Erasmus (ca.1466-1536) PhD Edit

Brightsidedotme: Amsterdam

May 5, 2020

My History, professor at Trinity Western University and Canadian Baptist Seminary, Dr. Ken Davis, a very knowledgeable historian (paraphrased) stated that Erasmus was a brilliant scholar that was not reasonably and fairly reviewed by Martin Luther in their debate; nor was Erasmus reviewed fairly by history on the debate. 

This work was previously presented in regards to Martin Luther, (link below) but this time Erasmus is the scholar in focus and with new material focused on Erasmus.

British philosopher, Blackburn writes that Erasmus (from Holland/Netherlands) was one of the earliest and greatest humanists of the Northern Renaissance. (124) Erasmus was a moderate and his moderate sceptism (124) gave him no reasonable place within the increasingly divisive Christian Church of his era. (124). However, his classical learning and teachings did have historical influence. (124).

His moderate views may have run afoul of the less than moderate views of Martin Luther.

The Pocket Dictionary explains Erasmus as a ‘major figure of the Reformation period’. (45). A humanist that sought reform for the Church through scholarly study in Scripture and Greek and Latin classical cultures. (45-46). The Pocket Dictionary opines that Erasmus influenced Reformers such as Martin Luther and John Calvin in the interpretation of the New Testament through the original Greek manuscripts and texts. (46) This assisted in their theological development within the Reformation. (46).

2010 Theodicy and Practical Theology: PhD thesis, the University of Wales, Trinity Saint David, Lampeter

In 1525 Luther wrote The Bondage of the Will, which was a debate with a Catholic scholar named Desiderius Erasmus (ca.1466-1536)[1] who was an advocate of the free will theory.[2]  Luther reasons that since human beings were fallen and abandoned God, they could not will good but only turned in the direction of their own desires.[3]  He comments that human beings were perverted and evil,[4] but this can be used by God for his purposes, although people can do nothing but oppose God by the use of their own will.[5]  He dogmatically assumes that there is no middle way between God’s grace and human free will,[6] and postulates that human free will should be theologically denied and everything should be ascribed to God.[7]

Luther’s sovereignty perspective[8] may place less emphasis on the human will than the later writings of Calvin and Feinberg.  However, even the title of Luther’s book The Bondage of the Will shows that he likely influenced Calvin somewhat in The Bondage and Liberation of the Will.  Jay Green writes that Luther can be viewed as an early and continual influence on Calvinism,[9] and it is reasonable to deduce that Luther is perhaps a minor historical influence on Feinberg’s sovereignty theology.[10]  Green points out that Luther’s views on theistic determinism are only accepted by a minority of Calvinists today.[11] 

BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

CAIRNS, EARLE E. (1981) Christianity Through The Centuries, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House.

CALVIN, JOHN (1539)(1998) The Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book IV, Translated by Henry Beveridge, Grand Rapids, The Christian Classic Ethereal Library, Wheaton College. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/institutes.html

CALVIN, JOHN (1540)(1973) Romans and Thessalonians, Translated by Ross Mackenzie, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

CALVIN, JOHN (1543)(1996) The Bondage and Liberation of the Will, Translated by G.I. Davies, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

CALVIN, JOHN (1550)(1978) Concerning Scandals, Translated by John W. Fraser, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

CALVIN, JOHN (1552)(1995) Acts, Translated by Watermark, Nottingham, Crossway Books. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1553)(1952) Job, Translated by Leroy Nixon, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1554)(1965) Genesis, Translated by John King, Edinburgh, The Banner of Truth Trust.

ERASMUS. (1525)(1972) ‘The Bondage of the Will’, in F.W. Strothmann and Frederick W. Locke (eds.), Erasmus-Luther: Discourse on Free Will, New York, Frederick Ungar Publishing Co., INC.

FEINBERG, JOHN.S. (1986) Predestination and Free Will, in David Basinger and Randall Basinger (eds.), Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press.

FEINBERG, JOHN.S. (1994) The Many Faces of Evil, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House. 

FEINBERG, JOHN.S. (2001) No One Like Him, John S. Feinberg (gen.ed.), Wheaton, Illinois, Crossway Books.

GREEN, JAY (1971) Five Points of Calvinism, ‘Forward’, Grand Rapids, Sovereign Grace Publishers.

GRENZ, STANLEY J., DAVID GURETZKI and CHERITH FEE NORDLING (1999) Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms, Downers Grove, Ill., InterVarsity Press.

LUTHER, MARTIN. (1516)(1968) Commentary On The Epistle To The Romans, Translated by J.Theodore Mueller, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House.

LUTHER, MARTIN. (1518)(1989) ‘Heidelberg Disputation’, in Timothy F. Lull (ed.), Martin Luther’s Basic Theological Writings,  Minneapolis, Fortress Press.

LUTHER, MARTIN. (1525)(1972) ‘The Bondage of the Will’, in F.W. Strothmann and Frederick W. Locke (eds.), Erasmus-Luther: Discourse on Free Will, New York, Frederick Ungar Publishing Co., INC. 

---

[1] Cairns (1981: 263).

[2] Erasmus (1525)(1972: 20).

[3] Luther (1525)(1972: 128-130).

[4] Luther (1525)(1972: 128-130).

[5] Luther (1525)(1972: 128-130).

[6] Luther is far more forceful in presentation that is Calvin and especially Feinberg.  He is very forceful in his debate with Erasmus.  I would provide the opinion that he seems closed-minded.

[7] Luther (1525)(1972: 133).

[8] Luther (1525)(1972: 123).

[9] Green (1971: 7).

[10] Feinberg is far more sympathetic to differing viewpoints than is Luther.

[11] Green (1971: 7).

---

Saturday, May 19, 2012 Martin Luther (and his influence on sovereignty defence/theodicy PhD Edit)