You’ve probably heard the quote/s from Martyn Lloyd Jones about how true preaching of the Gospel should lead to the charge of Antinomianism.
The true preaching of the gospel of salvation by grace alone always leads to the possibility of this charge being brought against it. There is no better test as to whether a man is really preaching the New Testament gospel of salvation than this, that some people might misunderstand it and misinterpret it to mean that it really amounts to this, that because you are saved by grace alone it does not matter at all what you do; you can go on sinning as much as you like because it will redound all the more to the glory of grace. This is a very good test of gospel preaching. If my preaching and presentation of the gospel of salvation does not expose it to that misunderstanding, then it is not the gospel. (Martin Lloyd Jones: The New Man, 8)
Lloyd Jones is drawing from Paul’s letter to the Romans. At the start of his letter, Paul makes plain the Gospel of Grace:
Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, Rom 5:1
Paul is making it clear, salvation. Cannot be earned. We cannot attain righteousness by means of religious works, we are made righteous through Christ alone and we receive righteousness by faith alone.
Paul then anticipates the response to this. In Romans 6:1, he asks:
What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase?
He repeats this question in a similar way in Rom 6:15
What then? Shall we sin because we are not under the law but under grace?
Paul is concious that his gospel of grace may cause some to respond with the above questions. So, we reason, if it’s not by my works, can I ignore the law continue in sin, and still be saved?
Lloyd Jones in the quote above was making the point that grace, when preached truly, should initiate that response.
However, I’d argue that Jones’ quote is misused today. Some preachers today use this reasoning to actually preach antinomianism. (Hyper grace that rejects the Law full stop).
Firstly, Paul himself did not end his argument here. He answers both questions with a strong: “By no means!”
What then? Shall we sin because we are not under the law but under grace? By no means!
Those who stop at grace as pardon for sin, and don’t continue (as Paul did) with grace as power over sin, are in fact in danger of being antinomian.
Lloyd Jones did not fall into this trap. In other places he balances what he says about grace and antinomianism.
Is it not true to say of many of us that in actual practice our view of the doctrine of grace is such that we scarcely ever take the plain teaching of the Lord Jesus Christ seriously? We have so emphasized the teaching that all is of grace and that we ought not to try to imitate His example in order to make ourselves Christians, that we are virtually in the position of ignoring His teaching altogether and of saying that it has nothing to do with us because we are under grace. Now I wonder how seriously we take the gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. The best way of concentrating on the question is, I think, to face the Sermon on the Mount. Martyn Lloyd Jones (Studies on the Sermon on the Mount p. 12)
The Christian is a man who of necessity must be concerned about keeping God’s law. I mentioned in chapter one the fatal tendency to put up law and grace as antitheses in the wrong sense. We are not ‘under the law’ but we are still meant to keep it. . . .So the Christian is a man who is always concerned about living and keeping the law of God. Here [in the Sermon on the Mount] he is reminded how that is to be done. (Studies on the Sermon on the Mount p. 26)
Rev John James 