davidbu@tekigm2.men.tek.com (David Buxton) (01/04/90)
From the Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible:
"The doctrine that the moral law is made void through faith, and that
faith alone is necessary to salvation. The term "antinomian" is not
biblical, but was used by Luther to describe the views of Johannes
Agricola. In the NT, however, the idea of antinomianism is attacked
in the book of James. The author asks: "What does it profit . . .if
a man says he has faith but has not works? Can his faith save him?"
(2:14)--i.e., can his faith, without works, save him? The implied
answer is obviously, No. James appears to be attacking a misunder-
standing of Paul's doctrine of justification by faith . . . . For
Paul, however, faith was impossible without works; for the justified
man had received the Spirit, and where the Spirit must appear. . . . .
I read what several Bible Encyclopedias, Dictionaries and Commentaries had
to say about Antinomianism. Some went on and on for page after page iden-
tifying the various religions that I'll not name and the sub groups such as
the Ranters and Supralapsarians; that were/are embracing Antinomianism.
I'll not take the time to catalog all of these.
I was more interested in the early history of Antinomianism. Where and how
did it get started. There is the theory that this sect originated in the
teachings of Nicolas of Antiochm (Acts 6:5), one of the seven deacons first
ordained by the apostles. (Hippolytus The Refutation of All Heresies vii.
24) This tradition is not considered at all reliable. Several Encyclo-
pedias did identify the Nicolaitans and Gnostics as being Antinomian. Here
is what the Jewish Encyclopedia said:
"The influence exerted by Antinomianism on the conduct of life proved
to be of a twofold nature; while Marcion and Tatian were led by it to
extreme asceticism, with the Gnostics it resulted in libertine prac-
tises which contributed not a little to their ultimate downfall.
Especially notorious in this regard were the Nicolaitans, the . . . ."
(Jewish Encyclopedia)
Here is what John the Revelator has to say about the Nicolaitans:
Speaking of the Church at Ephesus - "But you have this in your favor.
You hate the practices of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate." (Rev.
2: 6)
Speaking of the Church at Pergamum - "Nevertheless, I have a few
things against you: You have people there who hold to the teaching of
Balaam {sun worship}, who taught Balak to . . . . Likewise you also
have those who hold to the teaching of the Nicolaitans . . ." (Rev.
2: 14-16)
While the many references do not blame Paul directly, the mis-
interpretation of his writings is often sited as the the source of much of
the problem.
The author of II Peter also speaks out against Antinomianism:
"Bear in mind that our Lord's patience means salvation, just as our
dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him.
He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these
matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand,
which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other
Scriptures, to their own destruction. Therefore, dear friends, since
you already know this, be on your guard so that you may not be carried
away by the ERROR OF LAWLESS MEN and fall from your secure position.
But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus
Christ. To him be glory both now and forever! Amen." (2 Peter 3:15-
18)
The first extra-Biblical Christian writer to mention the Nicolaitans is
Irenaeus in A.D. 185. He identified them as a Gnostic sect. (Against
Heresies iii. 11. 1; The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1, p. 426) There is
also evidence of a Gnostic sect in the 3d century bearing the name
"Nicolaitans." The Nicolaitans appear to have taught that "deeds of the
flesh do not affect the purity of the soul, and consequently have no bear-
ing on salvation."
When on the topic of Antinomianism the predominant concensus of the Bible
dictionaries, encyclopedias and commentaries is that the Nicolaitans were
Antinomian Gnostics. When on the topic of the Nicolaitans they offer that
the early documentation on this opinion is often disputed.
Dave (David E. Buxton)
davidbu@tekigm2.MEN.TEK.COM
[The term antinomian seems to have different possible implications,
which I'm going to call "practical" and "theoretical" antinomianism.
I have called myself antinomian. By that I mean that in principle I
don't consider the OT Law to be binding on Christians. That doesn't
mean I reject the concept of ethics, just that I insist that ethics
should be recreated based on specifically Christian principles.a
However since God is consistent, I would expect to see a certain
consistency between Christian ethics and the ethics taught in the Law.
While I don't consider the 10 commandments to be binding on Christians
because of the Law they are part of, I have no problem justifying them
on Christian grounds, and certainly support Christians using them as
standards. I would call this "theoretical" antinomianism. By
"practical antinomianism" I would designate people who really do
believe "anything goes", either because they simply don't want to be
bothered by constraints, or (more likely) because they have some sort
of idea that love must be free of all constraints in order to be truly
loving. I think this viewpoint has been convincingly demolished by
Ramsey's book "Deeds and Rules in Christian Ethics". He maintains,
among other things, that loving relationships involving making
commitments to each other, and that a commitment by definition
distinguishes things you can and can't do. --clh]horton@b11.ingr.com (Mac Horton) (01/16/90)
In article <Jan.4.02.46.48.1990.13866@athos.rutgers.edu> davidbu@tekigm2.men.tek.com (David Buxton) writes:
[inquires about antinomianism in the early church]
I apologize for not being more specific, but I don't have a
Bible at work and keep forgetting to look this up at home: there are
some passages in Paul, I believe in either first or second Corinthians,
which have been taken by at least one commentator, Fr. Ronald Knox, to
be directed toward a group which seems to have been operating on
antinomian principles. (I mean antinomian in the sense of really
practicing an "anything goes" morality).
Also, the Albigensians of the Middle Ages were reputed to allow
their laity an antinomian attitude toward sex, on the grounds that the
body has nothing to do with the spirit anyway, and that the only real
sexual evil is procreation. Some scholars apparently take this
reputation with some skepticism, though, as the main witnesses for it
are the Catholics who crusaded against the Albigensians.
--
Mac Horton @ Intergraph | horton@ingr.COM | ..uunet!ingr!horton
--
And the wind shall say: 'Here were decent godless people:
Their only monument the asphalt road
And a thousand lost golf balls'. --Eliot