Talk:Monergism

message: Maybe a change in the structure would help the POV issue. Now, I’m not saying this research is completed or anything like that…heck this can just as easily be someone’s doctoral thesis but here you go:
Define Monergism in general--not leading with Christian Monergism 
Philosophical/Historical development of Monergism 
Religion and Monergism 
Judaism and Monergism 
-Historical View 
-Modern View 
Christianity and Monergism 
-Reformed 
--Historical 
--Modern 
Islam and Monergism 
--Historical 
--Modern
 
---r- 15:31, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Structure and POV 

message: In an effort to make the article more neutral, I made the "Opposition to Monergism" from the voice of "Syngergist."  The opposition section containing rebuttals by the Monergist view counters neutrality and gives a biased argument.--Francis419jn655 02:20, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality 

message: Where's there a page on synergism? You would think we need one - and the link to "synergy" is definitely the wrong thing to do, and if we can't make a page on synergism, it should be unlinked right away - anyone who clicks it expects to go to a page on the theology, and making it go to a page on "synergy" is dead inappropriate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.84.58.109 (talk • contribs) 
:Done. --Flex (talk|contribs) 13:58, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems to be undone to me... 66.220.212.193 (talk) 15:02, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Synergism

message: They do? I would have thought that perhaps they believed that monergism SHOULD lead to fatilism. It would be hard to take seriously anyone who believes monergism DOES lead to fatilism, since historically the opposite seems to have been true.218.214.18.240 04:07, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Syneregists believe that monergism can inevitably leads to fatalism. " 

message: This page has been idle for a while so I've just edited it a bit. Removed unsourced comments that strike me as unsubstantiated. Specifically, the claim that most synergists are liberal Protestants is not accurate. Also the claim that most synergists reject the solas is not accurate. Those were removed, and I've made some edits on all the sections. 
I believe the POV is now pretty well neutral, though this article could still use a bit of expansion. If anyone still feels there is a POV problem feel free to add back the tag.
Columcille (talk) 17:01, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Various edits and neutral POV 

message: The article is currently silent on monergism's view on prayer.  Adding a good section on prayer would enhance the article.  In prayer to Almighty God, petitioner's never earn answers to their prayers but Almighty God may sovereignly choose to hear their pleadings and petitions and to show mercy and to grant their requests.  A sincere prayer of "Lord, have mercy" is a prayer that Christ commended from a sinner who subsequently was justified. (Luke 18:13) 
75.220.216.203 (talk) 11:30, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Monergism - Theology of Prayer 

message: This sentence needs revision: "There is also a distinguishing between the truth being revealed and being accepted the truth (see the next section for more details)."  I'm no expert, but my gut feel is that the author intended to write "There is also a distinguishing between the truth being revealed and being accepted AS the truth (see the next section for more details)."  But it also makes sense to say "There is also a distinguishing between the truth being revealed and the truth being accepted (see the next section for more details)."  Based on the reference to the "next section," I'd recommend the latter option, because it seems to reflect the discourse in the section on Opposition more closely.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.67.6.37 (talk) 01:06, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grammatical edit 

message: While it's true that monergism and monoenergism aren't exactly the same thing, it's not true that they are unrelated. One common criticism of monergism is that it's formally equivalent to monoenergism, monothelitism, or both. See for example this article. There's evidence to support this position, too (including the fact that historically, the theologians most closely associated with monergism have also tended to make monothelite-sounding statements, and vice versa). Perhaps it'd be worth putting a clarification in the article saying that while the two concepts are not the same, they have been considered to be related (or even equivalent) by some commentators? FiredanceThroughTheNight (talk) 20:49, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Not to be confused with monoenergism" hatnote