My subject for this evening,
as has been announced, is Martin Luther's 97th Thesis given on
September the 4th, 1517. This is a very important thesis. And I'd like to quote Pierre
Robert Olivetin, a cousin of John Calvin, and the first to
translate the Bible into French from the original language he
wrote, there are but two religions in the world. The one class of
religions are those which men have invented, in all of which
man saves himself by ceremonies and good works. The other is
that one religion which is revealed in the Bible and which teaches
man to look for salvation solely from the free grace of God. I doubt if there is any person
who has not heard of Martin Luther or John Calvin. They stand as
the two giants of the Reformation, raised up by the Spirit of God
to build the house of the Lord. Our subject is an Augustinian
monk, Martin Luther, the 16th century Protestant reformer,
who was born on the 10th of November 1483 at Eiselben, Germany. He is remembered today for nailing
his 95 Theses to the door of Wittenberg Castle Church, 31st
of October 1517, which launched the Protestant Reformation in
Europe and even in England. He is also remembered for restating
the scripture doctrine of justification by faith on which the Church,
as Luther said, stands or falls. The focus of this lecture is
Luther's Ninety-Seven Theses, its predestinary in theology. One month before his Ninety-Five
Theses, Many histories of Luther's life end in 1531, 15 years before
his death on 18th of February 1546. The latter years of his
life are surreptitiously passed over Victorian artists have over-romanticised
the scene of Luther hammering his 95 theses to the legendary
church door surrounded by a large crowd of awestruck onlookers. I heard an evangelical minister
state recently that Martin Luther did not believe in predestination. Sadly, many Protestants and evangelicals
today have no idea what Martin Luther really believed doctrinally. Now, when Martin Luther fastened
his 95 thesis at Wittenberg Castle church door in 1517, John Calvin
was eight years old, born 10th of July, 1509. and did not experience
a religious conversion until the autumn of 1533. That Luther
learned predestination from John Calvin is not only chronologically
wrong, but Luther himself was a strong predestinarian long
before Calvin. See those sections 29 and 32
of the 97th thesis. Calvin was not a first generation
reformer but a second who benefited greatly from reading Luther's
writings and valued them. Both Calvin and Luther were the
mainstream reformers held the doctrines of justification, the
bondage of the will and eternal predestination. Now, In 1517, Luther was working on
a commentary on the first book of Aristotle's Physics. These
are lectures on nature for the purpose of dethroning the god
of scholastics. From this commentary now lost
grew Luther's disputation against scholastic theology. He wrote
this 97 thesis for Franz Gunther who defended it at Wittenberg
on September the 4th, 1517 to fulfill the conditions for a
Bachelor of Holy Scripture with Luther presiding as Dean of Faculty
of Theology. In truth, it was an exam paper,
and how many of us could pass this exam paper? How many of
us could write upon this very subject? And so, Christopher
Schirl of Nuremberg was sent a copy by Luther, and Schirl
believed that this disputation would restore the theology of
Christ Thankfully Luther's Ninety-Seven Theses was not lost, for in 1520
it was included in a collection of disputations at Wittenberg. I believe Luther's Ninety-Seven
Theses represents his settled theological convictions from
which he never wavered. Now what was the difference between
the September 97 thesis and his legendary October 95 thesis of
1517 which began the course of the Reformation? The difference was that the 97th
thesis was an evangelical theological dispute against scholasticism
and the 95th thesis a disputation on the power and efficacy of
indulgences. It was viewed by the Archbishop
of Mainz as an attack upon the sale of papal indulgences to
fulfil the Pope's ambition to build St Peter's Basilica Rome
for its lucrative revenue. It was an assault on Rome and
the authority of the Pope. However, They contain the living
germs of a new theology. The form of the 95 Theses is
Popish, but the spirit and aim are Protestant, and they represent
a state of transition from twilight to daylight. Now what was Luther's
own opinion of his 95 thesis which he nailed to the church
door at Wittenberg? In his book on the Babylonian
captivity of the church he reproved himself for that fuss over a
scrap of paper as he called it declaring I wrote about indulgences
two years ago, but now I extremely regret having published that
book. At that time I was still involved
in a great and superstitious respect for the tyranny of Rome,
which led me to judge that indulgences were not to be totally rejected,
seeing them, as I did, to be approved by so general a consent
among men. And when the 95 thesis was republished
in his collected works in 1545, he wrote in the preface, I allow
them to stand, but by them it may appear how weak I was, and
in what a fluctuating state of mind when I began this business. I was then a monk and a mad papist,
and so submerged in the dogmas of the Pope that I would have
readily murdered any person who denied obedience to the Pope.
Now the buying of indulgence was to reduce a sinner's time
in purgatory before entering heaven. It was fleecing the poor,
tyranny, and above all unscriptural, As Hebrew 1-3 tells us, Christ
purged us from our sins. These were peddled by John Tetzel, who was given the task of raising
money for the building of St. Peter's Basilica in Rome. You
know the old saying, as soon as the coin in the coffin rings,
a soul from purgatory springs. With the wrath of the public
stirred against Tetzel, he was forced to retire to a monastery
at Leipzig. broken and in ill health he passed
away in July 1519. It's interesting to note that
Martin Luther actually wrote a letter to Tetzel before he
died. What the contents were I don't
know but I believe it was a loving letter and the year 1518 after
his scrap of paper was published a period of intense trial, afflicted
Luther, in which his sword was sharpened in the Philistines'
camp, and the Holy Spirit separated him unto the gospel of God and
from the Roman communion. this that vital year moulded
Luther into the theologian of the forgiveness of sins. In the
97th thesis he defends the gospel which declares that without the
grace of God there is no salvation by the works of the law or by
worship of saints and holy relics and priestly absolution One person said, it is said of
Luther that by attacking the abuses of indulgences, he unwittingly
cut a vein of medieval Catholicism. He proclaimed the undeveloped
principles of evangelical Protestantism and kindled a flame which soon
extended far beyond his original intentions. I've been reminded
of an illustration of that 97th thesis that there was Lerzer
He was like a butterfly in a chrysalis. This 95 Theses was published. He had all the trouble in 1918
which broke open the chrysalis and out came a beautiful butterfly
preaching the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. Now Luther was, as we call him,
a monergist, as was John Calvin and the reformers. Monergism
is the doctrine of God's absolute sovereignty, God's unchangeableness,
and reigning over man's will, which he passionately argued in his Bondage of the
Will. This work and his exposition
of Galatians were the only two books he ever accepted to be
sent to the public for their attention. These two volumes
are Luther's noblest legacy to the Church. John Bunyan wrote
in Grace Abounding, I do prefer this book of Martin Luther's
upon Galatians, excepting the Holy Bible, before all books
that ever I have seen, as most fit for a wounded conscience. And Luther said that this lovingly
he called Paul's epistle to the Galatians, my Katie von Bora. that was his wife that he loved
very deeply. At the back here there's some
photocopies of Martin Luther and Katie Von Borow's betrothal
rings and wedding rings and you can take one free. It'll be of
much interest especially to the ladies Now besides all this in 1537
Luther wrote to Wolfgang Capito concerning the plan to publish
his complete works and this is what he says he writes I would
rather see them his books devoured for I acknowledge none of them
to be really a book of mine except for perhaps the one on the bound
will and the catechism. Now when we speak of monarchism
it is really in reality what Luther was himself, Augustinian
and he'd been brought up in that way in the monastery. And Augustinianism in reality
are the truths of free and sovereign grace which affirmed that God
alone saves sinners without the cooperation of the human will. Luther constantly affirmed that
God damns the undeserving as well as elects the undeserving. That's a precious saying of Luther's. He had a way of putting things
pithily that people could remember. Now double predestination is
more associated with Calvin than Luther, yet in his 97th thesis,
Disputation Against Scholastics, he is undeniably Augustinian
or monergistic, treating double predestination, man's
total fall in Adam and of the will, which without the grace
of God will produce an act that is perverse and evil. That's 7 to 9 of the 97 theses. And yet fallen man bravely strives
by the works of the law to win salvation. And Luther wrote,
every teacher of work righteousness is a troublemaker. Every teacher
of work righteousness is a troublemaker. the so-called, if you pardon
the expression, the so-called Calvinistic truths brought the
wrath of Rome down upon him. John Trapp tells us of a fiery
friar who openly in the pulpit at Antwerp preaching to the people
wished that Luther were there that he might tear him with his
teeth. There was much opposition You
know Luther wanted to be martyred and in his dying days he expressed
this of a great sadness to him that he had never been martyred
for the faith. Well we know why friends, the
Lord had raised him up for a great work. William Cunningham wrote
on page 109 of the Reformers and the Theology of the Reformation
when Luther's followers of subsequent generation openly deviated from
scriptural orthodoxy on these points they set themselves to
prove that Luther had never held Calvinistic principles. But we
have no hesitation in saying that it can be established beyond
all reasonable question that Luther held the doctrines which
are commonly regarded as most peculiarly Calvinistic. though
he was never led to explain and apply to illustrate and defend
some of them so fully as Calvin did. Luther's 97 theses and other
writings disprove Cunningham's last statement as wholly erroneous. However, Lorraine Bittner is
much more to the point in the Reformed doctrine of predestination. Luther went into the doctrine
of predestination as heartily as did Calvin himself. He even
asserted it with more warmth and proceeded to much harsher
lengths in defending it than Calvin ever did. That is nearer
to the truth concerning Martin Luther. I can only refer you to a few
of these articles in the 97th thesis. If I spent a minute over
each one then it would be 97 minutes and we would be here
until the election and the results have been fully announced. so
i must confine my remarks to a few of these things here because
they're vital and important there's much mention here of free will Luther preached the bondage of
the will and often in his sermons he brought out this of the bondage
of the will. Now you cannot believe that the
will is bound without believing in predestination. For if a man
is bound in his will and in sin and Satan has bound him, how
can he save himself? And when Luther looked upon these
things, he came to this conclusion. It must have been God that saved
me. His predestination, he must have
predestinated me to this. So let's look at a few of these
things that are here before us. He begins with number one here
to say that Augustine exaggerates in speaking against heretics,
is to say that Augustine tells lies almost everywhere. This
is contrary to common knowledge. And number two, this is the same
of permitting Pelagians and all heretics to triumph indeed. the same as conceding victory
to them. It is the same as making sport
of the authority of all doctors of theology. Now Augustine was
Luther's champion in the faith. didn't mean to say that Luther
idolized him in some points where Luther felt that Augustine was
wrong he said so. I've got his commentary on Genesis
and Luther speaks there of Augustine's views that the world and it was
a common opinion but it was all created at once and that the
six days were philosophical days but Luther said in these genesis
if it says six days it is six days And so we see Luther there used
his judgment rightly in things, though Dustin was his hero and
he loved him greatly. The judgment of the scholastics
by Luther's time were essentially Semipalagian teaching that Augustine
had overstated his arguments against free will and predestination. They were trying to lessen the
import of these great doctrines because they believed in free
will and merit and they followed Aristotle as we shall see And
there's a little saying, if you do a good thing, you can then
build on it and build on it and build on it until you come to
happiness. Or even as the Scholastics might
have said, eternal happiness. But Luther said of these things
that they were all wrong. the second point there is that
if Augustine was telling lies then Pelagius and all heretics
spoke the truth absolutely so this was against the scholastics
opinion basically their philosophies all ended up in free will and
merit and doing good and being in the esteem of men even And
so on, number four he says, it is therefore true that man being
a bad tree can only will and do evil. Matthew 7, 17 and 18. So every good tree bringeth forth
good fruit, but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. That
is, men dead in sin cannot bring forth any good at all. And so we see here Luther stating
these things here. As we saw it was an oral examination
we might call it. this good man had to indeed expand
these things it shows you the state of theology in the time
of the scholastics there was so much philosophy and scholasticism, aristotelism and
they were like that all the time And so Luther, when he read the
writings of Aristotle, we see how his soul was repulsed by
these things of imagination, of intellect, and man's opinion upon these things which
men received gladly. number five says it is false
to state that man's inclination is free to choose between either
of two opposites indeed the inclination is not free but captive this
is said in opposition to common opinion and number six is it
is false to state that the will can by nature conform to correct
precept This is said in opposition to Scotus and Gabriel. Well,
who were these two men? Well, Scotus is known in the
Catholic Church as the Blessed John Dunscotus. 1265 or 66 to 1308 and he was one
of the most important influential philosophers, theologians of
the high middle ages. His family name was Duns which
is also the name of a Scottish village in Berwickshire, Scotland
where he was born. His sarcophagus in Cologne bears
a Latin inscription which translated reads, Scotland brought me forth,
England sustained me, France taught me, and Cologne holds
me. He was known as the subtle doctor. It was he who presented a systematic
theology of the Marian privilege. of the Immaculate Conception
which the Catholic Church officially proclaimed as the Dogma of Faith
on the 8th of December 1854. He taught the freedom of the
will. But his followers, and this is
an interesting account, his followers were ridiculed by the 16th century
humanists and reformers as enemies of learning, calling them dunces. You know what a dunce is? A stupid
person. A foolish person. And it comes
from the word duns. so as he speaks about dunceys
remember the blessed John Dunce Otis he was a dunce himself and
so were his followers and so we read then of Gabrielle who
was Gabrielle Biel 1425 to 1495 he was the last of the scholastics some say sowed the seeds of the
Reformation, and indeed though Beelzebub taught justification
in his view, the sinner has to achieve salvation by their best
effort without the grace of the Holy Spirit under free will Pelagianism. The human initiative merits God's
grace, not as a wage earned but as a response to doing your best,
a hidden terror that Luther discovered as here. An important work of
Gabriel Bell was a commentary on the sentences of Peter Lombard,
which was just a collection of the church fathers, which would
come to play a major influence on Luther during the Reformation.
the will over intellect he denied the real distinction between
the soul and its faculties now you read all these things about
these men but at the bottom of their philosophy was that man
was good that man could do good works and man could please God
and he could exercise his free will and do good But as Luther
says, as a matter of fact, without the grace of God, the will produces
an act that is perverse and evil. So we go over to 9. It is nevertheless
innately and inevitably evil and corrupt. One must concede
that the will is not free to strive toward whatever is declared
good. This is in opposition to Scotus
and Gabriel. Nor is it able to will or not
to will whatever is prescribed. 12. Nor does one contradict St. Augustine when one says that
nothing is so much in the power of the will as the will itself. And so it is absurd to conclude
that erring man can love the creature above all things, therefore
also God. What they were saying was that
human love towards one another was the same as loving God, but
you yourselves are taught of God to love one another. Love is of God. So that what
they were saying there is quite erroneous. You see with
Luther here he's focusing everything upon God and the work of God
and what God himself can do. Now I must jump over again here
and we shall look at some interesting things here. But it is an act
of conversion, number 27, already perfected, following grace both
in time and by nature. See, without grace, without grace
there is nothing that man can do. now we come to a very important
thing that Luther makes which concerns us all and indeed as
strict baptism concerns us all. It says, it is said of the scripture
passages, return to me and I will return to you, Zechariah 1.3. Draw near to God and he will
draw near to you, James 4.8. Seek and you will find, Matthew
7.7. You will seek me and find me,
Jeremiah 29.13, and the like. that one is by nature, the other
by grace, this is no difference from asserting what the Pelagians
have said. You see here this seed, there
wasn't the controversy at this moment or in the time of Gatsby
with Andrew Fuller and his notions of a universal offer. It says
here the notion of a universal free offer is unproven from these
scripture texts. Luther lays bare these false
expositions as Pelagianism. Commenting on Romans 8.28, Luther
uses four clear-cut arguments. about the many arguments against
predestination so we see there are those who are against predestination
they say well return to me man can do it yes draw near to God
you can do it just exercise your free will and it will all come
to pass but commenting in Romans 8 28 There are four clear cut arguments
here. The second argument I would like
to draw your attention to. The second argument is that God
desires all men to be saved, 1 Timothy 2.4. and he gave his
son for us men and created men for eternal life. All things
exist for man, they say, and he himself exists for God that
he may enjoy him, etc. These points and others like
them can be refuted as easily as the first one. For these verses
must always be understood as pertaining to the elect only,
as the Apostle says in 2 Timothy 2 verse 10, everything for the
sake of the elect. For in an absolute sense Christ
did not die for all, because he says this is my blood which
is poured out for you and for many. He does not say for all
for the forgiveness of sins. Mark 14 24 and Matthew 26 28.
This is his lectures on Romans page 377 the Concordia edition. Now see how Luther establishes
his line of reasoning against Pelagianism and universal love
on the doctrine of definite redemption for the forgiveness of sins.
Now on Jude chapter 4 it has that word there, the Lord
that bought them. Now it's often been interpreted
by Arminians and Universalists and so on, that the Lord brought
those who were against the gospel. But see how it says here, He
expounds something similar concerning the limit of the atonement, and
they keep silent about Christ. It is as much as if they said
Christ is of no account to you, his works help you nothing, but
you must merit salvation by your own works. Thus they deny the
Lord, Now notice his words, who has bought us with his own blood. I found another comment, unique
to Luther and his way of argumentation. He's good in this matter, whom
I have had to read, I've had to read this several times to
get the gist of his thinking. On this word God wants all men
to be saved. Elsewhere we read in John 13
18, I know whom I have chosen. The Holy Spirit then must not
fight against himself. In this vein Augustine says no
one saves but the one God. Nowhere is there salvation except
in God. All men, that is, He is their
salvation. I think he is speaking about
general salvation. He saves from the perils of adultery,
fornication, poverty, error. Whoever now has escaped some
peril escapes as God saves him. And Psalm 107 confirms this.
Paul says in chapter 4, verse 10, he is the savior of all men,
especially of those who believe. The passage clearly distinguishes
between all men and those who believe. This is his lectures
on 1 Timothy. Luther then goes on to speak
of providence and the sun and the rain upon the wicked and
the godly. general salvation providence
of the wicked and the eternal salvation of the elect. It's an unusual exposition of
the text but when you read that in context with the passage there in 1 Timothy 2 he's exhorting us in
that way to pray for all men and you notice the word all and
throughout it there and it is important for us that we must
see these things. It's exhorting them to pray for
all men and for the good of all men. and who will have all men
to be saved that is to be delivered from disasters and earthquakes
from poverty and hunger as Luther goes on in this manner of speaking
and come to a knowledge of the truth not a knowledge of the
gospel but of the truth that there is a God in heaven who
oversees all the affairs of men. Now that is an interesting one
for some of us to contemplate and think upon. I was looking
at this coming over in the car this afternoon where Luther is
speaking, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy. and he compares that verse in
Romans 9 15 with the Greek and then the Hebrew which he says
the Hebrew reads this way I will show mercy on whom I will show
mercy and I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious Exodus
33 19 this is said in an indefinite sense as if it were and as if
he were offering mercy by chance without reference to predestination
you see the force of his argument there that at the bottom of all
things we should consider predestination Now, at number 29 he says, the
best and infallible preparation for grace and the sole disposition
toward grace is the eternal election and predestination of God. I'll read that again. The best
and infallible preparation for grace and the sole disposition
toward grace is the eternal election and predestination of God. Luther recalls, Stop it, you comfort
me with these words. Why do you torture yourself with
these speculations? Look at the wounds of Christ
and at the blood that was shed for you. From these, predestination
will shine. Luther's turning point in his
soul came when the light broke upon him in Romans 1 17. The just living by faith This is referred to as his tower
experience because it occurred in the tower of the Black Cloister
in Wittenberg, later Luther's home. He said, here I felt that
I was altogether born again and had entered paradise itself through
open gates. He saw that if it had not been
for eternal election and predestination he could never have been saved
or believed, being the chiefest of sinners. You know the agony
of soul that Luther went through until that came to him. Those blessed words were opened
up to his soul and he felt he was born anew and he entered
the gates of paradise. In the bondage of the will he
writes, all things whatever arise from and depend on the divine
appointment whereby it was ordained, who should receive the word of
life and who should disbelieve it, who should be delivered from
their sins and who should be hardened in them. and who should
be justified and who should be condemned. These things were
all determined in eternity. We call it a double predestination. On the part of man, however,
nothing precedes grace except in disposition and even rebelling
against grace. God has surely promised His grace
to the humble, that is to those who mourn over and despair of
themselves. But a man cannot be thoroughly
humbled till he realizes that his salvation is utterly beyond
his own powers, counsels, efforts, will and works, and depends absolutely
on the will, counsel, pleasure and work of another, God alone. Now we come to 31. It is said with the idlest demonstrations
that the predestined can be damned individually but not collectively. This is in opposition to the
scholastics. I believe Luther here is expressing
the Reformed doctrine of double predestination and reprobation
against the scholastic notion that a sinner is damned individually
for his sins, but there's no collectiveness in it, not collectively
as in reprobation. Modern Lutheran scholars maintain
that while Calvin and his followers, Beezer, Booser and Knox, etc.,
Uphold the doctrine of double predestination. Martin Luther
and his followers acknowledge the doctrine of single predestination,
which they cannot prove while the bondage of the will stands.
For Luther it was double or nothing. double or nothing. Johann Orfeiber,
an early compiler of the Tabletalk writing in 1566, stated categorically,
it is a lie that the dear man Luther, that dear man Luther
that dear man of God modify in any way his opinion on free will,
which they term hard because it is directly opposed to their
heresy, and yet they boast of being Luther's disciples. Some have acknowledged, yes,
Martin Luther believed in double predestination. Nevertheless,
we modern Lutherans are more enlightened and do not follow
Martin Luther in everything. Today, the Evangelical Lutheran
Church in America is as far from Luther's biblical teaching and
denies biblical inerrancy. On August 21, 2009, the Evangelical
Lutheran Church of America at their churchwide assembly in
Minneapolis voted to allow congregations to call and ordain gays and lesbians
in committed monogamous relationships to serve as clergy by a vote
of 559 to 451. Their ministers are allowed to
bless same-sex marriages. So you see how far they've gone.
Now there are those who are orthodox Lutherans who are separated from
this. They may be small, but indeed
in many things they are sound, but yet They may say of Luther
that he believed in single predestination. Well, what we've read there puts
a lie to that. Moreover, nothing is achieved
by the following saying, predestination is necessary by virtue of the
consequence of God's willing, but not of what actually followed,
namely that God had to elect a certain person. Luther recalls
Dorpitz used to comfort him and we've mentioned that there. I seem to have two pages here
but indeed we've noticed that of predestination and it's an
interesting thing here Luther said he said if it had
not been for Dr. Stobitz I should have sunk in
hell. Johann von Stobitz was himself
a passionate Augustinian who believed in double predestination
and he said because mercy and justice contribute Equally to
the praise of the Almighty, it has been decreed that some should
be elected and predestinated to confirmation with the image
of the Son of God and to faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. But
those who do not have faith are judged already. That is in a
writing of his called Eternal Predestination and its Execution
in Time. However, in 1559, Pope Paul IV,
Pope von Stoppitz, works on the index of prohibited books. In his last letter to Luther,
he wrote, My love to you is unchanging, passing the love of women, always
unbroken, as I do not I grasp all your ideas, I keep silence
about them. It seems to me that you condemn
many things which are merely indifferent. But we owe much
to you, Martin, for having led us back from the husks which
the swine did eat to the pastures of life and the words of salvation. Eight months after sending that
letter on December the 28th, 1524, the priest who had loved
Martin Luther died, a Benedictine abbot in St. Peter's Archabbey,
Salzburg. He's now celebrated in the Lutheran
liturgical calendar. and this is false number 33 that
doing all that one is able to do can remove the obstacles to
grace this is in opposition to several authority now in Luther's
lectures on Genesis particularly Genesis 26-9 Luther attacks fatalism
That is the notion circulating 1535-45 among nobles and persons
of importance concerning predestination. If I am predestined I shall be
saved whether I do good or evil. If I am not predestined I shall
be condemned regardless of my works. Luther was appalled at
this misuse of such a comforting doctrine to God's people and
as regards preaching Luther believed from the outline of the book
of Romans that we should approach an election first beginning with
chapters 1 to 3 by addressing men's sins and utter ruin under
the law then teach the way of reconciliation from chapter 3
verse 19 into chapter 4 which is an example in Abraham one
justified before circumcision and followed by the Adam fall
in chapter 5 a brief summary of justification I like Luther's
way of reading that text, therefore being justified. By faith we
have peace with God. And I believe that is a good
way of putting it. Even if we put it with a comma there, I
shall speak on it in a minute, but even if we put the comma
there, faith is set in opposition to good works. And so on chapter
six of sanctification and baptism, shall we continue in sin that
grace may abound? God forbid. In chapter seven,
the believer is both justified and a sinner at the same time.
Chapter eight, a summing up of sin and justification. And finally,
chapters nine to 11 on predestination. Then chapter 12 to the end, the
practical part. Luther taught the law first,
then the gospel. If we went into a true Lutheran
church and heard a sermon, they would speak of the law first,
and of sin, and then they would preach the gospel. That was in
Luther's mind. You should always brings them
to the law to see their sin and their iniquity and indeed their
bondage and then speak to them when the gospel of the freedom
of that grace which is in the Lord Jesus Christ to save helpless
lost sinners. Now 39 says we are not masters of our
actions from beginning to end but servants this is in opposition
to the philosophers we are servants of sin even as Christians and
unable to master sin in us but by the grace of God but by being
kept by the power of God We do not become righteous by doing
righteous deeds, but having been made righteous, we do righteous
deeds. It's in opposition to the philosophers.
Luther said that faith makes us godly, not by doing righteous
deed. Faith is the gospel rule of life
for the believer, not the law. The just shall live by his faith. a difficulty to us often to live
by faith for when we sin we come under condemnation we wish we
hadn't committed that that sin we don't know how to deal with
that of that sin but you see here friends we live by faith
friends we are justified and sinners at the same time Virtually the entire ethics of
Aristotle is the worst enemy of grace that's in opposition
to the scholastic. Luther made a whole and absolute
renunciation of Aristotelian scholasticism. Calvin denounced
scholastic theology as contemptible. Melanchthon said the church had
embraced Aristotle instead of Christ. He rejected their scholastic
notion that sin is not a latent possibility, note the words,
a latent possibility in us, but an ever active force. That's in his Loci Communes 1521.
And so we go on in this and we look at these things here
for indeed we're seeing Luther propounding this thought that
the gospel is our rule of life not the law. Luther was always
afraid of this one thing that once we had received the gospel
then we should go back to the law for our sanctification he
rejected that entirely and yet there were some like Agricola
who indeed was a friend at one time of Luther's but he overstepped
the mark and Luther wrote against him and his views on the law
and the dismissing of it and from that friends it was Luther
who first coined the word antinomianism so the word antinomianism goes
back to one that they accuse as being the greatest antinomian
like John Wesley who was appalled at Luther's exposition of Galatians for an act to be meritorious
either the presence of grace is sufficient or its presence
means nothing the grace of God is never present in such a way
that it is an active but is a living active and operative spirit and
you see what he's saying there if we are taught by God the Holy
Spirit it is an active principle in us that brings us into conformity
to the image of the Lord Jesus Christ now just like to commend some things
to you there are two articles on Luther in the magazine Perception
by Ian Sadler and I commend them warmly to you and there is a
double or nothing Martin Luther's Doctrine of Predestination by
Brian J Mattson which is worth consulting on this matter I've
consulted it a lot and found it very helpful But unquestionably
the late Ken Matrinola's lecture on justification delivered at
Guildford is central to a proper understanding of justification.
I have listened countless times to this lecture. It is in truth
the heart of Luther's gospel upon which the church stands
or falls. The discussion between your pastor
Mr. Matronola is invaluable and gives
us a faithful, radical understanding of justification. His scriptural
argument was that the work of justification was accomplished
by Christ alone without the cooperation of fallen man. We had no hand
in it. To say that faith justifies us
is, as Mr. Matronola points out, to make
faith a work, not the gift of God in regeneration. He goes
on to say that where we read in Paul by faith, that the grace
of faith stands opposite to good works for salvation. For by grace
are ye saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is
the gift of God, not of works, lest any man should boast. Ephesians
2, 8 and 9. again in Romans 5 verse 1 by
placing the comma as we just said there and the verb there
is an eris passive participle it is in the past having been
justified therefore being justified By
faith we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,
which fits the contents of the third and fourth chapters. If
we say justified by faith, we still set faith in opposition
to good works. Luther interprets it thus in
Romans. Now, let's move on here. Outside of the grace of God,
65, it is indeed impossible not to become angry or lust, so that
not even in grace is it possible to fulfill the law perfectly. That's a comfort to believers,
but not an excuse for sin. Shall we continue in sin that
grace may abound? God forbid. We are both justified
and sinners. It is the righteousness of the
hypocrite actually and outwardly not to kill or do evil. This
the sinner look to his own self-righteousness and thinks himself a good person
worthy of God's salvation. It is by the grace of God that
one does not lust or become enraged, 67. It is only as we are kept
by God and his children that we avoid all sin, not by our
own efforts for Luther. Sanctification was not a word
that readily entered into his language or his writings or his
preachings and sermons because he looked to Christ Jesus for
everything. every single thing he found in
Christ Jesus accepted in the beloved and in Christ we are
sanctified as it says in first Corinthians 1 does it not where
it speaks after this manner of let's turn to it where it says but of him are
ye in Christ Jesus who of God is made unto us wisdom and righteousness
and sanctification and redemption. As I've said Luther was always
afraid of this faith plus works saves the sinner which is in
a sense like his friend Melanchthon who drifted into synergism where
man could cooperate with God and he could do certain things
and so on. He was afraid of this, of the
law coming into the gospel in that sense that we must do something
and he believed God must do it in us. So in A.K. he says, blessed are
all those who do the works of the grace of God This would be
faith which makes us godly and repentance. We add to this the
fruits of the Spirit. But even the Decalogue itself,
83, and all that can be taught and prescribed inwardly and outwardly
is not good law either. The good law and that in which
one lives is the love of God, spread abroad in our hearts by
the Holy Spirit. See how he takes us away from
this, of the law being the believer's rule of life. It's the love of
God, shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost. And anyone's will hates it, that
the law should be imposed upon it. If, however, the will desires
imposition of the law, it does so out of love of self. See, keeping the law in that
sense, friends, is loving oneself. I can do it. Yes, I can. I can do it. The grace of God
is given for the purpose of directing the will, lest it err, even in
loving God. And so it goes on in this way
and in this manner throughout this whole thing. I think it
might be time to close at that point here. And Lou ends his
97th thesis with those words, in these statements, we wanted
to say and believe we have said nothing that is not in agreement
with the Catholic Church and the teachers of the Church. The Catholic Church, meaning
that doctrine that universal gospel of the salvation of men
by grace of lord he doesn't mean the catholic church itself but
it is that which has been taught from the very beginning i will
conclude there and the lord bless what i've said to you and that
you might realize In these times that we live in, the doctrines
of election and predestination are stability in our times. They are the determination of
God to save sinners. It's the determination of God
to save all of his dear elect. and they shall and they must
be saved. As Bunyan says, there'll be no
rusty crowns at the marriage supper of the Lamb. For all for
whom Christ died, they shall and must be saved. I'll conclude
there, the Lord's blessing upon these things. Amen.