5. Antinomianism and Neonomianism: Two Distortions
Antinomianism and Neonomianism: Two Distortions B oth antinomianism and neonomianism reflect distortions of the gospel.
Antinomianism (literally, "against the law") claims that because Christ has done everything, there's nothing left for the believer to do—not even repentance or good works. Christ didn't just bear our guilt, they say—He also took away the power and presence of sin entirely. So now we are perfect in Him, and our ongoing sins don't really matter. In extreme forms, antinomianism even denies that Christ accomplished anything new, insisting instead that salvation was already complete in God's eternal decree, and Christ merely revealed it.
This view has surfaced throughout history—from early Gnostics, to fringe groups after the Reformation, to modern-day anarchists and moral
relativists. It disconnects salvation from real transformation and grace from godliness.
Neonomianism, on the other hand, swings the opposite way. It turns the gospel into a new law (a "neo" law), saying that Christ made salvation possible, but now people must meet certain conditions—like faith, repentance, or obedience—to receive it.
While trying to uphold holiness, this view ends up confusing grace with merit and undermines the sufficiency of Christ's finished work.
The Reformed Alternative Against these errors, the Reformed understanding of salvation holds firm to grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, while also affirming that this grace is never without effect. Christ not only secures our forgiveness—He also brings us into real union with Himself. From that union flows new life, new desires, and obedience that glorifies God. This obedience is not a condition for salvation but a result of it.
True repentance and holiness are the Spirit's work in us, not the grounds of our acceptance with God. And far from being mystical or moralistic detours, they are part of the glorious transformation Christ secured in His death and resurrection. Faith looks not inward or upward into ecstasy, nor outward to moral effort, but to Christ crucified and risen, who saves completely and sanctifies thoroughly.
Law, Grace, and the True Ground of Justification All of the Reformers firmly rejected antinomianism—the idea that God's law no longer applies to believers. While Luther sometimes gave the
impression that the law was irrelevant for Christians (except insofar as they remained sinners), he strongly opposed Johann Agricola, who claimed the law should not be preached at all and that repentance comes only from hearing the gospel. This was a serious distortion. The Reformation never abandoned the law. Instead, it rightly taught that the law reveals our sin and drives us to Christ. More importantly, it emphasized that Christ fulfilled the law perfectly. Our salvation rests entirely on His obedience—His righteousness, not ours.
Nomism: A Legalistic Drift from Reformation Truth But just as antinomianism twisted the gospel on one side, an opposite error called nomism arose, especially under the influence of Socinian and Arminian theology. This view, in both rationalist and pietist forms, crept into Protestant churches and weakened the clear gospel witness of the Reformation.
Rationalist nomism was rooted in the idea that only Christ's suffering and death (His passive obedience) mattered, and not His lifelong active obedience to the law. Although this view was condemned by Reformed synods in France in the early 1600s, it gained traction, particularly through a theological school in Saumur, France. Teachers there, like John Cameron and Moïse Amyraut, promoted ideas that downplayed human sinfulness and altered the doctrines of election, grace, and justification. Amyraut, for example, taught that God's election was "hypothetical"—based on whether a person would believe. Others claimed that God's grace merely had to be agreeable to a person's circumstances in order to be effective.
The result was a departure from foundational doctrines: the covenant of works, the deep corruption of human nature, and the imputation of Adam's guilt and Christ's righteousness. Instead, these teachers mingled faith and
works, making human obedience part of the basis for justification. This theology, which began in France, spread to England and the Netherlands.
In England, the Episcopal Church was originally Reformed in confession, but Roman Catholic and Arminian views gained ground. Disillusionment with antinomian extremes during the time of Cromwell led many to embrace the so-called "middle way" of Saumur. But such compromise often leaned more toward legalism than grace.
Neonomianism: The "New Law" of Sincere Obedience This middle way led to a system called neonomianism, which taught that justification is no longer based on Christ's righteousness imputed to us, but rather on our own sincere, though imperfect, obedience—our faith, repentance, and good intentions.
In this view, Christ's death didn't actually save anyone but simply made salvation possible for all. It created a "salvable state," in which the old covenant of works—with its demand for perfect obedience—was replaced by a new law of grace. This new law supposedly requires only sincere faith and repentance. According to this scheme, Christ satisfied the old law, but now justification comes through our fulfillment of the new law.
Although these teachings gained support, they also sparked strong opposition—often labeled unfairly as "antinomian." In reality, these critics were better described as "antineonomians"—not opponents of God's law, but of the false teaching that justification depends on human obedience.
These believers held firmly to the moral law's ongoing authority. They emphasized that Christ completely fulfilled the law in our place and that this law, rooted in God's eternal nature, still guides our lives. The gospel is not a replacement of God's law with a lighter version. It is the announcement that Christ has satisfied the law fully, and that we are now
called to live by it—not to earn God's favor, but in joyful response to His grace.