Freedom of the Will vs. Bondage of the Will: Does "Free Will" Actually Exist?

You've heard it, probably even said it, over and over again: "Of course we have free will." However, Martin Luther, the Augustinian reformer, took issue with this particular doctrine 500 years ago in his work The Bondage of the Will, in which he refutes the Catholic humanist scholar Erasmus' work The Freedom of the Will."The issue that was, and is, at stake regarding the human will is who is the actor in salvation? Do humans "choose" salvation, or is it solely and completely an act of God?

Erasmus' main argument was: "By free choice in this place we mean a power of the human will by which a man can apply himself to the things which lead to eternal salvation, or turn away from them."[1] Careful not to make the mistake of attributing salvation to humans alone, Erasmus makes the distinction that salvation is a joint effort--both human and divine. Scripture-wise, Erasmus pulls upon all the calls for people to repent. His conclusion: repentance is a human act, a "choice" that is made by humans to accept the grace of God.

Luther's argument, by contrast, says that no man truly has a "free" will, for a free will would mean "that which can do and does, in relation to God, whatever it pleases, uninhibited by any law or any sovereign authority."[2] Never throughout any portion of scripture, including the Garden of Eden, has humanity existed without some force acting upon it. For even in the garden there was a command: Do not eat from the tree of knowledge. Luther suggests the terms "veritable choice," or "mutable choice," but not "free choice."

Luther ends his argument by stating that human will, left to its own devices, will choose evil rather than good. Human will, rather than free, is bound in sin and is constantly being acted upon by God as well as sin/Satan. Thus, while humans most definitely have a will--it is anything but free. It is bound in rebellion, a rebellion that can be freed by one thing and one thing alone: Christ. Plus, when one is given two choices, this is not freedom: this is being forced to choose either door number one or door number two. But not making the choice is not an option, thus the human will is not free.

The Problem of Free Will

The free will proponent will eventually be left with one conclusion: God is a giant test-giver. Grace and mercy are simply when one flunks a test, they are given another test to flunk again.

What is Freedom?

When the Bible states that people are "free" to be children of God, one must ponder what this means. Free to do what? Act totally autonomously? This is where the serpent's tongue starts to waggle once again, because it starts making one believe that "freedom" means complete and total autonomy. Yet, the bible says something different. Humans are "freed from sin" by Christ - not so that people can do whatever they want want, but so that they might serve God and others. (Galatians 5:13) Luther pulled upon this when he came up with his "On the Freedom of a Christian," stating: "A Christian is the most free lord of all, and subject to none, a Christian is the most dutiful servant of all, and subject to every one."

Therefore, true "freedom" does not exist, nor has it existed since the beginning - humans always belong to someone: God/Christ, or sin/Satan. Belonging to someone means being bound to them. You've heard the idiom: "Why serve in heaven when you can reign in hell?" This was the serpent's temptation - be your own person. Do your own thing -be like God: BE FREE! Only, the knowledge that Adam and Eve thought would free them did the exact opposite - it condemned them.

The Nature of the Human Heart

God knew a little something about the human heart and its inclinations. Certain knowledge simply did not belong in human hands because "the inclination of the human heart is evil from birth" (Gen. 8:21) and "for it is from within the human heart that evil comes." (Mark 7:21)

As the fall has shown, when faced with the "choice," left to its own devices, the will chooses only evil and is incapable of coming to God, incapable of trusting God, on its own. Sin incapacitates human beings from attaining their own salvation, and that they are completely unable to bring themselves to God. Thus, the only solution is God must bring humans to him. Christ then comes to people, rather than people going to Christ.

Faith and Love

What is truly ironic about the doctrine of free will within many Christian groups is that "free will," or total human autonomy, is a "humanist" ideology. Humanism is the ability to determine right and wrong by appealing to universal human qualities, in particular, reason. Most Christians reject humanism as being hostile to Christianity given it relies solely on human reason. But reason doesn't bring one to faith--only God brings someone to faith. Luther equates faith acting the same as love: can one control love and force oneself to love someone they do not love? Or is love something that is inexplicable, and one cannot explain how or why it is people fall in love with certain people, but don't fall in love with others?

Faith is the same way - faith is a gift of the Holy Spirit, and as Jesus says, the "spirit blows where the spirit chooses." (John 3:8) Thus, just as you cannot force yourself to love someone that you simply do not love, one cannot "force" oneself to have faith. One cannot "will" faith.

[1]E. Gordon Rupp, P. Watson, Luther And Erasmus: Free Will And Salvation (The Westminster Press, 1969), 47

Mar 24, 2009 7:08 PM

Guest :

Very funny. I've never failed to be amused by the deniers of free will. Lets see where this leads too. God created Heaven and Earth and all the Angels. This means that he new from the "begining" (meaning always) that Satan would rebel and everything that would happen subsequent to that. This of course means that God is fully and completely resbonsible for sin. This means that God is chosing who he will save and who he will damn havinfg already from time eternal decided. Thus humans will be damned for sins for which God is responsible because being all powerfull and all knowing he knew from the "beginning". Satan is Gods slave just like we all are. Thank you also for the strawman of "total human autonomy", Erasmus never said that and the idea is manifestly absurd. If you want to believe in God has Satan go ahead, but grace and salvation lose all meaning to me if "choice" doesn't exist at all. If you believe that people are bound to someone from the begining and given yourr views on grace and Salvation it can only be that everyone is bound to God. Unless you concieve of Satan has a free agent. But given your views he is not and therefore all that are slaves to him are slaves to God. oh and I don't undestand how if everyone is a Slave how anyone is the slightest bit responsible. After all if people are not in any sense responsible for being saved then of course how are they responsible for sinning in the first place? God as capricious monster isn't very appealing.

A final question Is Anne Frank burning in Hell?

Pierre

Mar 24, 2009 10:35 PM

Guest :

To the above commenter: You've missed the entire point. "...but grace and salvation lose all meaning to me if 'choice' doesn't exist at all." First, there IS choice - but it is a MUTED choice, a choice that has been tainted and skewed by sin. If we are not bound, then the ability to NOT sin exists. And that's impossible. As Augustine noted, from birth, we're greedy and self-involved. Sin enters in the moment we are born. The moment you put yourself first in anything, you've sinned. The moment you have a thought you shouldn't have, you've sinned, because we sin in thought, word and deed. We may be able to control certain actions, but we don't always have a choice over what enters our minds. And Jesus makes it clear when he talks about the man who lusts after a woman in his mind, that even the THOUGHT is a sin. Thus, we are indeed bound to sin, because sin is ever-present, it is always acting upon us, tempting us, pulling us and turning us away from God.

You say: "This means he knew from the 'beginning' (meaning always) that Satan would rebel and everything that would happen subsequent to that." Like any parent who knows before they ever have children that they're going to rebel, they still have them. God didn't decide not to create us just because He knew we'd screw up.

You continue: "This of course means that God is fully and completely responsible for sin." Is the parent who cares for and loves their child, sets rules and guidelines, responsible for the child who who eventually goes astray at some point, even though the parent knows this is an inevitability?

You ask: "I don't understand how if everyone is a slave how anyone is the slightest bit responsible." Well, as luck would have it, Paul apparently received the same question, for he states in Romans 9: "What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! For he says to Moses 'I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on who I have compassion.' It does not therefore depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy... 'Then why does God still blame us? For who resists His will?' But who are you, Oman, to talk back to God? Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'Why did you make me like this?' Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use? What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath--prepared for destruction?"

Mar 24, 2009 10:45 PM

Guest :

...continued from above...

And that is where we must leave the question of Anne Frank and all people for that matter: God will have mercy on whom he will have mercy. Only God can determine the fate of an Anne Frank, of a Hitler, of any of us. We don't get to determine that. "It does not depend on man's desire or effort, but on God." And this is the essence of faith... trusting God knows what the heck He's doing. Perhaps that's a difficult concept, but it is the essence of faith. Trusting God. Trusting that God is both just and merciful.