Pelagianism is a theological theory named after Pelagius. It is the belief that original sin did not taint human nature and that mortal will is still capable of choosing good or evil without special Divine aid. Thus, Adam's sin was "to set a bad example" for his progeny, but his actions did not have the other consequences imputed to original sin. Pelagianism views the role of Jesus as "setting a good example" for the rest of humanity as well as providing an atonement for our sins. In short, humanity has full control, and thus full responsibility, for obeying the Gospel in addition to full responsibility for every sin. According to Pelagian doctrine, because humans are sinners by choice, they are therefore criminals who need the atonement of Jesus Christ. Sinners are not victims, they are criminals who need pardon.

Now Pelagius was declared a heretic by the Council of Carthage but it seems that it was more because he clashed with Augustines views rather than any heresy. When he went to Rome, Pelagius became concerned about the moral laxity he found there. He blamed this laxity on the theology of divine grace preached by Augustine, among others.

Around 405, it is said that Pelagius heard a quotation from Augustine's Confessions: "Give me what you command and command what you will". This verse concerned Pelagius because it seemed that Augustine was teaching doctrine contrary to traditional Christian understandings of grace and free will. Pelagius also denied the more specific doctrine of original sin as developed by Augustine which caused the church to eventually excommunicate him.

Now the connection to Adventist thought is that many of our beliefs are from Arminianism which also says man has free will. So Adventist are acused of being Pelagian or Semi-Pelagian by many Christians especially within Calvinism. Now if you look closer you find that the primary difference between Arminianism and both Pelagians and Semi-Pelagians is the issue of the necessity of grace. Pelagians deny grace is necessary for conversion. Semi-Pelagians deny grace is necessary for man to begin conversion, which was Agustines veiw.

Augustine view strongly affirmed the existence of original sin, the need for infant baptism, the impossibility of a sinless life without Christ, and the necessity of Christ's grace. But he felt grace was what began the process as sin had left man with no true freewill.

Pelagius acused Augustine of being under the influence of Manichaeism by elevating evil to the same status as God and teaching pagan fatalism.

Augustine had been converted to Christianity from the religion of Manichaeism, which stressed that the spirit was God-created, while the flesh was corrupt and evil, since it had not been created directly by God. Pelagius argued that Augustine's doctrine that humans were lost for doing what they could not avoid (sin) was tantamount to the Manichean belief in fatalism and predestination, and took away all of mankind's free will.

Arminianism believes in the importance of Gods grace, but to what extant seems to be the question especially in terms of mans free will. Arminians insist that God’s grace is necessary from the very beginning of conversion and throughout the entire process, yet are acused of being Pelagians or at least Semi-Pelagians.

Many Christian denominations have been influenced by Arminian views, notably the Baptists, the Methodists, and show up in the teachings of John Wesley, and others as well and picked up as Wesleyan Arminianism in the Adventist beliefs.

Arminianism asserts that:
1.election (and condemnation on the day of judgment) was conditioned by the rational faith or nonfaith of man;
2.the Atonement, while qualitatively adequate for all men, was efficacious only for the man of faith;
3.unaided by the Holy Spirit, no person is able to respond to God’s will;
4.grace is resistible; and
5.believers are able to resist sin but are not beyond the possibility of falling from grace.

Augustine thought was that man was basically paralyzed by original sin, and thus had no free will to choose God, only grace could allow him to choose. Interesting....

Now it is posible that we dont get a full true picture of Pelagius views since his writings seem to have been destroyed after he was declared a heretic so we only have the writings in response by Augustine and others. His reaction and his simple lifestyle acted as a reproach to the spiritual laxity of many Roman Christians, whose moral standards apalled him. He blamed Rome's moral laxity on the doctrine of divine grace that was being passed by the church from Augustine, who taught that sin was an absence of good which only grace could draw and allow man to overcome and had to be given as the divine will determined, one could call it a form of predestination. Pelagius attacked this teaching on the grounds that it imperiled the entire moral law, as it may be from his reaction, he felt it gave a false grace allowing those who said they were given it to continue in any sin they desired.

Arminianism has a similiar reaction to the Calvinist doctrine of predestination. The movement asserted that God's sovereignty and man's free will are compatible, and these views along with others from Arminianism are what has influenced Adventist thought through Wesleyan Arminianisn.

Here is some more background by Woodrow W. Whidden
Andrews University in his article 'Adventist Theology: The Wesleyan Connection':

"....While it is true that Adventist theology does not seem to be exclusively indebted to any one major Protestant theological tradition, the present article will argue that the more immediate and essentially formative baseline has been provided by the Wesleyan/Arminian Tradition.

It is quite clear that there are distinct emphases in the Adventist tradition, especially when it comes to eschatology (such as imminence of the Second Coming and the Millennium). These eschatological accents arose out of the broad impulse of American millennialist concern in the early Nineteenth Century.
Furthermore, there are some clear strands that have come down to the Seventh-day Adventist theological tradition from the Lutheran, Reformed/Calvinistic, Radical Reformation (Anabaptist), Puritan, Pietistic, and Restorationist Traditions. But I am suggesting that the way Wesleyans understood issues involved with soteriology and the closely related issues of the nature of man, law, and sin were most directly formative for the core of Adventist theology

The whole reason why sin has been allowed to demonstrate its hiddeous character is because "free will".

God had a choice before creation:
1. Create beings who were programed to love and obey His laws.\, thus insuring prepetual harmony and peace, but also a rather "mindless" loyality.
2. Create beings with minds and reasoning powers that could love and obey because it's what they wanted to do, with the ability to rebel if they felt God wasn't worthy of this love and obedience.
3. Not create any beings.


God chose the second option, because He wanted beings who worshiped in mind and spirit out of love and recognition of the worthiness and goodness of God.
Doing this however, it was pretty much a sure thing that, not knowing evil, one or more of these created beings would rebel.

Evil would have to be allowed to demonstrate itself against the matchless love of God.

Why would God allow this controversy if in the end He really wasn't giving human beings the ability to chose? It just dosn't make sense that he would overpower some with "irresistable" pulling power so they have no choice but to accept and follow, while others He ignores and causes them to be lost? That theory, in my opinion flies against all that Great Controversy is trying to acocmplish. == That is, establishing a universe in which every created being is fully and totally convinced that God is worthy, just and loving and they worship and obey with their whole hearts and minds. Not because they have to or are programed to do so, but because it's what they want more than anything else.