Abstract
The question around which the most famous debates revolved in the history of Western thought during the sixteenth century is how we confront things that are not within our control. This leads us to ask what happened in the times that preceded our existence. It is the search for this existence, its nature, and the universe in which we live are among the things that are considered beyond our control. It is clear that many things happening outside our control fall under this description, and the task of these questions is to clarify the origin of the dispute that raged between the humanist Catholic theologian Desiderius Erasmus (1466-1536 AD), and the Protestant Reformed theologian Martin Luther (1483-1546 AD),
The study begins by investigating the controversy of determining the powers of our will and the extent of its effectiveness in knowing our ability to choose our actions, especially our free ability as adults and mentally sound people. Our actions and behaviours are not imposed on us by nature or by other people, noting that we resort to answers that represent the Christian faith as a source of human knowledge. The root of the dispute revolves around the ability of the book and its understanding to explain the description of this will or its cancellation, and that both theologians will resort to the same texts contained in the Holy Bible.
But the disagreement appears in the use of these commandments of the religious text in addition to the role of the answers that represent the era of the fathers and the space of the human mind. This has an effect on showing the depth of the gap and the contradiction of some texts, and thus the appeal to the human mind in interpreting the will of man and determining the fate of his actions and his ability to take human actions as well as his destiny from heaven, through the idea of servitude to God and His ability to determine the course of human actions. These are among the divine attributes that are emptied of God’s eternal knowledge, and the role of divine grace in saving man from evil actions (the first sin) through the Christian doctrine of salvation, Both Erasmus and Luther will reflect their direction in determining their answer and rejection of the other, to the extent that shows that this debate will clarify the path of the Catholic Church and the Protestant Reformation and its path, which represents its cognitive value.
The study begins by investigating the controversy of determining the powers of our will and the extent of its effectiveness in knowing our ability to choose our actions, especially our free ability as adults and mentally sound people. Our actions and behaviours are not imposed on us by nature or by other people, noting that we resort to answers that represent the Christian faith as a source of human knowledge. The root of the dispute revolves around the ability of the book and its understanding to explain the description of this will or its cancellation, and that both theologians will resort to the same texts contained in the Holy Bible.
But the disagreement appears in the use of these commandments of the religious text in addition to the role of the answers that represent the era of the fathers and the space of the human mind. This has an effect on showing the depth of the gap and the contradiction of some texts, and thus the appeal to the human mind in interpreting the will of man and determining the fate of his actions and his ability to take human actions as well as his destiny from heaven, through the idea of servitude to God and His ability to determine the course of human actions. These are among the divine attributes that are emptied of God’s eternal knowledge, and the role of divine grace in saving man from evil actions (the first sin) through the Christian doctrine of salvation, Both Erasmus and Luther will reflect their direction in determining their answer and rejection of the other, to the extent that shows that this debate will clarify the path of the Catholic Church and the Protestant Reformation and its path, which represents its cognitive value.
Keywords
Erasmus
freedom of the will
Luther
slavery of the
Abstract
إنَّ السؤال الذي دارت عليه أشهر المناظرات في تاريخ الفكر الغربي إبّان القرن السادس عشر هو كيف نواجه أشياء ليست في نطاق سيطرتنا؟ وهذا يدفعنا إلى السؤال عمّا حدث في الأزمنة التي سبقت مجيئنا، فهو البحث عن هذا الوجود وطبيعته، والكون الذي نحيا فيه من الأشياء التي تعد خارجة عن سيطرتنا، والواضحأنَّ كثيراً من الأشياء الواقعة في الخارج هي تحت هذا الوصف، ومهمة هذه الأسئلة أن توضحأصل الخلاف الذي أحتدم بين عالم اللاهوت الكاثوليكي الإنسانويدسيدريوسإيراسموس (1466- 1536م)، وعالم اللاهوت البروتستانتي الإصلاحي مارتن لوثر (1483- 1546م)، وتنطلق الدراسة لبحثالجدل الدائر في تحديد صلاحيات إرادتنا ومدى فاعليتها إزاء معرفة قدرتنا في اختيار أفعالنا، لاسيما قدرتنا الحرة بوصفنا اشخاصاً بالغين وسليمين عقلياً، فأفعالنا وتصرفاتنا لا تفرض علينا فرضاً من الطبيعة أو من أشخاص آخرين، بملاحظة أَننا نلجأ إلى اجابات التي تمثل الإيمان المسيحي بوصفه منبعاً للمعرفة البشرية، فأصل الخلاف يدور حول قدرة الكتاب المقدس، وفهمه في بيان وصف هذه الإرادة أو الغائها، وأنَّ كلا اللاهوتيينِ سيلجأنإلى النصوص نفسها الواردة في الكتاب؛ لكن الخلاف يظهر في توظيف هذه الوصايا الواردة في النص الديني، ويضاف لها دور الإجابات التي تمثل عصر الآباء، ومساحة العقل البشرية، التي تؤثر في إظهار عمق الفجوة وتضاد بعض النصوص، والاحتكام إلىالعقل البشري في تفسير مشيئة الإنسان، وتحديد مصير أفعاله وقدرته في إتخاذ الأفعال البشرية، ومصيره الذي يحتم عليه تلقيه من السماء، عبر فكرة عبودية الإله وقدرته في تحديد مسار أفعال الإنسان، التي هي ضمن الصفات الإلهية التي لا خلاف فيها ولا جدل، ودور النعمة الإلهية في تخليص الإنسان من الأفعال الشريرة (الخطيئة الأولى) عبر عقيدة الخلاص المسيحية، وكلّ من إيراسموس ولوثر سيعكس اتجاهه في تحديد إجابته ورفضه للآخر، إلى درجة تُظهر أنّ هذه المناظرة ستبين تحديد مسار الكنيسة الكاثوليكية والكنيسة الإصلاحية البروتستانتية الذييُمثل قيمتها المعرفية.
Keywords
إيراسموس، لوثر، حرية الإرادة، عبودية الإرادة،