God Loves… Himself

In short, Paul sets ‘him that worketh’ and ‘him that worketh not’ side by side and leaves none in the middle between them. He declares that righteousness is not reckoned to him that worketh, but is reckoned to him that worketh not, if only he believes. There is no way by which ‘free-will,’ with its effort and endeavour, can dodge or escape; it must either be numbered with ‘him that worketh’ or with ‘him that worketh not.’ If with ‘him that worketh’, you have heard Paul say that righteousness is not reckoned to it, If with ‘him that worketh not, but believeth’ on God, righteousness is reckoned to it. But then it will not be the power of ‘free-will’, but a new creation by faith, and if righteousness is not reckoned to ‘him that worketh’, it becomes clear that his works are nothing but sins, evil and ungodly in God’s sight. (Luther, Bondage of the Will)

If God does not reckon righteousness to those who work for it, then we must be careful not to set up any doctrine that calls for a work even if it does not in words. If a doctrine came up in the church that required a work but did not call it that, it would be a false gospel that is hidden underneath orthodox language and as such would be even more dangerous to all those who hold to it. This has already happened and it started early in history, was clear in the Reformation, and has never stopped. In fact, it may be as strong in the professing Church as at any point in history. The doctrine of works has slipped into the professing Church in the guise of ‘free-will’ and goes virtually unchallenged. Even among the professing Reformed who hold to the Westminster Confession of Faith and others there is no real outcry against the doctrine of works that has been brought into the professing Church. In theory, anyway, it is considered to be a doctrinal error but it is not thought to be a direct assault on the Gospel of grace alone. So this teaching has slipped into the professing Church and is working away against the Gospel even by those who would deny it as true in their formal Confession.

A.W. Tozer has written of how our creeds can hide our true hearts from us. Our real creed which we hold deep in our heart can even be unknown to the way we think, but it is still there. So we can hide our real animosity toward the doctrine of grace alone in the heart by a doctrine of grace alone. We can hide our animosity toward the sovereignty of God in giving grace by a creed which affirms God’s sovereign grace. Even in those who deny ‘free-will’ in their creeds can still hold to it deep in their hearts and explain it away in theological language. In other words, the doctrine of ‘free-will’ is a teaching that can be rampant even in those with creedal statements against it. As Jeremiah 17:9-10 teaches us, our hearts are so deceptive that we cannot know what is in them. It is the LORD alone who knows what is in them and He alone can show that to us.

The heart is more deceitful than all else And is desperately sick; Who can understand it? 10 “I, the LORD, search the heart, I test the mind, Even to give to each man according to his ways, According to the results of his deeds” (Jer 17:9-10).

Romans 4, then, is not just teaching human beings what they must put in their creeds, but it is teaching them about the true nature of God and the true nature of man’s inability. Romans 4 is teaching man that need for the heart to reach the point of not trusting in self or its own choice but to stop working. Romans 4 is not saying that if we have a creed that teaches us to stop trusting in works that we will receive the gift of righteousness, but that if we really and truly have no trust in our works in the depths of our souls and really and truly look to God alone who gives a perfect righteousness to those who trust in Him alone then that person is declared just. But the person is not declared just because of anything that s/he believes as such, but instead it is totally based on what God has done in the soul of that person.

In an effort to be crystal clear, let this be said again. It is what grace does in the soul that matters rather than an intellectual belief alone. The efforts to get people in line with a creed is not unimportant in and of itself, but it is unimportant as compared with having the heart conformed to the work of grace in the soul. A person can believe that s/he must be born again to enter the kingdom, but it is not believing that truth that will work the grace of the new birth in the soul. A person must believe in the Gospel, but it is not just the intellectual belief of a few facts in a creed that saves. The creed describes what God does in the soul to save sinners, but it is not the intellectual belief of those things that saves. God must actually work those things in the soul before the soul is saved. So the soul must actually give up all hope in itself before it can have all hope in the grace of God. So the soul must actually stop working and must actually believe before it actually is granted the perfect righteousness of Christ.

To put it plainly, until a person actually has given up all hope in his or her own ability to contribute to salvation in any way, that person has not stopped working and as such cannot look to grace alone. God alone can work that in a soul and God works by grace alone. Not only must the soul give up all actual hope of contributing to salvation, that soul must actually look to grace and grace alone in truth. Regardless of the creed, a soul must actually be brought to no hope in self to be saved. The ‘free-will’ is never brought to that point and as such is a terrible danger to souls. A person looking to ‘freewill’ is not a person that has stopped working and is not a person that really believes that God justifies the truly ungodly.

In short, Paul sets ‘him that worketh’ and ‘him that worketh not’ side by side and leaves none in the middle between them. He declares that righteousness is not reckoned to him that worketh, but is reckoned to him that worketh not, if only he believes. There is no way by which ‘free-will,’ with its effort and endeavour, can dodge or escape; it must either be numbered with ‘him that worketh’ or with ‘him that worketh not.’ If with ‘him that worketh’, you have heard Paul say that righteousness is not reckoned to it, If with ‘him that worketh not, but believeth’ on God, righteousness is reckoned to it. But then it will not be the power of ‘free-will’, but a new creation by faith, and if righteousness is not reckoned to ‘him that worketh’, it becomes clear that his works are nothing but sins, evil and ungodly in God’s sight. (Luther, Bondage of the Will)

One thing that this text sets out with a great deal of clarity is that righteousness is not reckoned to the one that works, but instead to the one that does not work. This statement, though directly from Romans 4, was a direct, frontal attack on Roman Catholicism in Luther’s day and on any teaching of any time which has the works of human beings contribute in any sense of way to justification. This shows once again how important the doctrine of the enslaved will is in any doctrine of justification. If the will is enslaved, it leaves sinners no way which it can dodge or escape at any point. It throws the sinner upon the mercy and grace of God with nothing in itself to trust in or look to. If the will is not enslaved, but instead has one little island of freedom left to its choice in the realm of salvation, then it can look to itself to do something in the realm of justification instead of resting in grace alone to do all that is needed. That one little something that is left to that one little island of freedom is a work of the flesh.

When Scripture sets out that sinners have righteousness reckoned or imputed to those that do not work but instead to the ungodly, something must be said to bow in humble brokenness or to try to fix a way to get around this text. If the only way of salvation is to have righteousness reckoned or imputed, then the will is not free to do anything of its own to obtain this righteousness and salvation is by grace and grace alone. A will that is free to obtain righteousness, even if on the basis of only one choice, is a completely different conception and way of obtaining righteousness than that of having no way but receiving it by the grace of God. In the modern day this seems overly precise and very harsh, but the Gospel of grace alone and the Gospel of the glory of God alone will not share glory with the wills of human beings.

Righteousness is only obtained by those who do not work (Rom 4:5). To repeat, using different words, righteousness is only given to those who do not work for it and look for it from grace alone. The difference between a true view of the enslaved will and those who leave that one little island of the will that is free enough to make one choice is enormous. It is the difference between working and not working. If the will is free enough to make one choice in order to obtain righteousness, then that will is still free enough to continue working for righteousness. This cannot be in the realm where the glory of God’s grace reigns. It is an overthrow of the biblical teaching of the Gospel. That one little act of the will that is free enough to make a choice means that righteousness is obtained by those who do one work and so Romans 4:5 is overthrown because it says that righteousness is only obtained by those who do not work.

Not only does the text say that “to the one that does not work…his faith is credited as righteousness,” but it says that it “believes in Him who justifies the ungodly.” So a true faith that because of its union with Christ is credited as righteousness is a faith that does not work and believes in Him who justifies the ungodly. The text limits the crediting of righteousness to those who do not work for righteousness and to those who believe in Him who justifies the ungodly. This is a complete overthrow of the one act of the ‘free-will’ to be saved theory. The ‘free-will’ cannot stop working as its very trust in itself is a work. The ‘free-will’ is not consistent with being ungodly in a total sense because it cannot admit that its free-choice is ungodly because if it is free enough to make a righteous choice it is not ungodly. It is also the case that the ‘free-will” looks to itself to obtain righteousness rather than to grace to actually give it by grace alone. The nature of true faith, then, is that it does not have one work to do and so it stops working for righteousness and it looks to God who justifies the ungodly. The nature of true faith is that it looks to God to do all the work in the soul and as such it does not look to itself. So the teaching of ‘free-will’ and the teaching of the enslaved will actually have a different view of the Gospel thought they may use a lot of the same language. We need to wake up and realize that the spirit of Erasmus has many followers while  Luther has few. While it is not such a major thing that people follow one man over another, it is the Gospel that Luther fought Erasmus over that is so vital. Luther thought that the teaching of ‘free-will’ was another gospel. Today, that is hardly even a blip on the screen. If Luther was correct about what Paul taught, our day is in deep darkness.

In short, Paul sets ‘him that worketh’ and ‘him that worketh not’ side by side and leaves none in the middle between them. He declares that righteousness is not reckoned to him that worketh, but is reckoned to him that worketh not, if only he believes. There is no way by which ‘free-will,’ with its effort and endeavour, can dodge or escape; it must either be numbered with ‘him that worketh’ or with ‘him that worketh not.’ If with ‘him that worketh’, you have heard Paul say that righteousness is not reckoned to it, If with ‘him that worketh not, but believeth’ on God, righteousness is reckoned to it. But then it will not be the power of ‘free-will’, but a new creation by faith, and if righteousness is not reckoned to ‘him that worketh’, it becomes clear that his works are nothing but sins, evil and ungodly in God’s sight. (Luther, Bondage of the Will)

Luther is taking two statements from Romans 4:1-6 and setting them side by side in order to show what is really going on in the text and how far the text actually reaches.

What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, has found? 2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? “ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS CREDITED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS.” 4 Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due. 5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness, 6 just as David also speaks of the blessing on the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works.

The reach of this text is to each and every work of human souls. Romans 4, quoting from Genesis, tells us that Abraham believed God and it was credited or reckoned or imputed to him as righteousness. Now, how was Abraham credited righteousness? The text first says (v. 2) that if he was justified by works he would have had something to boast about, but instead (v. 3) Abraham had righteousness credited to him. So Abraham obtained righteousness by faith and not by works, which means no works at all. If faith itself is a work, then justification is by one work. But the text says no works at all and so faith is not a work.

To the one that does work (v. 3), what that person receives is not credited as favor or grace, but simply what is due that person. But the text then sets out with great clarity that it is to the one that does not work but instead believes that this person is credited righteousness, and that is true because God credits righteousness apart from works. Now this passage is utterly devastating to the ‘free-will’ position. In fact, ‘free-will’ cannot survive in the avalanche of the truth of grace from this passage. To assert ‘free-will’ it has to be asserted that the will is free of grace at some point as well as total depravity so that the will can operate and function in its own power of choice. The word “free” means something in that context. What free power does the will have when the righteousness of God does not come by a work or any group of works together? If the will does operate free from grace, even if that is just the smallest amount of freedom, what it does is a work. But the text above teaches that God reckons or credits righteousness apart from works.
As Luther points out, the will is in one of two groups but not both. The ‘free-will’ is either in the group that does not work or in the group that does work. The text does not limit the group that does work to those who work totally for salvation, but simply to those that work at all. If the will has to be free in order to make a ‘free-will’ choice, then what it does while free of grace is a work of the flesh. So for a ‘free-will’ to make a choice it would necessarily be a work. Yet, according to Romans 4, righteousness is given to those that do not work. Luther taught in The Bondage of the Will and in the Heidelberg Disputation that a person must not trust in themselves or in their own ability in order to be saved. The Heidelberg Disputation puts it like this: “It is certain that man must utterly despair of his own ability before he is prepared to receive the grace of Christ.” It is not that the person must mostly despair of his or her own ability before s/he is prepared to receive grace, but that person must utterly despair of his or her own ability to receive grace that is all grace. Why is that? One reason is that until a person utterly despairs of his own ability that person is trusting in his own will which can do nothing but a work of the flesh. If a person is trusting in one work of the flesh, that person is not trusting in grace alone. In other words, a person trusting in his or her act of the ‘free-will’ is trusting in a work of the flesh rather than grace alone to be saved. The Gospel is that sinners are saved by grace alone and are given righteousness by grace alone and one work makes grace no longer to be grace. The teaching of ‘free-will’, therefore, is opposed to the Gospel of grace alone. The will that is bound, on the other hand, is necessary for justification to be by grace alone which is the only kind of grace there is.

What, pray, can be said for grace against ‘free-will’ clearly and plainly, if Paul’s discourse here is not clear and plain? He exalts grace against ‘free-will’ in categorical terms; using the clearest and simplest words, he says that we are justified freely, and that grace is not grace if procured by works. With the greatest plainness he excludes all works in the matter of justification, and so sets up grace alone, and justification that is free. Yet in this light we still seek darkness, and because we cannot give ourselves great credit, yes, all the credit, for justification, we try to give ourselves some tiny little credit—solely in order that we may gain that point that justification by the grace of God is not free and without works! As though Paul’s denial that any of our greater works contributes to our justification were not much more a denial that our tiny little works do so! Especially when he has laid it down that we are justified only by God’s grace, without any works—indeed, without the law, in which all works, great, small, congruently or condignly meritorious, are contained. (Luther, Bondage of the Will)

So with great plainness we have set out before us that grace is not grace if justification is procured by a work or by works. There is simply no way around this teaching of Paul and then set out and pointed to by Luther. To seek justification by one work of by man is to fall from grace as a way of justification (Gal 5:4). This is the way that all works and any work is excluded in justification and grace alone is set up and declared which means that there is no cause of justification found within the sinner. While sinners may not like this and certainly desire to leave things to where they can do one thing to move God to save them, but that is simply not the way of grace. For justification to be by grace alone there can be no cause in the sinner that would move God, but instead all causes are within God Himself. This is the way of grace alone.

So Paul, in his letters to the churches, was very clear about a justification by grace alone. But sinners have sought something that they could take credit for. Perhaps the most basic desire was not to have some tiny little credit, but to have some control of salvation so that I can do something in order not to be at the sovereign mercy of God. Sinners love to hear of grace, but not grace alone. Sinners love to hear of grace as available to them at their mere choice or prayer, but they hate to hear that grace alone means that it is God’s choice and not theirs. Indeed, in their battle against grace alone and for the ‘free-will’ they end up taking credit for that act of the will or choice, but the real issue is that sinners hate the true Gospel of grace alone and want a justification that is not by grace alone, that is not free of human cause, and is not free of all works in a categorical sense. But instead, sinners fight for ‘free-will’ in order that they may have some control of the situation which is to say that they want to be saved by their own choosing and have it left up to them. But that choosing comes at a great cost as seen before. In rejecting a free of cause justification the sinner sets up the cause within himself and as such rejects grace alone. In rejecting a grace alone salvation the sinner sets up himself as having the ability to choose which is a work. That makes grace to be no longer grace and is destructive to a justification by grace alone.

It seems so clear that setting up ‘free-will’ instead of grace destroys the true Gospel. Paul sets out so clearly that justification is by grace alone and apart from any works for justification at all. While the Galatians had the Judaizers come in and try to say that it was grace plus the one work of circumcision, Paul said that the one work meant that they had fallen from grace as a way of justification and were now obligated to keep the whole Law. This is the point that we must keep returning to over and over. If one act of the ‘free-will’ (which amounts to one tiny work) is necessary to be saved, then keeping the whole Law is necessary for that will. Nothing can be added to grace and still have grace alone.

Luther’s words (or something like them) must be ringing in our ears if we are to maintain a clear Gospel of grace alone. “We are justified only by God’s grace, without any works—indeed, without the law, in which all works, great, small, congruently or condignly meritorious, are contained.” If the Gospel of grace alone is to be preached in our day or in any day, it must be preached in such a way that we make it plain and very clear that a grace apart from the law means a grace that is apart from any and all works no matter how small and even inconsequential we think our one little work may be. It should also be made clear to people that they may be trusting in something other than grace alone so grace needs to deliver sinners from faith in self. It is not that grace is just a concept that  the brain must believe in, but grace is a reality of God and it must actually do the work in the soul so that the soul will not trust in anything of self or done by self.

What, pray, can be said for grace against ‘free-will’ clearly and plainly, if Paul’s discourse here is not clear and plain? He exalts grace against ‘free-will’ in categorical terms; using the clearest and simplest words, he says that we are justified freely, and that grace is not grace if procured by works. With the greatest plainness he excludes all works in the matter of justification, and so sets up grace alone, and justification that is free. Yet in this light we still seek darkness, and because we cannot give ourselves great credit, yes, all the credit, for justification, we try to give ourselves some tiny little credit—solely in order that we may gain that point that justification by the grace of God is not free and without works! As though Paul’s denial that any of our greater works contributes to our justification were not much more a denial that our tiny little works do so! Especially when he has laid it down that we are justified only by God’s grace, without any works—indeed, without the law, in which all works, great, small, congruently or condignly meritorious, are contained. (Luther, Bondage of the Will)

Luther sets out that Paul exalted grace against ‘free-will’ in categorical terms, which is to say that he exalted grace in all ways and at all times over and against ‘free-will.’ In that context, then, we can see that Luther believed that Paul set out that sinners are justified freely and by that meant that sinners are justified by grace apart from any cause in the sinner contributing to justification or to the procuring of salvation. For a sinner to be declared just by God there must be a basis in pure and holy justice for that declaration. Sinners are declared just by God on the basis of one of three possibilities:
              1. Sinners are declared just on the basis of works.
              2. Sinners are declared just on the basis of grace apart from works (grace alone).
              3. Sinners are declared just on the basis of a mixture of grace and works, or perhaps grace plus one work.

The doctrine of the Reformation that justification was by grace apart from works (grace alone) was built or came from many passages of Scripture. As seen in previous posts on this subject, Romans 3:24; 4:16, and 11:6 play a large part in this teaching. From Romans 3:24 it is seen that justification is a gift by His grace, which really means that the sinner is declared just apart from any cause found within himself. That is a vitally important passage. From Romans 4:16 it is seen that the reason that sinners are justified by faith is so that justification can be by grace. It is so clear that if faith is a work of the ‘free-will’ then salvation cannot be by grace alone and so faith would defeat its very own purpose. From Romans 11:6 it is seen that any work added to grace makes grace no longer to be grace. So if faith is the work of a ‘free-will’ it means that salvation is not only no longer by grace alone, but it is not by grace at all.

As we look at a few parts of justification we can see that the wrath of God on sinners for their sin must be propitiated by Christ or there is no way that the wrath of God can be removed. Romans 3:24-25 declares that Christ is the propitiation set out by God and that it is by the blood of Christ. Does the act of the ‘free-will’ have any way of removing all of its sin or even the smallest part of one sin? No, it is apart from the human will and it is an act of God in Christ and as such it is all by grace and grace alone. If not by grace alone, it is not by grace at all.

In moving to Romans 4 we see that the imputation or reckoning of God’s righteousness to sinners. In Romans 3 we have seen that Christ is the only way to remove the wrath of God in His propitiatory work on the cross. Now we see that sinners must have a perfect righteousness in order to be declared just by God, but that must come by grace alone as well. For example, in Romans 4:4-4 we see this: “Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due. 5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness.” To the person that works, that person does not receive grace but as what the person earns. So if the ‘free-will’ must come up with faith or a choice on its own, then that act of faith or choice actually does something to obtain righteousness in a way that is not by grace alone.

Romans 4:5 (see previous paragraph) is perhaps even more clear. It is to the person that does not work that faith is credited as righteousness. The text does not say that it is to the person that does not work totally for grace, but it simply says that it is the person that does not work. The clear implication is that it is to the person that does not work at all. But of course the person with the ‘free-will’ would be a person that had at least one work, but to go beyond that if the will is still free after justification then what does that will do during sanctification? It would still be working. So the will that is free enough to make one choice (because God must have men be that free, they say) must still be free for all other choices as well. This leaves a justification and a sanctification that is littered with the works of men and simply and clearly does away with any real meaning of grace alone.

For a sinner to be justified the sinner must have the wrath of God taken away and must be given a perfect righteousness. These must happen on the basis of works, the basis of grace alone, or on a mixture of the two. If any one work (as in Romans 11:6) mixed with grace makes grace no longer to be grace, then any mixture of the two destroys any teaching of grace alone. That leaves us with a system of works or a system of grace alone. The teaching of ‘free-will’ is part of a system of works and cannot be torn from the grasp of works. Therefore, anyone who wants to believe and proclaim a true Gospel of grace alone must deny that ‘free-will’ has any part of salvation at all. Grace alone means that it is really God alone and He will not share His glory with anyone. That means that He will not share the slightest bit with the ‘free-will’ of man. It is no wonder that John Owen referred to ‘free-will’ as an idol. It leaves men trusting in the idol of self rather than completely dependent on God alone.

What, pray, can be said for grace against ‘free-will’ clearly and plainly, if Paul’s discourse here is not clear and plain? He exalts grace against ‘free-will’ in categorical terms; using the clearest and simplest words, he says that we are justified freely, and that grace is not grace if procured by works. With the greatest plainness he excludes all works in the matter of justification, and so sets up grace alone, and justification that is free. Yet in this light we still seek darkness, and because we cannot give ourselves great credit, yes, all the credit, for justification, we try to give ourselves some tiny little credit—solely in order that we may gain that point that justification by the grace of God is not free and without works! As though Paul’s denial that any of our greater works contributes to our justification were not much more a denial that our tiny little works do so! Especially when he has laid it down that we are justified only by God’s grace, without any works—indeed, without the law, in which all works, great, small, congruently or condignly meritorious, are contained. (Luther, Bondage of the Will)

Luther had a very strong position for grace and against ‘free-will’ and was bold in setting it out. He did not play games on this issue and he was certainly not what people thought of as gracious when it came to grace and ‘free-will.’ He stood for grace and simply thought that if you stood for true grace you would be against ‘free-will’ since there was no middle ground. The Gospel of grace alone meant what it said that that no ‘free-will’ could be mixed with grace and that one would still have grace alone. Below are some positions that Luther took in the famed Heidelberg Disputation. His view of ‘free-will’ can be seen in these.

1. Free will, after the fall, exists in name only, and as long as it does what it is able to do, it commits a mortal sin.
2. Free will, after the fall, has power to do good only in a passive capacity, but it can always do evil in an active capacity.
3. Nor could free will remain in a state of innocence, much less do good, in an active capacity, but only in its passive capacity.
4. The person who believes that he can obtain grace by doing what is in him adds sin to sin so that he becomes doubly guilty.
5. Nor does speaking in this manner give cause for despair, but for arousing the desire to humble oneself and seek the grace of Christ.
6. It is certain that man must utterly despair of his own ability before he is prepared to receive the grace of Christ.

Can grace be obtained by a ‘free-will’ in any way if the only thing the will can do is sin? Can the ‘free-will’ do anything acceptable to God since the only power it has is to do evil? Can grace be obtained by a ‘free-will’ when by acting on that will adds to the debt and guilt of the person? Can grace be obtained by an act of the ‘free-will’ if it is true that a man must utterly despair of his own ability before he is prepared to receive grace? As long as sinners do not give up hope in their ‘free-wills’ they will hope in their will which makes it impossible to rest in grace alone. As long as sinners do not give up hope in the ability of their ‘free-wills’ they will trust in their own ability which makes it impossible to rest in grace alone.

For Luther, and I would argue Paul also, to speak of keeping the Law or works of the Law would necessarily involve speaking or at least implying something of the working of the will. The Law came to show men their sin and show them their inability so that they would go to Christ. The Law did not come to show men that they can kept it, but that they are wicked and vile sinners and cannot keep it. When Paul said that sinners were justified by faith apart from the Law the inescapable conclusion is that sinners are justified by faith apart from the ‘free-will’ as well. In other words, this fits with #6 above. Human souls must despair of any hope in themselves, of their own ability and their own will in order to rest in grace alone. It is not good enough for the Gospel of grace alone for the sinner to trust in his own will and ability to do one thing, but instead it is by grace alone. It is not good enough for a sinner to mostly rest in Christ and even 99.999% in Christ. The Gospel is of Christ alone and grace alone to the glory of God alone. As Paul wrote and Luther points to, this would make “grace to be not grace.” Paul was so clear that to trust in one work was to fall from grace as a way of salvation in Galatians. Luther has echoed Paul in this matter. The modern professing Church as not echoed Paul or Luther, and that includes many of the professing Reformed. The doctrine of ‘free-will’ cannot be reconciled to the Gospel of the Reformation nor with the Gospel of grace alone in the Bible. People must be awakened to this or in the name of ‘free-will’ or being gracious to others the door of hell will remain wide open in the name of a false gospel.

What, pray, can be said for grace against ‘free-will’ clearly and plainly, if Paul’s discourse here is not clear and plain? He exalts grace against ‘free-will’ in categorical terms; using the clearest and simplest words, he says that we are justified freely, and that grace is not grace if procured by works. With the greatest plainness he excludes all works in the matter of justification, and so sets up grace alone, and justification that is free. Yet in this light we still seek darkness, and because we cannot give ourselves great credit, yes, all the credit, for justification, we try to give ourselves some tiny little credit—solely in order that we may gain that point that justification by the grace of God is not free and without works! As though Paul’s denial that any of our greater works contributes to our justification were not much more a denial that our tiny little works do so! Especially when he has laid it down that we are justified only by God’s grace, without any works—indeed, without the law, in which all works, great, small, congruently or condignly meritorious, are contained. (Luther, Bondage of the Will)

While it is unusual for the modern mind to think of there being a problem putting ‘free-will’ together with free-grace, Luther shows how the two cannot fit together in reality. The real issue at hand, then, is for people to come to grips with a true understanding of ‘free-will’ and free-grace. Luther says that Paul “exalts grace against ‘free-will’ in categorical terms.” What does that mean in a practical sense? It means that Paul exalts grace against ‘free-will’ in all manners, in all ways, and at all times. If grace is exalted in categorical terms, then there is no room for ‘free-will’ in the matter of justification specifically and salvation in general. Another way to look at this would be to say that wherever grace is exalted in truth, ‘free-will’ is denied and trampled on in truth. Grace and ‘free-will’ are two opposing streams of thought and cannot be reconciled. Again, whatever is of grace cannot be by works in any way. Whatever is of grace cannot be by the work of a ‘free-will’ because a will that is truly free is one that is free from sin and grace and so it cannot be by grace alone. By definition these things cannot go together, so when Paul exalts free-grace in categorical terms he is categorically denying ‘free-will’ in terms of its ability to procure grace.

Romans 11:6 sets out this teaching very plainly by saying that “if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace.” This is a categorical denial of any power to anything but that of grace. If the Gospel is of grace alone apart from works, then the Gospel is of grace alone apart from ‘free-will’ too. Any denial of a work or works in the context of the Gospel of grace alone is a denial of the ‘free-will’ since it is the will that does a work. As Luther notes, this categorical use of grace denies any hope or any trust in then will and its choices and works. When one peels back the blindness about grace in the sense that it denies that grace simply finishes what human beings lack, it is seen that ‘free-will’ and the works of that will is not just inconsistent with free-grace, but contradicts free-grace.

Another place where Paul exalts free-grace in a categorical way is Romans 3:24 where he says that sinners are “justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus.” This is a passage which has been dealt with in previous posts, but it makes the point again. If we interpreted this passage literally it would read something like “being justified without cause by His grace.” This tells us that there is no cause within the sinner that justifies the sinner and the only cause of salvation is grace alone. The teaching of ‘free-will’ declares that there is a cause found in the sinner and that is the one little work of the choice or decision of the ‘free-will.’ But if the teaching of ‘free-will’ is correct, then Paul could not have asserted that there is no cause but grace in justification. God does not wait for the sinner to make a choice of the will in order to declare the sinner just, but God changes the heart of the sinner and unites that sinner to Christ apart from any cause in the sinner to do so.

Another way to approach this glorious teaching of the Gospel of free-grace is to look at the nature of grace in the sense that grace is not just some power operating in the universe, but grace is an attribute of God. When grace is shown, it is God showing Himself. When grace is exerted, it is God that is exerting Himself. So when it is said that the Gospel is a Gospel of free-grace, what is really being said (if one understands it) is that the Gospel is all of God and is in accordance with the grace of God who is gracious to whom He will be gracious. When the Scriptures teach that sinners are “justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus,” they are exalting the beauty and glory of God who saves sinners according to Himself. To assert grace alone, then, is to assert that the Gospel is all about what God as triune has planned and accomplished and what God as triune applies. The weak and miserable action of a choice of the ‘free-will’  not only is not  needed, but it  is also enmity against God.

What, pray, can be said for grace against ‘free-will’ clearly and plainly, if Paul’s discourse here is not clear and plain? He exalts grace against ‘free-will’ in categorical terms; using the clearest and simplest words, he says that we are justified freely, and that grace is not grace if procured by works. With the greatest plainness he excludes all works in the matter of justification, and so sets up grace alone, and justification that is free. Yet in this light we still seek darkness, and because we cannot give ourselves great credit, yes, all the credit, for justification, we try to give ourselves some tiny little credit—solely in order that we may gain that point that justification by the grace of God is not free and without works! As though Paul’s denial that any of our greater works contributes to our justification were not much more a denial that our tiny little works do so! Especially when he has laid it down that we are justified only by God’s grace, without any works—indeed, without the law, in which all works, great, small, congruently or condignly meritorious, are contained. (Luther, Bondage of the Will)

What a powerful and virtually unanswerable statement by Luther. There are, however, some things that are between the lines or perhaps could be said to be an undercurrent that is the energy that carries what is on the surface along. What must be seen is that Luther asserts that justification is by grace alone apart from any and all works. The teaching of ‘free-will,’ even the slightest bit of it, is in direct opposition to the words of Paul and his teachings on grace alone. If the Gospel includes the fact that sinners are justified by grace alone, then the Gospel excludes any help from the ‘free-will’ in all cases and in all ways. This is to say that Luther believed that the Gospel of justification by grace alone could not be preached apart from the bondage of the human will and apart from the utter helplessness of human souls in sin. Another issue, seen from previous writings of Luther and postings on those writings, is that this grace is always sovereign grace. So when Luther speaks of Paul exalting grace against works, he is setting out the real issue which is the grace of a sovereign God which lacks nothing in Christ versus something a human being can add to it or merit.

When grace is exalted, it is the glory of God’s grace that is being exalted. We must look below the surface of the words to see what is going on. God saves to the praise of the glory of His grace (Eph 1:5-6) and not based on any works or any single work of the human being. The grace of God is so glorious and so exalted that it must never have any human being contribute to the procurement of it. Luther is so clear that “grace is not grace if procured by works,” which comes from and is based on Romans 11:6. When Paul teaches that the soul is justified or saved by grace apart from works, he meant each and every work of the human soul. A soul that is saved by grace alone must be saved apart from one work and even a partial work in order for it to be by grace alone. The grace of God points back to the fact that salvation is entirely of God and man can do nothing to add to who god is. The grace of God points to the fact that salvation is entirely of the works of Christ which totally and in every way procures salvation for all those who are truly saved.

The word “procure” is a word that brings the teaching of ‘free-will’ out of the darkness and into the light so that it may shrivel into the nothingness that it is and any hope that a poor sinner has in it may die. To procure is the action of obtaining something. It is not just the purchase of something; it is also the actual acquiring of what was purchased. Can the ‘free-will’ actually purchase any part of its own redemption? Can the ‘free-will’ actually acquire what Christ has purchased? Now it can be seen what the ‘free-will’ must do if it is to do anything in the realm of salvation. In order for the ‘free-will’ to have a part in the salvation of the soul, it must at least have the ability to actually purchase part of its own salvation or to actually acquire and obtain the purchased salvation. It is precisely this which Paul and then Luther denied ever so strongly. But it is this point that the adherents of ‘free-will’ must defend if their teaching is going to mean anything meaningful at all.

As long as any person claims that ‘free-will’ has anything to do with salvation, that person must demonstrate where grace is lacking in either the purchase or the procurement (obtaining/acquiring) of that salvation. As Luther pointed out which he based on Romans 11:6, “grace is not grace if procured by works.” How many claim today that Christ has purchased the whole of salvation but that the actual obtaining of it depends on the act of the ‘free-will.’ What they are missing, however, is that Christ’s purchase included the procuring of salvation. The only way that salvation can be obtained or procured is by the Holy Spirit applying what Christ purchased and that is by grace alone. One cannot hold to ‘free-will’ and still hold to a Gospel of grace alone in truth.

For if we are justified without works, all works are condemned, whether small or great; Paul exempts none, but thunders impartially against all. (Luther, Bondage of the Will)

Luther, in his statements like the one above, was himself thundering against all works and any one work for salvation. His work, from which the above quote came from, was a defense of the biblical teaching on The Bondage of the Will. He wrote that work to defend the doctrine of justification by faith apart from works which was necessary in order to maintain the doctrine of salvation by grace alone. In other words, the teaching of the bondage of the will was and is the connection between two main teachings He was absolutely sure of. Those two teachings He thought were the main springs of Christianity. One, that man was totally and utterly helpless in sin. Two, it was a verity that grace alone could save and that grace was a sovereign grace. The teaching that man has a ‘free-will’ denies both of those teachings and as such is an attack on the Gospel of grace alone. Luther wrote his book in a defense of the Gospel itself. Since Luther saw that the doctrine of the bondage of the will was necessary to maintain the Gospel because it is the point where the depravity of man and the grace of God connect. The Gospel of grace apart from works is not a teaching that falls in some vacuum, but instead it is all about the character of God and the nature of human beings. Paul and Luther thundered against all works and any one work for salvation because any work or all works undermined the truth of the Gospel of grace alone.

Romans 3:24 being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus;
Gal 5:2 Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you 3 And I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law. 4 You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.

Ephesians 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9 not as a result of works, so that no one may boast. 10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.
Titus 3:7 so that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.

In the verses above it is quite clear that sinners are justified by grace and grace alone. There is no work possible when something is by grace alone. If a person seeks to be justified by works of the law or a work of the law, that person has fallen from grace in the sense that the person is not seeking justification on the basis of grace alone. Remember, Paul started off the book of Galatians stating that if an angel or anyone else preached a different gospel, that person was to be eternally cursed (Gal 1:6-8). The Judaizers believed that one could not be saved apart from being circumcised. So it is this one work that Paul is primarily going after in the book of Galatians.

It is quite clear from Galatians 5:2-4 that this one work of circumcision did not mean that it was grace plus one little thing, but Paul said that those who did that one little thing had fallen from grace as a way of salvation but that they were also under obligation to keep the whole Law. This is a powerful and even stunning point made by Paul. There are two ways of salvation. One is totally, wholly, and only by grace alone and the second is totally, wholly and only by works alone. There can be no mixing of the two at all. To seek justification by grace alone means that the soul must leave all works behind and look to grace alone. To seek justification by works alone means to leave grace behind and seek it by works alone. It is one or the other, it cannot be by both. If the soul wanted to rest or trust in one work, then the soul was obligated to the system of works for salvation. The soul could not try to add one work to grace because that would mean it was no longer by grace alone and that one work meant that the soul had only one way of salvation left to it and that was by works.

Indeed Luther and those who believe that he was accurate on what he wrote on the Gospel may sound crazy and very narrow. But are they narrower than the Bible itself? No, Scripture sets out two ways of salvation and two only. One is by grace alone where Christ has earned salvation as a whole and gives it by grace alone. The second is by the works of each individual person. To have grace alone a person must give up all works in every sense for justification. Adding one work to grace means that the person has fallen from grace alone and is now obligated to works as a system for salvation. That is why Paul and then Luther so thundered on these subjects. That is why Luther was so opposed to the teaching of ‘free-will.” That one little act of the so-called ‘free-will’ moved a person from trusting in grace alone to a system of obligation to works apart from grace. It is that important and it is that vital. A person that allows for a theology that asserts ‘free-will’ to be considered as the Gospel is not standing for the Gospel of grace alone. It would be to be thought of as gracious while it attacks the truth of grace itself.

For if we are justified without works, all works are condemned, whether small or great; Paul exempts none, but thunders impartially against all. (Luther, Bondage of the Will)

One of the great dangers of ‘free-will’ is that it demands that salvation is by grace plus one little work. Over and over the Scripture speaks of souls being justified by faith. Do the Scriptures mean that it is faith that justifies or that it is the person who has faith is justified by Christ alone and grace alone? It is clearly the latter. For the will to be truly free and so come up with faith itself it must have the ability to manufacture one work or one part of one work apart from grace. It is that little work that goes against the whole of Scripture. When Scripture defines or sets out that to be justified by faith means to be justified by faith apart from works, we must not then go on to say that when Scripture says in other places that a person is justified by faith that we can simply forget the “no works” part. Faith for justification is opposed to one or many works at all for justification. A true faith will lead to works, but one is not saved or justified by those works. The faith that saves or is the instrument God uses to justify sinners is opposed to any and all works that are for salvation or that try to help in salvation. The glory is all His and just on e smallest work spoils grace alone.

Romans 3:28 For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law.
Romans 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness,

Galatians 2:16 nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified.
Gal 3:24 Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith.

Ephesians 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9 not as a result of works, so that no one may boast. 10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.

While many good (at least outwardly) people try to cry out that salvation is by grace alone and Christ alone, they spoil that with their staunch defense of ‘free-will.’ Not only do they spoil it, they totally ruin it at least in terms of concept. God justifies sinners on the basis of faith because He justifies sinners by grace alone and Christ alone. There is no act of the human will that is apart from grace that one can add to grace and still think that it is grace alone that saves. There is no act of the human will that is apart from the power of Christ and the cross of Christ that one can add to the work of Christ and still think that salvation is by Christ alone. The Law was given for the purpose of showing men that they could not do works to be saved, but that has left so many who now just trust in the one work of the will in choosing or in coming up with faith in order to be saved. This little bit of the human will is like leaven which works itself all through the dough. Instead of this one little bit of the human will pointing to grace, it spoils grace because it demands something for itself.

There are many professing believers today who would cry out with vigor if someone tried to bring in one work that man is to do to be saved. They would be indignant if someone said that one is saved by grace plus tithing. They would be indignant if people cried out that people are saved by grace plus attending church. But there is barely a peep (if that) heard when people assert that one is saved by grace that requires an act of the ‘free-will.’ What does grace require of human souls? It does not require an act of the ‘free-will’ because the will is not free to do anything. The whole soul must be regenerated by grace alone before there will be faith. The grace of God is not dependent on the ‘free-will’ of man for it to act, but instead the will of man is dependent on the grace of God to enable it to act. In that case, then, the will is not free but instead it is totally dependent on grace. The ‘free-will’ position leaves man in a position of depending on his own will and that makes it a work. Paul, as Luther said, thundered against many works or one work because he said the soul was justified apart from works. ‘Free-will’ is a work of the human will and so Paul thundered against it as well. The Gospel of Christ is of grace alone through faith alone which means that it is apart from the works of the will or one work of the will. ‘Free-will’ is a work that is brought in to the Gospel and as such makes it a different gospel. Paul and then Luther stood against that.