The Bondage of the Will by Martin Luther

Contents
Preface
A Biographical Sketch of Martin Luther
Postscript on Plato and Augustine
Introduction
Reasons for the Work
PART I. ERASMUS’ PREFACE REVIEWED.
SECTION 1. Assertions defended.
SECT. 2. Erasmus shown to be a Sceptic.
SECT. 3. Christian truth is revealed and ascertained, not hidden.
SECT. 4. Scripture is falsely accused of obscurity.
SECT. 5. Freewill is a necessary subject
SECT. 6. Erasmus’ Christianity
SECT. 7. Erasmus’ theology exposed by similes.
SECT. 8. Absolute necessity of the subject of Freewill for true piety.
SECT. 9. Erasmus has omitted the question of God’s prescience.
SECT. 10. God’s absolute foreknowledge, flows from Erasmus’ confession.
SECT. 11. Objection to the term ‘necessity’ admitted: absurdity of the distinction between necessity of a consequence and of a consequent.
SECT. 12. Universal prevalence of this persuasion.
SECT. 13. The exceeding temerity and mischievousness of Erasmus’ pretended and boasted moderation.
SECT. 14. All Scripture truth may be published safely.
SECT. 15. The argument, ‘some truths should not be published,’ is either inconsistent with Erasmus’ act, or out of place.
SECT. 16. Erasmus’ three examples of truths ‘not to be published,’ considered.
SECT. 17. Erasmus neither understands nor feels the vast importance of the question.
SECT. 18. Peace of the world disturbed, is no argument against a dogma, but for it.
SECT. 19. Doubts whether the dogma of free confession is scriptural. The Pope and God cannot be obeyed conjointly. The people must be left to abuse.
SECT. 20. Erasmus’ counsel about persons, time, and place, is pernicious.
SECT. 21. The Fathers are not to be set on a level with Christ; their decisions have no authority but from the word.
SECT. 22. Injuriousness of certain paradoxes, ‘all things are by necessity;’ ‘God is all in all.’
SECT. 23. Answers to Erasmus’ objectionary questions, who will take pains, etc.? Two reasons why these things should be preached.
SECT. 24. The paradox that ‘all human works are necessary,’ explained and defended.
SECT. 25. Erasmus convicted by his own concession: the folly and madness of man’s claiming Freewill.
SECT. 26. Luther concludes his review of Erasmus’ Preface by reducing him to a dilemma, and making short work of some of his sharp sayings.

PART II. LUTHER COMMENTS ON ERASMUS’ PROEM.
SECTION 1. Canonical Scriptures are to be the standard of appeal. Human authority, all against Luther, is admitted but depreciated.
SECT. 2. The excellencies of the Fathers were not of, or for Free will.
SECT. 3. Luther challenges him to show effects of Freewill in the three particular excellencies which he has selected out of Erasmus’ catalogue.
SECT. 4. The saints practically disclaim Freewill, however they may dispute about it.
SECT. 5. However they may dispute about it, Luther demands a definition of Freewill; a specification of its parts, powers, properties, and accidents.
SECT. 6. Erasmus’ advice turned against himself: presumption, cruelty, and lack of discernment, are charged upon him.
SECT. 7. Injustice done to the Fathers, by choosing their bad sayings and leaving their good.
SECT. 8. Objection that God should have disguised the error of his Church, answered.
SECT. 9. The Church is not yet manifested; the saints are hidden.
SECT. 10. Distinction between judgment of faith, and judgment of charity.
SECT. 11. Erasmus’ perplexity and advice stated, in some degree admitted, but amended.
SECT. 12. There are two tribunals for the spirits of men; one private, the other public.
SECT. 13. Clearness of Scripture proved by testimonies from the Old Testament.
SECT. 14. The clearness of Scripture is proved by testimonies from the New Testament.
SECT. 15. The conclusion: if the dogma of Freewill is obscure, it is not in Scripture.
SECT. 16. Meaning and exemplifications of the promise, ‘All your adversaries shall not be able to resist.’
SECT. 17. We must be content with this sort of victory. Our adversary will not confess himself beaten.
SECT. 18. Why great geniuses have been blind about Freewill: viz. that they might expose Freewill. But it is no wonder that the natural man is blind to the things of God.
SECT. 19. Erasmus is shown to admit that Scripture is clear.
SECT. 20. Erasmus reduced to a dilemma.
SECT. 21. Luther claims victory already, but will proceed.

PART III. LUTHER CONFUTES ERASMUS’ TESTIMONIES IN SUPPORT OF FREEWILL.
SECTION 1. Erasmus’ Definition of Freewill examined.
SECT. 2. Definition continued.
SECT. 3. Definition continued.
SECT. 4. Inferences from Erasmus’ definition.
SECT. 5. Erasmus’ definition.
SECT. 6. Ecclesiasticus 15.15-18
SECT. 7. Opinions on Freewill stated.
SECT. 8. Erasmus inconsistent with his definition.
SECT. 9. The approvable opinion considered.
SECT. 10. The approvable opinion further considered.
SECT. 11. Freewill is not ‘a negative, intermediate power of the will.’
SECT. 12. The approvable opinion compared with the other two.
SECT. 13. Ecclesiasticus 15.14-18 resumed and expounded.
SECT. 14. Ecclesiasticus at least does not decide for Freewill.
SECT. 15. What is meant by ‘If you will,’ etc.
SECT. 16. Use of such forms of address.
SECT. 17. Diatribe is insincere in her inference.
SECT. 18. Concludes that Ecclesiasticus proves nothing for Freewill, whether what is said is understood of Adam, or of men generally.
SECT. 19. Gen. 4.7 considered.
SECT. 20. Deu. 30.19 considered.
SECT. 21. Passages from Deu. 30, etc. considered.
SECT. 22. His Scriptures prove nothing; his additions to Scripture are too much.
SECT. 23. Isa. 1.19; 30.21; 45.20; 52.1-2; and some other passages considered; they prove too much; no distinction between Law and Gospel, etc.
SECT. 24. Mal. 3.7 more particularly considered.
SECT. 25. Eze. 18.23 considered.
SECT. 26. The true meaning of Eze. 18.23 stated.
SECT. 27. Eze. 18.23 negatives Freewill, instead of proving it.
SECT. 28. How far God may be said to bewail the death He produces.
SECT. 29. Exhortations, promises, etc. of Scripture, are useless.
SECT. 30. Deu. 30.11-14 considered.
SECT. 31. Some of the Old Testament witnesses for Freewill.
SECT. 32. New Testament Scriptures for Freewill considered, beginning with Mat 23.37-39.
SECT. 33. The reality of God’s secret will is maintained.
SECT. 34. Mat. 19.17 and other like passages considered.
SECT. 35. Erasmus’ objection that precepts are given, and merit is ascribed to Freewill, considered. — Erasmus inconsistent with himself.
SECT. 36. New Testament precepts are addressed to the converted, not to those in Freewill.
SECT. 37. Merit and reward may consist with necessity.
SECT. 38. Why there are promises and threatenings in Scripture.
SECT. 39. Reason objects to the account, but is answered ‘such is the will of God.’
SECT. 40. Apology for not considering all his pretended texts separately — Absurd cavil from Mat 7.16.
SECT. 41. Luk 23.34 is against, not for Freewill.
SECT. 42. Joh 1.12 is all for grace.
SECT. 43. Objections from Paul summarily dispatched.
SECT. 44. Wickliff’s confession is confessed.

PART IV. LUTHER DEFENDS CERTAIN TESTIMONIES AGAINST FREEWILL.
SECTION 1. Erasmus has but two Texts to kill.
SECT. 2. Kills opposing texts by resolving them into tropes, which he defends by Luther’s example.
SECT. 3. Trope and consequence, when they are to be admitted.
SECT. 4. Luther denies having used trope in his interpretation of “Stretch out” and “Make yourself.”
SECT. 5. Diatribe must prove by Scripture or miracle, that the very passage in question is tropical.
SECT. 6. Erasmus’ trope makes nonsense of Moses, and leaves the knot tied.
SECT. 7. Necessity still remains, and you do not clear God.
SECT. 8. Diatribe’s similes of sun and rain are rejected.
SECT. 9. Erasmus’ two causes for tropicizing are considered.
SECT. 10. That God made all things very good, is not a sufficient reason.
SECT. 11. How God works evil in us, considered.
SECT. 12. How God hardens.
SECT. 13. Mistakes prohibited.
SECT. 14. Pharaoh’s case considered.
SECT. 15. Impertinent questions may still be asked.
SECT. 16. The trope compared with the text.
SECT. 17. Moses’ great object in such repeated testimonies of God’s design and work of hardening, is to strengthen Israel.
SECT. 18. Paul’s reference to this passage in Romans 9. Diatribe is hard put to it, and obliged to yield.
SECT. 19. Diatribe’s concessions and retractions exposed.
SECT. 20. Where true reverence for the Scriptures lies.
SECT. 21. What carnal reason hates.
SECT. 22. Paul’s argument resumed. Diatribe is dishonest and cowardly — would escape but cannot.
SECT. 23. Much joy to the Sophists and Diatribe in their necessity of a consequent.
SECT. 24. The other admitted text is defended. Nothing to do with salvation. So Jerome had said.
SECT. 25. Paul defended in his use of Gen. 25.21-23. Nothing is gained by supposing the service is temporal.
SECT. 26. The service is not really temporal, but spiritual.
SECT. 27. Diatribe’s evasions of Mal 1.2-3. Love, by a trope, is used for the effect of love.
SECT. 28. Malachi speaks of temporal affliction.
SECT. 29. Jacob and Esau are a trope for Jew and Gentiles.
SECT. 30. Paul does not quote the simile of clay in the hand of the potter — Temporal afflictions do not evade its force.
SECT. 31. The cavil from 1Tim 2.20 is repelled.
SECT. 32. Reason’s cavil from this simile, set forth in its audacity.
SECT. 33. Exposed further by asking, why not cavil against the salvation of the saved?
SECT. 34. Scripture must be understood with qualifications.
SECT. 35. Luther has always maintained the perfect consistency of Scripture — illustrates it in affirmed opposites.
SECT. 36. In merit and reward, etc., she contradicts herself — proves an absurdity, and cannot tell what she means to prove. But in fact, she proves nothing — Paul stands.
SECT. 37. Gen. 6.3 maintained.
SECT. 38. Gen 8.21 and 6.5 maintained.
SECT. 39. Isa 40.2 maintained.
SECT. 40. Episode on God’s help — Cornelius rescued.
SECT. 41. Isaiah 40.6-7 maintained.
SECT. 42. The true interpretation.
SECT. 43. Heathen virtue is God’s abhorrence.
SECT. 44. Consequences of this assumption respecting a part in man which is not ‘flesh.’
SECT. 45. Luther falsely charged. Authority of the ancients is abused, but good for nothing — if good, it contradicts Erasmus.
SECT. 46. Jer. 10.23-24 defended.
SECT. 47. Prov. 16.1 defended.
SECT. 48. Much in Proverbs for Freewill.
SECT. 49. John 15.5 maintained.
SECT. 50. Inconsistency charged. An advantage is given to heretics.
SECT. 51. Luther proves the negative.
SECT. 52. 1Cor 3.7; 13.2; Joh 3.27.
SECT. 53. Diatribe’s troop of similes is nothing, and go against her. — What she should have spoken to.
SECT. 54. Inconsistency and audacity of Diatribe; takes up one subject