This small sin ain't so bad...

In the classic The Mortification of Sin, John Owen uses Naaman the Syrian leper (2 Kings 5:1-19) as an example of antinomianism. ¹

Naaman was a sworn enemy of Israel and a commander in the army of the King of Syria, in whom he found great favor. Naaman had taken a Jewish wife; a young woman captured during a raid into Israel.

Naaman was also a leper. His Jewish bride told him of a prophet in Samaria who could heal his leprosy. With the king’s blessing, Naaman took letters of introduction and silver, gold, and clothing as gifts and journeyed to Israel. The king of Israel was not happy to hear Naaman's request, sensing a trap: his failure to cure Naaman would be viewed as an insult and seized upon as an excuse for belligerence.

Fortunately Elisha intervened and rescued the king from this conundrum. Elisha instructed Naaman to wash seven times in the Jordan. Naaman was singularly unimpressed with this instruction, expecting more of a "Thy leprosy be gone!" command (probably in King James English.)

But after some persuasion from his servants, he followed Elisha's instructions and, voilà, was cleansed. Naaman vowed to worship the God of Israel from that day forward. Although he had a lot to learn. He first tried to pay Elisha, who wisely declined, no doubt to avoid sending a message that Yahweh was a deity of cupidity or that Yahweh rewarded human works. ² Then Naaman wanted to take Jewish dirt home to serve as an idol. And on the tail end of this issue, we get to Naaman's problem that Owen addresses:

But may the Lord forgive your servant for this one thing: When my master enters the temple of Rimmon to bow down and he is leaning on my arm and I have to bow there also—when I bow down in the temple of Rimmon, may the Lord forgive your servant for this.” (2 King 5:18)

Yes, Naaman would worship only the LORD, but would the LORD kindly show mercy as Naaman continued with the sin of bowing to a pagan god in a pagan temple?

Jesus and Naaman

Jesus caused an uproar at the beginning of His ministry when He spoke at the synagogue in his hometown of Nazareth. So incensed were the Jews that they forcefully led Jesus to a cliff outside of town for the purpose of murdering Him. 

It all started out so promising! When He began to speak at at the synagogue in Nazareth, as recorded earlier in Luke 4, Jesus stated that He had come to fulfill the Messianic prophesy of Isaiah. Luke wrote:

²¹And He began to say to them, "Today this Scripture is fulfilled in your hearing." ²²So all bore witness to Him, and marveled at the gracious words which proceeded out of His mouth. And they said, "Is this not Joseph's son?" (Luke 4:21-22) 

This would appear to indicate that when Jesus claimed to be the Messiah, and then proceeded to teach, the Jews were not outraged; indeed they marveled at his eloquence. However when he spoke of Zarephath and Naaman, which to us may appear as incidental rabbit trails,  the Jews became filled with wrath and dragged Him from the synagogue.  He should have given a trigger warning:

²⁵But I tell you truly, many widows were in Israel in the days of Elijah, when the heaven was shut up three years and six months, and there was a great famine throughout all the land; ²⁶but to none of them was Elijah sent except to Zarephath, in the region of Sidon, to a woman who was a widow. ²⁷And many lepers were in Israel in the time of Elisha the prophet, and none of them was cleansed except Naaman the Syrian." (Luke 4:25-27)

Why was this teaching so upsetting? What incited the anger of those listening to Jesus teach? After all this was a well known story to the Jews in the synagogue. 

What angered the Jews was the coupling of this story to Jesus’ Messianic proclamation. The message was clear:

1. He was the Messiah, He came to free the captives (c.f. Luke 4:18-19). 
2. This salvation would be for the Gentiles and Jews alike, and not for the Jews universally, for there were ‘many lepers were in Israel in the time of Elisha the prophet, and none of them was cleansed except Naaman the Syrian.’
3. Salvation would be by the grace of a Sovereign God, for Naaman’s cleansing was not a reward for anything he had done, but a gift to an unlikely and unworthy recipient. To make it absolutely clear that works were not involved, even Naaman’s offering was refused. 

The Jews didn’t mind hearing Jesus claim that He was the Messiah. They wanted someone, anyone to free them from Roman tyranny. Yet when He taught the He had come not to free a nation from occupation but to free His people, including Gentiles, from their uncleanliness, they wanted to kill him.  

---

¹ The Naaman example is what I would call "realistic" antinomianism. In a believer, it would be someone who uses God's grace an excuse, perhaps even subconsciously, to continue engaging in an addictive sin. Oftentimes antinomianism is taught as the absolute acceptance of a totally licentious lifestyle with the rationalization of: why not: all sins are covered! I have never met such a person, and if I did I would regard them as an unbeliever. Using this absurd example of antinomianism makes it hard to self-diagnose the actual illness, which is far less drastic (though still serious, as Owen discusses.)

² In an interesting twist, some of Naaman’s money and clothing was surreptitiously accepted by Elisha’s servant Gehazi, who ended up getting Naaman’s leprosy as a punishment for his greed. Awesome!