No righteousness after

This, it must be acknowledged, comes home to the point, and is indeed the main pillar of Antinomianism. And yet it does not need a long or labored answer. We allow, 1. That God justifies the ungodly, him that till that hour is totally ungodly, full of all evil, void of all good. 2. That he justifies the ungodly that does not work, that till that moment does no good work: neither can he: for an evil tree cannot bring forth good fruit (Matthew 7:18). 3. That he justifies him by faith alone, without any goodness or righteousness preceding: and, 4. That faith is then counted to him for righteousness, namely, for preceding righteousness: that is, God, through the merits of Christ, accepts him that believes, as if he had already fulfilled all righteousness. But what is all this to your point? The apostle does not say, either here or elsewhere, that this faith is counted to him for subsequent righteousness. He does teach, that there is no righteousness before faith. But where does he teach, that there is none after it? He does assert, holiness cannot precede justification: but not, that it need not follow it. St. Paul therefore gives you no color for making void the law, by teaching that faith supersedes the necessity of holiness.