But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate. (Rev. 2:6)
According to Strong's Concordance the word Nicolaitans literally means "destruction of people" and refers to "a sect who were charged with holding the error Balaam by upholding the liberty of eating things sacrificed to idols as well as committing fornication."
The term for this error was first dubbed "antinomianism" around 1517, shortly after the Protestant Reformation. When a believer in Jesus Christ goes beyond the tradition of sound doctrine held by the early church and allows justification by faith to become something that allows him to go specifically against the commandments of God, he is held to be an "antinomian."
The Merriam-Wester Dictionary tells us that the word antinomian comes from the Latin anti meaning against, and the Greek nomos meaning law; in other words against law. It goes on to define the word as: "one who holds that under the gospel dispensation of grace the moral law is of no use or obligation because faith alone is necessary to salvation; one who rejects a socially established morality."
I suspect the apostle James would disagree with antinomianism: But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? (James 2:20)
According to Nelson's Illustrated Bible Dictionary antinomianism is "the false teaching that since faith alone is necessary for salvation, one is free from the moral obligations of the law. The word antinomianism is not used in the Bible, but the idea is spoken of....Since we have been freed from the dominion of sin through faith in Jesus, we have also been freed to practice the righteousness demanded by God (Romans 6:12-22).
It is obvious that God would "hate" any false teaching that causes his people to live contrary to His commandments. And the Ephesian church that also "hated" this error of doctrine, is praised by the Lord. The question is: would He praise our churches today? Perhaps the following passages and quotes from various sources will help to better identify what it means to be antinomian:
Paul spoke against antinomianism in the earliest form of it that threatened the church at Rome:
What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? Certainly not! (Romans 6:1)
What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Certainly not! (Romans 6:15)
What shall we say then? Is the law sin? Certainly not! (Romans 7:7)
Has then that which is good [the law] become death to me? Certainly not! (Romans 7:13)
And the same evil appeared in the church at Corinth:
It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and such sexual immorality as is not even named among the Gentiles - that a man has his father's wife! And you are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he who had done this deed might be taken away from among you....your glorifying is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump?...I wrote to you in my epistle not to keep company with sexually immoral people. Yet I certainly did not mean with the sexually immoral people of this world...since then you would need to go out of the world. But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolator, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner - not even to eat with such a person...Therefore "put away from yourselves the evil person." (1 Corinthians 5:1-13)
Paul himself was accused of antinomianism in Acts 21:19-26, but refuted it by performing the ceremonial law of purification at the temple, complete with an offering that appears to have been money. He was obviously more concerned about being considered "against the law" than to be considered "legalistic" as some would call him in this day and age:
On the following day ,Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were present. When he had greeted them, he told in detail those things which God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry, And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord. And they said to him, "You see, brother, how many myriads of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law; but they have been informed about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs. What then? The assembly must certainly meet, for they will hear that you have come. Therefore do what we tell you: We have four men who have taken a vow. Take then and be purified with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads, and that all may know that those things of which they were informed concerning you are nothing, but that you yourself also walk orderly and keep the law....Then Paul took the men, and the next day, having been purified with them, entered the temple to announce the expiration of the days of purification, at which time an offering should be made for each one of them.
Even further along in the 1500's, Martin Luther was also erroneously accused of antinomianism, yet strongly defended himself with his disputations:
To the reverend and learned Dr. Caspel Guttel, pastor in Eisleben, my especially good friend in Christ: Grace and peace in Christ, dear Doctor. I assume that you received some time ago a copy of the disputations against the new spirits who have dared to expel the law of God or the Ten Commandments from the church and to assign them to city hall. I never expected that such false spirituality would occur to the mind of man, much less that anyone would support it...It is most surprising to me that anyone can claim that I reject the law or the Ten Commandments, since there is available, in more than one edition, my exposition of the Ten Commandments, which furthermore are daily preached and practiced in our churches...Furthermore, the commandments are sung in two versions, as well as painted, printed, carved and recited by the children, morning, noon and night.[Martin Luther's "Against the Antinomians" 1539, Translated by Martin H. Bertram]
The following is an excerpt from a Wikipedia search on "Antinomianism" concerning Jesus and the idea that He also has been cited (by modern day churches) as being against the law, in favor of grace alone, especially the law of the Sabbath:
In the Gospel of Mark, Jesus' disciples were picking grain for food on the Sabbath (Mark 2:23-28). When the Pharisees challenged Jesus over this, he pointed to Biblical precedent and declared that "the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath." Some claim Jesus rejected complete adherence to the Torah [the law]. Most scholars hold that Jesus did not reject the law, but directed that it should be obeyed in context. E. P. Sanders notes, "no substantial conflict existed between Jesus and the Pharisees with regard to Sabbath, food, and purity laws...The church took some while to come to the position that the Sabbath need not be kept, and it is hard to think that Jesus explicitly said so."
[In fact, the church didn't change the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday until the 4th century B.C. Which begs the question: was the church in error for all those centuries, between its beginning in the time of Christ and the 4th century, by abiding by the Saturday Sabbath...or has the church been in error for the past 17 centuries because they changed the Sabbath to Sunday? It seems logical that it must be one or the other...which period of time was it that the church was in error? Why did it take them so long to decide to go against Saturday as the Sabbath?]
He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches: To him that overcometh I will give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God. (Rev. 2:2-7)
Jesus is telling us how important it is to hear what is being declared to the seven churched in Revelation, and it is being declared by the Holy Spirit. We were given the Holy Spirit to guide us into all righteousness, which apart from the law, we would not know that we have; we have to first recognize what sin is before we can then know what righteousness - the goal of the law - is. The Holy Spirit enables us to be overcomers of sin; if we will daily choose to walk in Him!
The tree of life - eternal life in the presence of God - is the reward for those who listen.
The term for this error was first dubbed "antinomianism" around 1517, shortly after the Protestant Reformation. When a believer in Jesus Christ goes beyond the tradition of sound doctrine held by the early church and allows justification by faith to become something that allows him to go specifically against the commandments of God, he is held to be an "antinomian."
The Merriam-Wester Dictionary tells us that the word antinomian comes from the Latin anti meaning against, and the Greek nomos meaning law; in other words against law. It goes on to define the word as: "one who holds that under the gospel dispensation of grace the moral law is of no use or obligation because faith alone is necessary to salvation; one who rejects a socially established morality."
I suspect the apostle James would disagree with antinomianism: But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? (James 2:20)
According to Nelson's Illustrated Bible Dictionary antinomianism is "the false teaching that since faith alone is necessary for salvation, one is free from the moral obligations of the law. The word antinomianism is not used in the Bible, but the idea is spoken of....Since we have been freed from the dominion of sin through faith in Jesus, we have also been freed to practice the righteousness demanded by God (Romans 6:12-22).
It is obvious that God would "hate" any false teaching that causes his people to live contrary to His commandments. And the Ephesian church that also "hated" this error of doctrine, is praised by the Lord. The question is: would He praise our churches today? Perhaps the following passages and quotes from various sources will help to better identify what it means to be antinomian:
Paul spoke against antinomianism in the earliest form of it that threatened the church at Rome:
What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? Certainly not! (Romans 6:1)
What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Certainly not! (Romans 6:15)
What shall we say then? Is the law sin? Certainly not! (Romans 7:7)
Has then that which is good [the law] become death to me? Certainly not! (Romans 7:13)
And the same evil appeared in the church at Corinth:
It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and such sexual immorality as is not even named among the Gentiles - that a man has his father's wife! And you are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he who had done this deed might be taken away from among you....your glorifying is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump?...I wrote to you in my epistle not to keep company with sexually immoral people. Yet I certainly did not mean with the sexually immoral people of this world...since then you would need to go out of the world. But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolator, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner - not even to eat with such a person...Therefore "put away from yourselves the evil person." (1 Corinthians 5:1-13)
Paul himself was accused of antinomianism in Acts 21:19-26, but refuted it by performing the ceremonial law of purification at the temple, complete with an offering that appears to have been money. He was obviously more concerned about being considered "against the law" than to be considered "legalistic" as some would call him in this day and age:
On the following day ,Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were present. When he had greeted them, he told in detail those things which God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry, And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord. And they said to him, "You see, brother, how many myriads of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law; but they have been informed about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs. What then? The assembly must certainly meet, for they will hear that you have come. Therefore do what we tell you: We have four men who have taken a vow. Take then and be purified with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads, and that all may know that those things of which they were informed concerning you are nothing, but that you yourself also walk orderly and keep the law....Then Paul took the men, and the next day, having been purified with them, entered the temple to announce the expiration of the days of purification, at which time an offering should be made for each one of them.
Even further along in the 1500's, Martin Luther was also erroneously accused of antinomianism, yet strongly defended himself with his disputations:
To the reverend and learned Dr. Caspel Guttel, pastor in Eisleben, my especially good friend in Christ: Grace and peace in Christ, dear Doctor. I assume that you received some time ago a copy of the disputations against the new spirits who have dared to expel the law of God or the Ten Commandments from the church and to assign them to city hall. I never expected that such false spirituality would occur to the mind of man, much less that anyone would support it...It is most surprising to me that anyone can claim that I reject the law or the Ten Commandments, since there is available, in more than one edition, my exposition of the Ten Commandments, which furthermore are daily preached and practiced in our churches...Furthermore, the commandments are sung in two versions, as well as painted, printed, carved and recited by the children, morning, noon and night.[Martin Luther's "Against the Antinomians" 1539, Translated by Martin H. Bertram]
The following is an excerpt from a Wikipedia search on "Antinomianism" concerning Jesus and the idea that He also has been cited (by modern day churches) as being against the law, in favor of grace alone, especially the law of the Sabbath:
In the Gospel of Mark, Jesus' disciples were picking grain for food on the Sabbath (Mark 2:23-28). When the Pharisees challenged Jesus over this, he pointed to Biblical precedent and declared that "the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath." Some claim Jesus rejected complete adherence to the Torah [the law]. Most scholars hold that Jesus did not reject the law, but directed that it should be obeyed in context. E. P. Sanders notes, "no substantial conflict existed between Jesus and the Pharisees with regard to Sabbath, food, and purity laws...The church took some while to come to the position that the Sabbath need not be kept, and it is hard to think that Jesus explicitly said so."
[In fact, the church didn't change the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday until the 4th century B.C. Which begs the question: was the church in error for all those centuries, between its beginning in the time of Christ and the 4th century, by abiding by the Saturday Sabbath...or has the church been in error for the past 17 centuries because they changed the Sabbath to Sunday? It seems logical that it must be one or the other...which period of time was it that the church was in error? Why did it take them so long to decide to go against Saturday as the Sabbath?]
He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches: To him that overcometh I will give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God. (Rev. 2:2-7)
Jesus is telling us how important it is to hear what is being declared to the seven churched in Revelation, and it is being declared by the Holy Spirit. We were given the Holy Spirit to guide us into all righteousness, which apart from the law, we would not know that we have; we have to first recognize what sin is before we can then know what righteousness - the goal of the law - is. The Holy Spirit enables us to be overcomers of sin; if we will daily choose to walk in Him!
The tree of life - eternal life in the presence of God - is the reward for those who listen.
2 comments:
again I have to say amen how long are we going to disobey the law and think that there will be no consequence and I do believe that we are saved by grace (undeserved favor) But it is the love of Christ that fills our hearts that drives us to be obedient to the word of God and to fallow Him and the law JR
Thanks for your reading and for your comment, JR!
Post a Comment