A not-so-disguised Seminary Paper

Often the greatest dangers to the gospel adopt a disguise rather palatable even to Christians. At the turn of the 16th century, Dutch theologian and humanist Erasmus masterfully packages one such danger in his Diatribe concerning the Free Will of man, which expounds a doctrine of free will founded on human reason rather than holy Scripture. The work gained popularity because of his eloquent language and compelling exhortations to return to the “basics” of Christianity, simple and upright living preserving peace within the church—in a word, moralism. He asserts man’s freedom to choose or reject God in relation to salvation; however, he also claims doctrines like this only distract the church and create unnecessary discord. His doctrine attributes to man a small amount of power by which he may gain a small amount of merit that leads to his salvation. This reflects the works-based salvation characteristic of Jerome, Pelagius, and likely many who call themselves Christian today. In his masterpiece The Bondage of the Will, Martin Luther, Erasmus' contemporary, crushes this free will theology. He describes the existence rather of two realms of slavery: slavery to Satan and slavery to God. Man has no choice in the matter of salvation, and arguments to the contrary assault the “basics” of Christianity: rightly interpreting Scripture, trusting God over human reason, and ascribing to God His due glory.

The simple and basic interpretation of Scripture eliminates man’s role in his salvation. Luther draws on the absolute nature of the Scriptures on this matter:[1]

o There is none righteous. (Rom 3:10)

o All have turned aside. There is none who does good. (Rom 3:12)

o No one will be justified by works. (Rom 3:20)

o All have sinned. (Rom 3:23)

o Those in the flesh cannot please God. (Rom 8:8)

o No one can come to Christ unless the Father draws him. (Jn 6:44)

o Apart from Christ one can do nothing. (Jn 15:5)

The absolute language of the Scriptures never masks the truth that many find so difficult to accept: God chooses those who will inherit salvation (1 Thess 1:4-5) and those who will inherit eternal punishment, and man has zero power to change this. The idea of free will arises out of man’s own invention. Luther argues that Erasmus reconstructs select difficult passages to give man a “free will” that the Scriptures’ grammar and basic meaning do not allow. Plain accounts such as “God hardened Pharaoh’s heart” and “Apart from Christ one can do nothing” reach an entirely new convoluted meaning under Erasmus’ crafty pen. Erasmus also supports the idea of free will with the argument that Scriptural imperatives imply man must have the ability to carry out the command. For what other reason, the Diatribe asks, would God command something which man cannot do? Luther keenly points out that imperatives imply only what man should do and not what he can do.[2] The Law and any other Scriptural imperatives—even “turn ye unto me”—serve only to strip man of his pride and reveal his helpless, wretched nature. Imperatives, therefore, highlight man’s slavery and not his freedom. Furthermore, Luther argues that Erasmus attempts to obscure basic passages by equating God’s mysteries with Scriptural ambiguities. Luther rebukes him in this: “Isaiah does not say ‘who has known the mind of Scripture?’ but: ‘who has known the mind of the Lord?’”[3] Although God cannot be fully known, His words hold clear and precise meaning, and the Scriptures lend no support to the concept of “free will.”

Since the Scriptures do not support free will in regard to salvation, the idea generally arises from the all too tempting tendency to subject God to human reasoning. Luther counters Erasmus’ free will argument with the idea that God alone has free will, which encompasses both man’s salvation and damnation. Luther himself confesses to wrestling deeply at one point in his life with God’s damnation of men, which he describes as “the greatest possible offense to common sense or natural reason.”[4] The very questioning of God’s will, however, creates a rule of measure for God’s will for which the Creator should never be subjected. God’s will is right simply because it is God’s will.[5] Luther asks indignantly why one would modify God’s message to fit human reason when human reason is so distorted as to consider the cross itself either a stumbling block or foolishness (1 Cor 1:23).[6] Luther recounts that when he found himself struggling with the idea of God’s will, he eventually found his state of helplessness and desperation the perfect state for receiving God’s help and grace.[7] Romans 11:33 illustrates Paul’s joy as well in the depths and mysteries of God. Believing in “free will” detracts from the need to trust God, whereas he who believes in the enslaved will finds trusting an all-powerful and mysterious God a good and freeing option.

Finally, the concept of free will with regard to salvation reproaches dangerously on the glory of God. The reasons are simple. If man has the ability within him to keep the commandments, Christ came for nothing.[8] If man has anything within him that can reconcile himself to God, Christ died needlessly. If only parts of man need redemption, Christ’s saving work loses its full power.[9] Scripture refutes each of these statements: man in the flesh cannot please God (Rom 8:7), there is no one who does good (Rom 3:12), and the whole person is assuredly defiled (Titus 1:15). Luther, in concordance with Scripture, refuses to let any sinner go uncondemned. He highlights the fact that while an unbeliever may appear good, his biggest sin lies in his believing God to be a liar (1 Jn 5:10).[10] Christ on the cross rescued mankind from its hopeless situation. Erasmus finds this entire doctrine negligible to one’s faith; however, Luther’s blazes this doctrine as the cornerstone of the Christian faith, for preserving the power of the cross preserves the glory of God.

In conclusion, asserting man’s free will in relation to his salvation violates Scripture and cheats God of His due trust and glory. Luther charges every believer to know and understand God’s work in him, for God’s grace alone secures not only one’s salvation but also every good work in him thereafter. Luther says, “Now if I am ignorant of God’s works and power, I am ignorant of God Himself; and if I do not know God, I cannot worship, praise, give thanks, or serve Him, for I do not know how much I should attribute to myself and how much to Him.”[11] Godly living requires godly knowledge.

---

[1] Luther, Martin, J. I. Packer, and O. R. Johnston. The Bondage of the Will. Grand Rapids, MI: Fleming H. Revell, 2000. P. 298.

[2] 156

[3] 73

[4] 217

[5] 209

[6] 201

[7] 217

[8] 172

[9] 253

[10] 253

[11] 78