Research Paper on Martin Luther

One of the last classes I took at community college was a philosophy course. The final research paper was very short, but we were allowed to choose our topic from an extensive list of philosophers. I chose Martin Luther. Here is the paper for anyone interested in purusing it. I must admit that it still needs a lot of work, but it was enough to get me an A in the class. Enjoy!

Luther’s Foundations:

Salvation a Gift not of the Will

Jonathan Schlaudraff

Introduction to Philosophy

Professor Cochrane

June 7, 2009

Martin Luther was a man of solid belief and determination, inherited perhaps from his father, perhaps from his experiences as an Augustinian monk, but in either case, this determination drove his adamancy concerning certain doctrines of the faith that he held as especially important to legitimate Christianity. Luther was born on November 10th, 1483 to a very religious man, Hans Luther, who began his climb of the social ladder working in a mine and eventually obtaining ownership of several mines.¹ Hans Luther purposed that his son should study to become a lawyer, but was disappointed when Martin joined a monastery of the Augustinian order.² After many internal spiritual struggles over sin and redemption, disillusionments over the indulgences and relics of Rome, and searching for answers in Scripture, Luther found a passage in Romans that reformed his worldview.³ Luther embraced the Apostle Paul’s concept of “justification by faith,”⁴ which fueled Luther’s eventual rejection of Catholicism and fierce opposition to it and its practices. In Luther’s consideration of sin and salvation, as one biographer puts it, “There is… something much more drastically wrong with man than any particular list of offenses which can be enumerated, confessed, and forgiven. The very nature of man is corrupt.”⁵ Likewise, what Luther himself considered one of his greatest writings, “The Bondage of the Will,” dealt exactly with this issue, that man was not only exceptionally sinful, but also incapable of finding or obtaining salvation on his own.⁶ This belief drove Luther to oppose the Catholic Church in several important ways, the first being when Luther posted ninety-five theses on the church door in Wittenberg in 1517, which were direct challenges to Catholic doctrines.⁷ This escalated to an intellectual and sometimes violent war between Luther and his followers and the adherents to the Catholic Church.⁸ Martin Luther’s adamant position concerning the bondage of the human will to sin and corruption corresponds directly to the earlier doctrine that man can only be saved through free justification by faith. This is such that the former doctrine bears as much importance as the latter, building the foundation for Luther’s immense opposition to the Catholic Church on issues such as church authority, Biblical authority, indulgences, and marriage.

Luther’s realization from reading and teaching the Bible, and particularly the Apostle Paul, that anyone could obtain salvation simply as a free gift from God, the only prerequisite being belief on Jesus, freed Luther from his own internal spiritual struggles and gave him purpose in countering the Catholic Church’s practices. The Catholic Church taught at the time that a soul would live in a type of limbo to purge it from sin before it could move on to the eternal afterlife. Luther spoke against this on the basis of Paul’s teachings as he states so well in his “Table Talk”, “All heretics have continually failed… that they do not rightly understand or know the article of justification. If we had not this article certain and clear, it were impossible we could criticize the pope’s false doctrine of indulgences…”⁹ He continues with certainty, “If we only permit Christ to be our Saviour, then we have won, for he is the only girdle which clasps the whole body together, as St. Paul excellently teaches.”¹⁰ So Luther not only believed that salvation was a free gift from God, but also that belief in Christ was the only means to obtain it. In Romans, the Apostle Paul states, “…election of grace. And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace.”¹¹ This comforted and reformed Luther for before that “Luther probed every resource of contemporary Catholicism for assuaging the anguish of a spirit alienated from God. He tried the way of good works… He endeavored to avail himself of the merits of the saints…”¹² In summary of this doctrine of justification by faith Luther held so dear, it meant for Luther that the spiritual struggles for salvation from a corrupt world were vanquished through simply believing on Christ Jesus, freeing all people from the tyranny of guilty submission to the Catholic Church and all forms of salvation through works.

Similarly to justification by faith, Luther realized in his studies another important doctrine that though justification came through faith, no person apart from the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, one of the members of the Trinity, could believe. This means simply that the human will is incapable of choosing to believe on Jesus because the human will, as with the entire essence of mankind, is in bondage to corruption and sin. One particularly recognized intellectual, Desiderius Erasmus, was pressed to write against Luther, which led to a book titled “On Free Will” and Luther responded with a work titled “The Bondage of the Will.”¹³ In this discussion, Luther revealed to Erasmus, “…you alone, in contrast with all others, have attacked the real thing, that is, the essential issue. You have not wearied me with those extraneous issues about the Papacy, purgatory, indulgences and such like—trifles, rather than issues—in respect of which almost all to date have sought my blood…”¹⁴ Of all the issues that Luther dealt with, this he considered pivotal to everything else. It set the foundation for justification by faith, for faith being a gift from God means justification is henceforth a free gift not won through indulgences, purgatory, or good works. Luther was emphatic on this point throughout all of his teaching whether it was his Bible commentary,¹⁵ “Table Talk,”¹⁶ or discourse on “The bondage of the Will.”¹⁷ As an Augustinian monk Luther quotes Augustine extensively throughout his book on the will. Augustine himself wrote in favor of the idea that mankind apart from God can work nothing toward his or her own salvation including faith except it is given to him or her.¹⁸ The ideology that Luther taught and propagated undermined the political and economic foundations of the Catholic Church.

Practically for Luther, these doctrines of justification by faith and the bondage of the human will to sin means that the Catholic Church’s custom of selling indulgences for salvation or for fewer years in purgatory and their practice of charging admittance to see and worship relics for the same purpose was blatant fraud. As the biographer Bainton states about Luther, “This was too much.”¹⁹ Luther took action, being particularly provoked by one man known for selling indulgences, John Tetzel.²⁰ Luther then began to realize the problems with multitudes of Catholic doctrines and practices beginning as already stated with indulgences, then also the worship of saints, monasticism in general, the papacy, the holy sacraments, marriage and especially that of ministers and priests, and many other precepts.²¹ Luther also put his new found beliefs to practice, like when he married a nun, Katherine Von Bora, and produced a multitude of children.²² This extreme opposition did not settle well with the Catholic Church and Luther was first summoned before Cardinal Cajetan, then issued a papal bull for which he was then summoned before the Diet of Worms.²³ That is where Luther made likely his most famous statement of conviction that, in response to a charge that he renounce his writings, “I am bound by the Scriptures I have quoted, and my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and will not retract anything, since it is neither safe nor right to go against conscience. I cannot do otherwise, here I stand, may God help me.”²⁴ Interestingly, Luther was not executed, though plainly many desired that fate for him. Instead, Luther has become the icon of the Protestant reformation, known for his brash opposition of the Catholic Church.

In the twenty-first century, Luther still affects modern culture and the modern church with his ideologies concerning justification by faith and, though less recognized, but equally important, the concept of the bondage of the human will to sin. There is even a denomination that bears the title of Lutheran. In an introduction to the book titled “The bondage of the Will,” J. I. Packer writes that many other reformers such as “John Calvin… Ulrich Zwingli, Martin Bucer, and all the leading Protestant theologians of the first epoch of the Reformation, stood precisely on the same ground here,” that of Luther’s ideologies concerning will and justification by faith.²⁵ One has only to see that over fifty percent of Americans in the United States label themselves as Protestants to realize how much of an influence Luther has been throughout history as one of the most pivotal people in a movement that has shaped entire cultures and countries.²⁶ J. I. Packer quotes insightfully an editor on Luther as stating concerning the book “The Bondage of the Will” that “Whoever puts this book down without having realized that evangelical theology stands or falls with the doctrine of the bondage of the will has read it in vain.”²⁷ Likewise, anyone who has read into the man Martin Luther without realizing the foundational doctrines of justification by faith and the bondage of the human will as how Luther describes being the “essential issue… the vital spot,” has studied Luther in vain.²⁸ To understand Luther’s doctrine is to understand his influence, his character, his passion, and his God.

Notes

1. Roland H. Bainton (1995), Here I Stand: A life of Martin Luther, (New York : Meridian), xii, 19.
2. Ibid, 25-26.
3. Ibid, 48-49.
4. Ibid.
5. Ibid, 41.
6. Martin Luther (1957), The Bondage of the Will, (Michigan: Fleming H. Revell), 40.
7. Bainton, Here I stand, 60-61.
8. Ibid, 63-64.
9. Martin Luther (1995), Table talk of Martin Luther, (Michigan: Baker Books), 188.
10. Ibid.
11. Rom. 11:5-6 (King James Version).
12. Bainton, Here I stand, 40.
13. Ernst F. Winter (1961), Discourse on Free Will, (New York: Frederick Ungar Publishing), v.
14. Luther, The bondage of the Will, 319.
15. Martin Luther (2002), Faith and freedom: an invitation to the writings of Martin Luther, (New York: Vintage), 90.
16. Luther, Table Talk, 186.
17. Luther, The bondage of the Will, 319.
18. Aurelius Augustine, A Treatise on Grace and Free Will, http://www.lgmarshall.org/Augustine/augustine_willgrace.html.
19. Bainton, Here I stand, 60.
20. Ibid.
21. Ibid, 15, 106.
22. Luther, Faith and Freedom, 245.
23. Peter Manns (1982), Martin Luther: an illustrated biography, (New York: Crossroad), 221-222.
24. Luther, Faith and Freedom, 20.
25. Luther, The bondage of the Will, 58.
26. CIA, World Fact Book, https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html.
27. Luther, The bondage of the Will, 58.
28. Ibid, 319.

Bibliography

Augustine, Aurelius. A Treatise on Grace and Free Will. http://www.lgmarshall.org/Augustine/augustine_willgrace.html

Bainton, Roland H. (1995). Here I Stand: A life of Martin Luther. New York : Meridian.

Brian Tierney (1977). Martin Luther –Reformer or Revolutionary. New York: Random House, Inc.

Luther, martin (2002). Faith and freedom: an invitation to the writings of Martin Luther. New York: Vintage.

Luther, Martin (1995). Table talk of Martin Luther. Michigan: Baker Books.

Luther, Martin (1957). The Bondage of the Will. Michigan: Fleming H. Revell.

Manns, Peter (1982). Martin Luther: an illustrated biography. New York: Crossroad.

Winter, Ernst F. (1961). Discourse on Free Will. New York: Frederick Ungar Publishing.

A passage for this season:

1John.4 (KJV)

[1] Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
[2] Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
[3] And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
[4] Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.
[5] They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them.
[6] We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error.
[7] Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God.
[8] He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.
[9] In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.
[10] Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.
[11] Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another.
[12] No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.
[13] Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit.
[14] And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world.
[15] Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.
[16] And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him.
[17] Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment: because as he is, so are we in this world.
[18] There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love.
[19] We love him, because he first loved us.
[20] If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?
[21] And this commandment have we from him, That he who loveth God love his brother also.

http://quod.lib.umich.edu/k/kjv/

I love verse 10. It really demonstrates the necessity for Christ coming into this world to die for our salvation. Is it not wonderful that we can now know love for God and for one another through fellowship because of Christ’s love demonstrated by His actions on our behalf?

Merry Christmas everyone!

Reading and reviews

Recently, I have been devoting more time (of which I seem to have very little) to reading and writing potential reviews for my new blog, which I am trying to get off the ground.  (I would appreciate your help doing that). So far, I have been focusing on the book “Do Hard Things,” but I also have to finish a review of Martin Luther’s “Bondage of the Will,” which I read during the summer. I think, while considering youth in America and particularly Christian youth, that striving to be well read is something that we should all endeavor to be. I especially recommend being well read in old books and old Christian books on both history (mostly through biographies) and theology/doctrine/ philisophical thought. Too much of our culture has driven people to short attention spans and fast paced ways of life because of our new technology and mediums such as the internet, TV, and so forth. It would be good for us to slow down a bit and enjoy, while also learning and developing our skills and knowledge, a good book, some intellectually stimulating conversation, and generally more interaction with real people, face to face (look whose talking you say? since I’m writing a blog? Well, this is the only way to reach you folks, so I feel obligated, but for real, I have been devoting more time to real things, real people and not so much to digital).

I apologize for not writing a good post on a hot topic lately, but like I mentioned before, I have been trying to get my other blog going, so I haven’t been able to devote quite as much time to this one. I will hopefully have a good post coming up though concerning education and Christians’ obligation to educate their own. Keep looking back! God bless.

Book Reviews

The difficult part about writing book reviews on a blog is that you can only read so many books so fast and write reviews about them. People in our fast paced world like things done right away and quickly. Perhaps that is one of the main reason’s people have not read books like they have in the past.

Right now, I a reading a book (mostly because most other folks my age are reading it and talking about it) titles “Do Hard Things” by the Harris twins. I once heard their dad give a sermon. I can’t say that I was particularly impressed by it or his sons’ books. Josh Harris’ either. Although, I guess I should be careful as these people are very popular and I don’t intend to make enemies among fellow homeschoolers and such. However, I do think that they, at the very least, leave something to be desired.

Anyway, I figured I needed to say something today. I’ll probably say more about my impressions of the Harris’ in later posts and especially as I read this book. Maybe I’ll light some fires and we’ll have some lively discussion. Then again, maybe I won’t. We’ll see. Hopefully I can build up some excitement for my review which i hope to post in the next few weeks.

The great mischaracterization of John Calvin

Well, I am back to blogging after a very large break. The topic for this post is, obviously, John Calvin who seems to me to be one of the most mischaracterized people of the reformation. He really is. Here are a few examples of that mischaracterization that I constantly run into.

First, John Calvin is most unduly credited with the doctrines of predestination and God’s sovereignty. People attack TULIP, but Calvin did not create this. TULIP itself is not particularly accurate when it comes to justly expressing Calvinistic doctrine, even the doctrines of people who identify themselves as Calvinists. (We can go into that another time.) All the major reformers believed in predestination and God’s sovereignty. Luther based his entire movement on it. He called it the “hinge on which all turns” and the “vital spot.” He believed that it was worth the world being turned upside down and pushed into chaos over this issue. Without it, the reformation would not have taken place and we would all still, probably, be catholic.

Secondly, Calvin is said to have “ruled Geneva with an iron fist.” This is obviously so far from the truth, it is hard to choose where to begin. The one example I like the most is the one about Communion. Calvin wanted it served every Sunday, but the council in the city disagreed and decided that it would be done four times a year. Calvin then thought that he could get the churches to order it in such a way that it was served somewhere in Geneva every Sunday, but the council saw through this too and struck it down, ordering that it be served in all the churches on the same Sundays. Calvin was so far from being a ruler in Geneva that he even refused to become a citizen of the city until close to the end of his life so that he would have no political authority whatsoever. Everything he influenced was through the council’s authority by his own arguments.

On to burnings in Geneva, there was only one man put to death by burning when people were being burned by the hundreds of thousands elsewhere. Calvin even petitioned the council three times to have the man beheaded instead of burned, but because he ultimately had no authority to control such matters, the council burned the man anyway.

So, John Calvin is really criticized unjustly when it comes to most modern Christians’ understanding of him. I would like to rectify this and I encourage all readers of this blog to learn their church history and especially the history of the reformers by reading their works. Calvin has so much to offer us and some great advice to give us for our Christian lives, but we need to get past our prejudices of him and actually read what the man wrote rather than getting hung up on something that is hardly his main focus.

This of course leads me into something else that I have to address briefly, but unfortunately will have to delve into later, and that is that we, in the modern Christian church, have adopted a new system of theology and doctrine (some of you may not call it this) concerning feelings and relationships rather than the nature and character of God. We have ignored the great works of the church’s past and decided to develop our own works born of personal and worldly reasoning. Even in my own Calvinistic reformed church, I see these things pop up in what people casually say. Don’t get me wrong, unfortunately, I even see it in myself. I have picked up many bad habits and beliefs from the many different churches and denominations I have been in. The more I read from the reformers and the more I read from the Bible, the more I can correct these doctrines and my system of thinking about myself, my relationships, and my walk through life, focusing more on who God is and what truth is rather than focusing on a false sense of unity and love in the world. It is a long and strenuous path, but I feel I must take it and I hope that you will take it with me. Please feel free to comment on this as these are just some thoughts I have been developing recently and hope will bear some fruit later on in my life.

A good passage for thought…

Finals are right around the corner, so I really don’t have much time, but here is some food for thought anyway. This is the passage following the famous John 3:16 verse.

“For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.” – John 3:17-21

Another quote from John Calvin

Here is an interesting quote from John Calvin, not only because of its theological implications, but also because it shows the great peace that such theology if properly internalized can bring a man. This is from the book I have been using in the last few posts.

“In full view of his approaching death, Calvin dictated his Last Will and Testament on 25 April 1564, reciting: I John Calvin, servant of the Word of God in the Church of Geneva… have no other hope or refuge than his predestination upon which my entire salvation in grounded…”

More quotes from Calvin

Something I hear a lot is the stereotype that says Calvinists, or rather people who believe in predestination, are not about evangelism and reaching the unsaved. I heartily disagree. Granted, our reason for evangelism changes because we no longer believe that it is us in and of ourselves who saves someone or even convinces them to believe, but rather, we are the instrument that God chose to use for such means and to reach such ends. Here are some quotes from Calvin (from the same book as I mentioned in the last post), two on predestination and another on controversy and evangelism.

God has a sufficiently just cause for election and reprobation in His own will.

Faith flows from the outward predestination of God, and… is not given indiscriminately to all… The predestination of God is in itself hidden, but it is manifest to us in Christ alone.

All who are sent to teach the word are sent to carry on a contest. It is therefore not enough to teach faithfully what God commands, except we also contend… We have a contest with the devil, with the world, and with all the wicked.

Two often very prominently misunderstood facts about the doctrine of predestination: first, only God knows who will be saved and we are not privy to that information, hence, we cannot base our actions on who we think is God’s elect among the unbelievers; second, that God predestines the means and that includes His use of us, believers in His name.

We witness because God commands us to, not because we think that we can convert someone in our own power or that it will cause a different outcome than that which God has already planned.

Some quotes from Calvin (and some thoughts)

My brother picked up a good book from our church library titled “Calvin’s Wisdom” by Graham Miller. Here are a few quotes I found particularly applicable to today on allegory.

In our natural vanity, most men are more delighted by foolish allegories, than by solid erudition.

I find this to be far too true in many churches I have attended (think of all the stories you hear from the pulpit that have only the purpose of making the congregation laugh).

It is better to confess our ignorance than to indulge ourselves in frivolous conjecture.

Allegories tend… to hold up the Scripture to ridicule.

They turn dogs into men, trees into angels, and… all Scripture into a laughing stock.

A contrivance of Satan to undermine the authority of Scripture.

Allegories ought to be extended no further than they are supported by the authority of Scripture; for they are far from affording of themselves a sufficient foundation for any doctrines.

Overall, I find it disappointing how many Christians find it “necessary” to be “creative” (especially in Sunday schools and from the pulpit). They undermine Scripture when they do it and really don’t help the rest of us (or themselves for that matter) grow. The Scripture stands strong and Christians need to learn to rely on it more.

Reviews and other such things

I am beginning to wonder about something, why do people consistently tell me that I cannot critique something unless I have fully indulged in it? (Even that is sometimes not good enough). I have to fully read a book (reading part of it and many reviews is not good enough) or fully watch a movie (seeing trailers, interviews, and reading reviews is not good enough) before I can say anything about it and even then, people don’t usually want to hear what I have to say. This is not applied elsewhere. People don’t say you have to commit adultery to say how wrong it is or you have to have an abortion to condemn it or you have to steal to say it is morally corrupt. Yet, I cannot speak against sleazy movies, doctrinally wrong movies, violent movies, doctrinally wrong books, sleazy books, corrupting books unless I have fully indulged in them. Would someone explain the logic of that to me?