God Loves… Himself

By what logic did you learn these inferences? Why not the opposite—‘grace is preached; therefore, “free-will” is done away’? ‘The assistance of grace is commended; therefore “free-will” is abolished’? To what end is grace given? Is it that grace may be, as it were, the fancy dress in which ‘free-will’, proud and self-sufficient in its strength, blithely disports itself on May-days? Wherefore, though I am no rhetorician, I am going to invert your reasoning, by a sounder rhetoric than yours, as follows: ‘All the passages in the Holy Scriptures that mention assistance are they that do away with “free-will”, and these are countless. Therefore, if the matter is assessed by the number of testimonies, victory is mine. For grace is needed, and the help of grace is given, because “free-will” of itself can do nothing. (Luther, Bondage of the Will)

Erasmus tried to find a middle road, but his middle road led him to a dead end. He tried to make the inference that because grace was given that this established the freedom of the will, but Luther saw through that. Earlier Erasmus had tried to say that the will had almost no power at all and could barely do anything by itself. Luther had that advantage in terms of argument at that point and he continues to press that home. It is perhaps here that we see the truthfulness of Luther’s position at its clearest. Grace and ‘free-will’ are opposites and cannot abide together. To the degree that the ‘free-will’ is asserted is to that same degree that grace is denigrated. If salvation is by grace alone, then there is no room for ‘free-will’ in salvation at all. If salvation is by the ‘free-will’ to any degree, then it is not by grace alone at all. The intrusion of ‘free-will’ into the Gospel of grace alone is the intrusion of that which makes grace no longer to be grace (Rom 11:6).

The Gospel of grace alone reaches to sinners who are dead in their sins and trespasses and are by nature children of wrath (Eph 2:1-3). In their spiritual deadness they are dead to spiritual things and are not free in those things at all. The sinner must not look to his deadness in order to make himself alive, but instead see that he is dead and needs the power of grace and life to make him alive. Ephesians 2:4-10 speaks of grace and grace alone as making the sinner alive in Christ Jesus. There is no help from the free-will mentioned and there is also no room at all for it. God will not share the glory of His grace with no one. God saves sinners by grace alone because He saves to His glory alone. God saves sinners by His grace alone because there is nothing in the sinner in terms of merit or righteousness that can move Him to save them. God saves by grace alone because there is nothing that the will of those dead in sin can do to help or assist in saving themselves. Whatever is of grace is of grace and whatever is of works is of works. The two cannot mix in this way and at this point.

What is it that people think the ‘free-will’ can do anyway that grace cannot do? What power is there in the will that grace cannot do? What merit is there in an act of the will that Christ could not merit? What righteousness in the act of the will is there that the righteousness of Christ is not enough for? For an act of the will to assist in salvation the will would have to be perfectly holy for that to be acceptable to God. Surely, then, the biblical teaching of grace alone shines out with unfettered glory at this point. No act of the will can be acceptable to God unless it is perfectly holy or has perfect merit. No act of the will that is less than perfect can possibly assist in anything that God will accept. For the will to be truly free it must be free from sin and from grace. Yet the will is never free from sin and can do nothing apart from grace alone. So the teaching of grace alone utterly destroys any hope of anyone of being helped in salvation by ‘free-will.” For the Gospel of grace alone, then, to be preached, the hope in ‘free-will’ must be given up and the soul must look away from any hope in itself and all hope must be in Christ.

Luther has left us right where we need to be. By pointing to Scripture and grace alone he has utterly destroyed the teaching of ‘free-will.’ Yet in our day the vast majority of people do not see this as an important topic. So many who think of themselves as Reformed don’t see that by their holding hands with Arminians and Pelagians on this issue (working together) that they are standing against the Gospel of grace alone themselves. How can a man preach the Gospel of grace alone unless he seeks to destroy any hope that a person has in his own merit, righteousness, power, and therefore will? How can a man preach the Gospel of grace alone when he says that those who believe and preach ‘free-will’ preach the same Gospel that he does? These things cannot be and so they should not be. The Gospel of grace alone is what Christ has done and the Spirit does alone. A gospel that includes the ‘free-will’ is not something that is of grace alone. It may be of grace provided, but it is not of grace alone in procuring and applying salvation. The teaching of ‘free-will’ cannot point to grace alone because it necessarily points to the will as a player in the Gospel. Any amount of ‘free-will’ in the Gospel is a different gospel.

When William Tyndale was charged and then later executed, one of the heresies he was charged with was his denial of ‘free-will.’ Tyndale was burned at the stake in October of 1536 which was eight years before Luther died. It was stated in the more modern (1957) introduction of Luther’s Bondage of the Will that true Christianity stands or falls with the doctrine of the will. This was at the heart of the Reformation and was and is a truth that a person must truly hold to in order to hold to the Gospel as Luther and the Reformers did. In being burned at the stake as he was Tyndale reminds others of what happened to John Wycliffe in 1428 though he died in 1384. His remains were dug up and burned as a heretic. Wycliffe strongly desired for the people to read the Bible in their own language. Tyndale desired that as well. Both men were outlaws and put their lives on the line in order to get the Word of God to ordinary people.

In our day a lot of noise has been made over the inerrancy of Scripture, yet not as much over the Gospel that the Bible teaches. Tyndale and Wycliffe wanted the Scriptures to go out, but both stood firm on justification by faith alone. Wycliffe got into trouble early on because of his teaching on predestination. One cannot logically or consistently believe in predestination and free-will at the same time. The point, however, is that both Wycliffe and Tyndale were those who believed strongly in the Scriptures and then both were persecuted over what the Bible actually taught. Luther translated the Bible into German and also believed fervently in the bondage of the will and predestination.

It is easy to stand for inerrancy in the modern day though one may be thought a fool to do so. It is also rather easy to believe in predestination if one does not push that too hard. But it is still hard to truly hold to the bondage of the human will. The men of old were persecuted and excommunicated not only for their beliefs about the Bible, but because of what the Bible taught about predestination and free-will. The religious institutions did not like it in their days and they do not like it in our day. The doctrine of ‘free-will’ is, in the words of John Owen, the Pelagian idol. Oh how men trust in their idol rather than God. Oh how angry men get when their idol is challenged. While some will attack the Bible itself to get rid of its teaching on the sovereign God, the sovereignty of grace, and the bondage of the human will, others will hold to inerrancy on the one hand and attack the biblical teachings with the other. The Gospel of free-grace is hated by those who deny Scripture and those who hold to inerrancy with tenacity.

In the modern day lip-service is given to inerrancy while the teachings of the Bible are denied. There are those who claim to believe in the depravity of human souls and the bondage of the will but they will not take a stand on these issues as vital to the Gospel. They join hands with those who are best practical Pelagians and decry those who truly hold to the bondage of the will as hyper-Calvinists. The Gospel is at best weakened and watered down when this happens, but one could speculate that political expediency in denominations is considered more important than the doctrine of the will. However, to Luther and Tyndale (and perhaps Wycliffe) the doctrine of the will was vital to the Gospel. It was Rome who persecuted them and charged them with heresy because they denied the freedom of the human will, yet today people have rejected the heart of the Reformation by rejecting (at least in practice) the bondage of the will.

We need to seek the Lord to raise up men who are fear God and not men. We need to seek the Lord to rise up men who are not in love with the honor, positions, and finances that are found in many denominations. We need men like Wycliffe, Tyndale, and Luther who will declare the bondage of the human will so that they can preach a real Gospel of grace alone through faith alone. Until the Lord gives men in our day real convictions that they are going to live and die by regardless of the wind blowing in the denominations and regardless of the finances and honor given by the denominations, we will not hear the Gospel in our day. In order for our day to see a true repentance and a true revival, the true Gospel must be preached. Until men reach the point of caring for nothing but the glory of God they will not preach the bondage of the will with power which is what must happen for the Gospel to be truly taught. Instead people want unity rather than truth. They want words instead of power. They want honor and friends in high places instead of the power of God from on High. Wycliffe, Tyndale, and Luther loved their God and the Scriptures enough to translate the Scriptures into the common language upon the pains of death. But they also loved the Gospel enough to preach against ‘free-will’ and in doing so they were persecuted even more. After all, why translate the Scriptures if they were not willing to die for what the Scriptures taught? May God help us in our own day to wake up to the truth of the bondage of the will and its necessary connection to the Gospel. We can proclaim an inerrant Bible and even study it a lot, but if we miss the bondage of the will we miss the Gospel itself.

In looking at this great doctrine of the enslaved will, it is important to be reminded again and again that this doctrine is not just a horrible doctrine that just a few horrible individuals in history have believed. It has been believed by the greatest of theologians and the greatest of the creeds that this doctrine is at the heart of the Gospel. It is not the Gospel itself by itself, but apart from it there is no need of the Gospel of grace alone. To the degree that a person denies (whether literally or practically) the doctrine of the enslaved will, is precisely the degree that a person will veer from grace alone in the Gospel. The problem with that is that grace will not stand for any co-workers at all. Grace will not stand for anything that wants to share in its glory.

The God of all glory has created all things for His own glory. The God of all glory has designed all creation that it would manifest His glory and He has designed the Gospel that it would be to the praise of the glory of His grace alone (Eph 1:5-6). The doctrine of the enslaved will is a necessary teaching for the Gospel of grace alone and the Gospel of the glory of God. No one can shout forth the glory of God and His grace alone that also trumpets man’s ability in spiritual things. If that which comes from man is from the strength of the self and the will of self, then it is the self that is shining forth. But if what comes from man is the shining forth of the glory of God, then it is God and His glory that is shining forth. If we teach the ability of man in spiritual things, then we may be praised by modern people but we will not be declaring the truth of grace alone.

Luther and the Reformers were used to set forth a Gospel of grace alone and revival broke forth and raced throughout the earth. The Gospel that they preached was the Gospel that was built and depended on grace alone, but to that end they preached the enslavement of the will of man in spiritual things. Even if people in the modern day preach the same doctrines with the same words as the Reformers, apart from a clear declaration of the enslaved will of human souls the same Gospel will not be taught. The Reformers were concerned to defend the sovereignty of grace because that is the only kind of grace there is. Apart from the enslaved will the sovereignty of grace is compromised. A Gospel that teaches explicitly or implicitly a salvation that is anything less than grace alone (which is a sovereign grace), is a different gospel than that of the New Testament.

A great problem with those who teach the ‘free-will’ of man is that they cannot preach the free grace of God consistently. They will use words that salvation is by grace alone, but they cannot show how that can be. A Gospel that is to the glory of God alone is a Gospel that is of the will of God alone. It is only when it is God who wills salvation of Himself and according to Himself and His own glory that salvation is by grace alone and to His glory alone. As soon as the so-called ‘free-will’ of man edges into the picture, salvation stops being by grace alone and to His glory alone and man (so to speak) has a share in the matter. The Gospel, after all is the Gospel of God and as long as human beings trust in themselves (part of that is the ‘free-will’) they will not trust in Christ alone. A.G. Illierap, in his personal testimony, points to this as a major issue:

For some time past I had been in the not uncommon condition of “sinning and repenting, sinning and repenting;” my will power for resisting temptation, never at any time very strong, growing weaker and weaker. At last, realizing my utter helplessness, I lost all confidence in myself, and despaired of ever being any better. But, blessed by God, deliverance is found when a man despairs of self. Sorely baffled, in deep anguish of soul, knowing not whither to turn for help, with bitter tears and sincere repentance I was constrained in my misery to fall helplessly at the feet of Jesus, my agony of spirit speaking louder than any words. I was not left long in my despair, for “the Lord is night unto them that are of a broken heart, and saveth such as be of a contrite spirit.”…I realise now, that not until a man loses faith in himself, can he possibly know his need of a Saviour. Thus it is recoreded that “when we were yet without strength, in due season, Christ died for the ungodly” (Rom 5:6). While we have hope in ourselves our case is hopeless, but as soon as we give up all pretensions to merit or righteousness of our own, and submit ourselves as lost and ruined sinners to God, He willing, and on a perfectly righteous basis (see Rom 4:26) justifies us “freely by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus” (Rom 3:25). Thus I found it.

This testimony points to the fact that a human being cannot trust in his or he own will or self and trust in Christ alone at the same time. So many in the modern day hold to the great doctrines of the past and yet do so in a manner where they trust in themselves. They trust in their intellects to believe certain truths. They trust in their own wills (though they say words as if it is all of God) to trust in Christ. They are Pelagians at heart though they give verbal assent to Reformed creeds. It is not enough to give intellectual assent to these great truths of the past and of the Bible. But instead, one must truly give up all hope in self and in the will of self in order to rest in Christ alone. Until the soul despairs of all hope in itself (including its own will and power or choice) it will not rest in Christ alone. This is the great truth that Luther and the Reformers found in Scripture and in their own experience. Until a sinner utterly despairs of self that sinner has faith in self to some degree. Until that great truth is discovered and actually experienced in the soul, the sinner has hope in self even if that sinner is orthodox to the letter. We live in a dark day, not only because of the lack of orthodoxy, but perhaps to some degree because of orthodoxy that rests in the mind alone. True enough there are also those who rest in themselves, their orthodoxy, and their elevated feelings, but still that is not resting in Christ alone. We must utterly despair of anything to do with self and look to Christ alone.

What need now of Christ? What need now of the Spirit? We have now found a passage which stops the mouths of all; not only does it clearly assert the freedom of the will, but it clearly teaches also that keeping the commandments is easy! What a fool was Christ, who shed His blood to purchase for us the Spirit, Whom we do not need, in order that we might be able to keep the commandments with ease, when we are so already by nature!  (Luther, Bondage of the Will)

If the soul has the ability to keep one command of God by its own freedom, then why couldn’t it keep all the commands of God? Luther points out that if the soul is free to keep the commands God, then in reality there is no absolute need of Christ and of the Spirit. Why did Christ need to go to the cross to purchase the Spirit for those who can already keep the commandments by their old nature? This is a cutting point that goes to the nature of sanctification as well. It seems as if many believe (at least practically) that the sinner is declared just by grace and then in many ways left to his or her own devices in the matter of sanctification. That position is just as bad as those who believe that one can be saved by works as well.

The Pelagian (Arminian) position really turns the Gospel of grace alone upside down. The only cause that God needs to save a person is Himself and His own glory. In fact, if God saved a person for something in themselves that would make God an idolater as He would not be doing all out of love for Himself and His own glory. This shows that the Pelagian (Arminian) position has turned grace into something that is no longer grace (Rom 11:6). Any work, no matter how slight, makes grace to be no longer grace. An act of the human will that is not of grace is an act of human flesh and so is a work of the flesh. God cannot be moved by a work of the human will/flesh rather than Himself and His own glory. The only reason that God saves sinners is to the praise of the glory of His grace (Eph 1:6). God bestows His grace on sinners only for the sake of His glory in Christ Jesus. The Pelagian (Arminian) position is inconsistent with a salvation that is by grace alone.

God the Father loved the Son and sent the Son to save sinners for the glory of His own name. Jesus Christ went to the cross primarily out of love for the Father. The Holy Spirit applies salvation as He is breathed forth from the Father and the Son. Pelagianism (Arminianism), then, tries to bring another aspect into salvation that gives God a reason or cause other than Himself to save sinners. In other words, Scripture teaches that God will not share His glory with another. “I am the LORD, that is My name; I will not give My glory to another, Nor My praise to graven images” (Isaiah 42:8). “For My own sake, for My own sake, I will act; For how can My name be profaned? And My glory I will not give to another” (Isa. 48:11).

The verses above show how much God loves His glory and how much He protects it. The gospel according to Pelagianism (and Arminianism), despite the protests to the contrary, is a message that involves human beings providing God a cause to save and so they share in the glory. As Romans 3:26-27 says in setting out why God saves and why He does not, it is for the demonstration of His righteousness and there is no room for boasting at all. “For the demonstration, I say, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. 27 Where then is boasting? It is excluded.” The case, it would seem, is closed. God does not save for any reason found in human beings, but He finds all the reasons and causes necessary to save in Himself. This totally excludes all boasting and glorying of human beings in their own choices or merit.

The Gospel that trumpeted out of the Reformation is the Gospel that rings forth during times of true revival. The Pelagianism of Finney could bring about moral reformation as such, but it could not be a message of true sovereign grace. If the grace preached is not sovereign grace, then it is no grace at all. There is no other kind of grace that can save sinners. In fact, the Bible knows of no other kind of grace at all because the only kind of grace there can be is a sovereign grace. The grace that takes sinners who are dead in sins and can do nothing to save themselves is a grace that is moved and caused by God Himself. Oh the danger souls are in who listen to those who preach in accordance with ‘free-will’ and those who will not deny it. The soul will either look to grace alone or it will look to itself for something. The soul that looks to itself for something, including an act of the will, is a soul that is not looking to Christ alone and is not resting in grace alone. ‘Free-will’ is at war with God and His Gospel of grace alone. We must wake up to this Trojan horse that has been brought into the walls of the city and befriended it by those claiming to be defenders of the Gospel.

What need now of Christ? What need now of the Spirit? We have now found a passage which stops the mouths of all; not only does it clearly assert the freedom of the will, but it clearly teaches also that keeping the commandments is easy! What a fool was Christ, who shed His blood to purchase for us the Spirit, Whom we do not need, in order that we might be able to keep the commandments with ease, when we are so already by nature!  (Luther, Bondage of the Will)  

These words from Luther should blow the cobwebs from our minds and souls and help us to see what the real issue at hand is. It is not that the teaching of ‘free-will’ is just a little different and perhaps slightly wrong, but it cuts at the very nerve of the Gospel. If the will is free enough to make moral choices apart from Christ, then where does that freedom end? We are either saved by Christ alone or by one or many things plus Christ. The teaching of ‘free-will’ is a direct assault on the Gospel of grace alone and Christ alone.

What can it mean to have a ‘free-will’ in light of what it means to be a spiritual person? Is the will free to understand spiritual things? Is the will free to do a spiritual act apart from Christ? If believers are not free to do one acceptable thing (spiritual fruit) apart from Christ, then how can an unbeliever do one acceptable thing apart from Christ? Is the will free to do what it wants in the spiritual realm when in fact we can only function in the spiritual realm with the fruit of the Spirit? There is a spiritual realm in which all that is done there is by the work and fruit of the Spirit. The reason it is the spiritual realm is because it is the realm in which the Holy Spirit works. True enough there are unholy spirits working, but we would not call them spiritual in the same way.

What is clear at this point is that the will is not free from the work of Christ and is not free from the work of the Spirit. Is the will ever able to do one good thing that is spiritual apart from grace? For the will to be free the will must be free from restraints and helps in order to do what it pleases. But if the will is free from the bondage of sin, then the Scriptures are wrong which teach the absolute bondage of the sinner in sin. If the will is free from the power of grace, then salvation is not of grace alone. So once again it can be seen that ‘free-will’ is an idol that sinners trust in rather than Christ alone and grace alone.

Can the will procure (purchase, obtain, lay hold of) any part of its own salvation? Is the will free to procure any part of its salvation? We can only turn from a teaching like that with disdain and disgust. Christ alone has procured salvation for His people. The will cannot do one thing to earn, merit, or apply salvation to itself. But if Christ alone has procured salvation, then what can the will do to obtain salvation itself? Anything it would try to do would be nothing less than an effort to insert itself into the salvation which Christ alone has purchased and the Holy Spirit alone applies. Oh the darkness that ‘free-will’ brings into the discussion and it attempts to overshadow the work of Christ and the Spirit.

Is the will of God free to save those whom He pleases? ‘Free-will’ teaches us that God cannot save those whom He pleases because the will of man is free to do as man pleases in the realm of salvation. Yet Scripture gives the account that God says that “I WILL HAVE MERCY ON WHOM I HAVE MERCY, AND I WILL HAVE COMPASSION ON WHOM I HAVE COMPASSION” (Romans 9:15). In other words, God is free to save whom He will. If the will of man is free to save according to its own will, then God is not free. Once again, the idol of the will is clear to see in that man wants to rest and trust in his own will rather than the grace of God alone.

Was Christ free to fully save all those that the Father gave Him to save or not? This shows again how the teaching of ‘free-will’ attacks the work of Christ. In fact, as can be seen in this post, the so-called ‘free-will’ of man is at war with the Trinity and the work of each Divine Person of the Trinity. This is why many Christians of old thought of the teaching of ‘free-will’ as that of something less than Christianity. This is also seen in how grace comes to the human soul. Is the will free to procure any part of grace as it pleases or is grace always in the hands of God to give as He pleases? The doctrine of ‘free-will’ is at war with God and the Gospel of grace. For grace to be grace it must always be at the mere pleasure of God and for there to be no cause in the human being to receive grace. Oh how this awful teaching is at war with God for His glory and many people who call themselves Reformed today still think of Pelagianism (under the guise of Arminianism) as teaching the same Gospel as they do. No, no and a trillion times no. The gospel of ‘free-will’ is now and always will be at war with God’s Gospel of grace alone.

What need now of Christ? What need now of the Spirit? We have now found a passage which stops the mouths of all; not only does it clearly assert the freedom of the will, but it clearly teaches also that keeping the commandments is easy! What a fool was Christ, who shed His blood to purchase for us the Spirit, Whom we do not need, in order that we might be able to keep the commandments with ease, when we are so already by nature! (Luther, Bondage of the Will )

Luther, despite his sarcasm, or perhaps even more through the use of it, makes a very powerful point. This point deserves to be declared and proclaimed from the rooftops. It is not as if ‘free-will’ is a rather small and innocuous teaching that can go along with the biblical teaching of grace, but it is opposed to the work of Christ and the work of the Holy Spirit. ‘Free-will’ stands opposed to the biblical teaching of justification by grace alone and sanctification by grace as well. In fact, it cuts at the very heart of who God is and who man is. While Scripture tells us that “it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy” (Rom 9:16), the teaching of ‘free-will’ teaches that in some way it does depend on the man who wills.

What does the sinner need Christ for? To supply some things so that man can apply it to himself? Does the sinner need Christ for a few things, many things, and perhaps most things; or does the sinner need Christ alone? The teaching of ‘free-will,’ though perhaps not all who hold to it see where it leads, leads to the insufficiency of the work of Christ. How many of the sins of man can man pay for Himself? None, absolutely none and so man is cast utterly upon Christ for the payment of sin so that God will be propitiated. Man is not free to pay for one sin and his vaunted ‘free-will’ is utterly powerless in this case. How much righteousness can man contribute to his own salvation? None again, so man and his much ballyhooed ‘free—will’ is utterly powerless in this situation as well. What can man’s ‘free-will’ do to obtain the Holy Spirit? Nothing at all because the Spirit was purchased for sinners by Christ Himself and so there is absolutely nothing left for man to do even if he could.

What can the so-called ‘free-will’ of man do to break the power of the bondage of sin and of the devil? Puny little man is helpless in the bondage of his sin until the omnipotent power of God breaks that bondage and sets man free from it. Can the ‘free-will’ of man give himself an understanding of spiritual things? Of course not since the Scripture is utterly clear that the “natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised” (I Cor 2:14). Can the ‘free-will’ of man give himself a view of the glory of God? Can the ‘free-will’ of man shine the light of this glory in his own heart? Of course not because it is God alone who can do this: “For God, who said, “Light shall shine out of darkness,” is the One who has shone in our hearts to give the Light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ” (II Cor 4:6). Can this mighty will of man procure salvation for himself or any part of it? Oh no, it is Christ alone who can do this. Salvation comes to sinners apart from what sinners can do and apart from any merit or work they can do. Salvation is by grace and grace alone. ‘Free-will,’ in terms of what it is, stands opposed to that. ‘Free-will’ is not just some harmless deviation from the truth of grace alone, but is opposed to it at all points.

What does it mean to have ‘free-will’ in light of the work of Christ? Did Christ die to save men who can do part of the work by their ‘free-wills’ or did He die to deliver men from their complete bondage to sin? We can argue this in a philosophical way, but we must see this from a Christ-centered and biblical way. Christ died to completely save sinners and not just provide them some, or even a lot, assistance. The Gospel is from beginning to end of grace and grace alone. It does not good for sinners to give lip-service to that and then go out saying that teachings (like ‘free-will’) that contradict it are not that big of a deal. Man cannot look to ‘free-will’ in the slightest if man is going to look to Christ alone and grace alone to save. One cannot have it both ways. It is not Christ alone and also mostly Christ and a little of my will. It is not Christ alone and virtually all of Christ plus a little of my will. It is either Christ alone or it is not Christ alone. No matter how little man tries to add to Christ alone it is still an addition which denies Christ alone. That makes it a different gospel.

In his day God moved in the heart of Luther and the gloves came off and Luther punched away with bare knuckles at all systems of thought that were opposed to Christ alone. God raised Luther up and then used that pure Gospel to shine forth His glory and bring about a true revival. We cannot be gracious and nice (in the modern sense) about these things and expect a revival to come. Being gracious in these things is to be opposed to true grace.

What need now of Christ? What need now of the Spirit? We have now found a passage which stops the mouths of all; not only does it clearly assert the freedom of the will, but it clearly teaches also that keeping the commandments is easy! What a fool was Christ, who shed His blood to purchase for us the Spirit, Whom we do not need, in order that we might be able to keep the commandments with ease, when we are so already by nature!  Luther, Bondage of the Will

Luther is responding to Erasmus who quotes Deuteronomy and states that it is easy to keep the commandments. With sarcasm dripping from his pen, Luther demolishes Erasmus’ thought and along with it the teaching of ‘free-will’ as well. True enough it may not be obvious at first glance, but with a little thought it will easily be seen. The position of Erasmus was essentially that of the Pelagian position, that if the Bible commands you to keep the commandments then you have the power to do so. The passage in question, Deuteronomy 30:14, tells us that “the word is very near you, in your mouth and in your heart, that you may observe it.” Erasmus made the deduction that since the word is in you and it is in you that you may observe it that the will must be free to do so. But Luther went in a different direction and in doing so makes a very powerful point.

If the will is already free enough to keep the commands of God and that without salvation, then what need do we have of Christ and the Spirit? Galatians 3:13-14 makes the point that Christ died that believers would have the Holy Spirit: “13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us– for it is written, “CURSED IS EVERYONE WHO HANGS ON A TREE “– 14 in order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we would receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.” This is very important and we must pay close attention to it, especially when we link the teaching of Romans 8:3-4 with Galatians: “For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh, 4 so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.”

Galatians 3:13-14 teaches with clarity that Christ died so that believers would receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. Romans 8:3-4 teaches us that what the Law could not do (holiness, power to keep the Law) that God did. God sent the Son to be an offering for sin, but one reason He did so is so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in His people. The power of these verses demonstrates to us that our will is not free to keep the Law since it took the death of Christ to purchase the Spirit who alone can fulfill the Law in the people of God. The will does not have the power to keep the Law or be holy, but instead it takes the work of Christ and the Holy Spirit in the soul of a human being to fulfill the Law.

There are many teachings that these verses shed light on. One, they show quite clearly that the will of human souls is not free and does not have the power to keep the Law apart from the work of Christ and the Holy Spirit. In fact, to assert the freedom of the will in this context is to denigrate the work of Christ and of the Holy Spirit. Second, this teaching shows that the Law of God has not been abrogated. Not only does Christ not do away with the Law of God, but He died in order to purchase the Holy Spirit who would work in human souls so that He could fulfill the Law in and through them. This shows the great error of those who are teaching the so-called New Covenant teaching today. The Law has not been done away with, but instead it is worked in the heart and life of believers by the Holy Spirit. The Gospel of grace alone is not that the Law has been done away with, but instead in accordance with the true teaching of the New Covenant God works in the souls of His people that they may fulfill it.

We see the so-called ‘free-will’ put to the test here by Luther. If the will is free enough to keep the Law now, then there was no need for Christ to have gone to the cross and suffered in order to purchase the Spirit so that believers could have the Law fulfilled in them. The will is utterly powerless to keep the Law until Christ Himself and His Spirit are in the soul working love for God and His people in them. The Law was not given in order that we may keep it, but to be a tutor to lead people to see their utter inability to keep it and so teach them their need of Christ and the cross. But that also teaches us the need of the Spirit to keep the Law. Today we have people asserting the power of the will and trying to do away with the Law of God. Both, at the very least, are very dangerous teachings. Both are opposed to the true work of Christ in purchasing the Spirit and in the work of the Spirit in working obedience to the Law in the souls of His people. The Law teaches that we must have Christ in us now.

So the words of the law are spoken, not to assert the power of the will, but to illuminate the blindness of reason, so that it may see that its own light is nothing, and the power of the will is nothing. ‘By the law is knowledge of sin,’ says Paul (Rom 3:20). He does not say: abolition, or avoidance, of sin. The entire design and power of the law is just to give knowledge, and that of nothing but of sin; not to display or confer any power. The knowledge is not power, nor does it bring power; but it teaches and displays that there is here no power, and great weakness….It is from this passage that I derive my answer to you; that by the words of the law man is admonished and taught, not what he can do, but what he ought to do; that is, that he may know his sin, not that he may believe that he has any strength. (Luther, The Bondage of the Will)

This concept that Luther sets out is just one of the many concepts concerning the will that is vital to understanding the Gospel of grace alone. It seems like human beings, apart from a close examination of Scripture and/or another person pointing it out; just assume that what God commands man has the will to do. But that statement, while seemingly innocent enough on the surface, is at the heart of Pelagianism. To some it is an Arminian thought, and so not as bad, but in reality it is a Pelagian concept. A.A. Hodge sets the heart of Pelagianism out like this:

(a.) Moral character can be predicated only of volitions. (b.) Ability is always the measure of responsibility. (c). Hence every man has always the plenary power to do all that it is his duty to do. (d). Hence the human will alone, to the exclusion of the interference of an internal influence from God, must decide human character and destiny.

Pelagianism, then, reads the commands of Scripture and believes that man must have the power to keep the commands. This is utterly vital. Whenever, then, we hear people saying and writing that man has the power to keep the commands because God commands, know that you are hearing Pelagianism. On the other hand, A.A. Hodge sets out what is Augustinian or Reformed:

(a.) Man is by nature so entirely depraved in his moral nature as to be totally unable to do any thing spiritually good, or in any degree to begin or dispose himself thereto. (b.) That even under the exciting and suasory influences of divine grace the will of man is totally unable to act aright in co-operation with grace, until after the will itself is by the energy of grace radically and permanently renewed. (c.) Even after the renewal of the will it ever continues dependent upon divine grace to prompt, direct, and enable it in the performance of every good work.

Notice the massive difference between the two and yet notice how the Reformed view is right in line with what Luther taught that Scripture taught. It is true that the Arminian and semi-Pelagian thinks that there is a middle position between the two, but that is nothing but an illusion. It is called “the semi-Pelagian” view and not “the semi-Reformed” view. The semi-Pelagian and the Arminian hold to the view that man is able to cooperate with grace because of the free-will to some degree. But the Reformed view is the biblical view and shows that man cannot do one good or spiritual thing apart from grace. The Law is brought to bear upon the conscience of the human soul and it is to show what sin is and the inability of the human soul to keep it. The Law, when brought to bear upon the conscience and the depths of the human soul, is a tutor that leads the soul to Christ. The semi-Pelagian and Arminian view that thinks that preaching the commands shows that man must be able to some degree to keep the Law does not lead man to grace alone but to grace plus human ability.

When some use the Law to show man his ability, they are using the Law in ways that it was not given for. Paul himself said that the Law was used to show him that he could not keep the Law.
Rom 7:8 But sin, taking opportunity through the commandment, produced in me coveting of every kind; for apart from the Law sin is dead. 9 I was once alive apart from the Law; but when the commandment came, sin became alive and I died; 10 and this commandment, which was to result in life, proved to result in death for me; 11 for sin, taking an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me.

Paul’s teaching of the Law does not contradict what God used the Law to do to him. The Law was preached to and read by Paul, but when that happened he saw sin in his heart and he died. What he died to was his own efforts to keep the Law and righteousness as a result of the Law. Paul the Pharisee lost all hope in his own works and righteousness once he heard and understood the true nature of the Law. So the Law must be preached in its fullest extent so that men and women may know that they don’t have any power at all to keep it. Then they will look to Christ and to Christ alone.

So the words of the law are spoken, not to assert the power of the will, but to illuminate the blindness of reason, so that it may see that its own light is nothing, and the power of the will is nothing. ‘By the law is knowledge of sin,’ says Paul (Rom 3:20). He does not say: abolition, or avoidance, of sin. The entire design and power of the law is just to give knowledge, and that of nothing but of sin; not to display or confer any power. The knowledge is not power, nor does it bring power; but it teaches and displays that there is here no power, and great weakness….It is from this passage that I derive my answer to you; that by the words of the law man is admonished and taught, not what he can do, but what he ought to do; that is, that he may know his sin, not that he may believe that he has any strength. (Luther, The Bondage of the Will)

Luther’s approach to the Law should awaken many to their own unexamined presuppositions that they have. When many read or hear the Law of God, they assume that man must have enough power in the will to obey the Law. It does take, after all, power to obey. But human beings simply assume that they have the power to obey the Law without really thinking about it. Could God have another reason in giving the Law? It is just as logical to think that God gives the Law to show man his inability in order to show man his need of Christ. The real question, then, is what Scripture teaches on the issue.

The Law is a transcript of the holiness of God. Can we be like God in our own power? Can man be like God in the power of the flesh? As seen above, the Law was given and men both then and now approach it in two (broadly speaking) categories. They look at the Law and assume that they have the power to keep it and to do that they must think of themselves as sufficient to do so. The second group looks at the Law and knows that they don’t have the power to keep it and need to be saved from their sins of breaking it and to have grace in the heart to keep it. Paul was very clear on this issue and the second approach is the biblical approach.

Galatians 2:19 “For through the Law I died to the Law, so that I might live to God 20 “I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me. 24 Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith

In these three verses from Galatians Paul could not have been much clearer. One use of the Law is in order that sinners may die to the Law. But note that it is not the Law that dies, but that the sinner dies to the Law. In other words, sinners are not to look to themselves and their own power to keep any part of the Law, but instead they are to die to their own ability and any strength in themselves to keep the Law. Sinners are to die to themselves in relation to keeping the Law as their own righteousness. It is in this way that Law serves as a tutor to lead sinners to Christ. It drives them to an end of their own strength and ability to keep the Law and so they must have Christ.

Romans 5:20 The Law came in so that the transgression would increase; but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, 7:4 Therefore, my brethren, you also were made to die to the Law through the body of Christ, so that you might be joined to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God. 7:6 But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter. 7:9 I was once alive apart from the Law; but when the commandment came, sin became alive and I died;

The verses listed above from Romans should nail the case down and put it beyond question. The Law does not assume ability in human beings at all in terms of keeping it. But instead the Law was given so that transgression would increase and grace would abound. Once again we see that the sinner must die to the Law and the sinner must die to the power and ability of self to keep the Law. The Law was not given to sinners so that they could see the power they have in themselves and keep the Law, but to show them their sin so that they could see that they have no power to keep the Law and so die to themselves and their own ability to keep it. Until the sinner dies to self the sinner is in bondage to the Law as a way of salvation. But the Law was never given as a way of salvation or for sinners to save or partially save themselves, but as a way for sinners to die to themselves and so rest in Christ and Christ alone. The fallen mind says we have the ability, but Scripture emphatically says we don’t.

So the words of the law are spoken, not to assert the power of the will, but to illuminate the blindness of reason, so that it may see that its own light is nothing, and the power of the will is nothing. ‘By the law is knowledge of sin,’ says Paul (Rom 3:20). He does not say: abolition, or avoidance, of sin. The entire design and power of the law is just to give knowledge, and that of nothing but of sin; not to display or confer any power. The knowledge is not power, nor does it bring power; but it teaches and displays that there is here no power, and great weakness….It is from this passage that I derive my answer to you; that by the words of the law man is admonished and taught, not what he can do, but what he ought to do; that is, that he may know his sin, not that he may believe that he has any strength.  (Luther, The Bondage of the Will)

In this passage from Luther we see a great dividing point. While the Pelagian (and differing forms of semi-Pelagianism) see that God gives the law and that man must have some ability or God would not give the law to them, Luther derives his answer from Scripture. It is true that the Pelagian answer is from so-called common sense, yet it is common from a fallen soul. Human beings fell into pride and self-sufficiency, so the Pelagian answer is really the answer of the proud and self-sufficient soul. The Pelagian answer says that what God commands a person to do what a person has the ability to do, but that it is simply the presupposition of a proud and fallen soul. Luther builds his case on Scripture.

 In Romans 3:20 Paul tells us that “through the Law comes the knowledge of sin.” With a little of the context this is seen with even more clarity: “19 Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law, so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God; 20 because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin” (Rom 3).

In verse 19 the Law has something to say and the reasons that it speaks is given. The Law speaks so that “every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God.” This passage gives the purpose of the Law. It is not given so that those with ability may or may not choose to keep it, but so that every mouth would be closed. The Law was not given so people can keep it and be justified in the sight of God. So the Law was not given as a way for sinners to justify themselves, but it is given as a means to know sin. Notice the correlation between knowing sin in verse 20 and the shutting the mouth in verse 19. That is what the Law does when it is understood.

 Paul also gives us the same thought in Romans 7 as he shows us what this looks like: “7 What shall we say then? Is the Law sin? May it never be! On the contrary, I would not have come to know sin except through the Law; for I would not have known about coveting if the Law had not said, “YOU SHALL NOT COVET.” 8 But sin, taking opportunity through the commandment, produced in me coveting of every kind; for apart from the Law sin is dead. 9 I was once alive apart from the Law; but when the commandment came, sin became alive and I died.” It is not that the Law just gives a bare knowledge about what sin is, but when applied by the Spirit the Law comes pierces and sin comes alive and the person sees that the Law speaks to the sin in the depths of his or her heart.

 The command to believe is not to show us what we can do, but what needs to be done. The command to believe does not tell us that we can believe, but that we must believe if we are going to be saved. This points to an awful reality that is so widespread today. Human beings have taken the Law that is supposed to show them their sin and break them from their self and self-will and instead they use it as a means of self-righteousness. People take the command to believe and instead of falling on their faces and crying out for hearts that can believe they think they have it in their own ability to do so. This shows us the self-sufficient and blinded hearts of so many today. They rely on themselves (free-will) and use that which God has given to break them from themselves as a way to attain righteousness in their own eyes.

 Romans 3:19-20 and 7:7-9 are very clear. The Law has a purpose and it is not to be a path for people to follow to obtain righteousness. The Law is to show people that they cannot keep it and to shut their mouths toward God and His righteous judgment of condemnation on them apart from Christ. The Law is used by the Spirit to pierce the soul and to lay open the depths of the heart and the intents of it. When it does that, no one can claim to be worthy of anything but eternal damnation and to look to nothing but sovereign grace to save. When the Law is preached there will be animosity in the unregenerate soul and it will hate what it hears. But maybe the mouth will be shut.