Is anyone aware of substantive responses to Luther's Bondage of the Will from people (theologians, philosophers) who at least partly disagree with it that are available in the Faithlife ecosystem?
Hi,
According to the sales pitch this resource by Robert Kolb addresses the 16th century reception to Luther’s De servo arbitrio (I don’t own it personally):
www.logos.com/product/161316/bound-choice-election-and-wittenberg-theological-method-from-martin-luther-to-the-formula-of-concord?utm_source=logos_dt&utm_medium=in_app_purch&utm_content=add_to_cart&utm_campaign=panel_upsell
To my knowledge Erasmus’ own response, the Hyperaspistes, is not in the Logos ecosystem. Correct me if I’m wrong.
According to the sales pitch this resource by Robert Kolb addresses the 16th century reception to Luther’s De servo arbitrio (I don’t own it personally): www.logos.com/product/161316/bound-choice-election-and-wittenberg-theological-method-from-martin-luther-to-the-formula-of-concord?utm_source=logos_dt&utm_medium=in_app_purch&utm_content=add_to_cart&utm_campaign=panel_upsell
These are the sections in this resource
Thank you both.
There has been quite a bit of discussion within Lutheranism as to what Bondage of the Will really means. I know that when I listen to what Luther is saying, I hear him speaking of the Power of the Gospel - which for him is very much based on a Catholic based sacramental view, eg. that Baptism does make us Children of God - even when we do not feel or understand what this means in our "will", and even when it doesn't look important in the eyes of the world. And I know that there are many Reformed who read the same text who do seem to see this as important.
Within the official Logos ecosystem you have to include the Book of Concord itself. In Solid Declaration 11 of the Formula of Concord itself there is extensive discussion as to what we do say about Predestination. The thing is that the Formula is more concerned with condemning doctrines rather than people - especially Luther. But it does condemn some one-sided readings of Luther here.
Someone above recommended Kolb's study. I have not yet read it, but having read many other works by him, I would suspect it would be a good presentation of the evidence.
I would recommend Schmid's Doctrinal Theology for an overview of how Lutherans have put things together, or the basic textbooks of Hutter, or Hunnius. While they do not have extensive analysis of Luther's arguments, they are important sources for how Lutheran have understood the topic.
And of course there are the many writings of the 19th century American Predestination controversy, but sometimes they are more heat than light.
