Martin Luther and Antinomianism
Vložit
- čas přidán 1. 03. 2015
- Did Martin Luther really reject biblical law and embrace Antinomianism? Many believe Luther came close to Antinomian views, at least, since his view of justification by faith was opposed to works of the Law. This video explains what Antinomianism is, and it looks at Luther's teachings on the Law in an important fight with Johannes Agricola.
Ryan M. Reeves (PhD Cambridge) is Assistant Professor of Historical Theology at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary. Twitter: / ryanmreeves Instagram: / ryreeves4
Website: www.gordonconwell.edu/academic...
For the entire course on 'Church History: Reformation to Modern', see the playlist: • Renaissance & Modern H...
As a former "hard-core" Lutheran, I confess the professor is correct. Proper Lutheran preaching is always "Law-Gospel". It is one thing I miss.
"Nomos" isn't really Latin; it's Greek. The Latin equivalent of -os is -us. (-os is only occasion seen in Latin for Greek loans and transliterations, though -us is often substituted.) The Greek -os was changed to -us in Etruscan, because Etruscan lacked an o vowel, and Latin subsequently inherited it.
Jesus clearly states in the Gospels that He came not to abolish the law but to fulfill it!
And what does that mean? Should we still be avoiding pork, not mixing fibers, and freeing our slaves in the Jubilee years?
JGW 54, avoiding pork isn't one of the ten commandments! Not mixing fibers isn't one of the ten commandments. Freeing slaves to be freed in the Jubilee year? Really, there aren't any slaves to be freed silly, lol!
TheMaster100, I think you mean the Ten Commandments. And those who don't follow the Ten Commandments aren't true Christians!
Like Forrest Gump said, "What if it's both? What if both are happening at the same time?" Paul stated that the law is used to train us in righteous behavior. But then states that we are set free from the law. If being free, we stumble, shouldn't we then re-embrace the law for additional training, until such a time as we are freed from it once again by it's corrective reproof(s) and it becomes part of our nature? The Spirit has been described to be like the wind, blowing here and there as God directs, not subject to the whimsical nature of man. I see our natures also being similar to this... Some people may need the law to stay well grounded, others may have a much more loving heart that obeys the law naturally, being in similitude to their basic nature. God is very wise, and perhaps has made both ends of this spectrum to help more people, encompassing the largest amount possible, or acceptable in His eyes. It seems at it's core, to be 'multidimensional' and I can think of only one master of multiple dimensions, namely God Almighty Himself, Master of both heaven and earth.
I suppose by suggesting such a thing I'll be labeled as an Antinomian...
It seems these same arguments that Luther had with Agricola continue with Christians today. I think it's now called 'Easy Believism'.
"For My yoke is easy and My burden is light.”
So, there is much to the "law" argument that they never even dreamed of. There is a covenant (Ex 19:5-24:12) that included the Sabbath and feast days and some other things. That is the covenant that the people agreed to and ratified and was blood sealed. The Levitical stuff came about because of that breach that occurs at the golden calf. What Yahshua does is to renew that covenant. He was the perfect sacrifice that was foreshadowed by the daily sacrifices; they also promised His coming. That's why Paul says what he does in Hebrews.
Love is the end of the law. Focus on love not works of the law.
Romans 13:10New International Reader's Version (NIRV)
10 Love does not harm its neighbor. So love does everything the law requires.
What part of faith "alone" does Luther not understand? Law has no place in the "alone". Agricola was simply taking Luther's doctrine to its logical end.