[FairfieldLife] Re: Diet of Worms
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 Church. 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 FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 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. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther#/media/File:%D0%9B%D1%8E%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%80_%D0%B2_%D0%92%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BC%D1%81%D0%B5.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther#/media/File:%D0%9B%D1%8E%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%80_%D0%B2_%D0%92%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BC%D1%81%D0%B5.jpg
[FairfieldLife] Re: Diet of Worms
A can of worms? It seems an old way of understanding 'faith' is the equivalent of 'experience'. Likewise, 'belief' was of the realm of creeds. Antinomian makes better sense in its reading context by substituting this meaning and the use of 'faith' over to 'experience', as in direct spiritual experience. Or, faith by experience. Different than belief in ideology or creeds. Chapter One: Lollards, Antinomians, and Renegade Yankees “objectives..to pinpoint and illuminate the Lollard origins of the Antinomian religious and political tradition that animated both England's and New England's seventeenth-century radical dissidents. The antinomian “tradition” began with the Lollard movement which, over a long term, promoted a radical church reform program.” ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 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. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther#/media/File:%D0%9B%D1%8E%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%80_%D0%B2_%D0%92%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BC%D1%81%D0%B5.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther#/media/File:%D0%9B%D1%8E%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%80_%D0%B2_%D0%92%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BC%D1%81%D0%B5.jpg
