Because I think it will be helpful for readers and for myself, to keep myself disciplined and concentrated on meaning, I'm going to try something. I'm going to summarize the main sections of Martin Luther's "The Bondage of the Will" as I read it. FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO WANT TO QUIT READING...just wait. There is perhaps no topic in the Bible more neglected yet remains more relevant to everything essential to the Bible than "Free Will". Most people dismiss it as abstract, superfluous nonsense, irrelevant to the weekend's football games, the stock market, Iraq, and the presidential election. What a sad misunderstanding. We have found no subject in the Bile more encouraging and enlightening to WHO God is than in this doctrine. Martin Luther, one of the foremost leaders in the Reformation and one of the most important people in history, said himself that this was his most important work. As I've started reading the book, it's scary how contemporary it sounds. With that said, give the periodic "book reports" a try.
P1- 38: Luther is replying to Erasmus, a Catholic writing who is known for being eloquent but not intellectually rigorous
Erasmus claims that discussion about "Free Will" is unnecessary and superfluous. Yet, at the same time he claims that the people must strive for God while recognizing that Gods mercy is necessary for this striving effective. Luther responds like this: The topic of "Free WIll" is anything but "unnecessary and superfluous" because (1) it clarifies for us what we can and cant do in our strivings after God, and (2) informs us as to whom God is so that we know what he does and thus can trust and worship. Luther uses and analogy--would a farmer sow and plow a field without first assessing his field, his seed, whether he has the proper equipment and know how to do the job? Would a general proceed into war without first examining whether his soldiers are fit, money is plentiful, and how the various elements of strategy fit together. Or as Jesus says in Luke 14, would we ever build a tower without first counting the cost? Of course not! However, Erasmus and any many of us says that such "theological jargon" is irrelevant. If we think such matters are too abstract and muddy for us to care about, how are we to know if and how we could be saved, what our needs and abilities are...MOST PEOPLE JUST ASSUME THESE ANSWERS WHILE AT THE SAME TIME SAYING THEY TOO UNCLEAR AND IRRELEVANT. Do you see the contradiction? How can you assume something so essential to becoming and being a Christian while saying it's unnecessary? Why are we so thoughtful and careful about worldly things and about eternal things, we're so flippant? This speaks much to our hearts' condition and perhaps to our salvation if we are not stirred to inquire of our needs and God's nature and work in saving us. Luther closes this section by stating his goal for the book. In short, he says to Erasmus, basically, I'm going to make you define "Free WIll". When you do, you'll see what happens. Hardly anyone does this and thus start using empty words and neglect to consider what the Scriptures say in light of their arbitrary definition. (As one theologian has pointed out, Arminians [those who traditionally are said to believe in "Free Will"] hang their entire argument on a philosophical presupposition that is BROUGHT to Scripture, not one that is explicitly seen in Scripture.)
By the way (Brad here, not Luther), I think one reason why people struggle so much on this when they think about it is that people aren't comfortable not understanding everything. IF the Scriptures creates for us categories of thought we can't reconcile, then so be it. However, what many do is reject "what" is the clear teaching of Scripture because they don't see "how" it could be true. Until next time...
