God Loves… Himself

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The principles advocated by Luther would certainly involve a mental and spiritual revolution for virtually all Christians and for professing Christians. As 16th century people were blinded by the religion and culture of their day, so is ours. Scripture warns against self-deception, the deception of sin, and the deception of the Deceiver. All of these deceptions can happen in the professing Church and in culture. The world that has virtually taken over the professing Church will stand against true Christianity in the world and in the Church. The manner, method, content, and aim of preaching and evangelism are not even close to what it was during the Reformation and then for some time after. What follows is from the Puritan preacher and writer, John Owen,

Let me add this to them who are preachers of the word, or intend, through the good hand of God, that employment: It is their duty to plead with men about their sins, to lay hold on particular sins, but always remember that it be done with that which is the proper end of law and gospel;–that is, that they make use of the sin they speak against to the discovery of the state and condition wherein the sinner is; otherwise, haply, they may work men to formality and hypocrisy, but little of the true end of preaching the gospel will be brought about. It will not avail to beat a man off from his drunkenness into a sober formality. A skilful master of the assemblies lays his axe at the root, drives still at the heart. To inveigh against particular sins of ignorant, unregenerate persons, such as the land is full of, is a good work; but yet, though it may be done with great efficacy, vigour, and success, if this be all the effect of it, that they are set upon the most sedulous endeavors of mortifying their sins preached down, all that is done is but like the beating of an enemy in an open field, and driving him into an impregnable castle, not to be prevailed against. Get you at any time a sinner at the advantage, on the account of any one sin whatever? Have you any thing to take hold of him by?—bring it to his state and condition, drive it up the head, and there deal with him. To break men off particular sins, and not to break their hearts, is to deprive ourselves of advantages of dealing with them (Of The Mortification of Sin in Believers).

The words of Owen in a very real sense are nothing more than an enlargement of Scripture which tells us that people will gather to themselves teachers who will tickle their ears rather than preach the truth (II Tim 4:3). Even Paul, who brought the Gospel to so many, exclaimed this: “So have I become your enemy by telling you the truth?” (Gal 4:16). The truth is not heard gladly by most people. We must not nod our heads and think that these things are not true of those who are orthodox. How many have eased up in preparation or in an actual sermon out of fear that it would make folks mad? Oh, sure, we will use language to excuse our sin. We will say that we don’t want to offend people or don’t want to harm those who are spiritually weak. But it is easy for the orthodox to tickle the ears of the hearers who love orthodoxy as well. It is easy to deal with the known sin of the world and go after that. It is easy to go after the sin of the liberals. It is easy to even go after certain sins and think we have done our duty. But do we really deal with the hearts of the listeners? Sure we will use the word “heart” and so on, but do we really try to show men, women, and children their utter helplessness in their sin? That might mean that we would be accused of being a hyper-Calvinist or of going too far. The real danger, however, is that we will not go far enough and leave many people deceived in their sin. We will drive people into an armory of self-deception where their hearts are hardened and our weak weapons aimed at the outside in nice words will make no impression at all. Our gracious words will do nothing but bounce off hardened hearts and be heard in a way that confirms people in their sin. That is not preaching in the Reformation way at all. It is not how Luther said we must teach if the Gospel is to be interpreted correctly. It is preaching in a modern way that leaves people in their sin while deceived about their eternal destinies. It will take a radical revolution in our preaching before we see change.

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

The principles which Luther sets out, vindicates, and powerfully argues for in The Bondage of the Will would demand a change in the modern Church. They do not demand a minor change, not do they simply demand a lot of change. They demand a radical change. It would be a change so radical that it would require a repentance from man-centered thinking and practices to those of God. While the externals are different from the Reformation that God sent in the sixteenth century, the heart of the matter is not. The core problem with Roman Catholicism in Luther’s day was a denial of the Gospel of grace alone through faith alone. When the true Gospel that is centered and focused upon God is not the focus of a professing church, then the focus becomes on man and on ways for man to obtain salvation or ways to obtain the favor of God. That is the state of the professing Church today.

It is hard for people to hear and apparently extremely hard for ministers to hear, but the version of Christianity of modern America is not what thundered forth during the time of the Reformation. Indeed we have some that hold to the creeds and writings that came forth from Luther, Calvin and others, but some basic things have changed. When one removes God from the center of those creeds and writings (at least in practice if not in theory), then the very heart of those creeds and writings has been changed. To really go back to the principles of Martin Luther is to take to heart the core beliefs that he had and not just pick some of the things we like. This is not to say that Luther was inerrant or perfect, because he was not. It is to say, however, that the core of his teaching is the core of true Christianity. We are impoverished the more we stray from those things.

The very core of Luther’s teachings can be adhered to in the externals while denying the very heart of them. The deepest core belief of Luther seemed to revolve around his teaching that all is to be done to the glory of God. While this sounds good to many on the surface (and most professing believers would intellectually agree to the statement), that is far different than having that as the cherished belief and love of the heart. If all things are for the glory of God, then that means that we must take God at His Word concerning the depravity of man’s heart and his utter inability to do spiritual things of himself. That would also mean that we would have to take the sovereignty of God out of our creeds and truly apply them to whatever we think and do. It is easy to give lip-service to a statement that God is sovereign, but it is far harder to really grapple with that fact in all of life. It is easier to give lip-service to God’s sovereignty than it is to bow to it. It is easier to give lip-service to God’s sovereignty and preach about it in sermons than it is to apply it to all of life. It is easier to speak nice words about God than it is to declare His absolute sovereignty over all of human life. We would rather think of God and His sovereignty as being focused on us and helping us fulfill our plans. But God and His sovereignty are God-centered. He is focused on Himself and His glory. We are to bow in humility before Him and seek His plans and His glory in His way.

Are ministers today really ready for the radical change and revolution that is needed today? Oh, many will talk about revival and this or that. Many will talk about the need for Reformed teaching and this or that. But do we really want to step off of our own thrones and bow in submission to God? Are we really ready to step out of the pulpits of the land in order to die to self and have the life of Christ preach in and through us? Are we really ready to die to the honor of men that Christ would be honored? In all honesty, I don’t see that as something men are ready to do. There are too many like the Pharisees who liked their positions of honor and power more than Christ.

Have we not grown used to an Erasmian brand of reaching from our pulpits—a message that rests on the same shallow synergistic conceptions which Luther refuted, picturing God and man approaching each other almost on equal terms, each having his own contribution to make to man’s salvation and each depending on the dutiful co-operation of the other for the attainment of that end?—as if God exists for man’s convenience, rather than man for God’s glory? Is it not true, conversely, that it is rare to-day to hear proclaimed the diagnosis of our predicament which Luther—and Scripture—put forward: that man is hopeless and helpless in sin, fast bound in Satan’s slavery, at enmity with God, blind and dead to the things of the Spirit? And hence, how rarely do we hear faith spoken of as Scripture depicts it—as it is expressed in the cry of self-committal with which the contrite heart, humbled to see its need and made conscious of its own utter helplessness even to trust, casts itself in the God-given confidence of self-despair upon the mercy of Jesus Christ—‘Lord, I believe; help Thou my unbelief!’ Can we deny the essential rightness of Luther’s exegesis of the texts? And if not, dare we ignore the implications of his exposition? (Johnson and Packer’s introduction to Luther’s Bondage of the Will).

When was the last time you heard a sermon that diagnosed the heart of sin and the sin of the heart of man that devastated you and allowed you to see that grace alone was the only way of salvation? When was the last time you had someone set forth the fact that human beings are hopeless and helpless in their sin? Instead, what we hear is some form of semi-Pelagianism that puts God at the feet of man hoping that man will do something so that He can save them. Do we hear sermons that set out how sinners are bound tight and are in slavery to sin and Satan? Do we hear sermons and writings that set out the nature of sin as enmity against God? Is sin set out as that which blinds sinners to the things of God and that sinners are truly dead to the things of the Spirit?

When sin is not set out for what it is, then only a shallow repentance from sin is possible. It is only possible to repent from sin to the degree we understand sin. But, says the modern person, sinners must believe in order to be saved. That is correct, but how can one believe unless one repents from unbelief? How can one be delivered from sin unless one repents of sin? It is easy enough for sinners to repent of certain sins and perhaps most of outward sins. So if we don’t dive to the depths of the sin of their hearts they don’t know that they must repent of the sins of their hearts as well. If we don’t show them the nature of their hearts, then they won’t see the need of the new birth. If we don’t set out the depths of the sin of their hearts, they won’t see the real issue of depravity nor the real need to be delivered from the depths of their bondage of sin.

Another problem of not getting to the bondage of the will in preaching and setting out the true nature of sin is that man will not find out what true faith is. Apart from a realization deep in the soul of the nature of sin and of man’s utter helplessness in sin man is not humbled and contrite and so does not see the true nature of faith. Apart from that deep realization of the helplessness of the soul in sin the soul will not see its inability to trust in Christ and to even cast itself on mercy. It is only when the soul that has reached an end to all hope in self that it can see that it must despair of self in order to have the gift of faith that God gives and not trust in self. Luther would teach us that until the soul has been deeply humbled and broken from its own self and self-will that it is not ready to be saved.

The Scripture sets out saving faith and the humbling of the soul in much the same way. It is those who are weary and tired of their burden of sin that find rest in Christ (Mat 11:27-30). The Lord is only pleased to dwell with those who are contrite and humble (Isa 57:15). It is only those who are turned and become as little children that can be said to be saved (Mat 18:3). It is only those who have denied self that can be said to follow Christ (Mat 16:24). God resists the proud but gives grace to the humble (I Peter 5:5). Verses like that describe the Philippian jailor who came trembling at the feet of Paul and cried out what must he do to be saved (Acts 16:27-30). God does not save the proud and He does not give salvation to those who have not repented but are still in their sin. But instead the salvation that He gives includes the repentance from sinful hearts and a transfer from the dominion of the devil to the kingdom of the Beloved Son. We live in a day where we are more afraid to offend people by telling them the truth of their sin than we are of offending God and not telling His enemies that they are offending and are at enmity with Him. While some buildings are filled with those who hear sweet things (maybe even orthodox) rather than the truth about themselves, the kingdom of heaven is populated only by those who have truly repented. True preaching will offend those who hate to hear about their sin. After all, they hated Christ first.