The Bondage of the Will is famous reformer Martin Luther’s most significant writing for God’s church. Why? It is such a strong defense of salvation by grace alone. The Lord used this work to expose Rome’s error of salvation by merit and keep the Reformation going. Filled with biblical arguments, this treatise still helps us today battle those who teach that man contributes to his own salvation.

This writing, and its fame, clearly came about by the providential hand of God. Luther wrote The Bondage of the Will as a response to Desiderius Erasmus, a world-renowned Dutch scholar. The Lord so directed all things that this giant in the academic world read Luther’s previous rejections of the free will of man and decided, at the encouragement of friends, to challenge Luther in a work entitled On the Freedom of the Will (1524). Although Erasmus had formerly written against some of the abuses of the Roman Catholic Church, and had called for certain reforms, he made clear in this writing that he had no intention of leaving Rome. What he did desire was that the fighting between Luther and Rome over free will would cease. He believed this subject was not so important and not so clearly explained in Scripture that the church should be divided over it.

In opposition to Luther, Erasmus provided several arguments for the freedom of the will of man, arguments that are noteworthy because they represent Rome’s view of salvation and are still used by semi-Pelagians today, including Arminians. First, Erasmus contended that the fact that God gives commands implies that man can obey the commands. Since Jehovah, for instance, demands that men repent, men must be able to will repentance.

Second, Erasmus taught that man must have free will because God would be unjust and cruel if He punished sinners who could not will to obey Him. Related to this, he wrote that God’s predestination is based on foreknowledge. God foreknew who would serve Him and who would not, and chose certain people on that basis.

In the third place, Erasmus maintained that natural man does not only perform evil. Every man has a certain inherent grace that has been weakened by sin but not taken away. Having that inherent grace, all men can seek virtue and therefore do some good. Erasmus basically argued the position of the semi-Pelagians, saying that while the will of natural man is weak, it is not powerless. Grace assists every man in doing good.

Fourth, Erasmus repeatedly contended that man must have a free will because man can merit something with God. He maintains, as Rome emphatically does, that because the Bible speaks so often of rewards for man, it must be true that man merits with God by doing good works. He added that the church had taught this doctrine of merit for centuries, and thus it must be correct. Erasmus’ conclusion is that since man can merit with God, he must have a free will. In consideration of Luther’s emphasis on grace in salvation, Erasmus did admit that grace performs nearly everything in man. There is only a small measure of man’s will that is working. Because the work of man is so small, Erasmus said man must still ultimately magnify God for salvation.

Related to the freedom of the will, Erasmus taught one more thing that was of great importance to Luther, which is that grace is resistible. Erasmus basically contended that grace operates, but it does not necessarily save. That Erasmus held to this view of grace makes sense. For all men to have free will, God’s grace must be resistible.

How then did Luther answer Erasmus in The Bondage of the Will? Before getting into the doctrinal issue itself, Luther argued that, contrary to Erasmus’ claims, the issue of the freedom or bondage of man’s will is an essential issue. The truth about God Himself and His place in salvation is at stake. Luther wrote,

For if I am ignorant of the nature, extent, and limits of what I can and must do with reference to God, I shall be equally ignorant and uncertain of the nature, extent, and limits of what God can and will do in me…. Now, if I am ignorant of God’s works and power, I am ignorant of God Himself; and if I do not know God, I cannot worship, praise, and give thanks, or serve Him, for I do not know how much I should attribute to myself and how much to Him (78).1

Luther then explained over against Erasmus that Scripture is indeed clear on this important matter of the will since it involves a salvation issue.

Next, Luther addressed the term “free will.” He desired that the term never be spoken because it can be deceiving. It wrongly suggests that men have the power of free choice in salvation. Luther indicated that man, in a sense, does have the free will to decide what he will do with his possessions and money, but even then, God is ultimately sovereign. Yet, in things that have to do with man’s salvation, Luther stresses that man has no free will. He is a servant to God’s will or Satan’s (103).

After commenting on the importance of the topic and addressing the term “free will” itself, Luther proceeded to refute Erasmus’ arguments about the freedom of the will, emphasizing that salvation is all of God’s sovereign grace. First, Luther explained that God’s commandments do not imply the ability to keep them. He writes,

It is from this passage that I derive my answer to you: that by the words of the law man is admonished and taught, not what he can do, but what he ought to do; that is, that he may know his sin, not that he may believe that he has any strength. Wherefore, my good Erasmus, as often as you confront me with the words of the law, so often shall I confront you with the words of Paul: ‘By the law is knowledge of sin;’—not power of will! Gather together from the big concordances all the imperative words into one chaotic heap (not the words of promise, but the words of the law and its demand)—and I shall at once declare that they always show, not what men can do, or do do, but what they should do (159).

In connection with this, Luther often reminded Erasmus of the implication of his doctrine. If God’s command truly does imply man’s ability to keep it, then man can keep God’s commandments himself. He can save himself and does not need grace. He does not need the Spirit or even the blood of Christ (172).

Second, Luther corrected Erasmus by explaining what Scripture says about natural man. Man cannot do good, but is bound to sin. Satan adds blindness so that man feels like he is free, but he is in fact, “captive, sick and dead” (162). Luther explained that all men are in bondage to sin by nature, but some men believe and obey because God, in His counsel, willed them to receive the gospel and enjoy His mercy (169). During their lives, God sends them His Word and graciously heals them (170).

In the third place, Luther addressed the great problem of merit. He contended from Scripture that man cannot merit with God by doing good works of his own free will. God does promise rewards, but these are gracious promises. These promises are made to God’s elect, to those who are “in grace, higher than ‘free-will’ can rise…and righteous” (180). Luther explained that rewards are all of grace in Christ, writing, “If you have worthiness in view, there is no merit and no reward. If ‘free-will’ cannot will good by itself alone, but wills good by grace alone (for we are speaking of ‘free-will’ apart from grace, and inquiring into the proper power of each), who does not see that the good will, and merit, and reward, are of grace alone?” (181)

Fourth, in answer to Erasmus’ teaching on free will, Luther defended the truth of sovereign election. He argued that if man has free will and God chooses someone based on what He sees they will do, then God is “robbed of His power and wisdom in election” (199). If man chooses to do good in his own free will, then God did not sovereignly elect certain people unto salvation as Scripture says He did. Luther went on to teach that God’s sovereignty and foreknowledge are closely connected, and connected in the sense that God knows because He has sovereignly determined what will happen. Basically, Luther showed here that since God is sovereign—and He must be sovereign to be God—man cannot possibly have a free will. Salvation cannot come about by the free will of man.

Luther indicated that he was aware of how offensive this doctrine of predestination is to man, this teaching that God has sovereignly determined to be gracious to some and to harden others. However, he emphasized that the truth of Scripture cannot and may not be changed. God is sovereign, and yet man’s sins are his own, for man is not forced to sin.

After clearly answering the points of Erasmus, Luther argued emphatically for salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, and in Christ alone. He showed from abundant Bible passages that men, who cannot will or do anything pleasing to God, are righteous before God only in Christ, and that this righteousness is imputed by faith alone. Men do not and cannot earn anything.

Luther then concluded by stressing the weightiness of the issue: “I could wish that the guardians of ‘free-will’ would be taught by this passage to recognize that when they assert ‘free-will’ they are denying Christ. For if I obtain the grace of God by my own endeavor, what need have I of the grace of Christ for the receiving of my grace?” (304-305). Luther added, “In setting up ‘free-will’ you set aside Christ, and make havoc of the entire Scripture” (307-308). Thus, this issue of the bondage of the will is “the hinge on which the whole” Reformation turns (319).

We today need this defense that the Lord provided through Luther because we continue to face the same errors concerning salvation. Many hold to free will in the broader church world. I hear about it from my catechism students often. The popular take is that God wants to save everyone, offers salvation to all, shows a certain grace to all that will assist them, and man must only accept that offer of salvation in his own free will. Understand that if we do not see the truth that our will is in bondage to sin by nature as Luther teaches, we end up with the idea that what man decides to do in his free will is what separates the man in hell from the man in heaven. Both were shown grace by God, but one used his free will the right way. If we do not see the truth that our will is in bondage by nature as Luther explains, we end up denying that salvation is by God’s grace alone and we take away from the glory of God. So, thanks be to God for working in Luther to defend salvation by grace alone. May we hold fast to this truth and magnify Christ as the only and complete Savior.

1 All quotations from The Bondage of the Will are taken from the translation by J.I. Packer and O.R. Johnston, published by Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, MI, 1957.