think it does.)
Basil the Great
“The human will is not sufficient by itself… but neither is it destroyed.”
Meaning he rejects both:
- Pelagian independence
- and a fully “bound” will
(But these are not the only two options. It might mean that the will of man is fully able to obey God but is unwilling to do so for selfish reasons. Therefore, the grace of God helps the unwilling to become willing. Might this be the proper interpretation? I think so, for he says our will is not destroyed. Can that mean anything other than our will is still fully free to do as God commands?)
Gregory of Nyssa
“The good is accomplished by cooperation (synergia) of divine grace and human choice.”
Meaning: Grace and free will work together, not in opposition.
⚖️ Side-by-Side Comparison
| Issue | Pelagius | Augustine | Eastern Fathers |
| Human nature at birth | Neutral | Fallen in Adam | Fallen/weakened (less juridical) |
| Free will | Fully सक्षम (intact) | Real but bound by sin | Real but weakened |
| Grace | External (law, example) | Internal, transformative | Both internal + cooperative |
| Ability to obey | Fully able | Unable without grace | Able with grace |
| Sinlessness | Possible by effort | Impossible without grace | Rare but theoretically possible with grace |
| Infant sin | Denied | Affirmed | Usually affirm corruption, less emphasis on guilt |
🔍 Where the real disagreement lies
The debate is not just about “free will vs no free will.” It’s deeper:
Pelagius: Grace helps human effort.
Augustine: Grace creates the ability to will and act.
(I mentioned this earlier, but Augustine’s grace to obey is not grace at all but is justice. For God to command obedience without giving us the ability is tyranny and the very definition of injustice.)
Eastern Fathers: Grace and will cooperate together.
🧠 Important clarification (often missed)
Pelagius did not deny grace outright.
(But if you listen to most Calvinists, you might very well assume that he did.)
Augustine did not outright deny free will.
(Augustine may not have directly and explicitly denied free will, according to ChatGPT. He affirmed free will and, at the very same time, denied it. But why? Might it be that if he didn’t affirm free will, no one would have taken him seriously? Augustine denies free will while at the same time affirming it. He changes the definition of free will to do.)
The real issue is:
- What does grace actually do?
- How damaged is human nature?
⚠️ Why Augustine saw Pelagius as dangerous
From Augustine’s perspective, Pelagius’s system implied:
- Christ becomes primarily a teacher, not a redeemer (I do not believe that is true.)
- The cross becomes less necessary (Nor do I believe this is true.)
- Salvation becomes achievable by effort (This is true and was believed by the entire early Christian Church before Augustine corrupted the gospel. Human effort and divine grace bring forth salvation. It is both/and, not either/or.)
Even if Pelagius didn’t intend all of that, Augustine believed it was the logical outcome.
(And even if Pelagius did affirm free will and the ability to obey God, it doesn’t mean that we do not need God’s help in doing so. That is not because we are unable. It is because we are unwilling to give up our primary pursuit of self-gratification. We have freely entered into the bondage of sinful habits, which makes it very difficult to forsake those sinful habits. That makes us fully and utterly blameworthy, while Augustine made us all victims and not the sinners and criminals we actually are.)
Most Christians think that the teachings of Pelagius are extremely dangerous and unbiblical. Why? They have been taught to believe that, even though most have no idea why.
But what about the teachings of Augustine and Calvin? Why is the teaching of Augustinian Calvinism so dangerous? Here are a few reasons.
- It makes Christ a minister of sin in direct and explicit contradiction to the truth
- It perverts the promises and truth of God’s word
- It makes God out to be the consummate evil in the universe
- It makes us victims and not the criminals that we actually are
- It makes ongoing sin in the life of a Christian compatible with salvation
- It is a strong delusion that has destroyed countless lives in perdition
