Commentary on Genesis, Vol. 1: Luther on the CreationLuther, Martin
ReligionChristian
Commentary on Genesis, Vol. 1: Luther on the Creation
Luther, Martin
Bible. Genesis -- Commentaries
But consider for a moment what will necessarily follow from the
doctrine of making original righteousness, not to have been an
essential part of created nature, but only a certain superfluous and
superadded gift or ornament. If you lay it down as a fact, that
original righteousness was not an essential quality of the nature of
man, it must inevitably follow that the sin, which followed original
righteousness, was also not an essential quality of the nature of man.
And if so, was it not an utterly vain thing that Christ should be sent
into the world as the Redeemer of man, if it was man's original
righteousness only, which was merely a foreign and separate addition
to his nature, that was lost; and if that loss still left the
faculties and qualities of his original nature sound and perfect? But
what doctrine can be worse than this? What doctrine more unworthy a
divine to utter?
Flee therefore from such mad dreams as from a real pestilence and from
corruption of the Holy Scriptures; and let us instead follow actual
experience which teaches us that we are born of corrupt seed and that
we derive from the very nature of that seed, ignorance of God,
self-security, unbelief, hatred of God, disobedience, impatience and
numberless other kindred evils; all which are so engendered and
implanted in our very nature, and are a poison so wholly diffused
throughout our flesh, body, soul, nerves and blood, yea, through all
our bones and their very marrow; and so wholly poisoning our will, our
understanding and our reason, that the poison not only can never be
extracted, but that we cannot even acknowledge, or feel, or see that
this is our state of sin!
It is a well known sentiment of the old Greek comedian, Aristophanes,
"that to visit harlots is no disgrace to a youth." Pardon however may
be extended to such a sentiment in a heathen poet. But it is most
awful in such as call themselves Christian men, and men professing a
knowledge of the Holy Scriptures, to incline toward such a sentiment
that whoredom is not positive sin. And yet, whole colleges of our
canonicals actually approve the sentiment, with one consent by their
lives and manners. When this is the case therefore with respect to
actual outward sins, what must we conclude to be the state of men's
minds, with respect to the uncleanness of the heart and the motions of
sin in our very nature? These motions of nature, wicked men cannot of
course understand to be sins.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account