Distortion and denial of justification

From John Murray's commentary on Romans (Murray, John. The Epistle to the Romans: the English Text with Introduction, Exposition and Notes. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1968. Print.):

The intimacy of the relations between justification and sanctification is made evident by the way in which chapters 5 and 6 are connected. There is no abruptness of transition. The question with which chapter 6 begins arises, from the emphasis at the close of chapter 5. If grace superabounds where sin abounds, if the multiplication of transgression serves to exhibit the lustre of grace, and if the law administered by Moses came in alongside in e order that the trespass might abound, the logical inference would seem to be, let us sin all the more in order that God may be gloried in the magnifying of This grace. This is the antinomian distortion of the doctrine of grace and it is also the objection of the legalist to the doctrine of justification apart from works by free grace through faith. It is both the distortion and the objection that the apostle answers in this Chapter, and in his answer he develops the implications of the death and resurrection of Christ. (212, emphasis mine)

I find it interesting that the depravity of our hearts and minds leads both the legalist and the antinomian to erroneously abuse the same doctrine; in the case of the antinomian, take our right standing with God as a springboard for license to sin and, in the case of the legalist, to deny justification outright either through argument or action. I know that I too often pitch my tent in both camps, but your more likely to find me in the same neighbourhood as the legalists. God help us.