‘But now the righteousness of God without the law, is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe in Him; for there is no difference, fall all have sinned are without the glory of God; being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in His blood,’ etc. (Rom. 3:21-25). Here Paul utters very thunderbolts against ‘free-will’. First; ‘The righteousness of God without the law,’ he says ‘is manifested.’ He distinguishes the righteousness of God from the righteousness of the law; because the righteousness of faith comes by grace, without the law. His phrase ‘without the law’ can mean only that Christian righteousness exists without the works of the law, the works of the law availing and effecting nothing toward its attainment. So he says, just below; ‘We concluded that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law’ (v. 28). Earlier, he had said: ‘By the deeds of the law shall no flesh be justified in his sight’ (v. 20). From all this it is very plain that the endeavour and effort of ‘free-will are simply null; for if the righteousness of God exists without the law, and without the works of the law, how shall it not much more exist without ‘free-will’? For the supreme concern of ‘free-will’ is to exercise itself in moral righteousness, the works of that law by which its blindness and impotence are ‘assisted.’ (Luther, Bondage of the Will)
Luther says that in Romans 3:21-25 “Paul utters very thunderbolts against ‘free-will.’” This is not something that is apparent in the first reading, and perhaps not apparent to numerous readings of the text without someone like Luther to point these things out. After seeing what Luther has to say on these verses, it would seem that it is not Luther than is blind but those who read this text and don’t see what it says against ‘free-will.’ The text is quite clear in telling us that the righteousness of God is something that is not the same thing as a righteousness of the Law. Human souls must obtain a righteousness either from the righteousness of God or from the righteousness of the Law. The Scripture is quite clear that by the deeds of the law one will not obtain righteousness. But the same line of thinking, however, a will that is free and a will that is free is free from the work of grace as well. The righteousness of God only comes through faith and so it is by grace alone. As Romans 4:16 sets out, it is by faith in order that it may be of grace. So that only leaves the so-called ‘free-will’ one option. It must obtain what it obtains by the Law, yet the Scripture has already stated that this is impossible.
The soul must be declared righteous by God for a soul to enter heaven. The soul is declared righteous based on what Christ has done, that is, the righteousness of God given to sinners or it is declared righteous based on the works of the Law or what the will does to some degree. The soul must either obtain its righteousness by keeping the Law in some way or by receiving it as a free gift. The soul obtains righteousness by the Law by keeping the Law (in the theory of some) or that God has lowered the standards of the Law (in one sense) to where if a person believes by an act of the will that act of faith is counted as righteousness. Either way, then, it is the will acting apart from grace alone and obtaining righteousness by the Law. But Scripture sets out that by the deeds (acts) of the Law no one will be justified in His sight. While it may not sound so bad to people to think that a will may be free enough to believe, there is more to the story. Why does believing save a soul anyway? Is it an act done by the will or is it a result of grace? One cannot have a Gospel of grace alone that includes an act of the will that is free of grace. This is also why Luther says things like “this wretched ‘free-will.’ He saw this as an enemy of the Gospel.
If it is true that (as Scripture says) man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law and that by the deeds of the law shall no flesh be justified in His sight, then what can a ‘free-will’ do to obtain righteousness? Can the will strive to obtain something that is not according to the Law? Can a will strive to obtain something that is righteous and be free enough to obtain that righteousness when in fact the righteousness of God is apart from the Law? The whole duty of man is to love God and his neighbor, yet is the will free to love God when it is in bondage to sin and at enmity to God? Is the will free from its bondage to sin and enmity of God at any point so that it can make a choice that is truly free? The will is either bound in sin or bound in love for God, but the will has to be transferred from the dominion of darkness into the kingdom of the Beloved Son. The will is not free to break its bondage of sin and it is not free to love righteousness and choose it apart from grace. Yet a will that is in bondage to sin and is free from grace is in fact not free at all. The righteousness of God is something apart from the Law in terms of man’s attaining it. It is also something that is apart from the will of man to obtain it and so the will of man is not free to obtain it at his own pleasure. The righteousness of God is given by grace and grace alone.
God Loves... Himself 
Leave a comment