I do not accept or tolerate that middle way which Erasmus (I think, with good intentions) recommends to me, namely, to allow a very little to ‘free-will’. So that the contradictions of Scripture and the aforementioned inconveniences may be more easily removed. The case is not bettered by this middle way, nor is anything gained. For unless you attribute all and everything to ‘free-will’, in the way that the Pelagians do, the contradictions in the Scripture still remain, merit and reward are done away, the mercy and justice of God are done away also, and all the inconveniences which we intend to avoid by allowing to ‘free-will this tiny, ineffective power continue with us; as I explained above. So we have to go to extremes, deny ‘free-will’ altogether, and ascribe everything to God! Thus will the Scriptures be free from contradictions; and the inconveniences, if not removed, may be borne with. (Luther, The Bondage of the Will)
Here is a powerful blast from Luther against Erasmus and his so-called “middle way.” Erasmus, and Luther admitted he might have had good intentions, knew that Pelagianism was wrong but he could not go with Luther to grace alone. So Erasmus tried to find a middle way as so many had done before him and so many have done after him. Instead of denying ‘free-will’ and leaving all to God and His grace, Erasmus wants to leave just a little to ‘free-will’ and so have something of a middle way. But Luther shows the problems with this. In one sense the middle way is not middle at all. It is simply less than grace alone. No matter how much you ascribe to grace and no matter how little power you assign to the ‘free-will’, when grace and ‘free-will’ are joined together you will always end up with less than the Gospel of grace alone.
The only two logical positions (logical within themselves) are Pelagianism and Augustinianism (Calvinism). Pelagianism ascribes to man the power (‘free-will’) while Augustinianism ascribes to God all the power (grace). While many try to find a middle road, they never reach the biblical position of grace alone. But the human heart does not want to give up all hope in self (‘free-will’) and look to God and His grace alone, so it is always looking for a mediating position. But any mediating position, regardless of how little is left to the will to do, leaves a person with the same problems of reconciling Scripture with Scripture. No amount of the will or man’s ability can be reconciled with grace alone. No matter how many men try, they will always fail because the gospel that results from such a mixture is another gospel.
This is the same problem that we find in the New Testament. The Judaizers were a group of Jews who wanted to add a little to the Gospel of grace alone. Some wanted to add circumcision and others wanted to add bits of the Law. That is the same thing as saying that the Gospel if by grace alone plus circumcision or the Gospel is by grace alone plus keeping this aspect of the Law. Paul referred to those things as another gospel. What is the difference between those things and saying that the Gospel is by grace alone plus an act of the will? At the heart of it the message is the same. What is circumcision but a decision or act of the will that a person makes to do something? What is having one little bit of the Law to keep that is not an act of the will to do? All of these things amount to the same thing and that is an effort to have an act of the human will added to grace alone. Any act of the so-called ‘free-will’ is a middle road position and is a different Gospel. The ‘free-will’ may be simply a choice that grace must have to work with. The ‘free-will may be the choice to be circumcised. The ‘free-will’ may include the choice to keep some bit of the Law. All of those refer to man’s ability to do something apart from grace alone. All of those in reality are at war with grace alone. All of those are a different gospel.
Any little bit that is attributed to the will leaves us wrestling with and adjusting Scripture and its teaching on grace alone. It leaves us with some power or ability left to man which controls or determines salvation. That and history should teach us the folly of looking to human reason and ability in the Gospel. In order to ascribe everything to God we will have to deny ‘free-will’ to do so. Yes, that is rather inconvenient in the modern climate within the denominations. However, if we don’t believe the Gospel of grace alone it will lead to a greater inconvenience on judgment day. Oh how crushing it is to the pride to denounce all power and ability to self, but that is why so many fight the Gospel of grace alone. Oh how awful it would be to lose positions of honor and power if we deny any ability to the will of man, but how awful it would be to lose our very soul as a result of our refusal to do so. The Gospel of grace demands nothing less than the complete and utter renunciation of our own ability and will.
God Loves... Himself 
Leave a comment