Antinomianism
- Thread starter phil36
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
S
No offense, but its crap like this that keeps the church spinning in circles. Every 'ism you can think of is totally and completely worthless when it comes to the building up of the church. Paul addressed this topic several times and even then, it shouldn't take an apostle of the Lord to tell you something you should already know. The only doctrine that matters is the Cross of Jesus Christ.
That's it.
That's it.
S
I understand what your saying.
Its just very frustrating to know that Christ taught against doctrines of men and then see Christians so adamantly pursue things that give no life.
Christians shouldn't unite under what "sect" of Christianity they feel they fall under. They should unite under Christ because he's Lord. One Lord. One baptism.
Its just very frustrating to know that Christ taught against doctrines of men and then see Christians so adamantly pursue things that give no life.
Christians shouldn't unite under what "sect" of Christianity they feel they fall under. They should unite under Christ because he's Lord. One Lord. One baptism.
E
(1) “Dualistic Antinomainism,” associated with Gnosticism, which treats the body (and its actions) as insignificant; way out there, no basis of truth
(2) “Spirit-centered Antinomianism,” which views the inner promptings of the Spirit as sufficient apart from the external Word; Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word. Thus is false.
(3) “Christ-centered Antinomianism,” which “argues that God sees no sin in believers, because they are in Christ, who kept the law for them, and therefore what they actually do makes no difference, provided that they keep believing” If your talking about faith, and not mere belief, and not licentiousness. This is actually fact. The problem is it can be taken to the extreme, and become false. The difference is the licentious will never change, the faith will change and understand all things are lawfull. but not all are profitable etc etc..
(4) “Dispensational Antinomianism,” which denies that in the “church age” believers are obligated to the moral law; Not all dispensationalists believe this, Even scofield would deny this. we are obligated to use it as the schoolmaster. but not obligates as per for salvation.
(5) “Situationist Antinomianism,” which teaches that love is the only rule and that duties (not just their application) will therefore vary according to circumstance. not sure what this means, could be true, may not be,, need more info
(2) “Spirit-centered Antinomianism,” which views the inner promptings of the Spirit as sufficient apart from the external Word; Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word. Thus is false.
(3) “Christ-centered Antinomianism,” which “argues that God sees no sin in believers, because they are in Christ, who kept the law for them, and therefore what they actually do makes no difference, provided that they keep believing” If your talking about faith, and not mere belief, and not licentiousness. This is actually fact. The problem is it can be taken to the extreme, and become false. The difference is the licentious will never change, the faith will change and understand all things are lawfull. but not all are profitable etc etc..
(4) “Dispensational Antinomianism,” which denies that in the “church age” believers are obligated to the moral law; Not all dispensationalists believe this, Even scofield would deny this. we are obligated to use it as the schoolmaster. but not obligates as per for salvation.
(5) “Situationist Antinomianism,” which teaches that love is the only rule and that duties (not just their application) will therefore vary according to circumstance. not sure what this means, could be true, may not be,, need more info
H
This topic hasn't discussed any detail yet, so clearly it's incomplete as you said.
Phil36 offered several various versions of so called "antinomianism", but so far no details have been discussed.
I'm hoping Phil36 can explain if he opposes the 3rd description, which several here have conditionally sided with.
Hopefully then we can start referring to scripture for detail and balance.
Phil36 offered several various versions of so called "antinomianism", but so far no details have been discussed.
I'm hoping Phil36 can explain if he opposes the 3rd description, which several here have conditionally sided with.
Hopefully then we can start referring to scripture for detail and balance.
H
Hi Crossnote,
Was the thief on the cross who called Jesus "Lord", lacking anything compared to what a believer has through a lifetime of growth?
If so, then that would be unfortunate for anyone with deathbed salvation.
Description #3 points to how we're complete in Christ (Col 2:10). That would be regardless of whether one receives Christ on their deathbed or whether they live for years growing in their walk of faith.
Was the thief on the cross who called Jesus "Lord", lacking anything compared to what a believer has through a lifetime of growth?
If so, then that would be unfortunate for anyone with deathbed salvation.
Description #3 points to how we're complete in Christ (Col 2:10). That would be regardless of whether one receives Christ on their deathbed or whether they live for years growing in their walk of faith.
(3) “Christ-centered Antinomianism,” which “argues that God sees no sin in believers, because they are in Christ, who kept the law for them, and therefore what they actually do makes no difference, provided that they keep believing”;
The point I am making is in bold. The thief did show a great repentance and even rebuked the other thief...quite a bit in his short time as a believer.
True faith in the Gospel will produce true works because ( as so many miss) it includes the working of the Holy Spirit to bring forth that fruit even if it's very little. I believe this is James' point on faith/works.
H
No doubt this description of Mr Packer (that you have highlighted in bold) refers to behavior/lifestyle.
I doubt that this #3 description of antinomianism is saying that Christians have a license to live selfishly and do whatever they want.
Consider King David who committed adultery and murder. Although God put away his sin, King David was disciplined.
Likewise for any Christian who does wrong. Nobody is going to profit by doing wrong.
But the point antinomianism #3 makes is that sin (with it's death penalty) is not charged against believers.
Alternatively, if we take the view you proposed, that the works spoken of in James 2 refers to good behavior, then that begs the question about what amount of good behavior are we supposed to have as proof of our faith?
The danger here is when some think that the works that show faith, is righteousness by perfect obedience to the law (which is really just unbelief in Jesus).
However, we see that when Jesus was asked what works we should do, he answered "believe on him whom He hath sent" (John 6:29).
Believing on Jesus are our works that shows our faith.
The thief on the cross believed in Jesus.
And his behavior/lifestyle was not a consideration for entering paradise, just as antinomianism #3 describes.
Also remember that unbelief in Jesus is the sin the world is convicted of, John 16:9.
Personally, I think that many Christians do improve in behavior. But as we're all at different stages of growth, then we will see different levels of improvement. Hence we should not be judging others and preaching messages of condemnation if your behavior is not good enough.
As antinomianism #3 states, it's all about believing on Jesus.
I doubt that this #3 description of antinomianism is saying that Christians have a license to live selfishly and do whatever they want.
Consider King David who committed adultery and murder. Although God put away his sin, King David was disciplined.
Likewise for any Christian who does wrong. Nobody is going to profit by doing wrong.
But the point antinomianism #3 makes is that sin (with it's death penalty) is not charged against believers.
Alternatively, if we take the view you proposed, that the works spoken of in James 2 refers to good behavior, then that begs the question about what amount of good behavior are we supposed to have as proof of our faith?
The danger here is when some think that the works that show faith, is righteousness by perfect obedience to the law (which is really just unbelief in Jesus).
However, we see that when Jesus was asked what works we should do, he answered "believe on him whom He hath sent" (John 6:29).
Believing on Jesus are our works that shows our faith.
The thief on the cross believed in Jesus.
And his behavior/lifestyle was not a consideration for entering paradise, just as antinomianism #3 describes.
Also remember that unbelief in Jesus is the sin the world is convicted of, John 16:9.
Personally, I think that many Christians do improve in behavior. But as we're all at different stages of growth, then we will see different levels of improvement. Hence we should not be judging others and preaching messages of condemnation if your behavior is not good enough.
As antinomianism #3 states, it's all about believing on Jesus.
B
(3) “Christ-centered Antinomianism,” which “argues that God sees no sin in believers, because they are in Christ, who kept the law for them, and therefore what they actually do makes no difference, provided that they keep believing”
This is a little distorted. When God puts away our sin he does not recall or remember it any more because it has been put away and the believer has been cleansed from it. Yes, we are in Christ and we still have a sin nature within that can cause us to sin in our body. We have a fellowship with Christ by faith through grace and truth revealed to us by the Spirit. If we stop walking by faith we will enter into the flesh and our fellowship will be broken. The Spirit will convict us of that broken fellowship being grieved. There is a big difference between having fellowship by faith through the Spirit and living in the flesh. We respond to the conviction of the Spirit within by faith and we receive grace from God as we name and confess our sin. Grace restores our fellowship and God never used our sin against us. We were never removed from being in Christ and in that place we are perfect having God's righteousness. However, our fellowship was not perfect being broken by the sins of the flesh and to get it back we have to go back to the cross that dealt with the sin and get restored through the grace of God with no condemnation and no guilt in the conscience.
This is a little distorted. When God puts away our sin he does not recall or remember it any more because it has been put away and the believer has been cleansed from it. Yes, we are in Christ and we still have a sin nature within that can cause us to sin in our body. We have a fellowship with Christ by faith through grace and truth revealed to us by the Spirit. If we stop walking by faith we will enter into the flesh and our fellowship will be broken. The Spirit will convict us of that broken fellowship being grieved. There is a big difference between having fellowship by faith through the Spirit and living in the flesh. We respond to the conviction of the Spirit within by faith and we receive grace from God as we name and confess our sin. Grace restores our fellowship and God never used our sin against us. We were never removed from being in Christ and in that place we are perfect having God's righteousness. However, our fellowship was not perfect being broken by the sins of the flesh and to get it back we have to go back to the cross that dealt with the sin and get restored through the grace of God with no condemnation and no guilt in the conscience.
H
Hi starfield,
Antinomianism #3:
“Christ-centered Antinomianism,” which “argues that God sees no sin in believers, because they are in Christ, who kept the law for them, and therefore what they actually do makes no difference, provided that they keep believing”;
This fits the circumstances of the thief on the cross. He believed in Jesus. There was no good behavior or works of the law that could add to his entry into paradise.
Are you proposing that Christians must attain some minimum standard of good behavior or else we're lost?
Also, I did mention in my previous post that God disciplines us should we do wrong.
However our weakness/failures are not "sin" that can be charged against us.
Antinomianism #3:
“Christ-centered Antinomianism,” which “argues that God sees no sin in believers, because they are in Christ, who kept the law for them, and therefore what they actually do makes no difference, provided that they keep believing”;
This fits the circumstances of the thief on the cross. He believed in Jesus. There was no good behavior or works of the law that could add to his entry into paradise.
Are you proposing that Christians must attain some minimum standard of good behavior or else we're lost?
Also, I did mention in my previous post that God disciplines us should we do wrong.
However our weakness/failures are not "sin" that can be charged against us.