Luther's Bondage of the Will and Epistomology

A few notes, this bleat will make no sense if you haven’t read my earlier bleat from this morning so scroll down and read the earlier entry on "The 21st Century reformation BIG observation point". (which is actually called Radical Transparency - Opening the "Oikos") Then come back and read this. My point here is going to be whether keeping a well-kept 'house of ideas' is relevant today. My answer is that it is relevant as a means to an end but Christianity is primarily lived "on planet Earth" and not in the realm of the mind.

I just read J.I. Packer's introduction to Luther's "Bondage of the Will". I was struck by Luther's honesty of how difficult it is to maintain His faith in God's total sovereignty. Here is the theological issue: Luther's position is that God is sovereign over both good and evil. The devil is God's devil and man does nothing without God's, at least, indirect activity. In short, man is not free. Therefore, man cannot do anything meritorious toward his salvation. Luther says any clear reading of scripture has this theistic position. Anything less robs God's grace and is deism. Now the ruthlessly honest part is that Luther admits that if a rational person looks at the world and sees God behind it all, the honest soul must conclude that God is unjust. WOW that is so true. This conclusion is what I find continually in the world, and the Christian needs to cut it with this sentimental, "Just look around and you can see that God is good", tripe. The holocaust victim doesn't always see it this way. The incest victim doesn’t always see it that way. And the sojourner of the Middle Ages didn't see it that way either. In fact, I talk to my friends at work all the time and ask, "How does it work that all the backstabbing jerks get all the promotions". The wicked prosper and the righteous so often suffer. So evil happens and Luther struggles and despairs. How if God rules everything and the world is so evil could God still be just and good?

Luther's answer is biblical faith. Trust in the word. The scripture is what man has been given so that he may know that God is good in spite of his reasonings. This was the issue of the reformation. The reformers concluded from scripture that God is sovereign and man did not have free will and concluded, due to their honesty, that the only way a person could trust that God is good and sovereign is via scripture and a gift of faith. I love the honesty of this stance and the Existential despair of the position. Keirkegaard said faith is hard. So true.

Now here is my point:
1. My first inclination is to say Luther is too concerned with making his theology make systematic sense. The essence of the matter should be what faith looks like and how it empowers us to lay hold of the eternal life in this life. This dynamic faith is the kingdom a sopposed to Luther's striving to hold onto a static and consistent static worldview.
2.BUT: This struggle to make sense of the world in our minds and to make our house of ideas in our minds make logical sense was a question of the prophets in many instances. This is the question of the wisdom literature especially Job and Ecclesiastes. How could God be good when such evil and injustice is everywhere.
3. So we end with a both/and issue which bridges the gap between the 20th and 21st century. Dynamic faith in God's participation in our life to move our communities into the Kingdom story is the goal of faith BUT this dynamic faith stands upon a static faith in who God is and how the world actually works. Static faith. The house of ideas all fitting together is the worldview in which we existentially live out our dynamic faith.

The 21st century disciple sees the necessity to place the primary emphasis on the dynamic faith but to exercise this dynamic faith it just might be necessary to think BIG THOUGHTS ABOUT GOD along with Luther and the father's of the faith who went before us.

passthebread