God Loves… Himself

Paul now proceeds to put on record that he is speaking of every man, and of the best and most excellent men most of all. These are his words: ‘that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world become guilty before God; for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified in His sight’ (Rom 3:19-20). How, pray, are all mouths stopped, if a power that gives us a degree of ability is left to us? One could then say to God; it is not the case that there is nothing at all here; here is something which You cannot condemn, seeing that you have given it a degree of ability. Its mouth at least will not be silenced, nor will it be subject to Your wrath. For if the power of ‘free-will’ is unimpaired and capable of effective action, it is false to say the whole world is guilty and answerable before God. This power is no small thing in a small corner of the world, but is the most excellent thing and the most universal; and its mouth must not be stopped! (Luther, Bondage of the Will)

The focus of this section will be on one sentence of Luther: “How, pray, are all mouths stopped, if a power that gives us a degree of ability is left to us?” In the modern day we are more afraid of offending men than God. We walk around quietly and with great care in order not to “offend” anyone that we are trying to “win for Christ.” So instead of telling these people the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help us God, we water things down in order to make it more palatable for their sinful and self-centered hearts. If the point of the Law, according to Paul, is to shut the mouths of men and that the whole world would be guilty before God, then who are we not to apply the Law in its real application to the souls of men so that their mouths would be shut when they see just how guilty and helpless they are before God? They will not see the depths of their guilt until they see their helplessness.

Samuel Walker (born 1714) was a man greatly used of God during his life. He was a minister from 1738-1746 in churches and then in 1746 he became pastor of a church in Truro. He had been a pastor in Truro for about a year (which means he was a pastor for 8-9 years) before he was converted. He tells us that he had historical notions of the doctrines of the gospel, and he knew that a person needed the work of the Spirit. He said that he knew these things “notionally,” but he did not know or teach them practically. He came under increasing conviction of sin and was led to finally know the truth. After so many years of being deceived by his own heart, he then began to search the hearts of those around him and proclaim the true Gospel. This brought intense persecution.

What we want to note at this point is that as long as we leave souls with even a little wiggle room they will take it. As long as we leave them the slightest bit of ability they will use it to deceive their own hearts and deceive themselves about their own work, ability, and salvation. Samuel Walker taught people the necessity of coming to a point of recognizing and coming under the weight of their own sin and original sin. He describes it thus: “That it is a state of impotence as to all conversion towards God, both because God being unknown, there can be no motive to turn unto Him, and also because under the bias of corrupt nature the will does freely and continually choose only the things contrary to Him” (Practical Christianity Illustrated, International Outreach).

As long as the soul thinks it has a little power to choose or a little ability to come to Christ, it will continue to trust in that little ability and remain unbroken and unhumbled. A soul that has that little power to choose or that little ability to come to Christ will not and cannot trust in Christ alone and grace alone. This is the dirty little secret that people don’t want to let out of the closet in the modern day. We think that if people are preaching the truth about Christ and are holding out Christ as the way of salvation that they are orthodox. But they are not. It matters not how much one preaches Christ and the depths of orthodoxy in terms of doctrine if one does not set out to teach people (experimentally) that they are truly dead in sin and have no power or ability in themselves. One can be quite Reformed in all doctrines and yet miss it all by missing this one vital link. So many Reformed people today are friendly with Pelagians and Arminians and link arms to work with them in the Gospel, but in doing so they miss this vital point. Men must be brought to an utter end of all hope in self and all hope in their own ability before their mouths will be shut. Until that happens they will not be at a place where they truly can look to Christ alone by grace alone. They will still look to themselves and when you try to mix grace with one little work you end up with no grace at all. Either the whole world is totally guilty or it is not. Either the whole world has its mouth shut totally or it does not. In order to preach the grace of the Gospel and the Christ of the Gospel we must preach in order to drive men from themselves totally. Until men’s mouths are totally shut they cannot rest totally in Christ.

Paul now proceeds to put on record that he is speaking of every man, and of the best and most excellent men most of all. These are his words: ‘that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world become guilty before God; for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified in His sight’ (Rom 3:19-20). How, pray, are all mouths stopped, if a power that gives us a degree of ability is left to us? One could then say to God; it is not the case that there is nothing at all here; here is something which You cannot condemn, seeing that you have given it a degree of ability. Its mouth at least will not be silenced, nor will it be subject to Your wrath. For if the power of ‘free-will’ is unimpaired and capable of effective action, it is false to say the whole world is guilty and answerable before God. This power is no small thing in a small corner of the world, but is the most excellent thing and the most universal; and its mouth must not be stopped! (Luther, Bondage of the Will)

We have to think just a little in order to follow Luther at this point. While Luther appeared to be something like a volcano at times and erupt into words, this book is not one of those times. He shows that he is a man capable of precise reasoning in places. In places like the section above, we see a man who looks past just the appearance of words and looks to what they mean and what must be true since they are true. What must be true since it is true “that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world become guilty before God”? What is true, Luther tells us, is that for the mouth to be stopped in truth and reality then there must be no ability of the will left to do good.

There is an undercurrent going on here that may not be obvious to the one that reads Scripture or Luther quickly. Is there nothing in the world that is good? God created the world and all things in it and then declared it good. After the fall, however, is there anything good left? Is there an island in the will of human beings that is not fallen and therefore is free to do good as it pleases? Is there an island left in the will of human beings that has enough good to choose good and do good as it pleases? Romans 3:12 has already dealt with that: “ALL HAVE TURNED ASIDE, TOGETHER THEY HAVE BECOME USELESS; THERE IS NONE WHO DOES GOOD, THERE IS NOT EVEN ONE.” The Scripture speaks and tells us that there is none (no one) who does good, not even one. One would think that the case would be closed at this point. If no one does good, then can we say that all human beings are free to do good but that they just don’t want to? The Divine declaration is that no one does good. In other words, what God calls good as opposed to man no man does it because no man can do it.

Luther goes on to point out that not all mouths would indeed be stopped if man can do good of his own will in which there is some little island of good left. If some little degree of ability to do good is left in man, then it is not the case that the mouth of men are closed. Men could simply step out and start doing good and show God that they are good and can do good and so show that they have ability to do so. They could then run their mouths about that rather than close them. They could run their mouths and say that they do have good in them and that they are not totally reliant upon Christ and upon the Gospel to be saved. They could run their mouths and say that they have good in them and that they can do righteous things and not depend utterly on Christ for righteousness. They could run their mouths and say that they don’t need grace alone to bring them to Christ and they don’t need Christ alone as a sacrifice for all that they have done (just some) and they don’t need the imputed righteousness of Christ alone (they have some good works that come from that ability in their will) to be declared righteous.

Luther helps us dive to a deeper depth of the words in Romans 3 and see that for those words to be true there can be no ability of the human will to do good. Can any human being be justified in His sight at any point and time? Can any human being be justified in His sight for any one good thing done? Can any human being be partially (even a very little) justified in His sight because that human being can do good from that little island of goodness left in the will so it has the ability to do good? As with Sodom and Gomorrah, God was willing not to destroy the place for the few righteous in it. If there is any good left in a will so that it is free to do good, then it is not true that God can declare the whole human as having no good and no ability to do good. The assertion of ‘free-will’ stands opposed to Scripture, the teaching of total depravity, and the Gospel of grace alone and Christ alone. It is like yeast which will permeate all things that it is around and eventually take over the Gospel. That is precisely what it has done in the United States. It has permeated every aspect of biblical truth and so many are willing to think of it (‘free-will’) as part of orthodoxy now. But in reality what it does is strike at the very roots of historic and biblical Christianity.

It is certainly what God aims at in the disposition of things in redemption, (if we allow the Scriptures to be a revelation of God’s mind) that God should appear full, and man in himself empty, that God should appear all, and man nothing. It is God’s declared design that others should not “glory in his presence;” which implies that it is his design to advance his own comparative glory. So much the more man glories in God’s presence, so much the less glory is ascribed to God.

By its being thus ordered, that the creature should have so absolute and universal a dependence on God, provision is made that God should have our whole souls, and should be the object of our undivided respect. If we had our dependence partly on God, and partly on something else, man’s respect would be divided to those different things on which he had dependence. Thus it would be if we depended on God only for a part of our good, and on ourselves, or some other being, for another part: or if we had our good only from God, and through another that was not God, and in something else distinct from both, our hearts would be divided between the good itself, and him from whom, and him through whom, we received it. But now there is no occasion for this, God being not only he from or of whom we have all good, but also through whom, and is that good itself, that we have from him and through him. So that whatsoever there is to attract our respect, the tendency is still directly towards God, all unites in him as the centre. (Jonathan Edwards, God Glorified in Man’s Dependence)

It is utterly vital to see what Luther and Edwards teach on this issue. Luther blasts away at ‘free-will’ because he knows that salvation is by grace alone and as long as human souls rest in any amount in their ‘free-will’ they will not look to grace alone. Edwards is setting out how vital it is that human beings should depend totally on God and be in utter dependence upon Him. He does this for the same reasons that Luther does, though in a different way. As long as human souls have any dependence on themselves (‘free-will’ is depending on self for something), they are not depending totally on God and His grace.

The human soul is born dead in sin and trespasses. The very nature of sin is seen in its pride and independence as it lives for itself and by itself. The human soul wants to depend on itself rather than God which is the soul doing what it does to its own glory which is sin (Rom 3:23). This is one reason why God hates self-righteousness so much. It is not that human beings can earn righteousness in and of themselves, but it is the human soul trying to be righteous in its own strength and being independent of God which is the soul trying to be like God. God alone is self-existent and thus has no need of anyone or anything other than Himself. He has created human beings in total dependence upon Himself for anything spiritual or good, yet they have struck out on their own in an effort to depend on themselves. This is what Eve did when she looked upon the fruit and saw that it was desirable to make one wise (Genesis 3).

The Gospel is not just God’s effort to save men from hell, but the Gospel is the way of God to save men from their own dependence on self and to depend on Him entirely. The Gospel comes to sinners who are totally unable to save themselves in any way or to contribute the smallest thing to their salvation. If the sinner has one little spot of power in him or her that is good enough to do one thing apart from God, then salvation is not totally and utterly of God and the sinner is not in utter dependence upon God and His grace alone.

While some may thing God is egotistical in being like that, the reality of the matter is that it describes God for who He really is. He is absolutely sovereign and He is absolutely self-existent in all ways. There is no source of good or of spiritual life or power that does not come from Him. When man tries to assert his ‘free-will’ or independence, man is lying about the reality of who God is and who man is. The Gospel in reality brings proud man to his knees and on his face in turning him from any hope in self or any dependence in self. Grace is not God’s helping man out in places where man cannot help himself, but grace is God stripping man of any hope in self and turning man back to an utter dependence on Him. The doctrine of ‘free-will’ is nothing more than an act of defiance in independence on man’s part in the face of God who alone is independent. How sinners must be brought off of any dependence on themselves in any way (including any hope or dependence on their so-called ‘free-will’) in order to depend totally on God and His grace alone. Until the sinner is resting in grace alone apart from himself in all ways that sinner is not trusting in Christ alone and is rebellion against God and the Gospel of God.

It is certainly what God aims at in the disposition of things in redemption, (if we allow the Scriptures to be a revelation of God’s mind) that God should appear full, and man in himself empty, that God should appear all, and man nothing. It is God’s declared design that others should not “glory in his presence;” which implies that it is his design to advance his own comparative glory. So much the more man glories in God’s presence, so much the less glory is ascribed to God.

By its being thus ordered, that the creature should have so absolute and universal a dependence on God, provision is made that God should have our whole souls, and should be the object of our undivided respect. If we had our dependence partly on God, and partly on something else, man’s respect would be divided to those different things on which he had dependence. Thus it would be if we depended on God only for a part of our good, and on ourselves, or some other being, for another part: or if we had our good only from God, and through another that was not God, and in something else distinct from both, our hearts would be divided between the good itself, and him from whom, and him through whom, we received it. But now there is no occasion for this, God being not only he from or of whom we have all good, but also through whom, and is that good itself, that we have from him and through him. So that whatsoever there is to attract our respect, the tendency is still directly towards God, all unites in him as the centre. (Jonathan Edwards, God Glorified in Man’s Dependence)

The Gospel of grace alone to the glory of God alone stands supreme and all other doctrines must fall at its feet and be crushed. So the heart of proud man must fall and be crushed to the dust that it may an instrument of God’s glory. Scripture is clear that God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble (Jam 4:6). God will not dwell with the proud, but with the contrite and the lowly (Isa 57:15). There is nothing in the grace of God that looks upon human souls and waits for it to move first or waits for it to become worthy. No, no, and an eternity of no after no must be written in response to that. The grace of God is what works in dead sinners to give them a desire after spiritual things. The grace of God is what works in sinners to make them alive. The grace of God is what works in sinners to give them faith and life. The grace of God is what works in sinners to give them love so that they can even do one thing that is good. There is nothing that a sinner can do apart from true love that is good, but the only source and origin of love in the universe is God Himself and He only gives love for Himself by grace alone.

It sounds so cruel and harsh in the modern world to speak of nice, kind, and learned men as Arminians or Pelagians and then go on to attack that position. But what must be seen is that the Pelagian system is an open attack on the grace of God while the Arminian system is a disguised attack on the grace of God. If we are to love grace and the glory of the grace of God we must stand against all that is opposed to His grace. Romans 11:6 tells us without the slightest equivocation that grace and works cannot be mixed: “But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace.” Putting a few extra words in a sentence can help explain what the meaning is. “But if it is by grace [alone], it is no longer on the basis of works [or any work or human effort at all], otherwise grace is no longer grace.” What is of grace can have no basis or part with human works as a basis for merit in the slightest. One drop of the poison of human works is deadly to pure grace.

In order to make this clearer it must be seen that by works simply means the human soul or will doing something apart from grace to obtain or receive grace. What that really means, then, is that a work is something a human does while grace is what God does. The will of man being involved in salvation that is apart from grace (by definition what a ‘free-will’ is) is then the human being doing something and God not doing something. So by simple definition it is salvation by the grace of God plus the work of man. It is the work of the human soul or will and so is a work. Clearly, then, this is at odds with what Edwards shows us (in the quote above). The soul that truly depends on God alone must depend on grace alone and that dependence or faith includes the faith and dependence itself. The soul that looks to itself for one choice of a ‘free-will’ is looking to itself for faith and so is a work that it believes God will respond to. In other words, apart from the total dependence of the sinner on Christ alone for all things by grace alone there is no salvation by grace alone to the glory of God alone. One drop of the choice of the human will that is free from grace (‘free-will’) makes the will dependent on itself and not on God alone. That destroys justification by grace alone and so the biblical teaching of faith alone as well. That is what both Pelagianism and Arminianism ends up doing.

It is certainly what God aims at in the disposition of things in redemption, (if we allow the Scriptures to be a revelation of God’s mind) that God should appear full, and man in himself empty, that God should appear all, and man nothing. It is God’s declared design that others should not “glory in his presence;” which implies that it is his design to advance his own comparative glory. So much the more man glories in God’s presence, so much the less glory is ascribed to God.

By its being thus ordered, that the creature should have so absolute and universal a dependence on God, provision is made that God should have our whole souls, and should be the object of our undivided respect. If we had our dependence partly on God, and partly on something else, man’s respect would be divided to those different things on which he had dependence. Thus it would be if we depended on God only for a part of our good, and on ourselves, or some other being, for another part: or if we had our good only from God, and through another that was not God, and in something else distinct from both, our hearts would be divided between the good itself, and him from whom, and him through whom, we received it. But now there is no occasion for this, God being not only he from or of whom we have all good, but also through whom, and is that good itself, that we have from him and through him. So that whatsoever there is to attract our respect, the tendency is still directly towards God, all unites in him as the centre. (Jonathan Edwards, God Glorified in Man’s Dependence)

The desire man has to keep some semblance of control and some decision in the matter of salvation is an attack on the complete sufficiency of God and the complete and utter dependence of human beings on God and His sufficiency. Human beings do not want to wait on and be utterly dependent on the grace of God, but instead they want to do it all of themselves or perhaps have God do all that they cannot do. Either way, the human soul is not completely dependent on God. When the soul tries to keep something of a ‘free-will’ so it can choose as it pleases, what it is doing is trusting in self. Its real trust is in self, though it says it is trusting in God. But it is trusting in itself to trust in God. This is not faith in Christ alone, but is instead faith in self to trust in Christ. It is not faith in grace alone, but is instead faith in itself to trust in grace.  One can hold to a creed of justification by faith alone, but unless the soul is looking to God for grace to give it faith as well it is not really looking to grace alone but to its own faith.

God saves sinners to the praise of the glory of His grace, but sinners want to be saved in a way that they can share in some of the glory. What they don’t realize is that God will not share His glory with another. So when they look to their so-called ‘free-will’ in the things of salvation, they are not looking to grace alone and they are not looking to a Gospel that is to the glory of God alone. The Gospel must be proclaimed in such a way that shows how utterly men are dependent on God and His grace alone so that the Gospel would be to His glory alone. Yet when ‘free-will’ sticks up its ugly head, what we see is that human beings share in that glory. Men and women clap for those who have made decisions to be saved, rather than bowing before the shining forth of the glory of God in salvation. Men and women give testimonies to their choices rather than to the grace of God, though indeed they give some words to the grace of God, but the focus is still on their choice. After all, if we believe in a ‘free-will’ then it was our choice that made the final decision. It was our choice that everything hinged on.

Jonathan Edwards saw so clearly that for salvation to be by grace alone it must mean that sinners are dependent on God alone and in all ways. Martin Luther saw so clearly that the Gospel cannot be of grace alone and Christ alone if the will is free. There has never been a Gospel that has been anything other than by grace alone. There never will be a Gospel that will be anything but by grace alone. That means that the salvation of sinners has never been dependent on their ‘free-wills’ and it never will be either. Whatever is of grace is of grace. Whatever is of works is of works. Whatever a will does that is free of grace (for a will to be free it must be free of grace) is a will that is moved by the self and by the flesh. God will not share His glory with another. The Gospel of grace alone is antithetical to the teaching of ‘free-will.’ This is one reason that we are in such a dark time in our modern day. We focus on the so-called ‘free-will’ of man rather than on the free grace of God. We focus on the ‘free-will’ of man by trying to persuade man based on fleshly reason, entertainment, music, and appealing to what man naturally likes. While we can obtain many decisions like that, they are but decisions of the flesh and in doing so we are destroying the preaching of the Gospel of grace alone. If we will not seek to destroy all the dependence men have in themselves and their ‘free-will,’ we cannot preach the Gospel of grace alone.

Moreover, if Paul were not understood to affirm lack of potency, his argument would be without force; for Paul’s whole aim is to make grace necessary to all men, and if they could initiate something by themselves, they would not need grace. As it is, however, they need grace, just because they cannot do this. So you see that by the terms of this passage [Rom 3:9ff] ‘free-will’ is utterly laid low, and nothing good or upright is left to man; for he is declared to be unrighteous, ignorant of God, a despiser of God, turned away from Him and unprofitable in His sight (Luther, Bondage of the Will).

The issue of ‘free-will’ is simply a philosophical issue that is not derived from a text of Scripture apart from the assumption of man. It simply must be admitted that Paul is attempting to drive men to the point of seeing that they cannot do what needs to be done and that it is grace alone that saves. Men need grace because they cannot keep one part of the Law. There is nothing left to the human soul except the proclamation of grace and grace alone. As long as human beings leave one shred of good or of potency to the human will, they will not look and rest in grace alone. In other words, we can have a doctrine of grace alone that men will hold to in their brains and even have affections rise at the thought of it. But until a man has been broken from any hope in self and has nothing to rely upon that man will not look to Christ alone. The man may admit that he cannot do it of himself and that he needs Christ, but as long as he thinks that it is in his own power to look to Christ he will look and trust in himself to some degree. In reality, he will trust in himself to trust in Christ.

The man that is trusting in himself to trust in Christ is a man that is not looking to grace alone. Salvation is by grace alone from the very first to all eternity. It is not just that God must provide grace and must help man take the medicine, but man is dead and cannot apply the medicine. A dead man has no power to trust in himself and no power to take the medicine. This is no horrible doctrine to those who see what they are by nature. They are dead in sins and trespasses and by nature are children of wrath. This is a doctrine of great hope to souls like that. They see that they cannot do one thing for themselves and that God’s grace must reach them where they are and that they are utterly without strength to do one things. So when those souls that recognize what they really, really are begin to see the hope of the Gospel of grace alone, it is truly good news.

As long as preachers and teachers leave people any hope in themselves and in their so-called ‘free-will,’ those preachers and teachers are leaving men hope in themselves and are not teaching grace alone. It may be the case that churches would empty out if men taught the truth of this, but there is no hope apart from grace and grace alone. Perhaps the pews would be emptied if we taught the truth of grace alone, but then again that is better than teaching people a false gospel that depends on ‘free-will.’ There are people who hate the doctrines of Calvinism and there are people who love the doctrines of Calvinism, but people from both sides of that debate truly hate the teachings of grace alone that leave men helpless in sin. While there are great intellectual admirers of Calvinism, that is a different thing than the application of these great truths to the heart. Men of great pride and self-assurance can hold to the doctrines of Calvinism, but when their pride is pricked they will not endure the truth about themselves. They will then try to use the doctrines of sovereign grace to protect their own proud and dead hearts.

We live in a day where the doctrines of Calvinism are said to be on the rise, but until men are preaching against ‘free-will’ and the potency of the will of man so that grace alone can truly be taught in something other than words, the Gospel of grace alone will languish. We live in a day where the doctrines of grace are taught more widely than before, but until these are applied to the heart in an effort to destroy all hope in man’s pride, self and will the Gospel of grace alone will languish. There may me a great “revival” of doctrine and of conservative teachings in our day, but apart from teaching men that they have no hope in themselves and striving to see men emptied of hope in their minds and wills the Gospel of grace alone will languish. We hear of a need for truth, and that is indeed very needful, but that same truth must be adhered to from a broken heart where confidence in self has been destroyed. There appears to be so many that hold to the doctrines of grace from a proud and confident self-reliance. These things cannot be. “Perhaps no one has yet been truthful enough about what “truthfulness” is” (Nietzsche).

Let us see how Paul proves his view from the Holy Scriptures, and whether ‘words have more force in Paul than in their own place’! ‘Thus it is written,’ he says: ‘there is none righteous, there is none that understandeth, none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are all together become unprofitable, there is none that doeth good, no, not one,’ etc. (Rom 3:10-12). Here let him that can give me a ‘convenient explanation,’ or invent ‘figures’, or contend that the words are ambiguous and obscure! Let him that dares defend ‘free-will’ against these indictments, and I will gladly give way and recant, and be a confessor and assertor of ‘free-will’ myself! It is certain that these words apply to all men, for the prophet introduces God as looking down from heaven upon all men and pronouncing this sentence upon them. (Luther, Bondage of the Will)

When we step back and look carefully at the words of Scripture in the texts above, it is amazing that anyone that bowed to Scripture as the revelation of God and His will could actually believe in free-will. If not one person is righteous in and of himself, then how can an unrighteous soul be free from unrighteousness to choose that which is righteous from righteous intents and motives? How could it be that if no one understands then how can the will be free from misunderstanding and so choose what is right with understanding? How could it be that if no one seeks God that a will is free to choose God if it just up and decides to do so? How could it be that if all are out of the way that the will is free to be on the way? How could it be that if all together are unprofitable that one will alone could be free to choose enough to be profitable? How could it be that if not even one is able to do good that one will would be free enough to do good?

It is easy enough for the modern mind that is restless to be active in its trivial pursuits to read over a few verses of Scripture and not stop to think deeply on the subject. But when we stop and truly think and pray over the verses and God opens them to the mind and the eyes of the heart, the obvious (so-called ‘free-will’) appears as nonsense and that which once appeared as unacceptable becomes clear and even beautiful. Now the heart sees that it was in bondage to self and pride and could not see beyond its own so-called ‘free-will.” Now the soul hates that it once trusted in itself by adhering to its self under the guise of ‘free-will.’ Now the soul sees that it once trusted in itself to trust in Christ rather than being emptied of self in true humility so that true faith could come as a free gift of God by grace alone. Now the soul sees that it once thought it had life because it chose it but now it sees that life comes from God on the basis of grace and grace alone.

The soul used to presume that it had enough righteousness to make a choice for God, but now it sees that all must come through Christ and must be for Christ. The soul used to think that it sought for God, but now it sees that it sought God as a means for seeking self. But now, but grace alone, that soul sees that it has been freed from self so that self can be used as a means of seeking God and His glory. The soul used to think that it was profitable to God because it was outwardly good, tithed, and did some good deeds. But now it sees that all of its good works were as monstrous cloths and the only good that can come from it is by grace alone. But the soul that is bound in the darkness of self-love and pride will not see the horror and futility that the teaching of ‘free-will’ leaves it in. It takes the very work of God in the soul to show the soul how bound it is in darkness and sin. Until the soul has been freed by grace and lives by grace it will not turn with disgust to see what it means to be in the bondage of its own will and to be free of grace.

Luther’s words above show the indignation of the soul that has been freed from itself and looks with horror on all that it did and tried to do by its own power. It cannot imagine that anyone could see these words of Paul and think of itself as free to do as it pleases. How can a soul still believe that it was free at any point and perhaps is now free when the truth of the matter is that all true spiritual life is by grace alone? Oh what darkness the soul that thinks it is free dwells in, yet what freedom the soul that lives by grace dwells in. The soul that has tasted of grace does not want anything to do with the teaching about the freedom of its own will, but instead the soul longs to live by grace alone. In that grace is true spiritual power. In that grace is true glory. In that grace is Christ Himself. The soul that has tasted and knows that the Lord is good wants nothing but pure grace and wants nothing to do with a so-called ‘free-will.’

Paul, writing to the Romans, enters upon his argument for the grace of God against ‘free-will’ as follows: ‘The wrath of God’ (he says) ‘is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold down the truth in unrighteousness’ (Rom. 1:18). Do you not hear this general judgment against all men, but that they are under the wrath of God? What does this mean, but that they merit wrath and punishment? He assigns the reason for the wrath by saying that they do only that which merits wrath and punishment—that they are all ungodly and unrighteous, and hold down the truth in unrighteousness. Where now is the power of ‘free-will’ to endeavour after some good? Paul makes it merit the wrath of God, and pronounces it ungodly and unrighteous! And that which deserves wrath and is ungodly is endeavouring and availing, not for grace, but against it. (Luther, Bondage of the Will)

If it is true, as Luther stated in accordance with Scripture, that all that men can strive for is that which merits wrath, what can the will do in all of its striving and choosing? What can a person do that is born dead in sins and trespasses and by nature a child of wrath? No one has a will that is free from the bondage of sin and of the devil and of being by nature a child of wrath but those who have been born from above. Human beings are born Pelagians and are constantly trying to do things in their own power. At some point a person may be awakened and realize the need for the help of grace, but that does not mean that the heart of the person is broken from seeking grace by some means of self. When the soul seeks for grace by any means of self, works, or self-effort, that soul is not seeking grace but is seeking something else in reality.

Romans 11:6 stands against that line of thinking: “But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace.” Whatever is of works is no longer of grace and no longer of grace at all. What is of grace and grace alone does not correspond with any effort to earn or merit it in the slightest. In fact, the very nature of grace is that it is free of any cause that is found in the human soul. Grace can only be shown as a result of God Himself and His reasons are found in Himself. When the soul tries to do something as a way to obtain grace from God based on what the soul does, the soul is no longer seeking true grace at all. In other words, in the words of Luther, “that which deserves wrath and is ungodly is endeavouring and availing, not for grace, but against it.” The teaching of ‘free-will’ is not teaching a way of obtaining grace, but a way of striving against grace. The teaching of ‘free-will’ does not teach grace alone but the act of the ‘free-will’ plus grace. There can be no grace alone as long as a person thinks that a ‘free-will’ has anything to do with obtaining grace. The teaching of ‘free-will’ cannot stand alongside of free-grace. The two are opposed to each other and cannot be reconciled.

In an effort to state the above teaching even more clearly, those who adhere to the teaching of ‘free-will’ say that the will is free when it is free from inner influence to make a decision. But when the will is free from the influence and power of grace, that shows without question that salvation is not by grace alone because the will is free from grace alone. At that point there is synergism involved (synergism = two or more workers) rather than the glory of the Gospel of grace alone as taught in monergism (one worker alone). The will that is free from grace is the will that is working for something in its own power and as such will never stop working by its own power and look to grace alone. The will that is free from grace is not working by grace and so all it does it deserves and merits wrath and is not endeavoring for biblical grace, but is actually fighting against it.

Here we see one of the great dangers in modern day versions of “Christianity.” Very little is said against ‘free-will’ and even those who deny it in theory don’t seem to proclaim what grace alone really means. To put it differently, if we don’t proclaim a grace that is free and a will that is bound in sin the Gospel of grace alone will, at the very least, not be proclaimed very clearly. On the other hand, if what has been written in this short BLOG is true, then even preaching about grace alone is not enough unless it is shown that the will is not free to obtain it. The preaching of grace alone requires us to preach and teach that the will is not free or we are not preaching grace alone in a way that can be understood. The grace of God will have no help from sinners in salvation or God would be sharing His glory with another. So regardless of what people profess with their mouths and with their creeds to believe, if they will not stand and fight against the teaching of ‘free-will’ in all corners that it is found they are not preaching and standing for the Gospel of grace alone. We must preach the inability of the will to be free if we are going to preach the Gospel of grace alone from the conviction of sin to the giving of faith as a gift. There is no other way of preaching grace from beginning to end.

Paul, writing to the Romans, enters upon his argument for the grace of God against ‘free-will’ as follows: ‘The wrath of God’ (he says) ‘is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold down the truth in unrighteousness’ (Rom. 1:18). Do you not hear this general judgment against all men, but that they are under the wrath of God? What does this mean, but that they merit wrath and punishment? He assigns the reason for the wrath by saying that they do only that which merits wrath and punishment—that they are all ungodly and unrighteous, and hold down the truth in unrighteousness. Where now is the power of ‘free-will’ to endeavour after some good? Paul makes it merit the wrath of God, and pronounces it ungodly and unrighteous! And that which deserves wrath and is ungodly is endeavouring and availing, not for grace, but against it. (Luther, Bondage of the Will)

 While it may not appear on the surface that Romans 1:18 and following is a formidable argument against ‘free-will and for free-grace,’ if we look a little deeper, Lord willing, we will see things a little differently. The will is only free to the extent that it is free from influences within it. The will is only free if it is free from both bad and good influences or powers which move it. If those things are true, then Romans 1:18 and following is demonstrative evidence that the human soul is in utter bondage to sin and cannot do anything apart from that sin. The only way that a soul in the bondage of sin that is set out in Romans 1 is grace and grace alone. Romans 1:16-17 sets out the Gospel as the power of God for salvation. It is not that the Gospel is the power of God and then we move to the ‘free-will’ of man who makes up what God lacks in order to save man, but the Gospel is the power of God for salvation. Romans 1:18-32 show us very clearly why the Gospel is the power of God and the power of God alone for salvation. Human souls are in bondage to sin because they are turned over to their sin and their hearts are hardened by God. Is the human soul free enough to free itself from the judgment of God?

Verse 18 tells us that “the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them, for God made it evident to them.” The hearts of men are not just neutral in terms of God, but they hate God and work to suppress the truth about Him. Some of the truths about God that men hate are the power of God and the grace of God. The will of men who hate God and are trying to suppress the truth of God are not free to love God and to do all to His glory. These people are acting according to their own nature and that nature is fully against God. They work to suppress the truth of God in their minds, hearts, and lives of unrighteousness.

Romans 1:24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

 What is the punishment of people who exchange the truth of God for a lie? They are given over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity. Verse 26 continues: “For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions.” Verse 28 sets out the same thought as well: “And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper.” What we see, then, is that those with sinful hearts desire and seek to suppress the truth of God and their punishment is to be given over to futile speculations and darkened hearts. They are given over to hardened hearts and depraved minds. They are given over to the lusts of their hearts and degrading passions. A passion is a strong desire that the soul follows along “passively.” In other words, a passion drives the soul rather than the soul being free to do what is holy, right and good.

What Romans 1:18-32 does, then, is set out what Luther says. It stands against the teaching of ‘free-will’ and the assertions that human beings must have it. The human soul is not free to overcome its own passions. The human soul is not free to overcome the power of God who is the One who turns the souls over to sin and darkened hearts. The soul is in bondage to sin and can do nothing right or good unless it is set from its bondage by grace and grace alone. The soul that is described in Romans 1:18-32 is a soul that is utterly dependent on grace to make it alive as it has nothing to make itself alive with. It is the soul that is dead in sins and trespasses and by nature is a child of wrath (Eph 2:1-3). It is a soul that must be made alive God and God alone as set out in Ephesians 2:4-10. It is a soul that cannot help itself at all and is utterly dependent on free grace rather than having a ‘free-will’ to assist.

I do not accept or tolerate that middle way which Erasmus (I think, with good intentions) recommends to me, namely, to allow a very little to ‘free-will’. So that the contradictions of Scripture and the aforementioned inconveniences may be more easily removed. The case is not bettered by this middle way, nor is anything gained. For unless you attribute all and everything to ‘free-will’, in the way that the Pelagians do, the contradictions in the Scripture still remain, merit and reward are done away, the mercy and justice of God are done away also, and all the inconveniences which we intend to avoid by allowing to ‘free-will this tiny, ineffective power continue with us; as I explained above. So we have to go to extremes, deny ‘free-will’ altogether, and ascribe everything to God! Thus will the Scriptures be free from contradictions; and the inconveniences, if not removed, may be borne with. (Luther, The Bondage of the Will)

Here is a powerful blast from Luther against Erasmus and his so-called “middle way.” Erasmus, and Luther admitted he might have had good intentions, knew that Pelagianism was wrong but he could not go with Luther to grace alone. So Erasmus tried to find a middle way as so many had done before him and so many have done after him. Instead of denying ‘free-will’ and leaving all to God and His grace, Erasmus wants to leave just a little to ‘free-will’ and so have something of a middle way. But Luther shows the problems with this. In one sense the middle way is not middle at all. It is simply less than grace alone. No matter how much you ascribe to grace and no matter how little power you assign to the ‘free-will’, when grace and ‘free-will’ are joined together you will always end up with less than the Gospel of grace alone.

The only two logical positions (logical within themselves) are Pelagianism and Augustinianism (Calvinism). Pelagianism ascribes to man the power (‘free-will’) while Augustinianism ascribes to God all the power (grace). While many try to find a middle road, they never reach the biblical position of grace alone. But the human heart does not want to give up all hope in self (‘free-will’) and look to God and His grace alone, so it is always looking for a mediating position. But any mediating position, regardless of how little is left to the will to do, leaves a person with the same problems of reconciling Scripture with Scripture. No amount of the will or man’s ability can be reconciled with grace alone. No matter how many men try, they will always fail because the gospel that results from such a mixture is another gospel.

This is the same problem that we find in the New Testament. The Judaizers were a group of Jews who wanted to add a little to the Gospel of grace alone. Some wanted to add circumcision and others wanted to add bits of the Law. That is the same thing as saying that the Gospel if by grace alone plus circumcision or the Gospel is by grace alone plus keeping this aspect of the Law. Paul referred to those things as another gospel. What is the difference between those things and saying that the Gospel is by grace alone plus an act of the will? At the heart of it the message is the same. What is circumcision but a decision or act of the will that a person makes to do something? What is having one little bit of the Law to keep that is not an act of the will to do? All of these things amount to the same thing and that is an effort to have an act of the human will added to grace alone. Any act of the so-called ‘free-will’ is a middle road position and is a different Gospel. The ‘free-will’ may be simply a choice that grace must have to work with. The ‘free-will may be the choice to be circumcised. The ‘free-will’ may include the choice to keep some bit of the Law. All of those refer to man’s ability to do something apart from grace alone. All of those in reality are at war with grace alone. All of those are a different gospel.

Any little bit that is attributed to the will leaves us wrestling with and adjusting Scripture and its teaching on grace alone. It leaves us with some power or ability left to man which controls or determines salvation. That and history should teach us the folly of looking to human reason and ability in the Gospel. In order to ascribe everything to God we will have to deny ‘free-will’ to do so. Yes, that is rather inconvenient in the modern climate within the denominations. However, if we don’t believe the Gospel of grace alone it will lead to a greater inconvenience on judgment day. Oh how crushing it is to the pride to denounce all power and ability to self, but that is why so many fight the Gospel of grace alone. Oh how awful it would be to lose positions of honor and power if we deny any ability to the will of man, but how awful it would be to lose our very soul as a result of our refusal to do so. The Gospel of grace demands nothing less than the complete and utter renunciation of our own ability and will.