, , , , ,

One Lutheran...Ablog!™

Martin Chemnitz in vol. 1 of Examination of the Council of Trent is arguing with his opponent Andrada about what remains in the regenerate of concupiscence, and whether or not it is truly sinful in the sight of God. Andrada tries to argue from what is possible. Isn’t it possible, he posits, that Baptism could have enough power to completely remove forever what is evil and sinful in a person? Are you saying, Martin Chemnitz, that the wickedness of Adam has harmed us more than the merit of Christ can benefit us? Chemnitz replies in a way that I would never have thought: “You cannot draw a firm conclusion about what is from what is possible.” No doubt the reason I wouldn’t have thought to say this is that I have never studied logic. Sadly. 

How many questions could be dismissed with these words! I thought immediately of the argument…

View original post 136 more words