Introduction
Antinomianism (anti- = “not/no/against,” -nomian = law; Lit. “antinomianism” is “no-law-ism”) is not the storm looming on the horizon; it is here. And it has been here for a long time. While it has been here ever since The Fall (Gen. 3), it has different seasons of strength and destruction. While we are not in an utterly unique age, the major problem today is that Antinomians appear to be the new Pharisees (i.e. legalism, works-righteousness). Popularly, legalism is out in today’s society. It is not merely authoritarianism that is rejected, but all authority and law is rejected. The law of our society is “Don’t tell me what to do. I am a law unto myself.”
While broader culture is driven by lawlessness, the Church often echoes this same voice. There appears to be a type of “religious Libertarianism” where I can live the Christian life how I want and I won’t encroach upon the choices of others. Because I am a Christian and saved by grace alone, no one can enforce God’s Law upon me to tell me how to live. When we doubt the authority of God’s Law, we are unsure whether we may tell others what they should believe and how they should live. (1)
We witnessed this Antinomianism with the recent Side-B/Revoice discussions. But that particular issue is only symptomatic of the larger problem. Antinomianism appears to be more dominant than formal Legalism today. To be sure, they are both present and in large swaths among professing Christians today. But Antinomianism, following the broader American culture of anti-authority and anti-law, appears to be rearing its deadly head above legalism.
Characteristics of Antinomianism
What characteristics appear with Antinomianism?
When people are ready to cancel preaching, worship services, prayer meetings, Bible studies, evangelism, discipleship, and private worship. But it will never sacrifice fellowship. Antinomianism does not like the effort put into attending church, private means of grace, searching one’s own heart, discipling others, and sitting under biblical preaching. To be very sure, various circumstances compel us to cancel at times. Not every cancellation needs to have the response of, “Antinomian!” But the readiness to cancel the ministry of the Word & prayer (whether private or public) indicates that antinomianism is present.
There is virtue signaling about religious duties, but not serious about personal holiness. People will call those who speak about seriousness in holiness as “Pharisaical” and “Legalistic”. It’s far easier to place blame on others rather than search our own hearts, confess our sins, and repent by God’s grace.
People are more ready to compare themselves to other lazy Christians to justify their deeds, but anyone who appears more dedicated is treated as “TR” or a “Legalistic Pharisee”. Eminent examples of men and women in previous eras are treated as “extreme” or “hyper”. We can treat them as if they were probably insecure about their standing with God and thought that further religious duties were needed to secure their salvation. It is much more comfortable to look at other lazy professing Christians and conclude that we are doing “just fine”.
They love to make cultural commentary and tell others what’s wrong and what to do, but is not intentional with personal repentance. Similar to above, this one is more so pointing to the social commentary that is rampant today. We are seeing many who are armchair cultural critics, but are slow to self-examine and positively seek ways in their personal life where they can promote righteousness. Like legalism, this characteristic loves the idea of appearing pious rather than pursuing true piety.
They love the feeling of forgiveness more than the Forgiver of sins. Like the Parable of the Unforgiving Servant, we plead with God for forgiveness of our sins, but it does not change our hearts to forgive others. We desire the “Get Out Of Jail Free Card” more than the desire to devoted to the One who forgives us. This often means that we think the Christian life is going well as long as we don’t feel guilty.
When people blame sin on personality and upbringing more than indwelling sin. It is true that we are not only sinners, but also sufferers. We must always keep this in mind when caring for people. There are many influences in our lives, but a sinful response to being sinned against never excuses our sin. My sin is not merely an Enneagram personality number. My sin is sin.
When we are willing to only receive the preaching and teaching that makes one not feel guilty. You can see the evidence of antinomianism when people are more concerned about not feeling guilty than they are to confess their sins to God, believe in Christ’s atoning blood, and strive to repent by His grace (1 John 1:8-10). The spirit of antinomianism is seen when people only want to hear that they’re doing fine and that there is no sin to worry about. They will react against being told that they are sinners who need to repent. (2)
They are legalistic toward legalists. Antinomians seem immovable to forgive legalists. They only want to tell them that they’re wrong rather than lead them in the paths of the gospel. They just want legalists to “stop it”. They don’t want to be part of a church with legalists, which results in either trying to get them out of their church or antinomians will denounce that entire church and go elsewhere. Ironically, these are all characteristics of a legalist as well.
When someone’s only response to justification is by putting little effort in holiness. “I’m justified by faith alone. I can’t obey the Law to be saved. So why worry about it? Any worry about obedience is legalism and is of the devil.” Effort is equated to the attempt to earn salvation. Justification is isolated from Christ Himself, which also minimizes the need for growing in good works.
They equate “slavish fear” with any form of obligation in the Christian life. Similar to above, the response to someone preaching Scriptural imperatives is the labeled as scaring people into holiness. To tell Christians that they are obligated to obey the Law is merely slavish fear that lingers within as part of our indwelling sin.
When we function as if there is only the first use of the Law. The first use of the Law is to show us our sins and lead us to Christ to rest solely upon Him. This is vital for believers, but it is not the only use of the Law. Antinomianism only or far-and-away mainly wants to view the Law in this way. Any imperative in Scripture is there to tell us that we can’t obey to earn salvation. Only Christ can. This is true! But a crucial piece missing is the same grace with forgives is the same grace which grows obedience to God’s Law.
Some even promote that there is no law for the Christian anymore. Going a step further than above, some say there is no Law for Christians because Christ delivered us from the Law. There is no more room for obligations in the Christian life.
Some say that all “marks, signs, evidences” of grace merely deceive people into legalism. In this thought, any self-examination is an extreme “Puritanical” introspection. I don’t need to worry about such things because I am saved by grace. Any counsel, advice, or command from Scripture that tells me to examine my life is merely legalism that needs to be repudiated.
The New Law Of Antinomianism
In The Whole Christ, Sinclair Ferguson has rightly shown that Antinomianism is merely legalism re-packaged. Thomas Boston says,
“This Antinomian principle, that it is needless for a man, perfectly justified by faith, to endeavour to keep the law, and do good works, is a glaring evidence that legality is so engrained in man’s corrupt nature, that until a man truly come to Christ, by faith, the legal disposition will still be reigning in him…though he run into Antinomianism he will carry along with him his legal spirit, which will always be a slavish and unholy spirit.” (3)
In many ways, we could say that Antinomianism is Legalism-of-the-Flesh. And because it is legalism at its core, Antinomianism promotes its own New Law. While not exhaustive, here are some of the new laws of Antinomianism today:
- You shall not tell me what doctrine is right and wrong.
- You shall not tell me how I must live and I shall not tell others how to live. (4)
- You shall not make me feel guilty and I shall not make others feels guilty.
- You shall not tell me I need to be more committed to the church.
- You shall not make me undergo church discipline.
- You shall not tell me how to identify myself.
- You shall not tell me that I am living unwisely.
- You shall not hold me accountable to my church vows.
- You shall not tell me that I cannot teach something inside the church.
- You shall not exhort me to particular repentance.
The Problem Of Antinomianism
It is entirely wrong to say that the problem on Antinomianism is preaching justification by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. While not the only doctrine we preach, justification must be a main doctrine we preach. While not the only motivation, the doctrine of justification is to be a main motivation unto good works and obedience.
Listen to what Horatius Bonar said in his classic The Everlasting Righteousness:
The knowledge of this sure justification was life from the dead to multitudes… It was not merely a new thought for man’s intellect, but a new discovery for his soul, (1) As to the true source of spiritual health, viz. the setting of a man’s conscience right with God; (2) As to the continuation of that health, viz. the keeping of the conscience right. The fruit of this was not merely a healthy personal religion, but a renovated intellect and a noble literature, and, above all, a pure worship… Our fathers saw that this truth was the basis of all real spiritual life. That which was superficial, and morbid, and puny, and second-rate, might do with some less deep, less broad foundation; but all that is healthy, and noble, and daring, and happy, and successful in religion must rest here. ‘The just shall live by faith.’ (5)
The problem is not proclaiming justification; the problem is a wrong understanding of justification. Because justification comes to us only because of union with Christ, it is not the only doctrine we preach. We preach a whole Christ to the whole man. 1 Corinthians 1:30 says Christ became to us “wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption.” We don’t merely preach justification; we proclaim Him (Col. 1:28).
It is entirely wrong to preach a Christ-less or Christ-minimized doctrine of justification. The right preaching of justification necessarily leads one to preach adoption and sanctification. This is exactly why the Westminster divines did not only put Question 33 in the Shorter Catechism, but naturally overflowed to Question 34 (on adoption) and Question 35 (on sanctification). Remember, the very context of those questions arise out of Question 32, which reads, “What benefits do they that are effectually called partake of in this life?” The answer: “They that are effectually called do in this life partake of justification, adoption, and sanctification, and the several benefits which in this life do either accompany or flow from them.”
These benefits are distinct yet inseparable because Christ is indivisible. Preaching justification only betrays the very doctrine of justification. Justification rightly understood necessarily and logically leads one to adoption and sanctification because these benefits are only received through union with Christ (Eph. 1:3). In Antinomianism, the problem is not preaching justification, it is preaching a truncated understanding of justification that treats Christ merely as a means to our guilt-less end. For Antinomianism, the chief end of justification is not to have a reconciled relationship with God, but to have the feeling of guiltlessness.
The Wrong Reaction To Antinomianism
Sin causes us to jump from one extreme to the other while missing the “marrow” of truth. This is classic for Legalism and Antinomianism. It is often a ping pong match between these two that misses the gospel altogether. When someone reacts to Antinomianism, they often are tempted to respond with Legalism.
How do we see this today? There is an Overt Legalism. This tells people that the gospel isn’t enough, grace alone isn’t enough, and prescribe formal penance. In this “Overt” Legalism, we tell people that they must add works to their faith in order to be justified. This is classic Roman Catholicism when it prescribes penance. There are other non-Roman Catholic ways of doing this. This occurs when we say that the gospel makes it easier to obey the Law, and that salvation is Christ plus our Christian obedience which justifies us. (6)
There is also a Covert Legalism. This emphasizes far more of what we’re to do and promotes a functional penance. This “Covert” Legalism is often more deadly because it is more subtle. This would outwardly deny the above statements, but it functions in the same way. This looks like preaching such Law-heavy (even with a 3rd Use of the Law) sermons that Christ’s sufficiency is eclipsed. People deny the doctrine of penance, but they treat repentance like it basically is penance.
The Proper Reaction To Antinomianism
We must rely on the power of the gospel for all of salvation. The only true antidote to Antinomianism is the sufficiency of the grace of God in the Person and Work of Christ as applied by the Holy Spirit.
Specifically, what do we need to cure us of our Antinomianism?
We need all 3 uses of the Law. (7) We do need the 1st Use of the Law, but we also need the 3rd Use (preaching the imperatives and obligations for Christians that are in Scripture). Genuine love for Christ results in heartfelt obedience. The gospel of free grace empowers us to grow in holiness. We need to obey God’s Law, but empowered by the freeness of God’s grace in Jesus Christ. Biblical preaching proclaims sin and salvation, Law and Gospel, indicatives and imperatives, full forgiveness of sins and obligations to obey.
We need Christ-saturated sermons. We can’t be content with merely tagging on Christ at the end of a sermon to check the box of having a supposed Christ-centered sermon. Christ must be the main diadem of every sermon. Most of our preaching happens in the context of corporate worship. Therefore, we must have the main goal of our sermons the worship of Christ right then and there amidst the preaching of the gospel. Moral messages can come from those who are more conservative, progressive, and moderate. Christ must be far-and-away the all-in-all of all our sermons. He alone is the basis for justification and He alone is the power for our sanctification.
We need preaching Christ Himself. There is a difference between talking about Christ and preaching Christ. We must hold Him out as supreme, sufficient, and one whom we place saving faith in. As Philip Ryan said, we need to preach a Jesus “we can grab hold of.” It is a false dichotomy to pit Jesus against doctrine, but we can preach doctrine in such a way where it feels as if we’re leading people merely to propositions rather than the Living Truth. There is no such thing as a doctrine-less Jesus. But our doctrine must be “logic on fire” that is most undeniably rooted in Christ Himself.
We need the preaching of Indicatives and Imperatives (and in their proper order). We can’t preach either/or, but both/and when it comes to indicatives (What Christ has done) and imperatives (What Christ commands). But we must ensure they are in their proper order. Indicatives empower imperatives; imperatives strengthen my faith in the indicatives. Doctrine is meant for living and living reinforces upon my conscience that the doctrine is true. We must proclaim both. Church members need to repent of calling all preaching of imperatives as “legalism”. They also must repent of calling all preaching of indicatives as “antinomianism”. We must proclaim both, but proclaim them in their proper order and emphasis. Notice the both/and of Ephesians 2:8-10,
For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.
Conclusion
It should be no surprise that we are responding to another issue with the power of the gospel. It is God’s power for every stage and season of our salvation. This gospel gives us the good news of the finished work of Christ and the power of His free grace to enable us to live for His glory. Most of the issues we face today have the foundation of twisting the gospel. While we must deal with particular issues themselves, we must make sure we also deal with the root problem. The answer for the New Pharisaism is the gospel of free grace in Jesus Christ.
(1) Thanks Rev. Parks Turner for providing some wonderful commentary and insight on this part.
(2) Antinomista: “For if I did commit any sin, I was presently troubled and disquieted in my conscience, and could have no peace till I had made humble confession thereof unto God, craved pardon and forgiveness, and promised amendment. But now I told them, that whatsoever sins I committed, I was no [longer] troubled at them, nor indeed am I at this day; for I do verily believe that God, for Christ’s sake, has freely and fully pardoned all my sins, both past, present, and to come; so that I am confident, that whatsoever sin or sins I commit, they shall never be laid to my charge, being very well assured, that I am so perfectly clothed with the robe of Christ’s righteousness, that GOd can see no sin in me at all. And therefore now I can rejoice evermore in Christ, as the apostles exhorts me, and live merrily, though I be never so vile or sinful a creature; and indeed I pity them that are in the same slavish condition I was in.” Thomas Boston comments: “How easy is the passage from legalism to Antinomianism! Had this poor man, under his trouble and disquiet of conscience, fled to Jesus Christ for the purging of his conscience from guilt by His blood, and the sanctifying of his nature by His Spirit; and not put his own confessions of sins, prayers for pardon, and promises of amendment, in the room of Christ’s atoning blood; and his blind and faithless resolutions to amend, in the room of the sanctifying Spirit of Christ; he had escaped this snare of the devil (Heb. 9:14, Rom. 7:4-6).” Fisher, Edward. The Marrow of Modern Divinity (Christian Focus), p. 113.
(3) The Marrow of Modern Divinity, p. 207.
(4) Antinomista: “But yet, sir, as I remember, both Luther and Calvin do speak as though a believer were so quite freed from the law by Christ, as that he need not make any conscience at all of yielding obedience to it.” The Marrow of Modern Divinity, p. 198.
(5) Bonar, Horatius. The Everlasting Righteousness (Edinburgh, UK: Banner of Truth, 2020), p. viii-ix.
(6) WCF 11.1 “Those whom God effectually calls he also freely justifies; not by infusing righteousness into them, but by pardoning their sins, and by accounting and accepting their persons as righteous: not for anything wrought in them, or done by them, but for Christ’s sake alone; nor by imputing faith itself, the act of believing, or any other evangelical obedience to them, as their righteousness; but by imputing the obedience and satisfaction of Christ unto them, they receiving and resting on him and his righteousness by faith; which faith they have not of themselves, it is the gift of God.”
(7) A phenomenal read on this is Stephen Spinnenweber’s book Loving The Law: The Law of God in the Life of the Believer.
