Week #2: Moral Relativism and Antinomianism: A Comparative Study of Two Dangerous Ideologies
Blog Series Intention Recap
This four-part series deals with common heretical beliefs held by those in society—and many in the church. Through examining some of these beliefs through a biblical lens and seeing the struggles Christians have had throughout the centuries, we can see the truth of God’s Word and how to gain a better appreciation of the importance of correct doctrine.
This post is part of the series “Heresies.” Click here to see the rest of the posts.
Let’s jump into Week #2:
The Crisis of Moral Absolutes
Moral relativism and antinomianism, though distinct in their origins and expressions, share a common thread: the rejection of absolute moral standards. Both ideologies undermine biblical teachings on righteousness and holiness, promoting subjective and lawless approaches to morality. Today, we explore the roots, development, and dangers of these two beliefs and compares how they distort Christian ethics.
Why it Matters:
Moral relativism asserts that moral truths are subjective and vary between individuals or cultures.
Antinomianism denies the relevance of God’s law for Christians, promoting a "lawless" approach to the Christian life based on a misunderstanding of grace.
Both ideologies reject the existence of absolute, universal moral truths and promote self-determined standards of right and wrong.
A historical comparison shows that while moral relativism is largely a modern phenomenon rooted in secular thought, antinomianism has existed as a Christian heresy since the early church.
Go Deeper:
Every society faces the challenge of defining right and wrong. Rooted in Scripture, Christians have long held that moral truth is objective and grounded in the character and law of God. However, various ideologies throughout history have sought to challenge this view. Two such ideologies—moral relativism and antinomianism—promote subjective approaches to morality and righteousness that ultimately conflict with biblical teaching.
Moral relativism is a modern, secular worldview that denies the existence of universal moral standards, claiming that ethics are determined by individual preferences or cultural norms. On the other hand, antinomianism is a Christian heresy that emerged during the early church. It argues that since believers are saved by grace, they are no longer bound by God’s moral law.
Despite their different contexts, both moral relativism and antinomianism present a similar danger: they erode the foundations of objective morality and encourage lawlessness. We will examine the key tenets of both ideologies, their theological implications, and the ways in which they distort the gospel and Christian ethics.
Moral Relativism: Subjectivity as the New Standard
Moral relativism is the belief that moral principles are not fixed but vary according to personal opinion, societal context, or cultural circumstances. Rather than seeing morality as objective and grounded in universal truths, relativists argue that each person or culture has the right to determine what is right or wrong for themselves. In this worldview, there is no single moral code that applies to all people at all times.
Key Beliefs of Moral Relativism:
Morality is Culturally Determined
A central tenet of moral relativism is that what is considered "right" or "wrong" depends on the society or culture in which one lives. For example, practices like polygamy or the death penalty might be deemed moral in one culture but immoral in another. According to relativism, there is no objective basis for judging between these perspectives.Individual Autonomy
In moral relativism, each individual has the right to decide what is morally acceptable based on their own experiences, preferences, and beliefs. This extreme emphasis on personal autonomy denies any external authority, including religious or governmental standards, in determining moral truth.Rejection of Universal Moral Standards
Moral relativists reject the idea that certain moral truths apply universally to all people. For instance, the prohibition against murder might be viewed as a socially constructed rule rather than an inherent, divinely ordained law. Moral truths are seen as fluid, evolving alongside societal changes.
How did moral relativism get its start?
The roots of moral relativism can be traced back to postmodern philosophy and thinkers such as Friedrich Nietzsche, who famously declared that "God is dead." By rejecting traditional religious and philosophical systems, Nietzsche and others opened the door to subjective morality, where each person becomes the arbiter of right and wrong.
In the 20th century, cultural relativism emerged as a dominant anthropological theory, asserting that no culture's morals should be judged by the standards of another. This view was popularized by figures like Franz Boas, who argued that all moral codes are equally valid within their respective cultural contexts.
Today, moral relativism is prevalent in secular societies, where tolerance for different moral perspectives is often seen as the highest virtue. However, this rejection of moral absolutes poses significant problems, particularly for Christians who believe that God has revealed unchanging moral laws in Scripture. In our culture, the church’s response to issues like LGBTQIA+ rights and abortion highlights the growing disconnect between biblical teachings and society's shifting moral standards. As the church upholds the sanctity of life and traditional views on sexuality, it increasingly finds itself at odds with a culture that promotes personal autonomy and subjective morality. This tension not only challenges the church’s influence in public discourse but also calls for Christians to navigate these complex cultural waters with both truth and grace, standing firm in biblical convictions while engaging a relativistic culture with love and compassion.
The Dangers of Moral Relativism
Moral relativism poses a direct challenge to biblical ethics. Scripture teaches that God’s moral law is eternal and applies to all people (Exodus 20:1-17, Romans 1:18-32). Relativism, however, denies any such absolutes, leaving individuals to determine their own moral code. This leads to several dangers:
Moral Chaos
Without objective standards, society descends into moral chaos. What one person considers right may be deemed wrong by another, with no higher authority to settle disputes. This leads to confusion and division, as seen in debates over issues like abortion, euthanasia, and sexual ethics.Undermining of Christian Witness
Moral relativism undermines the church’s ability to proclaim the gospel. If there is no absolute standard of right and wrong, the concepts of sin and repentance lose their meaning. The message of salvation becomes irrelevant if people do not believe they are guilty of violating God’s law.Erosion of Responsibility
When individuals are free to define their own morality, they are less likely to accept responsibility for their actions. Relativism encourages a "live and let live" mentality, where people are not held accountable for their sins. This directly contradicts the biblical call to repentance and holiness (1 Peter 1:15-16).
Antinomianism: Grace Without Law
Antinomianism is a Christian heresy that emerged in the early church and has resurfaced at various points throughout church history. The term comes from the Greek word "anti" (against) and "nomos" (law), meaning "against the law." Antinomians believe that since Christians are saved by grace, they are no longer required to obey the moral law of God. While moral relativism is a secular philosophy, antinomianism is rooted in a misunderstanding of Christian doctrine, particularly the relationship between law and grace.
Key Beliefs of Antinomianism:
Rejection of God’s Moral Law
Antinomians argue that the moral law—summarized in the Ten Commandments and further explained throughout Scripture—no longer applies to believers. Since Christians are saved by grace through faith (Ephesians 2:8-9), they are free from the obligation to obey the law.Grace as a License to Sin
A key aspect of antinomianism is the belief that grace permits Christians to live however they choose, without fear of judgment or consequences. This belief misinterprets Paul’s teaching on grace, particularly in Romans 6:1-2, where he explicitly rejects the idea that grace should lead to lawlessness: “Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? By no means!”Distortion of the Doctrine of Justification
Antinomians often emphasize justification by faith alone to the exclusion of sanctification. They argue that since Christians are declared righteous through Christ, there is no need for ongoing obedience to the moral law. This creates a false dichotomy between justification (being declared righteous) and sanctification (growing in holiness).
Whose idea was Antinomianism anyway?
Antinomianism first appeared in the early church, as some believers misinterpreted Paul’s teaching on grace. The apostle John warned against such thinking in his letters, urging Christians not to use their freedom in Christ as an excuse for sinful behavior (1 John 3:4-10).
Throughout history, antinomianism has resurfaced in various forms. In the 16th century, the Protestant Reformer Martin Luther opposed the antinomian teachings of Johann Agricola, who argued that Christians were not bound by the Ten Commandments. Later, in the 17th century, Anne Hutchinson was accused of promoting antinomian views in Puritan New England, claiming that believers were not required to obey moral laws.
The Dangers of Antinomianism
Antinomianism is a dangerous distortion of the gospel because it undermines the call to holiness and obedience. While Scripture teaches that believers are saved by grace, it also emphasizes the importance of following God’s commandments (John 14:15, James 2:14-26). Antinomianism leads to several key dangers:
Moral Lawlessness
By rejecting the moral law, antinomianism encourages lawless behavior. Without the guidance of God’s commands, Christians are left to follow their own desires, which often leads to sin and moral decay. This lawlessness contradicts Jesus’ teaching that he came to fulfill the law, not abolish it (Matthew 5:17-19).Cheapening of Grace
Antinomianism cheapens grace by turning it into a license for sin. The New Testament consistently teaches that grace is not an excuse to live in sin but rather the power to overcome it (Titus 2:11-12). True grace transforms the believer’s heart, leading to a desire for obedience, not lawlessness.Distortion of the Christian Life
Antinomianism creates an imbalanced view of the Christian life, focusing solely on justification while ignoring sanctification. Scripture teaches that salvation is a holistic process that includes both being declared righteous and growing in righteousness (Philippians 2:12-13). Antinomianism neglects this process, leading to a shallow and incomplete understanding of salvation.
A Comparative Analysis of Moral Relativism and Antinomianism
While moral relativism and antinomianism arise from different contexts, they share a common rejection of objective moral standards. Both ideologies deny the necessity of moral absolutes, whether by claiming that morality is subjective (relativism) or that believers are no longer bound by moral laws (antinomianism). In this way, both systems of thought promote a form of lawlessness that undermines the biblical call to righteousness and holiness.
Similarities:
Rejection of Absolute Morality
Both moral relativism and antinomianism deny the existence of absolute, universal moral standards. In relativism, morality is seen as subjective and culturally determined; in antinomianism, believers are seen as free from the constraints of God’s moral law.Emphasis on Autonomy
Both ideologies place a high value on individual autonomy. Moral relativism asserts that each person has the right to determine their own moral code, while antinomianism teaches that Christians are free to live as they please without regard to God’s commandments.Erosion of Responsibility
Both moral relativism and antinomianism encourage a lack of personal responsibility for one’s actions. Relativism denies that anyone can be held accountable to external moral standards, while antinomianism teaches that believers are not accountable to the law.
How does this help me understand, “Heresies?”
Moral relativism and antinomianism present significant challenges to Christians today. Both ideologies undermine the biblical foundation of moral truth, leading to lawlessness and moral confusion. However, Scripture calls believers to uphold God’s commandments as an expression of their love for Him (John 14:15). While Christians are saved by grace, they are also called to a life of holiness, walking in obedience to God’s moral law.
In a world increasingly influenced by relativism, Christians must stand firm in the truth of God’s Word, proclaiming the message of grace that transforms lives and empowers obedience. Similarly, in the face of antinomian tendencies within the church, believers must remember that grace is not a license to sin but the power to live in righteousness.
By understanding and rejecting these dangerous ideologies, the church can continue to uphold the truth of the gospel and live out the moral calling that God has placed on His people.
