‘By the law is the knowledge of sin,’ says Paul (Rom. 3:20). Here he shows how much and how far the law profits, teaching that ‘free-will’ is of itself so blind that it does not even know what sin is, but needs to law to teach it! And what can a man essay to do in order to take away sin, when he does not know what sin is? Surely this; mistake what is sin for what is not sin, and what is not sin for what is sin! Experience informs us clearly enough how the world, in the person of those whom it accounts its best and most zealous devotees if righteousness and godliness, hates and hounds down the righteousness of God preached in the gospel, and brands it heresy, error, and other opprobrious names, while flaunting and hawking its own works and devices (which are really sin and error) as righteousness and wisdom. By these words, therefore, Paul stops the mouth of ‘free-will’, teaching that by the law it is shown sin, as being ignorant of its sin; so far is he from allowing it any power to make endeavors towards good (Luther, Bondage of the Will).
Luther drives a point home that is really another stake against those who adhere to ‘free-will’ and the gospel that depends on it. It should be pointed out that Luther drives this point home not only to those who adhere to ‘free-will’ but also those that do not fight against it. The doctrine or teaching of ‘free-will’ stands opposed to Paul and what he taught about the law, sin, and the Gospel. The will is not free from the law in its need to be taught what sin is. The will must be taught what is sin and so it is blind to the nature of sin. The will must also, then, listen to what the Bible teaches on the bondage of the will. If the will thinks it is free to keep the law or to make a choice in terms of salvation, then it must be free enough to make choices so that it can keep the law. How, then, can the will that must be taught by the law what sin really is, actually strive toward keeping the law in its own freedom?
The teaching of ‘free-will’ is simply opposed to what the Bible says about the extent of sin. It (’free-will’) wants to be free to determine what is good and evil (following the lie of the Serpent to Eve) and so it wants the freedom of ability to do what it thinks is good and evil. The will that thinks it is free, therefore, is deluded and deceived. The will that thinks it is free is blind to the true nature of sin and the bondage of that sin and is blind to the true glory of the grace of God. The will that thinks it is free is deceived at that point and those who will not try to instruct them are not trying to lead people out of the bondage of their sin and instruct them in the way of true grace.
Thomas Watson wrote to this point: “Examination of a man’s self is difficult because of self-love. As ignorance blinds, so self-love flatters. Every man is ready to think the best of himself. What Solomon says of love to our neighbor is most true of self-love; it hides a multitude of evil (Prov. 10:12). A man looking upon himself in Philautae speculo, in the mirror of self-love, shall think his virtues appear greater than they are and his sins lesser. Self-love makes one rather excuse what is amiss than examine it” (Heaven Taken by Storm). A soul that is dead in its sin of pride and self-love wants to delude itself regarding its own ability and power of the will. It thinks and feels that it is free, and so it will fight to the death to stand for its freedom. But Scripture tells us that the soul is not free to determine what sin is and is not free to obtain good at any point on its own. It is delusional to think it does.
Richard Baxter tells us that “A proud heart hath so little experimental sense of the great accusations which Scripture bringeth against the corrupted heart of man, that it is easily drawn into any heresy which denieth them: as about our original sin, and misery, and need of a Saviour; about the desperate wickedness of the heart, and man’s insufficiency and impotency to good, yea, averseness from it” (Baxter’s Practical Works, Vol 1). Why are so many people who claim to be Reformed so reticent to stand and preach the depravity of man as the Bible sets it out? Unless we preach the bondage of the will we cannot teach the sovereignty of grace. Unless we stand against the freedom of the will we cannot stand for the doctrines of grace in reality.
Jonathan Edwards put it this way: “If you imagine that you have it in your own power to work yourselves up to repentance, consider, that you must assuredly give up that imagination before you can have repentance wrought in you” (Seeking God, International Outreach). As long as a person thinks of self as having the power of a ‘free-will’ (choice and ability) to repent and believe; Edwards teaches us that the person cannot have true repentance and true faith worked in him or her. This is not just some metaphysical nicety, this is vital to the Gospel. If we are to instruct souls as to the nature of sin and of how to be truly delivered from that bondage, we must teach them in such a way as to drive them from all hope in themselves and that includes the teaching of ‘free-will.’ The Gospel of grace alone is at stake in this issue. But if true, the Gospel of grace alone is not being preached very much today.
God Loves... Himself 
Leave a comment