MARK: 13.33: 125/9–10
LUKE: 18.1: 125/9–10
174/12
no good werke.
Cf. CWM 6/1.352/30.
174/15–25
And then ... no
lenger. Tyndale states Luther's doctrine of simul iustus et peccator, cf. 3o/19n. For Tyndale the
non-imputation of sin rests on the believer's fundamental
good will and readiness to improve, while for Luther it is
based solely on the righteousness of Christ, with whom one is
united by faith in the
promises. Also, Tyndale introduces a reason
for ongoing sinfulness that Luther did not feature, namely, that one is
at fault to the extent that one's love is less than Christ's
love. Luther defended the simul, e.g., in
response to the censure of Art. 31 of Exsurge (In omne
opere bono iustus peccat; DS 1481; Neuner Dupuis 1923/31) in
Defense and Explanation of All the
Articles, December 1520 (WA 7.136–38; LW 32.83–86). Here he
writes that there is sin whenever one falls short of the
command to love God with all one's heart and strength, and that the simul has backing in Isaiah, Paul, Augustine
, and Gregory the Great. (JW)
evens] eues 1573
2 KINGS: 18.4: 66/29, 88/12, 123/9, 124/9, 125/16, 184/23
of] om.
1573
174/21–22
good . . .
doynge well. Cf. CWM 6/1.352/31–32.
1 CORINTHIANS: 8.11:125/26, 201/10–11
174/26
no synne . . .
vnbeleffe. Cf. CWM 6/1.352/33–34. Cf. Matt. 12.31–32, Luke
12.10. In The Supplication of Souls (1529), More
discusses blasphemy against the Holy Spirit as the
unforgivable sin (CWM 7.191/11–192/14). In his prologue to the Book of
Numbers , Tyndale claims that malicious persecution of the
clear truth is the sin against the Holy Spirit (Mombert 388/29–32; TOT
193).
tithes] 1573, rithes 1531
GENESIS: 14.16, 20: 125/30
HEBREWS: 7.2: 125/30
174/30–175/1
no frewyll .
. . the werke man. Cf. CWM 6/1.352/ 36–353/5. Where More saw
error in Luther's doctrine of the bondage of the will, Tyndale offers a
key distinction. Humans have no power to overcome darkness and sin until
God frees the will to do good voluntarily. But the will itself is the
creator's gift, which sinful human beings misuse because of the
blindness inflicted by the devil (176/9–16). Luther had developed his
doctrine in 1520 and 1521 in response to censure in Exsurge, Art. 36 (DS 1486; Neuner-Dupuis 1923/36), e.g., in
Defense and Explanation (WA 7.142–49; LW
32.92–94). The culmination then came in Luther's broadside against
Erasmus, On the Bondage of the Will, 1525 (WA
18.600–787; LW 33). Cf. also 39/2n. Tyndale further discusses other difficulties concerning free will raised by More: God's
initiative in justification (175/10–12, 211/3–4), the effect on morality
of lack of belief in free will (188/28–29, 189/1–6), the dilemma of
God's causality and responsibility for evil (191/4–9). (JW)