Luther and Erasmus: The Controversy Concerning the Bondage of the Will

Protestant Reformed Theological Journal ^ | April 1999 | Garrett J. Eriks

[AlbionGirl]

Paul spoke plainly to "those little, weak, unsightly congregations that he organized, who he nevertheless dares to characterize in terms of that which is from all appearances far from reality." He didn't have to speak plainly, he was well-educated, used to mixing with people of influence and perhaps affluence. He was a Roman citizen who seemed not unhappy to be able to call himself one. He knew the value of being plain, as the following Scripture shows.

“Being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in His blood, to declare His righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; to declare, I say, at this time His righteousness: that He might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus. Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? Of works? Nay: but by the law of faith. Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.” Romans 3:24-28

For quite a while following St. Paul, it seems that the congregations were of an artisan class, I'm not sure when it became fashionable to mold the faith in an 'intelligentzia' pattern, but it seems to have conincided with the rise of the cementation of the clerical class thereby creating sort of a 38th parallel between them and the laity. Maybe they had no choice, if the Faith was to be preserved, but it changed everything and many of those things not necessarily for the good.

A while back I discovered the following quote from Spurgeon, which says it all, in my view:

“It is treason to men's souls to conceal the plain truth of salvation beneath a cloud of words: where God's honour and man's eternal destiny are concerned, everything should be as clear as the sun at noonday. Metaphysical becloudment, when a soul is at stake, is diabolical cruelty.” (C. Spurgeon - Be Plain)

[D-fendr]

My post was intended to address a lack of the transcendent.

[AlbionGirl]

I personally think this is wrong and the Lord's Supper should be offered every time Christians meet. I have thought of going to the pastor on this and offering to underwrite the cost of communion. However I suspect the issue isn't one of cost as much as it is of time. We don't have the time to be bother by it. Sad indeed.

I agree, Harley. And I've wondered how it evolved as unimportant. Calvin was pretty big on making sure that those that partook of the Sacrament, though I think he called it an Ordinance of the Lord, were not obviously in a state in which they would profane the Sacrament by partaking of it, as addressed by Paul. That isn't the action of a man who considered the Lord's Supper just symbolism.

St. Paul referred to the Lord's Supper as sharing the Loaf, didn't he? It's interesting to me to see the evolution of language as it regards the Lord's Supper. The Eucharist, as I've always known it to be called, means thanksgiving I think, and while obviously referencing the Bread or Loaf, does not mean either one of those words itself.

[AlbionGirl]

Happy and Blessed Easter, Kosta.

[AlbionGirl]

Forgot to copy you in on post 5044. I think I know what you're thinking is on the subject, Dr. E, but I'd also like to know what qua and FK think.

[D-fendr]

The post you mention also included: "And the universe is suffused with Truth." which I think we would agree is an expression of divine immanence.

[HarleyD]

Man's "free will" is a curious thing....Man can either follow God's will or his own.

You know, at times I can either post something either totally profound or utterly stupid. In this rare case I believe it was the former. I was thinking of our Lord Jesus and His "will". The scriptures states:

Phi 2:6-8 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.

I've been thinking about this. Our Lord Jesus completely gave up His will throughout His entire life even onto a horrible death and submitted to God's will. Why would we, who are to emmulate Christ, insist on our "free will"? Shouldn't we submit to the Father just as our Lord Jesus did? Didn't He set us an example to go and do likewise?

Rather interesting.

[kosta50]

Happy and Blessed Easter, Kosta.

Thank you, and may God's blessings be with you too. Christ is risen!

[Gamecock]

I fail to see what is so special about our free will. It has caused nothing but trouble for the sons and daughters of Adam.

[kosta50]

Is the atonement established by our "putting it into practice," or by the direct hand of God?

Everything is from God, Dr. E, but God does not circumvent His people.

"Unexpected trials are sent by God to teach us to practice the ascetic life; and they lead us to repentence even when we are reluctant" [St Mark the Ascetic, #8, Philokalia]

Reluctance comes from our will to resist God's will (pride and arrogance) we inherited from our Ancestral Parents and their Fall. But we are also free to use these trials to reach repentance God offers us.

[kosta50]

HD Why would we, who are to emmulate Christ, insist on our "free will"? Shouldn't we submit to the Father just as our Lord Jesus did? Didn't He set us an example to go and do likewise?

But that's exactly the point. Jesus, the Man, chose to obey the Father unto death. God leaves us the same choice.

[Gamecock]

***But that's exactly the point. Jesus, the Man, chose to obey the Father unto death. God leaves us the same choice.***

The only reason He could obey the Father was that He was God. Adam was a man and couldn't do it. We can't do so. It requires a devine nature.

[kosta50]

The only reason He could obey the Father was that He was God. Adam was a man and couldn't do it. We can't do so. It requires a devine nature

God give His blessings to the righteous and to the unrighteous; He offers to all. We don't fail because God's grace is lacking; but our will to obey Him.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

I fail to see what is so special about our free will. It has caused nothing but trouble for the sons and daughters of Adam.

Yep. "Free will" is an illusion. We think we are acting a nano-second before God considers the moment itself. In reality, we are reacting a nano-second behind God's will for every speck of time in existence.

The assumption of free will is the first, last and most stubborn vestige of our fall.

"Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?" -- Romans 9:20

It's always surprising that so many Christians are loathe to admit to it. Rather than disdaining God's control of our lives, we should be glorifying God with our gratitude for His gift of grace through faith in His Son. If God guides our every step, we should rejoice.

Off-center, distracted and nervous, that's how the world wants us.

[AlbionGirl]

"We think we are acting a nano-second before God considers the moment itself. In reality, we are reacting a nano-second behind God's will for every speck of time in existence."

Wonderfully stated!

"Off-center, distracted and nervous, that's how the world wants us."

No question about it, Dr. E. Satan has no better ally than confusion:

"why puzzlin' you, is the nature of my game..."

[Dr. Eckleburg]

LOL. A Stones fan! You must have a colorful past. 8~)

[AlbionGirl]

Yes, 'colorful' indeed, my FRiend. :)

[HarleyD]

It's always surprising that so many Christians are loathe to admit to it.

An interesting paradox, Dr. E. I believe Spurgeon once said something to the effect that Christians will broadly say they make a choice. Yet if you question them on their specific salvation they will say it is God's grace that saved them.