Martin Luther and Erasmus were both scholars whose work touched on Christianity and Biblical teaching. The two theologists had controversial and contrasting accounts on free will. Their works were highly controversial and drew widespread criticism from the church. Martin Luther maintained that there is nothing like free will by man, and only God has free will. Man, therefore, has no power to determine his salvation. On the other hand, Erasmus held that God provides man with grace to will good. Therefore, the salvation of man depends on whether he wills good or not. The accounts for both Martin Luther and Erasmus have been further analyzed below.
Martin Luther Account on Free Will
Martin Luther in his works refutes the possibility of free will existing among humanity. His arguments are majorly based on the biblical teachings. The expression of free will is therefore used to evaluate the relationship between human beings and God. Martin Luther relies on the Bible and strived to reveal the truth of God's word through his work. He made numerous assertions from the Holy Scripture that he believes support his views on free will as a fictitious concept (Luther 2008, p.32).
Martin Luther strived to maintain a good relationship with God by being good to others, being charitable and repenting his sins; in accordance with the teachings of Christianity. However, the more he attempted to obtain favor from God by trying to be good and repenting his sins, the more he feels that he is not perfect enough (Luther 2008, p.44). The realization prompts him to look deeper into the scripture in a bid to establish the truth about salvation (Luther 2008, p.47).
In his refutation of Erasmus support of free will, Martin Luther held that it was critical for human beings to differentiate between a person's work and God's work (Luther 2008, p.21). Salvation is the sovereign work of God, and human beings have no stake deciding on their salvation. His points of view concerning human beings having no free will is supported in two main assertions. First, man has no free will and is enslaved to sin. Second, God's sovereign rule through which He exercises His will as per His counsel does not accommodate free will (Finger 2010, p.256).
According to Luther (2008, 43), man being enslaved to sin, he is predisposed to evil. It is only through the grace of God that man can will good. Therefore, man has no capacity to will good or evil, but rather it is God who determines the will of man through His grace. Man's will without God's grace cannot be free, and such a man is a permanent prisoner of the bondage of evil. A man without the spirit of God voluntarily commits evil. A man by himself is entirely evil and hence cannot claim to have free will. He supports his claim with a text in the book of Ezekiel which says that unless God intervenes through his word and provides grace, man cannot will good (Luther 2008, p.57).
God is sovereign in all aspects and in determining salvation and hence justifies why man has no free will. Man is predisposed to evil and has no capacity to do anything that merits salvation according to Luther (Loewenich 1982, 267). The ascribing of man with the ability to determine his free will as proposed by Erasmus is a negation of God's sovereignty and omnipotence. Only God has free will, and therefore everything that human beings do is dependent on God's divine will (Luther 2008, 34).
The claim of the divine will of God brings Martin Luther to question himself as to whether God wills the evil deeds that human beings commit (Erasmus and Luther2013, p.120). He answers the question by stating that people's actions, whether good or bad are in accordance with the will of God (Erasmus and Luther 2013, p.119). God's work is perfect and admitting that man has free will is tantamount to claiming that God's work is imperfect, and requires human beings to correct it. Therefore, this leads him to maintain his position that human beings have no free will (Finger 2010, p.257).
Erasmus view on free will
Erasmus quoted the Old Testament books to support his arguments on the existence of free will. According to him, human beings are given freedom to choose voluntarily. The Bible contains several passages that demonstrate how they are given the power to make decisions. They can control their lives towards salvation or decide to do wrong. Erasmus illustrates by an example of the creation story where God created Adam and Eve then gave them mandate to choose right and wrong. Adam chose to eat the apple voluntarily without the grace of God. There was a question that arose on what happened to free will after the fall of humankind. Erasmus answers by saying that the human beings still retain the freedom of making their own choices because life continued after the fall of Adam and Eve (Erasmus and Luther 2013, p.100). He argues that people are born with the will in their minds, and that is what they use for reasoning (Luther 2008, p.87). Will is more inclined to the aspect of doing evil, and the assumption was made from the fall of Adam. The assumption does not mean that people cannot do good out of their own will. Erasmus defined the term free will as the power that humans have to choose between evil and salvation (Graybill 2010, p.126).
Erasmus explains three different types of laws that prove the existence of free will that is, the law of nature, work, and faith. However, the law does not hinder people from choosing voluntarily according to Erasmus. The law of nature is evident where people do good to others and expect others to do the same for them. The law of nature defines the knowledge of the individuals towards God. People can choose to do good out of their will through the law of nature, and this does not guarantee salvation. The law of works is demonstrated where people choose to do good because they fear being punished by God. However, the threats and punishments do not hinder people from choosing to forsake God or decide to do what is right according to the biblical teachings. Men are given the law of faith automatically when they decide to follow God’s teaching. The law of faith is given to humans as a gift after doing what pleases God; by making right choices out of their free will
Erasmus highlights some Old Testament chapters that defend the concept of the existence of free will. For instance, he quoted the book of Ecclesiastes, which explains that God gives people choices to decide out of their own (Graybill 2010, p.125).Human beings are given the commandments to either follow them or decide to break them. According to Erasmus, people are given by God what they choose either good or bad. All human beings are born with the ability to differentiate between right and wrong as per his arguments. Erasmus defines the role of conscience as what guides people when they make choices. He argued that God gave human beings conscience so that they can be free and decide on their own between evil and good. The Ten Commandments was provided to act as the law that governs the relationships between people themselves and people with God (Erasmus and Luther2013, p.122).
Conclusion
Martin Luther claims that the actions by human beings are predetermined by the fact that man is predisposed to evil. A person is bonded to sin even without doing the actions according to Luther. On the contrary, according to Erasmus, the actions are not predetermined. People are given the power to decide their deeds. Luther’s interpretation of the scripture seems more rigid as it heavily depended on the biblical text and engaged very less reasoning. Erasmus gives his views according to his understanding and reasoning drawing reference from the scripture. The bone of contention between the two philosophers is their disagreement on the concept of the existence of free will. However, both philosophers support their arguments using the biblical teachings. From Luther’s point of view, our actions are predetermined by God who imposes his will on us. On the other hand, Erasmus concludes that God gives us grace to choose to will good or otherwise chose bad, which indicates that man has free will.
References
Erasmus, D. and Luther, M., 2013. Discourse on free will. A"C Black.
Finger, T.N., 2010. A Contemporary Anabaptist Theology: Biblical, Historical, Constructive. InterVarsity Press.
Graybill, G., 2010. Evangelical Free Will: Phillipp Melanchthon's Doctrinal Journey on the Origins of Faith. Oxford University Press.
Loewenich, W 1982, ‘The Dispute with Erasmus’, in Martin Luther: the man and his works, Augsburg Publishing House, Minneapolis, pp. 265-278.
Luther, M., 2008. The bondage of the will. Hendrickson Publishers.
