As far as I know, Puritans were devout Calvinists. According to Theopedia, [Antinomianism](http://www.theopedia.com/Antinomianism) is associated with disobedience to the established authority, so it may be connected with the idea of lawlessness, immorality, or licentiousness. Was this term merely a pejorative adjective for people who disagreed with the established religious authority, like legalism? Or did the Puritan antinomians really have their own theology on justification before God, and if so, how did the Puritan antinomians thought they were justified? What was the purpose of God's moral laws then? This question was previously posted on the History.SE , but it was closed for being off-topic. Hopefully, it's on-topic here.

I've heard it reported that Martin Luther told his parishioners to "sin boldly". I'm not sure if this is based in fact and his writings or something that is made up by Catholics to paint him badly. If he *did* say this, what's the original source/context, and how is it explained? Is he claiming that sin has no *ultimate* consequences? Is he claiming that sin has no consequences whatsoever? Is he claiming that it's "ok" to sin? Please help me to exegete Luther's statement.

What is the biblical basis for systematic Antinomianism, or, if you prefer, extreme Grace? I am looking for someone with first hand knowledge of its teachings who can justify this view. Wikipedia lists verses of the Bible which seem to counter it. A good answer will rebut those verses from an Antinomianist's perspective.

I read that claim in an article written by A.M. Toplady (reproduced in a 2020 Christian magazine.) Toplady (1740-1778) did not go on to give his reasons for that claim, apart from adding, "An Antinomian looks to be justified by his works." Toplady is best known for hymns, such as *Rock of Ages* and verse 2 shows his view on the matter of works: "Not the labour of my hands can fulfil thy law's demands. Could my zeal no respite know, could my tears forever flow, all for sin could not atone. Thou must save, and thou alone." His article, however, was dealing with text from the Bible letter of James, written before the end of the first century. Therefore, ***I'm asking this question to those who know about ancient Gnosticism circa the end of the first century, and who also know about Antinomianism.*** Please bear in mind that I'm *not* looking for any opinions about Gnosticism and/or Antinomianism, whether they are good, bad or indifferent religious beliefs. **I'm simply wanting to know why Toplady could have made the claim, "Gnostics were the Antinomians of their day."** What basis might he have had for that?

The second great commandment, "You shall love your neighbour as yourself," is often turned into "You cannot love your neighbour unless you love yourself." Is this a form of antinomianism? If not, how would you classify it? I'm thinking along the lines of "I must love myself before I can love my neighbour, so I'll concentrate on loving myself; and when I feel that I love myself enough, I can start to think about loving my neighbour." Edit: Please note that I am not suggesting that it is improper to love one's self (in the sense of taking care of one's legitimate needs). A man who truly hates himself is of little use to anyone.