OK, so I find theology debates to be funny

Posted On June 9, 2006

I was studying yesterday and came across this paper written by John Wesley called “A Conversation between an Antinomian and his Friend.” It’s a conversation, either real or somewhat fictional, that Wesley apparently had with a friend who disagreed with his doctrine on certain points. It particularly relates to holiness, sanctification, faith, works, and “reason”. As I read the first couple pages, I was laughing so hard! It was quite funny to me, partly because it was in old style english and yet they say things like “Do you ever read the Bible?” and “There you go with that carnal reasoning again!” It sounded like a very real conversation, and I found it to be very amusing. It is also thought provoking, and I couldn’t help but think of my friend Luke K. as I read it. Any way, I’m posting the first page or so for you to enjoy. It is a good read, which is why I’m making the whole article available for you to download if you are interested. (It is a nine page document.) It should be remembered that this was written in the 1700s, and some the terms might have changed definitions over the years. I won’t say I understand everything, (even though I am a “Wesleyan”) but Wesley’s arguments are quite good, and he certainly had a better grasp on Scripture than I do. (Wesley is the “Friend”.) It is a very thought provoking conversation, to say the least.

Antinomian
— Well met, my friend. I am glad to see you. I am sorry to hear that
you have changed your religion.

Friend
— Changed my religion! I do not know what you mean.

Ant.–
You once believed, we are saved by faith.

Friend
— Undoubtedly; and so I do still.

Ant.
— Do you believe, then, that the “whole work of man’s salvation
was accomplished by Jesus Christ on the cross?”

Friend
— I believe, that, by that one offering, he made a full satisfaction
for the sins of the whole world.

Ant.–But
do you believe that “Christ’s blood and our sins went away
together?”

Friend
–To say the truth, I do not understand it.

Ant.–
NO! Why, did not Christ, “when he was upon the cross, take away,
put an end to, blot out, and utterly destroy all our sins?”

Friend
— Did he then heal the wound before it was made, and put an end to
our sins before they had a beginning? This is so palpable an
absurdity, that I don’t see how you can swallow it.

Ant.–I
thought you would come to your “carnal reasoning.” What has
faith to do with reasoning ?

Friend
— Do you ever read the Bible? Does not God himself say to sinners,
“Come now and let us reason together, (Isa_1:18)?”
Does not our Lord reason continually; with the Scribes and Pharisees;
St. Peter with the Jews; (Act_2:14)
and St. Paul with both the Jews and the Gentiles? Nay, is not the far
greater part of his Epistles, both to the Romans and to the
Galatians, and the far greatest part of that to the Hebrews, one
entire train of reasoning?

Ant.
— You may do what you please, but I do not reason but believe.

Friend
— Now, I believe and reason too: for I find no inconsistency. And I
would just as soon put out my eyes to secure my faith as lay aside my
reason.

Ant.–But
do not men abuse their reason continually?” Therefore it is best
to have nothing to do with it.

Friend
— So, now you are doing the very thing you condemn! You are
reasoning against reasoning. And no wonder; for it is impossible,
without reasoning, to prove or to disprove anything.

Ant.
But can you disprove the facts? Do not men abuse their reason
continually?

Friend
— They do. The fact I do not deny. But I deny the inference drawn
from it, for if we must lay aside whatever men abuse continually, we
must lay aside the Bible; yes, and food and drink too.

Ant.–
Well, but come to the point. In what do you trust for salvation?

Friend
— In the merits of Christ alone, which are mine if I truly believe
that he loved me, and gave himself for me.

Ant.–
If! So you make salvation conditional!

Friend
— And do not you? Else you make God a liar: For his express words
are, “He that believeth shall be saved; he that believeth not,
shall be damned.” What is this but to say, “If, you
believe, (there is the condition) you shall be saved”.

Ant.–But
I do not like that word condition.

Friend
— Then find a better, and we will lay it aside.

Ant.–However,
I insist upon it, “nothing else but faith is required” in
order to justification and salvation.

Friend
— What do you mean by “nothing else is required”?

Ant.–
I mean, “there is but one duty, which is that of believing. One
must do nothing, but quietly attend the voice of the Lord. The gates
of heaven are shut upon workers, and open to believers. If we do
nothing for heaven, we do as much as God requires.”

Friend
— Do you really mean, we are to do nothing, in order to present our
final salvation, but “only believe?”

Ant.–
Did I not tell you so? “To believe certainly, that Christ
suffered death for us,” is enough, we want no more. We are
justified by our submitting in our judgments to the truth of God’s
grace in Christ Jesus. It is not necessary that a man do any works,
that he be justified and saved. God does not require you to do
anything, that you may be saved or justified. The law sets you to
work, but the gospel binds you to do nothing at all. Nay, the works
not only are not required, but forbidden. God forbids us to work for
justification. And when the Apostle Paul presses men to believe, it
is as much as if he had forbidden them to work;”

Friend
— Let Paul speak for himself. In the twenty sixth chapter of Acts.
He relates how our Lord sent him “to open the eyes of the
Gentiles,– that they might receive remission of sins,”
(Act_26:17-18,)
“Whereupon,” saith he, “I was not disobedient to the
heavenly vision; but showed– to the Gentiles, that they should
repent, and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.” So
far was he from “bidding them not to work,” while he was
“pressing them to believe.”

Ant.–
You are got to your carnal reasoning again.

Friend
— Carnal reasoning, I perceive, is a cant term, which you use when
you don’t know what else to say. But I am not through with this
instance yet. Did St. Paul, indeed, preach to those Heathens
according to the instructions given him from heaven, or not?

Ant.–
Without doubt, he did; otherwise he would have been “disobedient
to the heavenly vision.”

Friend
— How say you then that a minister ought to preach nothing but
“Believe, believe?” and, that to tell men of doing
anything, is “preaching the law?” Do not you herein
condemn, not only the great apostle, but also Him that sent and
commanded him “thus to preach?”

Ant.–
Why, surely, you would not have us to be “under the law!’

Friend
— I fear you do not know what that expression means;

And he goes on from there. If you want to read more, go up and download the full document.