Paul's Response to Antinomianism in Romans Six
Paul's letter to the Romans addresses the potential misunderstanding that God's grace, freely given, might lead to a disregard for moral law, a concept known as antinomianism. This concern is particularly evident in Romans 6, where Paul directly confronts the question, "Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound?" [2]. This objection, that a doctrine emphasizing grace might remove the necessity of good works, was not new to Paul's time and has been "reiterated a thousand times since" [2].
The core of Paul's response in Romans 6 is that believers have undergone a fundamental change through their identification with Christ's death and resurrection. one tradition argues that those who have died to sin cannot continue to live in it (Romans 6:2). This "death to sin" is not merely a metaphorical concept but describes a profound spiritual reality experienced in baptism, which symbolizes union with Christ [2]. As Charles Hodge explains, Paul's doctrine of justification by faith, which asserts that personal goodness is not the ground of acceptance with God, naturally provoked the antinomian objection [2]. Paul's subsequent argument in Romans 6 is designed to demonstrate that this doctrine, far from encouraging sin, actually provides the strongest possible motive for holiness [2].
Paul states, "knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him, in order that our body of sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin" (Romans 6:6 NASB) [1]. This verse encapsulates the transformative power of Christ's crucifixion for the believer. The "old self" (or "old man") refers to the unregenerate nature, dominated by sin [1]. Its crucifixion with Christ signifies a decisive break from the dominion of sin. The purpose of this crucifixion is that the "body of sin" might be "done away with" or rendered inoperative, leading to liberation from slavery to sin [1]. This does not imply the eradication of sinful desires or the impossibility of future sin, but rather a change in allegiance and a new capacity to resist sin's power [1].
The Apostle's argument continues by emphasizing the believer's resurrection with Christ. Just as Christ was raised from the dead, so too are believers raised to "walk in newness of life" (Romans 6:4). This "newness of life" is characterized by obedience to God and a pursuit of righteousness, in contrast to the former life of sin [2]. John Chrysostom, in his homilies, frequently emphasizes the transformative power of Christian life, urging believers to live in a manner consistent with their new identity in Christ [3, 4, 6]. He highlights the radical change that occurs when one embraces the Gospel, moving from a state of spiritual death to one of vibrant life [6].
Paul further develops this idea by using the analogy of slavery. He asks, "Do you not know that when you present yourselves to someone as slaves for obedience, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin resulting in death, or of obedience resulting in righteousness?" (Romans 6:16). This rhetorical question forces his audience to recognize that they cannot serve two masters. Having been set free from sin, they have become "slaves of righteousness" (Romans 6:18). This new slavery is not oppressive but liberating, leading to sanctification and eternal life [2]. The choice is stark: slavery to sin leads to death, while obedience to God leads to righteousness and life [2].
The concept of antinomianism itself has appeared in various forms throughout Christian history. Paul's letters, particularly to the Corinthians, also address similar concerns where some might have misinterpreted Christian liberty as license for immoral behavior [5]. For instance, in 1 Corinthians 6:12, Paul confronts those who might use the phrase "All things are lawful unto me" as a justification for fornication, clarifying that while some things are permissible, not all are beneficial or constructive [5]. This demonstrates a consistent pastoral concern in Paul's ministry to ensure that the freedom found in Christ does not devolve into lawlessness [5].
The early Church Fathers also grappled with the implications of Christian freedom. John Chrysostom, for example, often exhorted his listeners to live lives of virtue, emphasizing that true faith is demonstrated through righteous conduct [3, 4, 6]. He understood that while salvation is by grace, it necessitates a transformed life [6]. The patristic writers, in general, stressed the importance of living according to God's commands as a natural outflow of one's faith and union with Christ [7, 9].
Calvin, in his Institutes of the Christian Religion, also touches upon the dangers of antinomianism when discussing the nature of the Church and the importance of sound doctrine [8]. He, like Paul, would argue that a proper understanding of grace leads to greater holiness, not less [8]. The Reformed tradition, following Calvin, consistently emphasizes that while good works do not earn salvation, they are an inevitable fruit and evidence of true faith [2].
Paul's argument in Romans 6 is not merely a theological discourse but a practical call to ethical living. He is not simply refuting a logical objection but is urging believers to live out the implications of their new identity in Christ [2]. The transformation described is both positional (united with Christ in his death and resurrection) and progressive (growing in holiness and obedience) [2]. The apostle's message is clear: the grace of God, far from providing an excuse for sin, empowers believers to overcome it and live lives that honor God [2]. This understanding of grace as transformative, rather than permissive, remains a cornerstone of Christian ethics and theology [2].
Sources
- Romans “Romans 6:6 (NASB) — knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him, in order that our body of sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin;”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 3, section 20: ground of our justification. 140 7. This still further and most decisively appears from the grand objection to his doctrine which Paul was constantly called upon to answer. That objection was, that if our personal goodness or moral excellence is not the ground of our acceptance with God, then all necessity of being good is denied, and all motive to good works is removed. We may continue in sin that grace may abound. This objection has been reiterated a thousand times since it was urged against the Apostles. It seems so unreasonable and so”
- CCEL/NPNF (Eastern Orthodox) “John Chrysostom, Homilies on Acts & Romans: is justification in superabundance, not to flee from his accusers, but to be ready to give account to all. 1115 1115 Vv. 5 and 6 had contained the three charges preferred by Tertullus, viz.: sedition, sectarianism and profanation of the temple. Paul was charged with creating disturbances among the Jews ( 5 ). To this he replies ( 11, 12 ), that the charge is not sustained by facts; he worshipped in the temple, but neither there, nor in the synagogues, nor in the city, did he create a disturbance or gather a crowd. To the second charge that he is a ri”
- CCEL/NPNF (Eastern Orthodox) “John Chrysostom, Homilies on 1 & 2 Corinthians: for this is the sort of person that is able to receive rebuke also with readiness. Exactly the same then he doth here also. And first he makes void their conceit by declaring that this very thing which they considered as peculiar to themselves, the having perfect knowledge, was common to all. Thus, “we know,” saith he, “that we all have knowledge.” For if allowing them to have high thoughts, he had first pointed out how hurtful the thing was to others, he would not have done them so much good as harm. For the ambitious soul when it plumes itself ”
- 1 Corinthians (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on 1 Corinthians 6:12: REFUTATION OF THE ANTINOMIAN DEFENSE OF FORNICATION AS IF IT WAS LAWFUL BECAUSE MEATS ARE SO. (Co1 6:12-20) All things are lawful unto me--These, which were Paul's own words on a former occasion (to the Corinthians, compare Co1 10:23, and Gal 5:23), were made a pretext for excusing the eating of meats offered to idols, and so of what was generally connected with idolatry (Act 15:29), "fornication" (perhaps in the letter of the Corinthians to Paul, Co1 7:1). Paul's remark had referred only to things indifferent: but they wished to treat fornicat”
- CCEL/NPNF (Eastern Orthodox) “John Chrysostom, Homilies on Acts & Romans: one that must die. Or rather as one that ought to enjoy immortal life for evermore. For if what I am going to say be distasteful, and big with horror, still it must be said. Reckon with thy slaves the Lord. Art thou giving thy slaves liberty? Give Christ liberty from famine, from distress, from imprisonment, from nakedness. Art thou horrified at the words? Is it not then more horrible when thou dost not even thus much? And here the word makes thy blood curdle. But when thou art gone to that world, and hast to hear things far more grievous than these,”
- Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “ANF Vol 6: Gregory Thaumaturgus, Dionysius, Julius Africanus, Methodius, Arnobius — AN EXPOSITION OF THE CHAPTERS OF THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES.(1) (part 5): and the voice of God that befell him once in the temple. *And that when Paul was about to be beaten for these words, on declaring that he was a Roman, he was let go. GG. What Paul endured, and what he said, and what he did exactly(5) when he came down into the council. HH. Of the ambush planned by the Jews against Paul, and its discovery to Lysias;* and that Paul was sent to Caesareia to the governor with soldiers and with a letter. II. Of ”
- CCEL (Reformed) “John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, section 89: but since she began to be the seat of Antichrist she ceased to be what she was. 25. To some we seem slanderous and petulant, when we call the Roman Pontiff Antichrist. But those who think so perceive not that they are bringing a charge of intemperance against Paul, after whom we speak, nay, in whose very words we speak. But lest any one object that Paul’s words have a different meaning, and are wrested by us against the Roman Pontiff, I will briefly show that they can only be understood of the Papacy. Paul says that Antichrist woul”
- Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “ANF Vol 5: Hippolytus, Cyprian, Caius, Novatian — TO THE CLERGY AND PEOPLE ABIDING IN SPAIN, CONCERNING BASILIDES AND MARTIAL. (part 6): the Church of God, nor 372 the strength of Christian virtue or faith so languished, that there is not left a portion of the priests which in no respect gives way under these ruins of things and wrecks of faith; but, bold and stedfast, they maintain the honour of the divine majesty and the priestly dignity, with full observance of fear. We remember and keep in view that, although others succumbed and yielded, Mattathias boldly vindicated God's law; that Elias,”