God Loves… Himself

Anyway, this is what your words assert; that there is strength within us; there is such a thing as striving with all one’s strength; there is mercy in God; there are ways of compassing that mercy…But if one does not know what this ‘strength’ is—what men can do, and what is done to them—what this ‘striving’ is, what men can do, and what is done to them—then what should he do? What will you tell him to do?…For as long as they do not know the limits of their ability, they will not know what they should do; and as long as they do not know what they should do, they cannot repent when they err; and impenitence is the unpardonable sin…So it is not irreligious, idle, or superfluous, but in the highest degree wholesome and necessary, for a Christian to know whether of not his will has anything to do in matters pertaining to salvation. Indeed, let me tell you, this is the hinge on which our discussion turns, the crucial issue between us; our aim is, simply, to investigate what ability ‘free-will’ has, in what respect it is the subject of Divine action and how it stands related to the grace of God. If we know nothing of these things, we shall know nothing whatsoever of Christianity. (The Bondage of the Will, Luther’s Reply to Erasmus)

Luther demonstrated a vast amount of insight in the above response to Erasmus’ claim that the will had some strength, but it just needed the mercy of God to help it. The historical Reformed view is that the will has no strength in it at all to do any good. It appears that Luther believed that. But notice how clearly the Gospel of grace alone stands out when it is looked at in this light. If the will has no strength, then it is grace alone that saves sinners and actually moves the will. But if the will has some strength, even just a tiny amount, then it is not grace alone that saves sinners. It is grace plus the will. This is a lesson that we moderns should pay close attention to. This should change the way we preach and practice evangelism. How can we assign power to the will either explicitly or just remain silent on the issue when there is no power in the will? We are misleading people if we do not tell them that they have no power of the will and we are not telling them what will really save them. In other words, we are telling them something less than a whole Gospel.

If the Gospel is the Gospel of grace alone, then that needs to be explained and set out clearly. As long as people think that they have power in the will to make the final decision or even make some contribution, we have not set out the Gospel of grace alone to where they understand it. This was what Jonathan Edwards did in the 1700’s and then Asahel Nettleton did so well in the early 1800’s. They strove to deliver people from any hope in themselves because they saw that as long as a person had any hope in the strength of the will that they were under a delusion. If a clear Gospel is to be taught in any age, then we must set out the strength and power of the will so that grace can be seen for what it is and what it does.

Luther points out that if a person believes that the will has some power to do certain things then that person will do them. This is precisely what the preacher sets out to destroy so that the sinner may trust in grace alone. The confidence of the sinner in his own will must be destroyed so that he can see that he has no merit and no work that will contribute to salvation. Grace saves only when it saves without any help in order that grace may be grace (Romans 11:6). As long as the sinner thinks that s/he has some power in the will or free-will to do something pertaining to salvation, s/he will do that. But as long as the sinner thinks s/he has that power of the will to do something, the sinner will never truly repent of self-sufficiency.

It must be grace in the heart enabling it to believe, trust, and love or it would not be a work of human effort. It must be grace in the soul doing this or nothing it would do would be acceptable. There is no choice that a human being can make that is full of evil intents and motives that is acceptable to God. The only thing that can move God is His own name and the unbelieving heart hates Him and all it does falls short of His glory. Yet Genesis 6:5 tells us about the state of the unbelieving heart. Its very intents and motives are evil. The unbelieving heart can do nothing that is anything else but apart from an intent to do evil with motives that are evil. The unbelieving heart cannot do one thing out of pure love. If the heart that chooses God is an unbelieving heart, it chooses with evil intents and motives. It chooses without love which is the Greatest Commandment. Teaching on the impotence of the will, therefore, is not something that is extra or makes one a hyper-Calvinist. It is something that we do in order to preach the Gospel of grace alone. If we do not teach people that their will has no power and it is grace alone that saves, then we are not preaching the Gospel of grace alone. It is vital to the biblical Gospel of God. If we don’t know these things, we know nothing whatsoever of Christianity. If we don’t teach these things to others, then they will know nothing whatsoever of Christianity. It is that vital.

Do we not stand in urgent need of such teaching as Luther here gives us—teaching which humbles man, strengthens faith, and glorifies God—and is not the contemporary Church weak for the lack of it? The issue is clear. We are compelled to ask ourselves: If the Almighty God of the Bible is to be our God, if the New Testament gospel is to be our message, if Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, to-day and for ever—is any other position than Luther’s possible? Are we not in all honesty bound to stand with him in ascribing all might, and majesty, and dominion, and power, and all the glory of our salvation to God alone? Surely no more important or far-reaching question confronts the Church to-day (Johnson and Packer’s introduction to Luther’s Bondage of the Will).

The urgent need of the Church is not more methods and more activities, but instead it needs more of God. Those are words that are easy to say and easy to type, but to have more of God is something beyond the power of man. That is precisely what Luther teaches and that is what most everybody in our day will deny. Men want to leave something for themselves to do and some sufficiency in themselves to carry out what they have left for themselves to do. They want to define love and many things in the Bible in order to leave for themselves one little corner to carry out what they have left for themselves to do. Nevertheless, Jesus did say that “apart from Me you can do nothing” (John 15:5). Apart from love there is not one thing we can do to please God (I Cor 13), yet there is no love but that which comes from God (I John 4:7-8).

In Luther’s Bondage of the Will he goes after the sufficiency of man to do anything. He shows how helpless man is to contribute the smallest part of his own salvation and that salvation is by sovereign grace alone. He shows how that for human beings to bow and receive sovereign grace we must be thoroughly humbled and broken. This is simply another way of saying that the urgent need of the Church today is to preach the depths of man’s inability and impotence before a holy and sovereign God. There is no salvation apart from a deep humbling and brokenness of the soul because grace will have no helpers or enemies in the soul it saves. Saving grace delivers a soul from its pride and self-sufficiency or the soul cannot rest in grace alone. This is why it is an urgent need in the professing Church to teach as Luther did (and all the pioneer Reformers) that the soul must be deeply humbled and broken in order to rest in grace alone.

In the professing Church of today we have a lot of talk about the responsibility of man. That is just one way to sneak in the idea of man’s ability, though the word can be used apart from that. Nevertheless, the ability of man is relied on in what is called the “preaching of Christ” in so many places. The Gospel of grace alone is virtually unknown in the modern times because the humiliation of the soul is virtually unknown. Luther taught that the Gospel of grace alone teaches that God must empty the soul of itself and then bring the soul to itself by grace alone. If we claim that we believe in the inability of the soul, then we must teach that to people and how that is necessary to look to grace alone. Today there is a weak hybrid of those who claim to believe the Reformed teachings who also teach the responsibility of man in such a way that it leaves man with the ability (at least in their own minds) to come to Christ when they please and how they please. Until the Church gets back to preaching the Bible as Luther taught it will always have that weak hybrid as long as anyone tries to claim to be Reformed.

The urgent need of the Church is to discover once again the New Testament Gospel as proclaimed by the Reformers in all of its parts. Part of that seamless Gospel is the utter inability of man as taught by Luther in The Bondage of the Will. It is the true humbling of man that is so desperately needed by the Church in our day. Apart from the humbling of man there is no faith unto salvation and also no strengthening of the Church by faith. Apart from the humbling of human souls there will be no desire for the glory of God out of love for God. The natural man can seek the glory of God in name but in reality be seeking self in some way. Apart from the total inability of man in our preaching of the Gospel there will be no total glory of God in our preaching of the Gospel. As long as we leave some power in the soul we have not sought the humbling of that soul to the degree that it needs to be saved to the glory of God alone. I Corinthians 10:31 tells us that whatever we do we are to do to the glory of God. Part of that is to preach in such a way that the glory is God’s alone in the Gospel. Apart from preaching the total inability of human souls there will be no preaching of the Gospel of grace alone to the glory of God alone. In other words, there will also be no true preaching of faith alone either. This is an urgent need.

To accept the principles which Martin Luther vindicates in The Bondage of the Will would certainly involve a mental and spiritual revolution for many Christians at the present time. It would involve a radically different approach to preaching and the practice of evangelism, and to most other departments of theology and pastoral work as well. God centered thinking is out of fashion to-day, and it recovery will involve something of a Copernican revolution in our outlook on many matters. But ought we to shrink from this? Do we not stand in urgent need of such teaching as Luther here gives us—teaching which humbles man, strengthens faith, and glorifies God—and is not the contemporary Church weak for the lack of it? The issue is clear. We are compelled to ask ourselves: If the Almighty God of the Bible is to be our God, if the New Testament gospel is to be our message, if Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, to-day and for ever—is any other position than Luther’s possible? Are we not in all honesty bound to stand with him in ascribing all might, and majesty, and dominion, and power, and all the glory of our salvation to God alone? Surely no more important or far-reaching question confronts the Church to-day (Johnson and Packer’s introduction to Luther’s Bondage of the Will).

The quote from above should force some thinking and re-thinking on major issues of our day. Luther’s book The Bondage of the Will was and is a fair representation of the heart of the Gospel. To put it even more bluntly, to the degree that we reject that book is the degree we reject the Gospel that was proclaimed in the Reformation. Can we really have the New Testament Gospel if we reject Luther’s position in this book? If Luther and the pioneer Reformers preached the New Testament Gospel in its purity, then the degree we fall from that is how far we have fallen from the one and only Gospel of grace alone. We may think that we are okay and have unity with various denominations and various theologies, but if we have fallen from the true Gospel of grace alone then we are united with those who have fallen as well. This is no minor issue and this is not something that should be swept under a rug. It is the Gospel of grace alone that determines what a true church is and what a true believer is. It is the Gospel by which nations can fall as well. How can we prefer denominational unity over the Gospel?

Is Jesus Christ the same yesterday, today, and forever? Is the Gospel that Paul preached still the one and only Gospel? Is it so much the one and only Gospel that all who preach a different Gospel will be eternally cursed? Did Luther and the pioneer Reformers preach the Gospel that Paul preached? If so, then all those who preach a different Gospel than Luther and the pioneer Reformers did will be eternally cursed. We want to smooth off the rough edges and broaden the gate into the kingdom wider than Jesus did, but that is unsafe and damning. We must wrestle with the New Testament and Luther’s The Bondage of the Will rather than just assume that all is well.

But, so many argue, we believe in justification by faith alone and so do the Arminians. Aside from the point that it appears that most who think of themselves as Arminian are actually Pelagians, an Arminian cannot believe in justification by faith alone as Luther preached and wrote it. One cannot remain an Arminian and believe what Luther did about justification by faith alone. It is logically impossible. One or the other must be given up. So what can we say about those who claim to be Reformed and seek unity with “Arminians” in the Gospel? One must give up what Luther and the pioneer Reformers taught or they must give up unity with “Arminians.” I use the quote marks around Arminians because I am convinced that Pelagianism is the primary teaching among professing Arminians today.

We live in an age where so many just want to get alone and have drank deeply from the poisoned wells of the thinking that sets out unity as more important than all else. There can be no biblical unity apart from the biblical Gospel, so when people are united in a gospel that is not biblical they are not biblically united. Sure they might use the same words, but that does not mean that they mean the same things. Luther set out that justification by faith alone was important because it safeguarded salvation by grace alone. The Pelagian/Arminian position, despite using the same words of faith alone as Luther did, does not safeguard grace alone. It means something very different. The Pelagian/Arminian position also uses the word “by” in justification by faith alone very differently than Luther and the pioneer Reformers did. The Pelagian/Arminian position uses the word “by” to refer to what the human will can come up with and applies salvation to itself. The pioneer Reformers thought of the will as in bondage and so the word “by” refers to faith as an instrument in the hands of God who applied salvation. That leaves one side thinking of faith as coming from a so-called free-will and the other as faith as coming from God. The two positions are virtual opposites at that point and both cannot be the Gospel of grace alone. The Gospel of grace alone cannot exist with the teaching of free-will. It may not be politically correct to say so, but to preach free-will is to preach that which is opposite of the Gospel. To hold hands with those who preach free-will is to hold hands with what John Owen called an idol and is to hold hands with those who cannot logically hold to the Gospel of grace alone. The Gospel is the power of God unto salvation and is not the power of man to save himself. We must get straight on the Gospel of grace alone or we are alone without the Gospel. Luther had that part right.

To accept the principles which Martin Luther vindicates in The Bondage of the Will would certainly involve a mental and spiritual revolution for many Christians at the present time. It would involve a radically different approach to preaching and the practice of evangelism, and to most other departments of theology and pastoral work as well. God centered thinking is out of fashion to-day, and it recovery will involve something of a Copernican revolution in our outlook on many matters. But ought we to shrink from this? Do we not stand in urgent need of such teaching as Luther here gives us—teaching which humbles man, strengthens faith, and glorifies God—and is not the contemporary Church weak for the lack of it? The issue is clear. We are compelled to ask ourselves: If the Almighty God of the Bible is to be our God, if the New Testament gospel is to be our message, if Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, to-day and for ever—is any other position than Luther’s possible? Are we not in all honesty bound to stand with him in ascribing all might, and majesty, and dominion, and power, and all the glory of our salvation to God alone? Surely no more important or far-reaching question confronts the Church to-day (Johnson and Packer’s introduction to Luther’s Bondage of the Will).

The contemporary Church is about 50 years weaker than when the above quote was written. Martin Luther and the pioneer Reformers focused their teaching on the humility of man and the glory of God. The strengthening of faith came from a greater humility and the indwelling God who manifested His glory through men. But this confronts us with not only an important question, but a vital one in our day. If the Reformation was indeed a revival of truth and of the pouring out of the Spirit of God, then why are we not preaching and teaching that message? If the God of the Bible is the One we claim to adhere to and the one and only Gospel is the one that they preached, then what does this say to our day? If Jesus Christ is, as Hebrews 13:8 sets Him out to be (the same yesterday, today, and forever), then if we are preaching a different Christ than they did then either the Reformers were wrong or we are. Logically speaking, both of us could be wrong but both cannot be right.

In the quote above (from the intro to Luther’s Bondage of the Will) Johnson and Packer ask us if any other position than Luther’s is possible. This was not an idle question then and it is not an idle question now. While the Reformed position is taken in name by many more in recent years the Reformed position on the will and how it applies to the main principles of the Reformation is being fled from by even those who take the name of Reformed. Some degree of Pelagianism is rampant within the professing Church of today and that includes those who profess to be Reformed. It is at this issue of the will that so many flee from in preaching what they say is the Gospel. Once again, the main principles of the Reformation had to do with the helplessness of man in sin and the sovereignty of the grace of God. The bondage of the will is a necessary teaching if we are to hold to those two principles. If a sinner is to turn from trust in himself to a total trust in God, then that sinner must see that there is utterly nothing in him or herself to trust in and there is no other God but a sovereign God to trust in and no other grace but a sovereign grace given by God. The grace that a person must have to be saved is a grace from a sovereign God and so there is no other way of salvation but by a sovereign grace. How can a person profess to be Reformed in our day and yet flee from preaching the truth about the helplessness of man in sin and the sovereignty of God’s grace? It is because of the fear of men and perhaps the deep tint of Pelagianism in the soul.

R.C. Sproul was so correct in his talk and paper on the Pelagian Captivity of the Church. Pelagianism (in some form) is not just some historical teaching; it is rampant in the professing Church and among Reformed ranks as well. Yet many who profess to be Reformed are holding hands with the enemies of the Gospel of grace alone in an effort to get along. There will be no modern Reformation apart from the one and only Gospel of grace alone. Until men and women are ready to stand for the true Gospel and be willing to leave churches and denominations if need be over it, there will be no true Reformation in our day. We have to face reality and come to grips with what must happen if we are going to see Reformation and Revival in our day. God will not dwell with anyone but the humble and the contrite. He will not dwell with those who have the idols of the esteem of men in their hearts. He will not dwell with those who are holding hands with the enemies of the Gospel. In our efforts to be gracious and winsome and get along with people, we have let go of the Gospel of grace alone to hold the hands of those who deny it in reality. In our efforts to make Reformed theology easier to stomach and fit in with others the truth of the Gospel has slid out of the hands of the professing Church. If we are not willing to stand for and preach the utter helplessness of man in sin and the sovereignty of the grace of God both in theology and practice, we don’t love the Gospel as preached during the Reformation which was a time of revival that shook the world. It sounds so winsome to be able to get along with so many, but that can be nothing but the deception of the evil one who would love to have people unified on their march to deceiving even more and then to hell.

To accept the principles which Martin Luther vindicates in The Bondage of the Will would certainly involve a mental and spiritual revolution for many Christians at the present time. It would involve a radically different approach to preaching and the practice of evangelism, and to most other departments of theology and pastoral work as well. God centered thinking is out of fashion to-day, and it recovery will involve something of a Copernican revolution in our outlook on many matters. But ought we to shrink from this? Do we not stand in urgent need of such teaching as Luther here gives us—teaching which humbles man, strengthens faith, and glorifies God—and is not the contemporary Church weak for the lack of it? The issue is clear. We are compelled to ask ourselves: If the Almighty God of the Bible is to be our God, if the New Testament gospel is to be our message, if Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, to-day and for ever—is any other position than Luther’s possible? Are we not in all honesty bound to stand with him in ascribing all might, and majesty, and dominion, and power, and all the glory of our salvation to God alone? Surely no more important or far-reaching question confronts the Church to-day (Johnson and Packer’s introduction to Luther’s Bondage of the Will).

Instead of shrinking from the biblical teaching of the Reformation as found in The Bondage of the Will, these God-centered teachings must be proclaimed with conviction and power. Just having them in a creed will not be enough, nor will it do anything other than make us feel good about ourselves. These things and their implications must be preached and taught. The core teaching of The Bondage of the Will, when applied to the heart by the Spirit, will humble man, strengthen faith, and glorify God. These are precisely the things that we have virtually lost in the modern Church. Instead of humbling man in truth, we are careful not to offend him and preserve his pride and self-esteem. Instead of strengthening faith in truth, we strengthen man’s faith in himself and in a false god. Instead of truly glorifying God, we take his name on our lips when we do what we please as we please. We like to think we are glorifying God but that is something that comes by grace as well.

If we are not teaching the principles found in The Bondage of the Will we are not teaching the core of the Gospel as set out in the Reformation. But if we are teaching those principles, then our teaching must strive to see men and women truly humbled. Luther was so clear that until the soul is deeply humbled it is not ready to hear the Gospel. This principle is lost in the modern day. Humility, while it is taught as a virtue, is not just something that we can add on as we please. Humility, in the negating sense, will only come by the work of the Spirit in casting self out as the ruler of the soul. Humility in the positive sense is the life of Christ in the soul. There is no true humility apart from the Divine activity in the soul and yet we have left that for man to do by self.

Faith, interestingly enough, is under attack in the professing Church. When we step away from the principles found in The Bondage of the Will we will not know what true faith is or how to obtain it. Faith is taught as something that men and women must come up with since it comes from a free-will. Those more Reformed say that they know that it comes from God but they want to keep that quiet. If faith is a gift of God and trusting in self is an idolatrous and damning trust of the soul, then why do people want to keep quiet about it? It does make it harder to come up with our goals that we have set out if we do that. When we do not teach the humbling of the soul so that it is totally and wholly helpless to do anything spiritual or pleasing to God, we are not teaching what is in accordance with true faith in Christ. Instead we are teaching faith in the power of man. For true faith to be taught it must teach the helplessness of man and the power of the sovereign God in the soul.

The quote from above mentions glorifying God as one of the things the contemporary Church is weak in. That was written a little over 50 years ago. We are far weaker now. Apart from man arriving at the experiential knowledge of his utter helplessness before God and the true nature of faith in the sovereignty of God and His grace, there will be no true glorification of God as He commanded the professing Church. The principles of the helplessness of man and the sovereignty of God are foundational to the heart of the Reformations soli deo Gloria (to God alone be the glory). Until man is wholly helpless and in the hands of the one and only sovereign God, man cannot glorify God because man can do nothing spiritual that does not come from God by grace alone. Until man is wholly helpless, man does all he does in his own strength. Even when man speaks as if he is doing what he is doing for the glory of God, it is nothing but self doing it. When self does the work in God’s name, it builds even more self-righteousness in doing it because it thinks it is doing it for the glory of God. We live in desperate times.

To accept the principles which Martin Luther vindicates in The Bondage of the Will would certainly involve a mental and spiritual revolution for many Christians at the present time. It would involve a radically different approach to preaching and the practice of evangelism, and to most other departments of theology and pastoral work as well. God centered thinking is out of fashion to-day, and it recovery will involve something of a Copernican revolution in our outlook on many matters. But ought we to shrink from this? Do we not stand in urgent need of such teaching as Luther here gives us—teaching which humbles man, strengthens faith, and glorifies God—and is not the contemporary Church weak for the lack of it? The issue is clear. We are compelled to ask ourselves: If the Almighty God of the Bible is to be our God, if the New Testament gospel is to be our message, if Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, to-day and for ever—is any other position than Luther’s possible? Are we not in all honesty bound to stand with him in ascribing all might, and majesty, and dominion, and power, and all the glory of our salvation to God alone? Surely no more important or far-reaching question confronts the Church to-day (Johnson and Packer’s introduction to Luther’s Bondage of the Will).

God centered thinking is certainly out of fashion in our day. It will perhaps require something of a far greater magnitude than the Copernican revolution in our outlook for things to change. After all, when we are dealing with the sun and the earth we are still dealing with things that are finite. We could even think of the sun and the earth as being quite small in terms of the universe. However, to be turned from a focus on a speck of dust on the earth which is small compared to the sun which is small compared to the universe and even more to the infinite God that is an enormous revolution. But that is precisely what needs to happen. When a person turns from the will and glory of the infinite God to the will and honor of self, there is an unspeakable distance between the two and the guilt and ugliness of the sin is infinite. But there has to be a turning back or a repentance worked in our soul.

Romans 3:23 defines sin for us as falling short of the glory of God. When we consider what that means in light of the infinitude of God, it should move us to fall on our knees and faces. If we would but once gain that sight we would be like Daniel and then John who lost all strength in their knees and they could not stand in their own power. So imagine what an affront it is to the infinite God when men try to do things for God in their own power and strength. Imagine what an act of rebellion it is to God to do things our own way and in our own strength. Imagine the enmity in the least sin that man does in seeking his own honor and glory. Perhaps we cannot imagine the depths of sin when men and women believe and teach that the will is free and that man must do something that God cannot do for himself. The will of a piece of dust must do something that the infinite God cannot do?

The sheer idolatry of such a statement or belief is far beyond the level that human words can express. Yet we preach and evangelize in our day as if salvation depended on the act of a human will that was free from the power and grace of God. Instead of turning the minds and hearts of men and women to the infinite power of God and His ability to show grace in giving faith and turning hearts to Himself, we focus men and women on their own power. John Owen, in his work A Display of Arminianism, showed how that teaching on the free will and its power is really an act of enmity and idolatry against God. In this we deny many if not all of the attributes of God. In this we try to get men and women to focus on and trust in their own will and reason rather than God’s. Perhaps that is not the intent, but that is the result. So many today love the praise of men rather than the glory of God. Scripture gives us the words of Jesus on that: “How can you believe, when you receive glory from one another and you do not seek the glory that is from the one and only God?” (John 5:44). They continue to preach or at least hold hands with those who preach as trusting in and teaching on the idol of the free-will. They love the honor of men and refuse to break with such teaching.

If the professing Church and this nation is going to come back from the pit it is in a greater revolution than Copernicus brought about must happen. The hearts of men must be turned from the worship and trust in themselves and to the worship and trust in the living God. It will be hard and suffering in various forms will come, but it must happen. Many pastors and denominations will love their positions, ease, comfort, and influence too much to be part of that revolution. It is easy to see that many who are considered evangelical or conservative or even the bastions of conservative Christianity today will not like the revolution that must come. It will require them to deny themselves which includes their positions, influence, power, and honor to do so. Scripture tells us that the love of money is the root of all kinds of evil. But let us not forget that the love of honor is deep root of sin as well. If we are not willing to preach the utter helplessness of man in sin and the sovereignty of God to all people, we will not be willing to preach the Gospel to all people. We must be turned to God as the center and core of all things if we are going to preach the true Gospel to all people. Even the Pharisees were willing to cross land and sea to make one convert. So preachers, evangelists, and denominations can go to a lot of trouble and make many converts and yet make them all twice the sons of the devil as they are. Numbers do not tell the story. The real issue is whether the real Gospel is being preached or not. Luther would condemn our day. So does Scripture.

To accept the principles which Martin Luther vindicates in The Bondage of the Will would certainly involve a mental and spiritual revolution for many Christians at the present time. It would involve a radically different approach to preaching and the practice of evangelism, and to most other departments of theology and pastoral work as well. God centered thinking is out of fashion to-day, and it recovery will involve something of a Copernican revolution in our outlook on many matters. But ought we to shrink from this? Do we not stand in urgent need of such teaching as Luther here gives us—teaching which humbles man, strengthens faith, and glorifies God—and is not the contemporary Church weak for the lack of it? The issue is clear. We are compelled to ask ourselves: If the Almighty God of the Bible is to be our God, if the New Testament gospel is to be our message, if Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, to-day and for ever—is any other position than Luther’s possible? Are we not in all honesty bound to stand with him in ascribing all might, and majesty, and dominion, and power, and all the glory of our salvation to God alone? Surely no more important or far-reaching question confronts the Church to-day (Johnson and Packer’s introduction to Luther’s Bondage of the Will).

If indeed, as the quote says, to accept the principles of Luther in The Bondage of the Will would certainly involve a revolution, then it is true that not many will want a revolution like this to occur. People are comfortable in their pastorates, their denominations, and in general religious ministries. To come to the realization that one needs to accept principles in reality (not just in theory) that would shake up their whole lives is not something that people will accept easily. It would be hard for those whose preaching is liked or whose evangelism has been successful in terms of numbers to come to the position that they need a radical change. But that is precisely what the teaching of Luther leads to. If the will of human beings is enslaved to sin and cannot help itself at all and can only be helped by a God-centered God who is under no obligation to show grace, then ministries need to be changed. Preaching must change and evangelism must change. Denominations and seminaries must change. Change is dreaded because it might mean that I would lose my position, honor, and perhaps power. But do we love the glory of God or not? If change is needed, then I must change. Wait a minute! Change and hard times are for other people. Hard times are the things I need to preach about rather than experience?

It is far easier to say that I believe the Westminster and/or the 1689 Baptist Confession than it is to really believe it much less practice it. It is easier to believe one of them in some superficial way than it is to dive to the depths of their teachings and actually apply them. It is easier to stand in the pulpit and tell people that they are dead in their sins than it is to say what that really means, but even more it is harder to look someone in the eye and tell them what it really means to be dead in trespasses and sin. This is why change is hard. It costs the esteem and honor of others. It costs positions and income. But without this change the professing Church will not be marching forward but will continue to be fleeing from the fight. We want to be friends with those who are enemies of the Gospel and so we hold hands with them and call it unity. That is change, but it is not the change needed and it is certainly not the change that Luther called for and would call for today.

Martin Luther wrote The Bondage of the Will to defend the Gospel of grace alone. This book gives us his commentary on what justification by faith alone means. We can speak evil of Luther as indeed he was not a perfect man. But we must understand that this book sets out what is necessary for the Gospel that came out of the Reformation. Apart from the doctrine of the enslaved will, there is no justification by faith alone as the Reformers taught it. We ignore this at our own peril and the peril of the souls that we say we minister to. Can we say that we love souls if we don’t teach them what is necessary to understand the Gospel? The pulpits in the land are full of those who love themselves and their own positions more than the souls of those they preach to and the God they say they love. We love to preach about how we should not tickle the ears of the hearers while we tickle the ears of the hearers. We are afraid that if we do not tickle their ears that they will throw us out. This is to love ourselves rather than the people and the God we say we preach for.

But what is that in reality other than to cry out peace, peace when there is no peace? It is a false prophet that will not preach the truth out of fear that men are not saved and are in bondage to their sin. We have a land full of false prophets who do not preach the Gospel of grace alone in truth though they may give lip-service to the words. There is a famine in the land and those who are commanded to feed the sheep are starving them. Those who are commanded to be watchmen on the walls are supposed to keep watch are saying things that may be correct in a sense and yet people are sleeping through them while the enemy is sowing tares. We can memorize our catechisms while our soul sleeps the sleep of spiritual death. We can attain high academic degrees while our souls are in complete ignorance of the knowledge of God in Christ. We can preach according to the creeds in ways that are acceptable to men, but bring the wrath of God. We need the fire of Luther who was bold enough to take on the top academic of his day and the entire religious institution of his day as well. Where are those who will stand for the bondage of man’s will and the sovereignty of God in order to stand for the Gospel of grace alone?

To accept the principles which Martin Luther vindicates in The Bondage of the Will would certainly involve a mental and spiritual revolution for many Christians at the present time. It would involve a radically different approach to preaching and the practice of evangelism, and to most other departments of theology and pastoral work as well. God centered thinking is out of fashion to-day, and it recovery will involve something of a Copernican revolution in our outlook on many matters. But ought we to shrink from this? Do we not stand in urgent need of such teaching as Luther here gives us—teaching which humbles man, strengthens faith, and glorifies God—and is not the contemporary Church weak for the lack of it? The issue is clear. We are compelled to ask ourselves: If the Almighty God of the Bible is to be our God, if the New Testament gospel is to be our message, if Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, to-day and for ever—is any other position than Luther’s possible? Are we not in all honesty bound to stand with him in ascribing all might, and majesty, and dominion, and power, and all the glory of our salvation to God alone? Surely no more important or far-reaching question confronts the Church to-day (Johnson and Packer’s introduction to Luther’s Bondage of the Will).

The change that is needed that would correspond to a real revival and a new Reformation is drastic. It is not about getting people to intellectually accept a creed. It has to do with a complete transformation in the way things are viewed and looked at. The change has to be from a man-centered way to a God-centered way of thinking. This can be very tricky as it is easy and very common for people to think highly of God but only because He is man-centered and has done a lot for man. However, that is still a man-centered way of thinking and it is an idolatrous way of thinking as well. If God is centered upon man rather than Himself, then He violates His own Greatest Commandment. For God to be holy He must love Himself with all of His heart, mind, soul, and strength. I John 5:2 teaches us that human beings cannot know that they love human beings unless they love God and keep His commandments. There is no true love for human beings that is not love for God first since all true love comes from God. So we can know that God must love Himself and be focused on Himself. He is God-centered and is the example of what it means to be God-centered. Human beings must learn to love God as a God-centered God or they will not love the true God at all. The triune God must be God-centered or there is no love in the universe.

The difference between loving a god that is man-centered and the God that is God-centered is the difference between heresy and truth. It is also the difference between a religion of self and a religion that is all of God. No one needs a new heart to love a god that loves him or her and does all for him or her. We do, however, need a new heart to love a God that is the source and origin of all true love and that love is for Himself as triune. This is the radically different approach that would change the way church is viewed, how theology is done, and how preaching and evangelism would be practiced. A God-centered God is not an option since He alone is the true God. The God-centered God is the only God and so He alone must be the content and love of sermons and evangelism. When we drop down to a man-centered god, even if we pay a lot of attention to that god and even if we have the same creeds that were written centuries ago, we are still dealing with a different god than the true God. This is perhaps the most fundamental difference in the modern day and the days of the Reformation. It is so fundamental that we can hold to the same creeds that came from the Reformation and the Puritan time period and still believe things that are totally different.

The God of Holy Scripture is the God that will not give His glory to another (Isa 42:8). The God of Holy Scripture is the God who does all for the sake of His own name (Isa 48:11). He shines forth His glory in Jesus Christ and in no other place. Human beings must be humbled and broken from themselves and their own self-centered lives in order to have Christ as their lives. Paul tells us that he was crucified with Christ and that he no longer lived but it was Christ in him (Gal 2:20). Who was it that went on those missionary trips and preached the glory of God in Christ as the Gospel? It was the life of Christ in Paul who did that. Paul labored hard, but it was the energy and power of God in Him that really did the work (Col 1:28-29). It is likely that many who are orthodox in their creeds and moral in their lives need to repent of their self-centered god and bow in brokenness before the true and living God-centered God. We cannot live holy lives while centered upon ourselves thinking that God is centered upon us, but instead we will only live truly holy lives when we are emptied of self and so we then partake of or share in His holiness (Heb 12:10). It is then that the God-centered God will be seen in His glory. He is not focused on humans to make us live better, but He brings us in to share in His divine nature for His own glory (II Peter 1:4).

To accept the principles which Martin Luther vindicates in The Bondage of the Will would certainly involve a mental and spiritual revolution for many Christians at the present time. It would involve a radically different approach to preaching and the practice of evangelism, and to most other departments of theology and pastoral work as well. God centered thinking is out of fashion to-day, and it recovery will involve something of a Copernican revolution in our outlook on many matters. But ought we to shrink from this? Do we not stand in urgent need of such teaching as Luther here gives us—teaching which humbles man, strengthens faith, and glorifies God—and is not the contemporary Church weak for the lack of it? The issue is clear. We are compelled to ask ourselves: If the Almighty God of the Bible is to be our God, if the New Testament gospel is to be our message, if Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, to-day and for ever—is any other position than Luther’s possible? Are we not in all honesty bound to stand with him in ascribing all might, and majesty, and dominion, and power, and all the glory of our salvation to God alone? Surely no more important or far-reaching question confronts the Church to-day (Johnson and Packer’s introduction to Luther’s Bondage of the Will).

The teaching in Luther’s Bondage of the Will demands an evangelism that is totally different because the Gospel it teaches is different. If human souls are indeed in bondage to the devil and to sin, then the evangelism that treats sinners in such a bondage will be different than those that don’t. Those who profess to be Reformed and yet their evangelism is no different than semi-Pelagians need to wake up and see that if their evangelism is the same then down deep their theology is the same as well. If a professing Reformed person evangelizes the same as the semi-Pelagian then the Gospel is going to be the same as well. That means that the professing Reformed person is a practical semi-Pelagian if not just a Pelagian in Reformed dress after all.

How can we believe that grace is sovereign from beginning to end and not tell people that in evangelism? After all, the Gospel is by grace alone and any work makes grace to be no longer grace (Romans 11:6). The justification by faith alone that is not built and based on sovereign grace is not the justification by faith alone taught by the Reformers and the Puritans who came after. It is so hard for the sinner to be broken from his pride and free-will in order to be able to rest in grace alone. Interestingly enough Luther said that until a person was broken from their free-will then s/he was not ready to be saved. Yet professing Reformed people today will not teach people about sin and sovereign grace in order to teach them the truth about justification by faith alone. In their evangelism, then, despite their creeds, in effect they are denying the truth of the Gospel of grace alone.

The helplessness of man—the omnipotence of God, were the two truths that Luther desired to re-establish. That is but a sad religion and a wretched philosophy by which man is directed to his own natural strength. Ages have tried in vain this so much boasted strength; and while man has, by his own natural powers, arrived at great excellence in all that concerns his earthly existence, he has never been able to scatter the darkness that conceals from his soul the knowledge of the true God, or to change a single inclination of his heart (D’aubigne, The Life and Times of Martin Luther).

In order to proclaim a true Gospel of grace alone the helplessness of man and the sovereignty of grace (omnipotence of grace included) must be proclaimed to sinners. When evangelism is done in such a way that teaches people (whether in actual words or implied) that God has done all He can do and now it is up to them, that is not the Gospel of grace alone. It is also not teaching truth about who the true God really is. When we do not tell men the true state of their own souls and how they are helpless before God, we leave them in the bonds of a sad religion and a wretched philosophy because we have left them with their own natural power to do what needs to be done. Yet the natural power of man cannot arrive at one single spiritual thought and cannot have a single desire or action of the soul that is spiritual. It is true; however, that when we don’t teach the utter helplessness of man in his sin and of the sovereignty and power of grace we will be relieved of many trials from unbelievers and professing believers alike. The natural soul hates the teaching that it is helpless before God and in bondage to sin and the devil. It hates the teaching that God has no obligation to save it and it will not impugn His glory one bit to pass that soul by and leave it to its bondage in sin for eternity. Yet it is not until it arrives at these truths that it will understand grace alone. So when people flee from these teachings they are fleeing from the truth of the Gospel of grace alone as well as what is truly good for the souls of others which is what true love really does.

To accept the principles which Martin Luther vindicates in The Bondage of the Will would certainly involve a mental and spiritual revolution for many Christians at the present time. It would involve a radically different approach to preaching and the practice of evangelism, and to most other departments of theology and pastoral work as well. God centered thinking is out of fashion to-day, and it recovery will involve something of a Copernican revolution in our outlook on many matters. But ought we to shrink from this? Do we not stand in urgent need of such teaching as Luther here gives us—teaching which humbles man, strengthens faith, and glorifies God—and is not the contemporary Church weak for the lack of it? The issue is clear. We are compelled to ask ourselves: If the Almighty God of the Bible is to be our God, if the New Testament gospel is to be our message, if Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, to-day and for ever—is any other position than Luther’s possible? Are we not in all honesty bound to stand with him in ascribing all might, and majesty, and dominion, and power, and all the glory of our salvation to God alone? Surely no more important or far-reaching question confronts the Church to-day (Johnson and Packer’s introduction to Luther’s Bondage of the Will).

The principles that Martin Luther set out (which all the pioneer Reformers agreed with) are diametrically opposed to the evangelism that is practiced today. If we simply take the two basic principles that were vital to the teaching of the Reformers in terms of justification by faith alone, it is apparent that something is terribly wrong with the evangelism of today. Two main principles of Bondage of the Will are man’s utter helplessness in bondage to sin and the sovereignty of God’s grace. Luther not only said that man was utterly helpless in sin, but that man must come to understand that in order to understand grace. This is a departure from the evangelism that is practiced in this century, but perhaps we should look at our own day and see it as a departure from orthodox evangelism.

Evangelism is practiced today with barely a mention of sin, though some still teach something about it. But the difference with Luther is stark. Today people are evangelized with some teaching on sin (those who do) in an effort to get them to see that they cannot pay for their sin and so need a Savior. Much of this is built on the premise that man can simply believe when he pleases and so come to faith. Professing Reformed people say that God must give the people a new heart but their evangelism is really no different than that of semi-Pelagians. They say that they believe other things but they keep that as a secret. But the older way was to tell people about their sin and attempt to drive them to the point where they lost all hope in self. This was referred to as legal humiliation. The soul had to be broken from its own ability and sufficiency in order to trust in the ability and sufficiency of Christ alone. This is a vital issue. If the soul is to be saved by grace alone, then the soul cannot look to itself or anything else but grace alone to be saved during the entire salvation. It must be grace that saves it from eternity past, to the cross, to imputed righteousness, to the application of salvation, and then to sanctification and eternity. An evangelism that does not instruct people to be completely broken does not teach a true Gospel of grace alone.

An evangelism that does not take a soul to contrition and brokenness does not take the soul to the experiential place where it can rely on nothing but Christ and grace. As long as the soul is not broken it is in bondage to sin which is to be in bondage to its pride and its own ability and sufficiency. As long as the soul has any hope in its own self it will not hope in Christ alone. As long as the soul has the least hope that it can believe in and of itself it will not look to God alone to give it a believing heart. The Bondage of the Will is a masterpiece in setting out the basics needed for evangelism as well as the Gospel. The two do, after all, go together.

The soul that still believes and adheres to its free-will is not a soul that will hold to grace for the whole of salvation. The will is not free but it is in bondage to self, pride, its own sufficiency, and the devil. If we do not preach and teach this to people in evangelism, we are not telling them the extent of their depravity and of the reality that has them in its grasp. If we don’t tell them the extent of their depravity, then we have no basis for teaching them about the truth of grace. After all, Romans 9 teaches with the utmost clarity that grace alone saves and that true grace is a sovereign grace. “For He says to Moses, “I WILL HAVE MERCY ON WHOM I HAVE MERCY, AND I WILL HAVE COMPASSION ON WHOM I HAVE COMPASSION.” 16 So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy” (vv. 15-16). Scripture is so clear that mercy and grace are sovereign and the will of man does not determine these things. Surely our evangelism must reflect that. An evangelism that does not reflect that is not Reformed and is not biblical.