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

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

[HarleyD]

Augustine about Pelagius-"Certainly He did not make them so; nor did He foresee that He would make them so, but that they would be so"

Jokus about Augustine-THIS is what Pelagius says...That God didn't make man good - but that man would BE so.

To ensure I have not missed anything let's just take the entire passage...

"Therefore," says the Pelagian, "He foreknew who would be holy and immaculate by the choice of free will, and on that account elected them before the foundation of the world in that same foreknowledge of His in which He foreknew that they would be such. Therefore He elected them," says he, "before they existed, predestinating them to be children whom He foreknew to be holy and immaculate. Certainly He did not make them so; nor did He foresee that He would make them so, but that they would be so." Let us, then, look into the words of the apostle and see whether He chose us before the foundation of the world because we were going to be holy and immaculate, or in order that we might be so. "Blessed," says he, "be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us in all spiritual blessing in the heavens in Christ; even as He hath chosen us in Himself before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and unspotted." [Eph. 1.3.] Not, then, because we were to be so, but that we might be so. Assuredly it is certain,—assuredly it is manifest. Certainly we were to be such for the reason that He has chosen us, predestinating us to be such by His grace. Therefore "He blessed us with spiritual blessing in the heavens in Christ Jesus, even as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and immaculate in His sight, predestinating us in love to the adoption of children through Jesus Christ to Himself." Attend to what he then adds: "According to the good pleasure," he says, "of His will;" in order that we might not in so great a benefit of grace glory concerning the good pleasure of our will. "In which," says he, "He hath shown us favour in His beloved Son,"—in which, certainly, His own will, He hath shown us favour. Thus, it is said, He hath shown us grace by grace, even as it is said, He has made us righteous by righteousness. "In whom," he says, "we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace, which has abounded to us in all wisdom and prudence; that He might show to us the mystery of His will, according to His good pleasure." In this mystery of His will, He placed the riches of His grace, according to His good pleasure, not according to ours, which could not possibly be good unless He Himself, according to His own good pleasure, should aid it to become so. But when he had said, "According to His good pleasure," he added, "which He purposed in Him," that is, in His beloved Son, "in the dispensation of the fullness of times to restore all things in Christ, which are in heaven, and which are in earth, in Him: in whom also we too have obtained a lot, being predestinated according to His purpose who worketh all things according to the counsel of His will; that we should be to the praise of His glory."

The error of Pelagius was to say God uses His foreknowledge to elected us before the foundation of the world by looking through that "corridor of time". Pelagius wanted to say it was that God looked down and saw who was good. You want to say that God looked down and saw who would accept Him. There isn't any difference.

The Orthodox just simply reject most of Augustine's teaching. However for the Catholics who supposedly revered Augustine it becomes more problematic.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

I can tell you for a FACT that when I go back and read my very early postings on this thread, I won't recognize myself. Thanks and Praise be to God.

Isn't God's plan amazing to behold?

"For our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our conscience, that in simplicity and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of God, we have had our conversation in the world" -- 2 Corinthians 1:12

Scripture tells us God even chooses our adversaries for us, like He did for Solomon, in order to accomplish His will.

"And the LORD stirred up an adversary unto Solomon, Hadad the Edomite: he was of the king's seed in Edom...

And God stirred him up another adversary, Rezon the son of Eliadah, which fled from his lord Hadadezer king of Zobah" -- 1 Kings 11:14;23

Apparently God's been "stirring up" this thread so that He could bring you to the place He wants you to be.

"And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose." -- Romans 8:28

And to prove how wondrous God is, I just realized for the very first time what Romans 8:28 actually says, even though I've posted it a hundred times.

"...to them who are the called according to his purpose."

I've always read that verse too quickly and assumed it said "who are called according to his purpose." But "called" is a noun here, not a verb. God's sheep are "the called." And apparently this is not universal, nor is everyone "the called," or else why make a distinction between "the called" and the "not called"?

So by this thread God has brought me, too, to a different place than where I was before it started.

"Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious.

For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you.

God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands;

Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;

And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;

That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:

For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.

Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.

And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:

Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.

And when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked: and others said, We will hear thee again of this matter." -- Acts 17:22-32

[HarleyD]

The Greek for "guided" or as you insist "ordained" is "euthunetai". It never appears as translation for King James's "ordained [by God]";

I don't use the King James. BTW-I'm a little confused by your post. Proverbs is Hebrew not Greek.

Pick a translation, I don't care...

NASB-Man's steps are ordained by the Lord...

KJV-Man's goings are of the Lord...

D-R-The steps of man are guided by the Lord...

Hebrew Names Version-A man's steps are from the LORD;...

It doesn't change the meaning. Your steps are guided by the Lord. The Douay-Rheims would like to soften this with guided. You'll find the D-R to be out of sinc with all translations, probably another error of the Latin Vulgate. The Hebrew states, "A man's steps are from the Lord..." Just so as to be absolutely correct, I've updated my tagline with the Hebrew translation.

Where is the sin of Adams ordained, Mr. Sola Scriptura?

Would you disagree with the Douay-Rheims version that the Lord did NOT guide Adam's steps? Want others???

The king's heart is like channels of water in the hand of the Lord; He turns it wherever He wishes. Prov 21:1

The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the Lord. Prov 16:33

BTW-I'm extremely flatter about my "Mr. Sola Scriptura" titled but I simply reading what God has spoken.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Amen. It all gets back to the most basic error -- to presume that man is intrinsically good and wants to obey God.

But Paul is correct. "There is none righteous; no not one."

All error begins with a misreading or a complete disregard of Genesis. The fall was complete and is indelibly stamped in the hearts of all men.

Only God can give a new heart.

"Consider the work of God: for who can make that straight, which he hath made crooked?" -- Ecclesiastes 7:13

And our faith is in Him who rose from the dead to prove the truth of God...

"That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;

Holding forth the word of life; that I may rejoice in the day of Christ, that I have not run in vain, neither laboured in vain." -- Phil. 2:15-16

[AlbionGirl]

Well, I was already changing a little when this thread began, but since, I'm finding that I need Help! (I think) I'm going hyper!

Very moving Scriptures, Dr. E., thanks.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

lol. Jump in; the water's warm and refreshing. 8~)

[annalex]

The Greek Septuagint is older that the known Hebrew. Douay translated it faithfully. The Hebrew meaning is not any closer to "ordained" than Septuagint. Septuagint is also what the Apostles read, knew, and quoted.

The meaning is not the same. While God guides our steps by revealing what His pleasure is, He does not ordain them in a mechanical Calvinist way.

I'd like to know where you get the idea that Adam's sin, described with great care in Genesis, was "ordained" by God. We sure know where Adam was guided, -- away from the Tree. Does God guide in one way and ordain the other?

The verses in Proverbs are not specific as to ordainment vs. guidance, nor do the latter ones apply to men universally: one is about kings, the other about chance.

[annalex]

presume that man is intrinsically good

That's what God said, you know.

[jo kus]

The error of Pelagius was to say God uses His foreknowledge to elected us before the foundation of the world by looking through that "corridor of time". Pelagius wanted to say it was that God looked down and saw who was good. You want to say that God looked down and saw who would accept Him. There isn't any difference.

As I quoted originally, St. Augustine wrote that Pelagius says "nor did He {God} FORESEE that He {God} WOULD MAKE THEM SO - BUT THAT THEY WOULD BE SO." St. Augustine says Pelagius taught that God's foreknowledge has nothing to do with a man being good. Man was good on his own account. Have I not made that clear that this is not Catholic teaching? Christ Himself says in Scripture that we can do NOTHING good without Him. This is infallibly taught by the Council of Trent - but taught well before by the Church.

As I have stated before, the Catholic Church does not have a infallible stand regarding HOW God determines WHOM He imbues His efficacious graces upon (He gives sufficient graces to all), predestining them to eternal life. Augustine and Aquinas believe that God's foreknowledge of one's utilization of His graces do NOT determine God's choices. But Molinarism says that man's merits ARE foreseen and ARE part of the formula. WE as Catholics can believe either point of view - the Church condemns neither position.

The Elect are predestined by God. Whether God uses His knowledge of our turning to Him or not to decide if we will be of the Elect is undetermined by the Church. Again, St. Augustine is only one voice within the Tradition. There are others who teach things more in line with Molina. We revere St. Augustine, who is currently (from our point of view) enjoying eternal union with the Father in heaven. But it doesn't follow that St. Augustine taught everything that the Church later declared as official teaching.

Regards

[Nihil Obstat]

"But Paul is correct. "There is none righteous; no not one.""

Dear Dr. Eckleburg -

God bless you for your love of scripture but I think you are missing the point there. You quote that verse in Romans a lot but you leave out 4 very important words.

AS IT IS WRITTEN, There is none righteous; no not one.

As it is written is the key. Where is it written? It is written in Psalm 14. Read it here:

http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/psalms/psalm14.htm

Psalm 14 is about fools who deny God:

...Fools say in their hearts, "There is no God." Their deeds are loathsome and corrupt; not one does what is right.

The LORD looks down from heaven upon the human race, To see if even one is wise, if even one seeks God.

All have gone astray; all alike are perverse. Not one does what is right, not even one.

Will these evildoers never learn?

They devour my people as they devour bread; they do not call upon the LORD.

They have good reason, then, to fear; God is with the company of the just.

They would crush the hopes of the poor, but the poor have the LORD as their refuge. ...

This is about the fools that deny God. (Atheists and evil-doers.) The FOOLS who deny God are the ones whose deeds are loathsome and corrupt. The fools who deny God have all gone astray. The fools who deny God are perverse. None of the fools who deny God do what is right, not even one of those fools.

This verse does not refer to everyone who ever lived. This only refers to the fools that deny God. Plenty of people are called righteous in both the Old and New Testament. I am sure there are righteous people even today. You can read the accompanying psalms for a better context.

[jo kus]

All error begins with a misreading or a complete disregard of Genesis. The fall was complete and is indelibly stamped in the hearts of all men.

IF the fall was complete, then explain my tagline and many more verses like it that call for man to obey God's commandments? I would agree that men cannot, over the course of a life, never sin. He will falter eventually. But God doesn't expect perfection from His children, only those who try to SAVE THEMSELVES through the Law. He expects us to conform to His gifts of grace - grace that we can foresake.

"Unless YOUR righteousness exceeds the Scribes and Pharisees, you shall not enter the Kingdom of heaven" (Mat 5:20). When we abide in Christ and He in us, OUR righteousness can exceed the Scribes and Pharisees. But it is still OUR righteousness.

Regards

[annalex]

This verse does not refer to everyone who ever lived. This only refers to the fools that deny God. Plenty of people are called righteous in both the Old and New Testament. I am sure there are righteous people even today. You can read the accompanying psalms for a better context

... or simply read Romans in its entirety rather than picking isolated verses out of context.

[HarleyD]

LOL!!! I found myself identifying with just about all.

[HarleyD]

I'd like to know where you get the idea that Adam's sin, described with great care in Genesis, was "ordained" by God.

1) God placed man in the garden.

2) God placed the fruit tree in the garden.

3) God had the serpent go into the garden.

4) God knew what would happen.

Seems simple enough.

[annalex]

Nevertheless, Genesis 3 describes the decision to be Eve's and later Adam's. The only involvement of God is that He commanded them not to eat from the fruit. When they have eaten it, God is described looking for them, and then querying them what did they do. The plain reading does not agree with the "God ordained it" fantacy. In fact, the inspired author goes out of his way to describe God as discovering the truth as if by accident during His afternoon stroll.

[HarleyD]

Man was good on his own account. Have I not made that clear that this is not Catholic teaching?

Well what precisely IS your teaching with what Augustine has written here. My grammar teacher always taught me that you start a paragraph off with a leading sentence. Augustine states clearly the Pelagius error is all this nonsense of God looking down the "corridors of time" to see who would choose Him.

As I have stated before, the Catholic Church does not have a infallible stand regarding HOW God determines WHOM He imbues His efficacious graces upon (He gives sufficient graces to all), predestining them to eternal life....WE as Catholics can believe either point of view - the Church condemns neither position.

Didn't you tell me somewhere about 200 posts or so that the Catholic Church DOES have a policy on predestination? Is their policy that they have no policy?

Again, St. Augustine is only one voice within the Tradition.

Now Augustine becomes ONE voice within Tradition. Well that ONE voice is telling you what precisely is the Pelagius error; something that the Church now believe and you espouse on this board.

[HarleyD]

Nevertheless, Genesis 3 describes the decision to be Eve's and later Adam's.

I know that's what the Church teaches but that's not what the scriptures state. I suppose it comes down to what you want to believe.

[annalex]

No it does not what the scriptures state. This is the scripture:

2 And the woman answered [the serpent], saying: Of the fruit of the trees that are in paradise we do eat: 3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of paradise, God hath commanded us that we should not eat; and that we should not touch it, lest perhaps we die.

This is the extent of God's ordaining: do NOT eat it.

6 And the woman saw that the tree was good to eat, and fair to the eyes, and delightful to behold: and she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave to her husband who did eat.

Eve takes the decision following her own judgement, Adam follows suit.

8 And when they heard the voice of the Lord God walking in paradise at the afternoon air, Adam and his wife hid themselves from the face of the Lord God, amidst the trees of paradise. 9 And the Lord God called Adam, and said to him: Where art thou?

God is shown taking a stroll apparently unaware of what had happened; Adam and Eve are able to hide. God does not know where Adam and Eve are.

10 And he said: I heard thy voice in paradise; and I was afraid, because I was naked, and I hid myself.

God's request was that Adam and Eve came to Him; but they hid CONTRARY to God's request. Did God command them to come to Him and hide form Him at the same time?

11 And he said to him: And who hath told thee that thou wast naked, but that thou hast eaten of the tree whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldst not eat? 12 And Adam said: The woman, whom thou gavest me to be my companion, gave me of the tree, and I did eat. 13 And the Lord God said to the woman: Why hast thou done this? And she answered: The serpent deceived me, and I did eat.

God is shown asking as if not knowing what happened. If the inspired author wanted to teach us how God ordained the Fall, he would not have chosen for his description of God anthropomorphisms that teach just the opposite.

*** It get annoying when, shown the scripture your response is "that's what the Church teaches". My Church teaches scripture. Calvin teaches extrascriptural speculation. Deal with it.

[jo kus]

My grammar teacher always taught me that you start a paragraph off with a leading sentence.

All paragraphs have a "leading sentence". What's your point? It would be no paragraph without sentences...

Augustine states clearly the Pelagius error is all this nonsense of God looking down the "corridors of time" to see who would choose Him.

I don't see anything about "looking down a corridor of time" in St. Augustine's statement. He clearly disagrees with the idea that man does not need God to do good. I am at a loss to identify what you disagree with here...You didn't finish the part that I highlighted and bolded for you to see the crux of the matter that St. Augustine disagrees with Pelagius. And again, the Church did not make any sort of statement regarding what you claim St. Augustine taught regarding "looking down the corridor of time".

St. Augustine is NOT the entire Tradition and only teacher of the Catholic Church's received doctrine. One is free to hold his view, or the view that God DOES consider one's merits when predestining someone. Why can't God do just that? If God sees time as one now (rather than a "corridor", a poor analogy), then God MUST see our merits in light of His graces.

Didn't you tell me somewhere about 200 posts or so that the Catholic Church DOES have a policy on predestination? Is their policy that they have no policy?

Yes, we believe in predestination of the elect. Perhaps you should read my posts. I never said the Church has identified EVERYTHING POSSIBLE on the theology of predestination. One who makes that claim is clearly speculating. Who can fully know the mind of God?

Now Augustine becomes ONE voice within Tradition. Well that ONE voice is telling you what precisely is the Pelagius error; something that the Church now believe and you espouse on this board.

You are having a problem reading St. Augustine and where I point out to you that Pelagius problem, according to the Saint, is that man doesn't need God to enter the Kingdom. Man comes to God alone. That is Pelagianism. Why is this so difficult a concept for you? Where does the Church teach that man does not need God to come to Him?

Regards

[jo kus]

3) God had the serpent go into the garden.

Where does Scripture say that? This is key. God ALLOWS the Serpent into the Garden. He does not SEND ACTIVELY the Serpent to FORCE Adam to sin. That is making God an accompliss of sin! God created sin??? Utter foolishness.

And you expect us to buy your droning that states "we don't believe that God causes men to sin"? Make up your mind.