Originally Posted by ADKing

If you can find the time, I would be interested in your thoughts about the thesis of this article. http://www.soundofgrace.com/v7/n5/an...sm-hartley.htm

When many people hear the term "antinomian" they think only about a denial of the third use of the law. This seems to have had a greater emphasis in 16th century libertinism. It is generally thought that 17th century Antinomianism focused on different issues: sanctification as evidence of justification etc. Many scholars believe (rightly in my opinion) that 17th century antinomianism set out to be a different system of theology than federalism. Read in this light (and fleshed out in much greater detail by the linked article) I think a stronger case can be made that Crisp was in fact an antinomian.