Antinomianism and Arminianism: Law and legal protocols were widely in vogue in the Victorian era, in the Christian era and hence, going against that or rejecting the laws was something that was known as antinomianism.
The greatest example of this view and thought process can be sited through the works and working principle of Martin Luther who did reject the prevalent Christian laws and did not at all care about the staunch ecclesiastical system.
The Origins of Antinomianism
Antinomianism, is any view which rejects laws or legalism and is against moral, religious, or social norms, or is at least considered to do so.
He made his own rules, his own morals and his own principles to be followed and preached as well. This is an example of antinomianism.
Well… on the other hand when we talk about Arminianism, the first name that strikes our head is Jacobus Arminius who actually coined this term rather fleshed out this theological idea. This theology rather philosophy is somewhat overlapping with the antinomianism of Martin Luther but does not converge.
These are not binary opposites as well. The existence of salvation’s importance is quite relevant in both these genres and in the latter case we can see Jacobus was strictly against the mundane rules and morals that were taught. He believed that the supreme power, the almighty did choose the ones for salvation and that it was spontaneous and random too.
Jacobus Arminius & Arminianism
As we already spoke about Jacobus Arminius, he propounded the classical method of Arminianism but there has been a divide in its way when the new, rather Wesleyan group of Arminianism was created. The classical way had some theologies such as depravity is for all, God’s justice has been satisfied with the death of Jesus, man has the liberty to respond or resist and so on and so forth.
The classical way of Arminianism also spoke about the almighty predestining the future. In this way, the classical way of Arminianism had its own facets.
In this case, John Wesley’s Methodism was different and hence, has a different set of protocols. He spoke about the legal justice that operated between one’s good deeds that were blessed by God and one’s sins that were cursed by God.
The two School of Thoughts
Both these school of thoughts are having its own pros and cons and hence, crossroads too. The thoughts never intersect but sometimes do not run parallel as well. The outcome of World War 2 had a massive societal abyss and hence, to set up the society with a constructive administration was Arminianism’s forte.
This school of thought was in favor for social customs and morals that can bring back the social welfare after the crisis of war was over.
This too had religious thoughts enmeshed and spoke about the God’s interference in blessing one for his / her good deeds and cursing the other for sins. Hence, this was in total a complicated set of theology comprising of both the classical and the Wesleyan method of thought.
On the other hand, when we consider the antinomianism school of thoughts we can mark a clear difference as social norms and rules are not that important in this case. Here, individual priority, freedom, and liberty, free thinking are given emphasis upon. In this way, the comparison can be reflected.