HYPER-GRACE

THE DOCTRINE
OF THE DEVIL
According to David Kowalski
Started During The Apostles

Key: - Any Truth Pressed too Far

Becomes Heresy

In Every Revival in History Watch Out For:

a. False Apostles - Rev. 2: 1-2
b. False Prophets - Matt. 24:24
c. False Teachers - 2 Pet. 2:1-2
d. False Brethren - Gal. 2:4

1
 DEFINITION OF TERMS

HYPER-GRACE
The term hyper-grace has been used to describe a new wave of teaching that
emphasize the grace of God to the exclusion of other vital teachings like hell
and judgment.

The preachers and teachers teach that the New Testament is all about grace
and does away with the Old Testament law!

Hyper-grace teaches, once born again, Christians need never again repent
for sins because they are automatically forgiven by the blood of Jesus the
moment they are committed.

I believe the hyper-grace message could be the end-time deception that will
cause millions of people to fall away from God! Rev. Sid Roth.

ANTINOMIANISM

This comes from the Greek meaning lawless. In Christian Theology, it is a

derogatory term for the teaching that Christians are under no obligation to
obey the laws of ethics or morality. Antinomian: One who holds that under
the gospel dispensation of grace the moral law is of no use or obligation
because faith alone is necessary for salvation.

GNOSTICISM
Gnostics claim to possess an elevated knowledge, a 'higher truth' known
only to a certain few.

Gnosticism comes from the Greek word gnosis which means ''to know''.
Gnostics claim to possess a higher knowledge, not from the Bible but
acquired on some mystical higher plane of existence. Gnostics see
themselves as a privileged class elevated above everybody else by their
higher, deep knowledge of God.

2
 THE REBELLION OF ANTINOMIANISM
In the political realm a revolution is distinguished from a
rebellion by which side of the conflict one sides with. In the
spiritual/doctrinal realm this distinction is determined by
whether or not the agitator is faithful to God and His
Word. In recent years enthusiastic proponents have
fervently popularized within the church an old teaching
that has reemerged in fresh harmony with compatible,
contemporary, cultural sentiments.

Its advocates claim the teaching is an end-time message of

a “grace revolution” while critics see it as merely a fresh
spin given to the rebellious, old heresy of Antinomianism –
a heresy named in the 16TH century by Martin Luther, in
which proponents in some manner negate or minimize any
application of the obligatory nature of God’s moral
law (and/or the implications of that obligation) for
believers.

Alexander M. Renwick succinctly defines Antinomianism

in Baker’s Dictionary of Theology:

The word comes from the Greek anti, against, and nomos,
law, and signifies opposition to law. It refers to the doctrine
that the moral law is not binding upon Christians as a rule
of life. In a wider sense it is applied to the views of fanatics
who refuse to recognize any law but their own subjective
ideas which they usually claim are from the Holy Spirit. 6

3
Advocates claim the teaching is an end-time message of a
"grace revolution." Critics see it as a fresh spin on the
rebellious, old heresy of Antinomianism.

We should first note the difference generally recognized

between two, basic forms of Antinomianism. First there is
the less common yet more extreme form referred to as
libertine or practical Antinomianism, in which supposed
Christians brazenly and unashamedly live in wanton sin
with no restraint.
The second and less extreme (though more common) form
of Antinomianism is referred to as doctrinal
Antinomianism or, as others may sometimes refer to it,
Sandemanianism— named after the teachings of Robert
Sandeman (1718-1781) who, while not endorsing sinful
practices, asserted that mental assent alone was sufficient
for salvation.
It is this second kind of Antinomianism with which we are
presently concerned, and though its immediate
manifestation may be less dramatic, its more subtle, long-
term effect on the church is often just as harmful – leading
to scores of people having false assurances of salvation
within a rebellious and ungodly state. John Flavel (1627-
1691) warned against the insidious nature of doctrinal
Antinomianism:
But others there are, whose judgments are unhappily
tainted and leavened with those loose doctrines; yet being
in the main godly persons, they dare not take liberty to sin,

4
or live in the neglect of known duties, though their
principles too much incline that way; but though they dare
not, others will, who imbibe corrupt notions from them;
and the renowned piety of the authors will be no antidote
against the danger, but make the poison operate the more
powerfully, by receiving it in such a vehicle. 9 [Emphasis
mine]
This kind of Antinomianism edits out from its system any
mention of God’s continuing and binding, moral rule over
the redeemed. In his critique of Antinomianism Daniel
Steele summarizes the essence of its doctrinal form as
follows:
“…A believer is not bound to mourn for sin, because it was
pardoned before it was committed, and pardoned sin is no
sin [emphasis mine]; that God does not see sin in believers,
however great sins they commit…”
Consequently, in Antinomian thinking there is no place for
confession of sin, godly sorrow for it, or consciously
repenting of it 11 (points to which they go to absurdly
imaginative extremes as they vainly try to justify them
from Scripture) because in the mind of God these sins
essentially do not even exist.

In Antinomian thinking there is no place for confession of

sin, godly sorrow for it, or consciously repenting of it.

In the Evangelical Dictionary of Theology R. D. Linder

describes contemporary, popular Antinomianism as the
belief that “Once persons are justified by faith in Christ

5
they no longer have any obligation toward the moral law
because Jesus freed them from it.”12 Antinomians
frequently assert that apart from the Mosaic system there is
no moral law that believers are obligated to obey. I address
this misunderstanding in “Should We Say Should?” linked
to below.
Though the Antinomian heresy was named in the
16TH century and has experienced a kind of modern
renaissance it is as old as the church itself, as evidenced by
such things as John’s apparent rebuttal (in 1 John) of a
form of Gnostic Antinomianism that had influenced the
church:
By this we know that we have come to know Him, if
we keep His commandments. The one who says, ‘I have
come to know Him,’ and does not keep His
commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him; but
whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God has truly
been perfected. By this we know that we are in Him: the
one who says he abides in Him ought himself to walk in the
same manner as He walked. – 1 John 2:3-6.
These things I have written to you concerning those who
are trying to deceive you. – 1 John 2:26
If you know that He is righteous, you know that everyone
also who practices righteousness is born of Him. - 1 John
2:29
Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness;
and sin is lawlessness [Grk ἀνομία]. You know that He

6
appeared in order to take away sins; and in Him there is no
sin. No one who abides in Him sins; no one who sins has
seen Him or knows Him. Little children, make sure no
one deceives you; the one who practices righteousness is
righteous, just as He is righteous; the one who practices
sin is of the devil; for the devil has sinned from the
beginning. The Son of God appeared for this purpose, to
destroy the works of the devil. No one who is born of
God practices sin, because His seed abides in him; and he
cannot sin, because he is born of God. By this the children
of God and the children of the devil are obvious: anyone
who does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor the
one who does not love his brother. – 1 John 3:4-10
By this we know that we love the children of God, when we
love God and observe His commandments. For this is the
love of God, that we keep His commandments; and His
commandments are not burdensome. 1 John 5:2-3 (note the
plural form of “commandments”)
Similarly, Paul confronted an arrogant form of Antinomian
posturing in the Corinthian church:
It is actually reported that there is immorality among you,
and immorality of such a kind as does not exist even among
the Gentiles, that someone has his father’s wife. You have
become arrogant and have not mourned instead, so that
the one who had done this deed would be removed from
your midst. For I, on my part, though absent in body but
present in spirit, have already judged him who has so
committed this, as though I were present. In the name of
our Lord Jesus, when you are assembled, and I with you in

7
spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus, I have
decided to deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of
his flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the
Lord Jesus. Your boasting is not good. Do you not know
that a little leaven leavens the whole lump of dough? Clean
out the old leaven so that you may be a new lump, just as
you are in fact unleavened. For Christ our Passover also
has been sacrificed. Therefore let us celebrate the
feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and
wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and
truth. I wrote you in my letter not to associate with immoral
people; I did not at all mean with the immoral people of
this world, or with the covetous and swindlers, or
with idolaters, for then you would have to go out of the
world. But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with
any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or
covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a
swindler—not even to eat with such a one. For what have
I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who
are within the church? But those who are outside, God
judges. Remove the wicked man from among yourselves. –
1 Corinthians 5:1-12.

The problem with the “grace message” is not that it

presents us with “hyper-grace” but that it offers a pseudo
(unbiblical and therefore false) “grace”

The term “hyper-grace” has become popular to describe the

“grace movement” – due in part, I think, to the writings of
Michael Brown (see his book). While I agree with Dr.

8
Brown in essence I think the term “hyper-grace” falls short
as a moniker for the “grace” movement in the same way the
term “hyper-faith” did when people once used it denote the
Word-Faith heresy. The problem with the “grace message”
is not that it presents us with “hyper-grace” (“hyper”
meaning excessive or fanatical) so much as it offers
a pseudo (unbiblical and therefore false) “grace” that has
for centuries been called Antinomianism.

I do understand the current popularity of the term “hyper-

grace” since it sounds less academic than
“Antinomianism,” and is thus a catchier term. I also
understand Michael Brown’s reluctance to call the
teachings of the “grace” movement a completely false or
pseudo grace. I sympathize with this posture since like him,
I do not wish to imply that none of those in the “grace”
movement are true Christians. Still, I believe there is a
legitimate sense in which we can say that the so-called
grace of the “grace” movement is not true, biblical grace as
it is fully explained in the Bible.

As I explain in the article “Why We Should Preach the

Whole Counsel of God,” a supposed truth isolated from the
larger context of truth in which it rightly fits dies much as
an organ does when removed from a body. Just as James
said that faith “by itself” is dead (James 2:17, 26) grace
removed from the larger context of biblical salvation is
dead, and thus not the lively, efficacious, true grace of
Scripture.

Sanctification Flows from Justification

9
Antinomianism errs most especially on the doctrine of
sanctification, which is an indispensable element of biblical
salvation. Sanctification refers to our being made holy in
nature but also involves the practical obedience
Antinomians seek to censor from public discussion. J. C.
Ryle comments on the crucial distinction between
justification and sanctification:

In justification our own works have no place at all and

simple faith in Christ is the one thing needful. In
sanctification our own works are of vast importance, and
God bids us fight and watch and pray and strive and take
pains and labour.

While sanctification must never be confused with

justification it cannot be divorced from it since the grace
that justifies also sanctifies in biblical salvation. R. D.
Linder expresses this sentiment in following way: “The
Christian community as a whole has rejected
Antinomianism for several reasons. It is damaging to the
unity of the Bible, which demands that one part of divine
revelation not contradict another. Even more important,
Antinomians misunderstand the nature of justification by
faith, which, though granted apart from works of the law, is
not sanctification.

We should note that in the New Testament many of the

passages concerning sanctification relate to our positional
status as saints and new creatures. Nevertheless, other
passages on the topic speak of the progressive aspect of our

10
being made holy in our practical state: For by a single
offering he has perfected for all time those who are being
sanctified. 19 – Hebrews 10:14 ESV .

Not that I have already obtained it or have already become

perfect, but I press on so that I may lay hold of that for
which also I was laid hold of by Christ Jesus. Brethren, I
do not regard myself as having laid hold of it yet; but one
thing I do: forgetting what lies behind and reaching
forward to what lies ahead, I press on toward the goal for
the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus. Let us
therefore, as many as are perfect, have this attitude; and if
in anything you have a different attitude, God will reveal
that also to you; — Philippians 3:12-15

Now for this very reason also, applying all diligence, in

your faith supply moral excellence, and in your moral
excellence, knowledge, and in your knowledge, self-control,
and in your self-control, perseverance, and
in your perseverance, godliness, and in your godliness,
brotherly kindness, and in your brotherly kindness, love. –
2 Peter 1:5-7

All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for

teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in
righteousness; — 2 timothy 3:16 (Note that righteous
standing is not something for which believers must be
trained – it is a gift. The righteousness we need training in
is righteous living).

11
Typical of those in the “grace” movement, Joseph
Prince conflates (combines so as to blur their distinctions)
the notions of justification and sanctification, saying the
believer’s positional righteousness in justification negates
any discussion we should have about his or her practical
righteousness in sanctification. Prince rejects the position
of biblical and historic orthodoxy (“conventional
theology”), saying, “Today, conventional theology teaches
you that not only is there such a thing as ‘positional
righteousness’, there is also something known as ‘practical
righteousness’.” 20

Tullian Tchividjian likewise conflates justification and

sanctification by claiming that in practice sanctification
does not result from choices to obey in specific
circumstances but only in mental reminders of our justified
status: “Sanctification is the daily hard work of going back
to the reality of our justification. It‘s going back to the
certainty of our objectively secured pardon in Christ and
hitting the refresh button a thousand times a day.”21 While
it is true that sanctification is by God’s truth (John 17:17)
and does involve a continual reminder of what God has
done (2 Peter 1:9) it does not thereby exclude the specific
intentionality of the one being sanctified, as is evidenced by
the many, New Testament passages in which the command
to live obediently is directed to us in practical terms. 22 J. I
Packer notes the further distinction between regeneration
and sanctification:

Regeneration was a momentary monergistic act of

quickening the spiritually dead. As such, it was God’s work

12
alone. Sanctification, however, is in one sense synergistic –
it is an ongoing cooperative process in which regenerate
persons, alive to God and freed from sin’s dominion (Rom.
6:11, 14-18), are required to exert themselves in sustained
obedience. God’s method of sanctification is neither
activism (self-reliant activity) nor apathy (God-reliant
passivity), but God-dependent effort (2 Cor. 7:1; Phil.
3:10-14; Heb. 12:14). Knowing that without Christ’s
enabling we can do nothing, morally speaking, as we
should, and that he is ready to strengthen us for all that we
have to do (Phil. 4:13), we “stay put” (remain, abide) in
Christ, asking for his help constantly – and we receive it
(Col. 1:11; 1 Tim. 1:12; 2 Tim. 1:7; 2:1).23

Though the Antinomian heresy has surfaced with varied

justifications and emphases over the centuries, its latest
explosion in the so-called “grace” movement has its most
immediate roots in the extreme manifestation of Darbyite
Dispensationalism referred to as the “Free-Grace”
movement of the 20TH century (led by teachers such as
Lewis Sperry Chafer, Zane Hodges, and Charles Ryrie) that
eventually persuaded some of its number to become near or
even complete universalists, believing that not even
specific belief or trust in Christ or the cross was required to
be saved, since, according to them, “grace” meant there are
no requirements or conditions of any kind for salvation. 24

The Bible, however, teaches that saving grace is not given

to all but only to those who have biblical faith.

13
The Bible, however, teaches that saving grace is not given
to all but only to those who have biblical faith – something
the Bible says has very strong doctrinal content and moral
consequences. While the doctrinal content and moral
consequences of faith do not work for or earn salvation,
they are indispensable parts of the bucket that receives
God’s free gift. As is often said (following Calvin) we are
saved by faith alone but the faith that saves is not alone
(see, for example, James 2:14-26). We are saved from our
sins and any so-called salvation that does not result in our
turning away from habitual, willful sin is not biblical
salvation.

Though Scripture refutes Antinomianism it clearly does

teach much about genuine grace. It is not enough, though,
for us to merely use words found in the Bible in our
theological systems. We must say the very same things
about those words that Scripture does. For example, the
Word-Faith movement uses the word “faith” very boldly,
but what they teach about this word from the Bible is not
biblical. The enemy is not so naïve as to suppose he can
lead Christians astray in the name of “anti-faith” or “anti-
grace” but must package his deception as a kind of “super
faith” or “super grace.”

Martin Luther noted this phenomenon in his commentary

on Galatians: “The devil knows better than to appear ugly
and black. He prefers to carry on his nefarious activities in
the name of God. Hence the German proverb: ‘All mischief
begins in the name of God.’ When the devil sees that he
cannot hurt the cause of the Gospel by destructive methods,

14
he does it under the guise of correcting and advancing the
cause of the Gospel.” 25

Biblical Christians wholeheartedly believe that we are

saved not by any works of our own but purely by the
unmerited favor of God received through faith in Christ:
For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that
not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as 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 so that we would walk in
them. – Ephesians 2:8-10

He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done

in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the
washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy
Spirit, whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus
Christ our Savior, so that being justified by His grace we
would be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
— Titus 3:5-7

Real faith results in a life-changing work of God that

makes us “new creatures” who live godly and obedient
lives.

Not everyone will be saved, though. Jesus, in fact, said we

must “Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide
and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there
are many who enter through it. For the gate is small and
the way is narrow that leads to life, and there

15
are few who find it.” (Matthew 7:14). The Bible says only
those who have biblical faith will receive the true grace that
leads to our inheriting the kingdom of God.

One of the differences between true and false faith

specified in the Bible is that real faith results in a life-
changing work of God that makes us “new creatures” (2
Corinthians 5:17) who live godly and obedient lives.
Consequently, perseverance in this godliness is an essential
consequence of the faith that ultimately inherits the
kingdom (I address this at more length in “Is Eternal
Security Conditional or Unconditional?”). Again, though
we are saved by faith alone the faith that saves is not alone.

Orthodox Christians also firmly believe in the love and

mercy of God toward His sometimes disobedient children –
a thought expressed in Charles Wesley in his hymn “Depth
of Mercy”:
Whence to me this waste of love?
Ask my advocate above!
See the cause in Jesus’ face,
Now before the throne of grace.
There for me the Savior stands,
Shows His wounds and spreads His hands.
God is love! I know, I feel;
Jesus weeps and loves me still. 26

Membership in God’s family is largely determined by one’s

bearing of the family likeness in the way they live.

16
 “For we all stumble in many ways…” – James 3:2.
Nevertheless, God has not ceased to command holy living
in the lives of believers, and He sometimes rebukes and
disciplines even His children (as in Christ’s messages to the
churches in Revelation). On the basis of biblical
teaching, orthodox Christianity has always likewise insisted
that membership in God’s family is largely determined by
one’s bearing of the family likeness in the way they live.

Calvinists say those who do not persevere in displaying this

godly image were never true children to begin with
while Arminians say that a child of God can forfeit their
heavenly inheritance through a persistent and willful
lifestyle of ungodliness. Only Antinomians contradict the
New Testament teaching that the ungodly will by no means
inherit the kingdom of God: Or do you not know that the
unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be
deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers,
nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves,
nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor
swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. Such were some
of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but
you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and
in the Spirit of our God. – 1 Corinthians 6:9-11

Paul contrasts those who do not live sanctified lives with

those who have been cleansed from their guilt and their
former, sinful ways. Right living flows from a genuine,
right standing. Thus, Paul makes clear that those who
remain in the sinful conduct he specifically identifies are
not considered part of the company of the cleansed. Indeed,

17
Revelation chapter 22 makes a similar contrast between the
cleansed and those who wantonly persist in their evil
conduct.
Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they may
have the right to the tree of life, and may enter by the gates
into the city. Outside are the dogs and the sorcerers and the
immoral persons and the murderers and the idolaters, and
everyone who loves and practices lying.” – Revelation
22:14-15

God does not unrealistically expect sinless perfection of

saints but He does expect saints to essentially behave as
saints.

God does not unrealistically expect sinless perfection of

saints but He does expect saints to essentially behave as
saints. Those who are truly made righteous in standing are
made essentially righteous in their living. Lack of right
living betrays a lack of right standing. Antinomians will
sometimes challenge the orthodox believer to show at
precisely what point it is determined that a person has
“departed from the faith” (according to Arminian
theology):
At that time many will fall away and will betray one
another and hate one another. – Matthew 24:10
But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some
will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful
spirits and doctrines of demons, — 1 Timothy 4:1

18
Similarly Antinomians challenge at what point someone
who has professed faith has shown by their conduct that
they are not elect overcomers (Revelation chapters two and
three) who have persevered to the end (as in Calvinist
theology):
If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a
branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them
into the fire and they are burned. – John 15:6
Pursue peace with all men, and the sanctification without
which no one will see the Lord. – Hebrews 12:14
For this you know with certainty, that no immoral or
impure person or covetous man, who is an idolater, has an
inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God.
Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of
these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of
disobedience. Therefore do not be partakers with them; for
you were formerly darkness, but now you are Light in the
Lord; walk as children of Light (for the fruit of the
Light consists in all goodness and righteousness and truth),
trying to learn what is pleasing to the Lord. Do not
participate in the unfruitful ldeeds of darkness, but instead
even expose them; — Ephesians 5: 5-11
By this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep
His commandments. The one who says, “I have come
to know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a
liar, and the truth is not in him; but whoever keeps His
word, in him the love of God has truly been perfected. By

19
this we know that we are in Him: the one who says
he abides in Him ought himself to walk in the same manner
as He walked. – 1 John 2:3-6
Such determinations have not been delegated to us,
however, and to imply that they are too difficult for God
who is the judge is an insult to His majesty.
Grace, as Louis Berkhof notes, is a deeper concept than
merely unmerited blessing; it is “the unmerited operation of
God in the heart of man, effected through the agency of the
Holy Spirit.”27 The Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich, and Danker
lexicon affirms that tangible “attractiveness” is a root
concept of χάρις, the Greek word translated as “grace” in
the New Testament. The lexicon follows the word’s use to
the expression of the beauty observed in God’s saving act
at Calvary and the comprehensive results of that beauty in
those who receive and are beautified by it. 28 The real grace
of God effects a real and godly change in the recipient. A
lack of “the beauty of holiness” (Psalm 96:9) betrays an
absence of God’s charis. This life-changing effect of real
grace has historically been spoken of as
the efficacious nature of grace. Samuel Rutherford (1600-
1661) spoke of the practical effect of genuine grace in this
fashion: “The way that crieth down duties and
sanctification, is not the way of grace; grace is an innocent
thing, and will not take men off from duties; grace
destroyeth not obedience.” 29

Though we are not saved by works we are

saved unto works, as Horatius Bonar observed: “When we

20
say that believing is not working, but a ceasing from work,
we do not mean that the believing man is not to work, but
that he is not to work for pardon, but to take it freely, and
that he is to believe before he works, for works done before
believing are not pleasing to God.”30 Though the
Christian’s works do not earn salvation and are done by
those saved by grace alone the Bible still speaks of these
works as good:

For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that
not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as 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 so that we would walk in
them. – Ephesians 2:8-10

Real faith receives more than a change in legal status

before God, it receives a comprehensive salvation that
results in a lifestyle of good works.

Real faith receives more than a change in legal status

before God, it receives a comprehensive salvation that
results in a lifestyle of good works (James 2:14-26). Efforts
to sever resulting and evidential works from the larger
organism of salvation result in a pseudo-faith. As James
says in James 2:26, “For just as the body without the spirit
is dead, so also faith without works is dead.” The works of
the unregenerate may be no better than filthy rags as a basis
for justification (Isaiah 64:6) but, as Mark Jones says, “It is
actually an affront to God to suggest [as Antinomians often

21
do] that Spirit-wrought works in believers are ‘filthy
rags.’” 31 Though good works cannot justify they are not to
be belittled regarding Christian sanctification. Our
commendable actions can never earn salvation but they
give necessary evidence to it and can actually
please/delight (Grk ἀρέσκω) the heart of God:
Trying to learn what is pleasing to the Lord.—Ephesians
5:10

For this reason also, since the day we heard of it, we have
not ceased to pray for you and to ask that you may be filled
with the knowledge of His will in all spiritual wisdom and
understanding, so that you will walk in a manner worthy
of the Lord, to please Him in all respects. — Colossians
1:9-10

Finally then, brethren, we request and exhort you in the

Lord Jesus, that as you received from us instruction as to
how you ought to walk and please God (just as you
actually do walk), that you excel still more. — 1
Thessalonians 4:1 32

Paul, the apostle of grace, goes further in what he teaches

about salvation than it seems some people like to consider,
insisting that though we must not trust in any good works
of our own as the source of our right standing with God, we
are not, in the New Covenant, freed from an obligation to
obey the moral stipulations still commanded by God, and
this obedience is essential to the identity of the company of
the saved. We must, as the writer of Hebrews says, “Strive
for peace with everyone, and for the holiness without which

22
no one will see the Lord” (Hebrews 12:14 ESV). Kevin
DeYoung comments in kind:

Not only is holiness the goal of your redemption, it

is necessary for your redemption. Now before you sound
the legalist alarm, tie me up by my own moral bootstraps,
and feed my carcass to the Galatians, we should see what
Scripture has to say. . . . It’s the consistent and frequent
teaching of the Bible that those whose lives are marked by
habitual ungodliness will not go to heaven. To find
acquittal from God on the last day there must be evidence
flowing out of us that grace has flowed into us.33

Martin Luther said, “Oh, it is a living, busy, active mighty

thing, this faith; and so it is impossible for it not to do good
works incessantly…He who does not these works is a
faithless man…and thus it is impossible to separate works
from faith, quite as impossible to separate heat and light
[from] fires.”34 Charles Spurgeon echoed this sentiment,
saying, “It is a faith which produces works which saves us;
the works do not save us; but a faith which does not
produce works is a faith that will only deceive, and cannot
lead us into heaven.” 35

Godliness Is Not Optional

This practical sanctification is such an integral part of
genuine salvation that Paul identifies the difference
between the saved and the unsaved on the basis of their
obedient or disobedient lifestyles:

23
But because of your stubbornness and unrepentant
heart you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of
wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of
God, who will render to each person according to his
deeds: to those who by perseverance in doing good seek
for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life; but to
those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth,
but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation. There
will be tribulation and distress for every soul of man who
does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek, but glory
and honor and peace to everyone who does good, to the
Jew first and also to the Greek. — Romans 2:5-10
Those who are favorably judged will be those who show
the “obedience of faith” (Romans 1:5). When the judgment
is portrayed in Scripture the distinction between saved and
condemned presented is between the doers of good and the
doers of evil (Matthew 25:31-46, Romans 2:5-10,
Revelation 22:15) and at the judgment rewards and
retribution will be granted within these differing camps
according to their deeds:
For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ,
so that each one may be recompensed for his deeds in the
body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad.
— 2 Corinthians 5:10 (This verse applies to both
retribution and rewards. See also Matthew 16:27, 1 Peter
1:17, and Revelation 20:12)

The biblical teaching that saving faith is shown by godly

living has always been the position of historic orthodoxy.

24
The same Paul who made clear our freedom from Mosaic
law as a justifying system also maintained that we are still
under God’s kingdom rule (moral law) and are supposed to
obey Him. If exhortations to obedience are a “legalistic
ministration of death” (to use Joseph Prince’s words) then
the New Testament authors, under the Holy Spirit’s
inspiration, were repeatedly guilty of this “legalism” in a
multitude of passages such as the following:

Flee immorality. Every other sin that a man commits is

outside the body, but the immoral man sins against his own
body. Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the
Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and
that you are not your own? For you have been bought with
a price: therefore glorify God in your body. – 1
Corinthians 6:18-20

So this I say, and affirm together with the Lord, that you
walk no longer just as the Gentiles also walk, in the futility
of their mind, being darkened in their understanding,
excluded from the life of God because of the ignorance that
is in them, because of the hardness of their heart; and they,
having become callous, have given themselves over
to sensuality for the practice of every kind of impurity with
greediness. But you did not learn Christ in this way, if
indeed you have heard Him and have been taught in Him,
just as truth is in Jesus, that, in reference to your former
manner of life, you lay aside the old self, which is being
corrupted in accordance with the lusts of deceit, and that
you be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and put on

25
the new self, which in the likeness of God has been created
in righteousness and holiness of the truth. Therefore, laying
aside falsehood, speak truth each one of you with his
neighbor, for we are members of one another. Be angry,
and yet do not sin; do not let the sun go down on your
anger, and do not give the devil an opportunity. He who
steals must steal no longer; but rather he must
labor, performing with his own hands what is good, so that
he will have something to share with one who has need. Let
no unwholesome word proceed from your mouth, but only
such a word as is good for edification according to the
need of the moment, so that it will give grace to those who
hear. Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you
were sealed for the day of redemption. Let all bitterness
and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away
from you, along with all malice. Be kind to one another,
tender-hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ
also has forgiven you. – Ephesians 4:17-32

Therefore consider the members of your earthly body as

dead to immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and
greed, which amounts to idolatry. For it is because of these
things that the wrath of God will come upon the sons of
disobedience, and in them you also once walked, when you
were living in them. But now you also, put them all
aside: anger, wrath, malice, slander, and abusive speech
from your mouth. Do not lie to one another, since you laid
aside the old self with its evil practices, and have put on the
new self who is being renewed to a true
knowledge according to the image of the One who created
him. – Colossians 3:5-10

26
What is the source of quarrels and conflicts among you? Is
not the source your pleasures that wage war in your
members? You lust and do not have; so you commit
murder. You are envious and cannot obtain; so you fight
and quarrel. You do not have because you do not ask. You
ask and do not receive, because you ask with wrong
motives, so that you may spend it on your pleasures.
You adulteresses, do you not know that friendship with the
world is hostility toward God? Therefore whoever wishes
to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.
– James 4:1-4
For the time already past is sufficient for you to have
carried out the desire of the Gentiles, having pursued a
course of sensuality, lusts, drunkenness, carousing,
drinking parties and abominable idolatries. – 1 Peter 4:3

Though Prince repeatedly rejects the notions of reproof

and correction, he also repeatedly offers strong rebuke to
those who openly differ with his teaching.

With the Pauline passages of this type specifically in mind,

J. C. Ryle offered this challenge: “I defy anyone to read St.
Paul’s writings carefully without finding in them a large
quantity of plain practical directions about the Christian’s
duty in every relation of life, and about our daily habits,
temper, and behavior toward one another. These directions
were written down by inspiration of God for the perpetual
guidance of professing Christians.” 37

27
Antinomian Joseph Prince rejects the conscious application
of these passages to our lives, however, threatening that if
we do so it will interfere with our relationship with God. To
Prince, one must choose between the Bible’s, specific,
moral imperatives (for which he uses the derogatory term
“rules”) and a vital relationship with God. 38 He does not
explain, however, why, if moral imperatives are supposedly
antithetical to a relationship with God, the God who desires
relationship with us provides us with so many specific ones
in the New Testament.

Though today’s Antinomians tend to demean godly

exhortations as “legalist behavior modification” the New
Testament is brimming with instances of the apostles’
obedience to Jesus’ commission that we make not just
cleansed converts but dedicated disciples, “Teaching them
to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you”
– Matthew 28:20.39 After saving us in spite of our bad
behavior, God does want to modify our behavior for the
better! Though this new lifestyle originates from a new
heart, God wants it to be openly manifested in our practical
conduct, outwardly displaying the inward transformation.

The laws/moral standards of God are given to us both

objectively and subjectively.

The Bible does not present us with what God has done and
what we must do as subjects we must choose between for
discussion as though these were mutually exclusive topics.
Paul tells us that the grace of God received through what

28
He has done teaches (Grk παιδεία) us regarding what we
should do: “For the grace of God has appeared, bringing
salvation to all men, instructing us to deny ungodliness
and worldly desires and to live sensibly, righteously and
godly in the present age,” – Titus 2:11-12. Many
Antinomians claim that this Pauline passage means that the
indwelling Spirit in each believer renders external
exhortations needless and even counterproductive.
Antinomian claims of this kind, however, ignore the many
passages (such as the ones listed earlier) in which the Holy
Spirit inspires externally given exhortations to specified,
godly behaviors. God graciously teaches us to live godly
lives and He often uses others to specifically instruct and
exhort us in the ways we should live. Those who condemn
this ministry seek to censor the Spirit of God.

These laws/moral standards of God are given to us both

objectively and subjectively. God writes His laws40 (moral
standards) on our hearts (Hebrews 8:10 and 10:16) but the
laws He so writes are objective and originate externally to
us. They are not the sum of our feelings (if this were so
Christians would be left with no objective basis for
determining right from wrong). Thus, Hebrews 8:10 and
10:16 validate rather than repudiate the specific words of
instruction and exhortation we find so often in the New
Testament.

Since Antinomians ignore teaching and exhortations related

to practical obedience (progressive sanctification) they
subsequently widen the concept of “legalism” in an
unbiblical way. They tend to view any attempt to address or

29
correct sinful misconduct as “legalistic.” In biblical and
historic orthodoxy, however, legalism pertains specifically
to justification. It is the systematic effort to attain a right
status with God on the basis of anything other than the
cross of Christ. God wants His children to mature, though,
and legalism is not the systematic effort to teach Christians
to grow up in order to conform to Christ rather than the
world, or to specifically obey the Word of God rather than
the dictates of the flesh.

Therefore I urge you, brethren, by the mercies of God,

to present your bodies a living and holy
sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service
of worship. And do not be conformed to this world, but be
transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may
prove what the will of God is, that which is good
and acceptable and perfect. – Romans 12:1-2
An important part of the “grace” message’s falling away
from biblical grace is its tendency to redefine other,
biblical terms – including the word “repentance”.

One, important part of the “grace” message’s falling away

from biblical grace is its tendency to redefine other, biblical
words – including the word “repentance.” Following the
teaching of “Free Grace” movement leader Charles
Ryrie, 41 Joseph Prince does this by only partially quoting
from Thayer’s lexicon 42 (no doubt from one of the
abridged versions available on the internet). Antinomians,
however, should go to any Christian bookstore or library to
look up “repentance” in an unabridged version of Thayer’s

30
lexicon to see how terribly Prince misrepresents the
meaning of Thayer, who strongly insists that repentance
always involves godly sorrow for sin and turning away
from sinful deeds, saying “The change of mind of those
who have begun to abhor their errors and misdeeds, and
have determined to enter upon a better course of life, so
that it embraces both a recognition of sin and sorrow for it
and hearty amendment, the tokens of which are good
deeds.” 43

Greek scholars do not consider Thayer the ultimate

authority on New Testament Greek, but even the more
authoritative sources agree with Thayer that the Greek
word for repentance includes godly sorrow for sin and a
turning away from sinful deeds as parts of the
concept. 44 To misrepresent repentance as only a mental
change that agrees with what the Bible says about Jesus is
heresy. Even the demons know and believe the truth about
Christ, as James points out. They have not “rejected Jesus”
mentally though their hearts are far from Him and they do
not have the real faith that receives real grace. Richard
Alderson points out that historically, “Antinomians, in their
anxiety to exalt free grace, began to disparage repentance
as a ‘work.’” 45 Paul’s descriptions of repentance typically
involved explicit mention of behavioral change.

So, King Agrippa, I did not prove disobedient to the

heavenly vision, but kept declaring both to those of
Damascus first, and also at Jerusalem and then throughout
all the region of Judea, and even to the Gentiles, that they

31
should repent and turn to God, performing
deeds appropriate to repentance. – Acts 26:19-20
Those who live unrepentant lifestyles are not walking in
the faith that receives salvation...

We are saved by faith alone but real faith results in real

repentance that actually turns from sin. Faith and
repentance can and must be separated in concept (we
must trust in the cross alone) but never in experience (see
“Wayne Grudem on the Unity of Faith and Repentance” 46).
Those who live unrepentant lifestyles are not walking in the
faith that receives salvation, regardless of their mental
assent to certain truths about Jesus. The teaching that
someone is saved regardless of how they live if they just do
not verbally reject a belief in Jesus is unvarnished
Antinomianism. Joseph Prince goes so far as to claim that
the biblical preaching of repentance is wrong:
“Nevertheless, there are still people who insist that we have
to preach on repentance. Well, I disagree!”47 Contrast
Prince’s assertion with the practice of the apostles the
prophecy of Jesus, and the words of the risen and ascended
Christ:

Peter said to them, ‘Repent, and each of you be baptized in

the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins;
and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.’ – Acts 2:38
Therefore repent and return, so that your sins may be
wiped away, in order that times of refreshing may come
from the presence of the Lord. – Acts 3:19

32
“Therefore having overlooked the times of ignorance, God
is now declaring to men that all people everywhere
should repent,” – Acts 17:30

“how I did not shrink from declaring to you anything that

was profitable, and teaching you publicly and from house
to house, solemnly testifying to both Jews and Greeks
of repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus
Christ” – Acts 20:20-22

So, King Agrippa, I did not prove disobedient to the

heavenly vision, but kept declaring both to those of
Damascus first, and also at Jerusalem and then throughout
all the region of Judea, and even to the Gentiles, that they
should repent and turn to God, performing
deeds appropriate to repentance. – Acts 26:19-20

And He said to them, “Thus it is written, that the Christ

would suffer and rise again from the dead the third
day, and that repentance for forgiveness of sins would be
proclaimed in His name to all the nations, beginning from
Jerusalem. You are witnesses of these things. – Luke 24:46-
48

“Therefore remember from where you have fallen,

and repent and do the deeds you did at first; or else I am
coming to you and will remove your lampstand out of its
place—unless you repent.” – Revelation 2:5“
Therefore repent; or else I am coming to you quickly, and I
will make war against them with the sword of My mouth.”
– Revelation 2:16

33
“I gave her time to repent, and she does not want
to repent of her immorality. Behold, I will throw her on a
bed of sickness, and those who commit adultery with her
into great tribulation, unless they repent of her deeds. ” –
Revelation 2:21-22

“So remember what you have received and heard; and

keep it, and repent. Therefore if you do not wake up, I will
come like a thief, and you will not know at what hour I will
come to you.” – Revelation 3:3

“Those whom I love, I reprove and discipline; therefore be

zealous and repent.” – Revelation 3:19

There is a synergy between power and repentance. We can

only live godly lives by the Spirit’s power yet our choice is
involved in the process (as evidenced by the fact that
commands to repent are repeatedly addressed to us), and
right living is the tracks upon which the train of
God’s genuine life and power flow in revived churches. J.
Edwin Orr observes (as do nearly all historians of revival
movements), “The important thing to remember is
repentance is the prelude to revival.” 48

Another misconception frequently presented by

Antinomians is that Christ’s atonement for sin in believers
changes God’s inherent disposition toward sin in believers.
In other words, Antinomians tend to think that since the
cross God is, in effect, indifferent toward sin in those who
make any profession of faith. The New Testament,

34
however, reveals that God still hates sin wherever it is
found and is especially zealous for His house to be clean:
“But I have this against you…” – Revelation 2:4
“But I have this against you…” – Revelation 2:20
“Those whom I love, I reprove and discipline; therefore be
zealous and repent.” – Revelation 3:19

These verses do not fit into the Antinomian system that

claims God is not mindful of any current misconduct on our
part or that though in His omniscience the Lord knows all
things He is indifferent toward our bad conduct in all but
how it might rob us of some blessing. God is still mindful
of all sin and hates sin for its evil nature even when it is
found in those He loves. John Flavel comments as follows
on God’s hatred of sin in the lives of the saved:

God’s antipathy to sin can never be taken away by the

satisfaction of Christ, though his hatred to the persons of
the redeemed be; for the hatred of sin is founded in the
unchangeable nature of God: and he can as soon cease to
be holy as cease to hate sin, Hab. 1.13. Nor was Christ’s
death ever designed to this end; though Christ hath
satisfied for the sin of believers, God still hates sin in
believers. His hatred to their sins, and love to their
persons are not inconsistent. [Emphases mine] 49

There frequently seems to be a kind of schizophrenic

disconnect between the heart and mind in many
Antinomians who have not emotionally followed their
doctrinal system to its logical ends. Such people may
occasionally display repugnance over some sin committed

35
by a Christian, but their false, theological system eventually
forces them to reaffirm their lawless mantras, insisting that
the believer’s sin was already made nothing before it was
done, that the person should not feel bad for or confess
anything, and that the bad behavior (bad fruit) is no means
by which to evaluate whether or not the person is a genuine
Christian (good tree) or one whose profession of belief is
not born from an unconverted heart (bad tree).

You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not

gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are
they? So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree
bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor
can a bad tree produce good fruit. Every tree that does not
bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. So
then, you will know them by their fruits. Not everyone who
says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of
heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in
heaven will enter. Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord,
Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your
name cast out demons, and in Your name perform
many miracles?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never
knew you; depart from Me, you who practice
lawlessness.’ – Matthew 7:16-23

“Rejecting Jesus” and “No Longer Under the Law”

Some Antinomians suggest that since there is only one sin
that cannot be pardoned (1 John 5:16 — they usually refer
to this as permanently rejecting Jesus) all others will

36
be pardoned (or to more accurately reflect their teaching,
“have already been pardoned”).

This is neither scriptural nor logical. To liken the case to an

earthly king, he may stipulate that only one, specific crime
cannot possibly be pardoned in his realm but that does not
logically entail the automatic pardon by him of all other
offenses. If the king states that stubborn rebels will be
punished, his word on the matter can be taken to heart even
by those who have not committed the one offense specified
as completely unpardonable. Our heavenly King says such
things as the following without stating that any of the
people identified in these passages has committed the
unpardonable sin:

Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are:

immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery,
enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes,
dissensions, factions, envying, drunkenness, carousing, and
things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have
forewarned you, that those who practice such things will
not inherit the kingdom of God. — Galatians 5:19-21

For this you know with certainty, that no immoral or

impure person or covetous man, who is an idolater, has
an inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God.—
Ephesians 5:5

Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit

the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither
fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate,

37
nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor
drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the
kingdom of God. Such were some of you; but you were
washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in
the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our
God. — 1 Corinthians 6: 9-11

But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and

murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and
idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that
burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.
— Revelation 21:8

But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-

called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or
an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler—not
even to eat with such a one. — 1 Corinthians 5:11 (The
larger context for this verse is given on page three above.
Note that the basis upon which Paul identifies the false
brother is that this is someone who lives in sinful rebellion
against the Lords’ commands while they publicly profess
Christ).

In Antinomian theology God supposedly takes an

essentially “anything goes” posture toward those who
profess belief, as long as they do not openly recant that
profession. Antinomians speak about “rejecting Jesus”
exclusively as a verbal issue, though. The Bible, however,
also speaks of a behavioral rejection done by people who
continue to verbally profess God but deny Him through
their evil conduct:

38
They profess to know God, but by their deeds they deny
Him, being detestable and disobedient and worthless for
any good deed. – Titus 1:16

The Greek word translated “deny” in this verse is ἀρνέομαι,

the meaning of which, according to the Bauer Arndt,
Gingrich, and Danker lexicon, includes to “deny, repudiate,
disown.” 50 Those who profess belief (not the same thing as
the fuller concept of biblical faith) can repudiate the Lord
through their choice of a habitually disobedient lifestyle.

Antinomians often claim the passages which say we are no

longer under the law (see Romans 6:14 and Galatians 5:18)
mean Christians are no longer under God’s moral rule.
Truly we are no longer “under the law” but nevertheless it
is important to identify exactly what is meant by the term
“law” each time it is used in the New Testament.
Essentially there is a twofold sense in which we are no
longer under the law:

1) Paul uses the word “law” at times to speak of an errant

form of seeking right standing with God through good
works rather than God’s free gift. Though God still requires
obedient living of the saved, our justified status before Him
is solely based on what Christ did for us at the cross. In
Galatians 2:21 he says, “I do not nullify the grace of God,
for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ
died needlessly.” Even the moral law of God is lifeless as a
system whereby to seek righteous standing with God and
righteous principles alone cannot impart the life to follow

39
them. Regarding salvation the law can only show our guilt
and point us to our need for a savior. The law as a system
for attaining righteous standing has been superseded by the
gospel in which we are justified before God on the basis of
the cross alone. From the old way of seeking righteousness
we have been freed through the grace of God who “justifies
the ungodly” (Romans 4:5).

You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to
be justified by law; you have fallen from grace. —
Galatians 5:4

Antinomians frequently seek to bolster their sin-trivializing

position by contrasting it with a misrepresentation of
historic orthodoxy, making a straw man of the “average”
(orthodox) Christian, claiming he or she does not
understand this freedom from law as a system through
which to seek right standing with God (though most do
fully understand this). Orthodox Christians do not quarrel
with the Antinomians’ contention that we are justified by
grace through faith alone. They do, however, differ with
Antinomians concerning how that grace manifests and is
detected in the believer’s life, and they maintain that
believers are still obligated to observe God’s eternal, moral
standards. God’s moral imperatives are not erased by the
cross. In fact they are specifically and forcefully repeated in
the writings of the New Testament. Ulric Rule concurs that
while the external rites of the Old Covenant are no longer
binding, the moral principles of the law are restated in the
New Testament and obedience to these moral imperatives
is still mandatory for Christians: “The great general

40
principles of the law were not transitory and reappear under
the gospel dispensation.”

2) By “the law” Paul often refers specifically to the Mosaic

system in which right standing with God depended in part
on the proper rituals, observances, diet, and ceremonies
prescribed in the Pentateuch (the first five books of the
Bible). By saying we are free from this Mosaic system Paul
declares we are released from any obligation to obey its
merely external aspects.
But now that you have come to know God, or rather to be
known by God, how is it that you turn back again to the
weak and worthless elemental things, to which you desire
to be enslaved all over again? You observe days and
months and seasons and years. I fear for you, that perhaps
I have labored over you in vain. — Galatians 4:9-11

Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food

or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a
Sabbath day— things which are a mere shadow of what is
to come; but the substance belongs to Christ. — Colossians
2:16-17

If you have died with Christ to the elementary principles of

the world, why, as if you were living in the world, do you
submit yourself to decrees, such as, “Do not handle, do not
taste, do not touch!” (which all refer to things destined to
perish with use)—in accordance with the commandments
and teachings of men? These are matters which have, to be
sure, the appearance of wisdom in self-made religion and
self-abasement and severe treatment of the body, but are of

41
no value against fleshly indulgence. — Colossians 2:20-23
(Note that Paul contrasts non-moral externalism that is no
longer binding with moral principles [not indulging the
flesh] that are still valid for believers).

After discussing the New Testament passages that refer to

sin as lawlessness, William Evans said, “When Paul claims
to be “without law” he has reference to those things in the
ceremonial law which might well be passed over, and not
to the moral law. Paul was not an antinomian.” 52

The abiding nature of God’s moral law as shown in the

reaffirmation of its principles in the New Testament has
been traditionally been referred to by Protestants as the
“third use of the law.” Louis Berkhof explains this “third
use of the law” as its normative function in guiding moral
conduct: “A usus didacticus or normativus. This is the so-
called tertius uses legis, the third use of the law. The law is
a rule of life for believers, reminding them of their their
duties and leading them in the way of life and salvation.
This third use of the law is denied by the Antinomians.” 53

Conclusion
While accusations of Antinomianism are sometimes false
and at times originate from legalists who do not understand
the biblical teaching of grace (some, classic authors such as
Martyn Lloyd-Jones have even suggested that unless we
have at some point been falsely accused of Antinomianism
we have never really preached the gospel 54), not all
accusations of Antinomianism are false, nor do all such
accusations originate from true legalists. By comparison,

42
the fact that people are sometimes falsely accused of
stealing does not prove that no one ever truly steals.

Many errors in theology are born from an overreaction to

a different kind of error.

I tend to agree with those who think that the

Antinomianism taught in the “grace” movement most likely
appeals in a special way to believers who have at some
time been ensnared in a genuinely legalistic system of some
kind, but we must always guard against the common
tendency to jump from one theological extreme to another
rather than comprehensively pursue the whole counsel of
God. Many errors are born from an overreaction to a
different kind of error. “It is good that you grasp one thing
and also not let go of the other; for the one who fears God
comes forth with both of them” – Ecclesiastes 7:18. The
whole counsel of God to be kept in view on this topic is not
a mixture of law and grace (as Antinomians allege) but the
complete, New Testament teaching on justification and
sanctification.

Participants in the “grace” movement often claim they

represent an end-time revelation. I believe this so-called
grace teaching may well be related to the end times but not
as a substitute for or improvement on the old, old story of
biblical grace that has been with us since the days of the
apostles. Paul says, “But the Spirit explicitly says that in
later times some will fall away from the faith, paying

43
attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons” – 1
Timothy 4:1

This “falling away” can only happen within the church.

Those outside of the church cannot “fall away” from
something of which they have never been part. What these
people Paul speaks of fall away from is the “the faith” of
which Jude says we are to contend for “that was once for
all delivered to the saints” (Jude 1:3). The Antinomian
heresy seems to be part of a larger, contemporary falling
away from biblical faith – a falling that in the long run
tends to trivialize sin and soften our morality. Other
branches of this apostasy can be seen in the moral and
doctrinal compromises of many, prominent leaders in the
church today.

Feelings should not be our ultimate guide in distinguishing

between true and false teaching.

In the articles linked to below I contrast the teachings of the

“grace” movement (though in some cases [such as in “The
Bondage of Congregational Elitism”] the “grace”
movement is not specifically mentioned I believe the
principles considered in them apply to this movement) with
the teachings of the Bible, which is our ultimate authority
for understanding true grace and how it fits into the scheme
of salvation.

In examining this contrast, feelings should not be our

ultimate guide in distinguishing between true and false

44
teaching. Most cults and heresies devised by the enemy
have made people feel good in some way. As Martyn
Lloyd-Jones says, “False teaching can make people very
happy. Let us be quite clear about that. If you judge only in
terms of experience and results you will find that every cult
and heresy that the world or the church has ever known will
be able to justify itself.”55 Our feelings often lead us astray,
which is one very important reason God gave us His
objective, revealed Word to guide us in our beliefs and
conduct. We should additionally note that a sense of God’s
presence or manifestation of His power must never be
taken as God’s blanket endorsement of everything said or
done by the person(s) blessed. God was working miracles
in the Corinthian (1 Corinthians 1:7) and Galatians
(Galatians 3:5) churches in spite of their sin and error
not because of them, and His blessings today are likewise
often in spite of our sin and error.

People are generally reluctant to carefully consider the

reasoning of people whose positions differ with theirs, but
we are commanded nevertheless to “test all things” (1
Thessalonians 5:21) even if our pride is at stake. In his
book The Heresy of Mind Control, Stephen Martin
describes the way false teachers and false movements
respond to biblical critiques of their teachings:

Such information is automatically counted as ‘evil’ or

simply dismissed as, ‘It can’t be true because this group is
so wonderful.’ Often they label negative information as
‘persecution’ [disagreement is not persecution!] that is evil
but expected. Some believe it is a sin to even listen to

45
negative information about someone, especially the
leader…There are some who will not even listen to
alternative information because of their presupposition
from the outset that it is false…But how can you know a
report — or even a religious doctrine — is false unless you
listen to it, examine it, hear both sides of the debate, and
investigate?56

The posts linked to below are of varying length. Some are

short, devotional pieces while others are full length articles.
There is also a diversity in their content but I believe each
of them addresses an issue pertinent to answering whether
or not the “grace message” is a revolution or rebellion. I
emphatically do not expect all believers to agree with me
on all points covered in the essays. There is much room for
disagreement on non-essentials among the orthodox. It is
with some trepidation that I include a link to my article on
conditional security among the essays that follow.

Opposition to Antinomianism is one point at which the

Calvinist George Whitefield and the Arminian John Wesley
found common ground.

I have no desire to portray Antinomianism as a natural

consequence of Calvinism. Calvin himself securely fenced
out Antinomianism through his teachings on the third use
of the law (as a guide to moral conduct) and the
perseverance of the saints (real Christians will demonstrate
their salvation by persevering in godly living to the very
end). Reformed confessions of faith throughout history

46
have likewise opposed Antinomianism. As Kevin DeYoung
notes, “The Reformed confessions understand that
obedience to God’s commands–which we all want–is not
accomplished merely by insisting on indicatives, but also
by insisting directly and explicitly on the imperatives that
flow from them.” 57 Additionally, many of the most
outspoken opponents of Antinomianism in our day are
Calvinists.

Antinomians are outside of the bounds of orthodox

soteriology (the doctrine of how we are saved and how that
salvation is shown), be it Calvinism, Moderate Calvinism,
Molinism, or Arminianism. Opposition to heresies such as
Antinomianism is one point at which all, orthodox
Christians should momentarily lay aside their differences as
they reaffirm basic, biblical essentials. Opposition to
Antinomianism is one point at which the Calvinist George
Whitefield and the Arminian John Wesley found common
ground. In our current contention with this heresy we find
agreement from such diverse voices as the Calvinist
Cessationist John MacArthur (in The Gospel According to
Jesus and Faith Works: The Gospel According to the
Apostles) and the Arminian Continuationist Michael Brown
(in Hyper-Grace: Exposing the Dangers of the Modern
Grace Message). What I seek overall in the writings linked
to below is to explain exactly how the “grace” message is a
harmful rebellion rather than a beneficial revolution.

47