Good morning and welcome back to Sochiology 101.

We're going to be talking about the bondage of the will.

It was brought up recently in a back and forth that I had with Dr. White with regard to historical debates over

this issue with Erasmus, the bondage of the will written by Luther. And we brought up in that

back and forth the fact that we believe Luther was making the same mistakes that we see many

modern-day Calvinists make, which is the assumption, and I do believe it is

an unfounded assumption. Obviously, Calvinists would contend with me on that point, and that's

part of the debate. But what Calvinists seem to assume is that if you are enslaved or in bondage

to sin, that therefore you can't confess humbly that you are in bondage to sin and that you need help when it's offered to you by God himself.

And that is a non sequitur. It does not follow that just because someone is enslaved or in bondage to something,

that therefore they cannot confess, they cannot first recognize that fact and confess that fact in light of

the provisions of God. And that is the point of contention. So what oftentimes Calvinist will do

is they will quote verse after verse after verse, talking about how enslaved we are, how much in

bondage we are, how we are at enmity with God,

as if that is hitting our point of contention. And it's not because we agree with Calvinists

that mankind, you know, those who sin are enslaved to sin, as Romans 6 says. We agree with them.

If you are a sinner, you're cast out of the garden. You are at enmity with God. But being at enmity with somebody doesn't

necessarily entail that you can't confess your enmity and be reconciled whenever the person

comes to you and offers reconciliation. That's just a, that's just again a non-secular.

Does not follow.

You can prove that I have enmity with my next-door neighbor.

We are at odds with each other.

...