Re "Since to be antinomian implies that the believer becomes automatically and 
instantaneously sinless":

 Sounds good to me!

 To belittle justification by faith is to find yourself condemned to trying to 
live up to an *external* standard (ie, not your own standard) which you must 
inevitably fall short of. Cue lots of breast-beating and tears of repentance.

 Granted that an antinomian is often just someone looking for an excuse to 
devote his life to debauchery and vice. But the more "philosophical" 
antinomians are probably onto something vitally important: The only values that 
ultimately matter are those each of us chooses freely

 Marguerite Porete (burned at the stake by the Paris Inquisition!) wrote: “…the 
annihilated soul [can] grant to nature all that it desires without remorse of 
conscience…” She mentions in her book that she had no need of Christ's 
sacrifice as she was already sinless. Now you see why she was executed by the 

 But she was talking from the perspective of The Self and not from the 
perspective of little, old Marge. If she'd stuck to doing what her Sunday 
School teachers had told her was right and proper she would never have 
discovered her radically free heart.




---In, <yifuxero@...> wrote :

 Thx previous contributor for bringing up the word "Antinomian" (derived from 
the Greek (anti + law); i.e. an exaggerated form of  justification by faith 
alone (not of works, and not of "Law"). Luther saw into the potential flaw in 
this line of thinking, since to through out the "Law", one would have to throw 
out the Ten Commandments. But Luther circumvented the problem by retaining the 
Commandments but rejecting the legalistic interpretations of  Roman Catholocism.
 George Fox likewise rejected Antinomianism (as I see his viewpoints, since to 
be Antinomian implies that the believer becomes automatically and 
instantaneously sinless)  But Fox obviously believed in what nowadays we might 
call self-improvement - at least in a Spiritual sense, derived from internal 
belief along with silent contemplation. 
 Modern Evangelicals I might add (the ones I've met), are indeed Antinomian, 
believing in instantaneous Salvation by faith alone, and the idea of further 
"progress" is something they fail to adequately explain or reconcile.
 . Needless to say (but I'll say it anyway), the notion of progress is 
thoroughly entrenched in MMY's teachings, as opposed to non-progressive 
thinking as is present among some Neo-Advaitins.
 Wiki says that "silent waiting" was already established [even before Fox?], so 
it's unclear as to how this movement originated in Europe; whether 
spontaneously or from external influences..  Some speculation on this will be 
reserved for further discussion pending more research.


Reply via email to