"The charge of antinomianism is very much welcome, to the point of being a stamp of authenticity"

Jason Hood on why groups emphasizing grace should not measure their orthodoxy by accusations of antinomianism. Heresy Is Heresy, Not the Litmus Test of Gospel Preaching

732 reads

There are 2 Comments

Aaron Blumer's picture


Hood wrote:
Adopting accusations as a badge of honor or litmus test represents a failure to understand the rhetorical function of the antinomian accusation in the literary context of Romans and in Paul's social context: It was neither a fair and honest assessment nor a reasonable response to Paul's preaching, but a weapon employed against Paul's honor in the court of public opinion. Taking the charge of antinomianism as a positive sign is as anachronistic as suggesting that the charge of drunkenness is a good test of our ministry in light of Matthew 11:19 and Luke 7:34.

RPittman's picture

Hood is probably correct in that the charge of antinomianism (i.e. absolute lawlessness) is not accurate for the excesses of the modern grace emphasis. It is NOT that a problem does not exist in the way grace is defined and emphasized today but it is that the problem is wrongly named. The good Biblical term of licentiousness is the more apt descriptor.

And I would differ with Mr. Hood on that Paul would have us brush up against antinomianism. Knowing Paul's respect for law, I dare not think he would advise risk pushing the envelope. On the contrary, I would think he would say stay far away from antinomianism but live in grace. I do not see grace as the neighbor of antinomianism.