500 Years of Protestantism: 38 Things Martin Luther Wrote

  • Thread starter Thread starter yosephdaviyd
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
yosephdaviyd said:
Thanks so much for all of the feedback. This compilation has received much more interest from protestors than I thought it would. All of this stuff is already online, so I admit I wasn’t careful be as rigorous about as I would have been for a grad school school. LOL

Nevertheless, over the weekend I did take care to read all of the critiques from blogs and message boards that linked to it, and I added an addendum at the bottom in response to that. True to form, it seems even Protestants don’t all agree on the quality of these quotes, but I posted what they do seem to agree on in the addendum.

Again, I appreciate everyone’s feedback. I AM NOT AN APOLOGIST. I NEVER CLAIMED TO BE. Who I am and what I do I spell out clearly on my about page and about us page.

I’m going to continue the series on the 500 Years of Protestantism, and I hope if you find time you stop by for more helpful comments and critiques. 👍
Click to expand...
I was one of those “protesters” who came across Mr. Gray’s blog entry when he posted a link to it here. I also left a few comments for him on his blog entry. Mr. Gray has revised his entry by including a postscript which claims:
In some cases Swan was spot on, but in other cases he would have been much better off not trying to contextualize or excuse Luther. In those cases, Swan’s intellectually honesty is betrayed by his passion for Luther.
Click to expand...
What he doesn’t do, is provide any examples. Certainly each of us is prone to error, and each of us comes with a set of presuppositions. I make no claim to be infallible, just someone who looks stuff up to see what the actual and historical context says.

One irony in Mr. Gray’s blog entry is that I took the time to look up one of his Luther quotes that I had not gone over before (#18). It turns out, Luther didn’t write the quote Gray posted, Melanchthon did.

I also mentioned to Mr. Gray that even the first quote he uses is grossly out of context. In fact, in context I can’t believe that any Catholic would have a problem with what Luther meant. Similarly, I can go through many of the other quotes he posted and prove they’re out of context. Certainly Luther wasn’t perfect and was a man of times with sins and failures, but as I always say, he did not kick the cat on his way to post the 95 Theses

JS
 
EvangelCatholic said:
There are talks of some sort of symbolic gesture in 2017 including inter-communion; this is a particularly pressing issue in Germany.
Click to expand...
There are also talks about letting the divorced and remarried receive Communion as well. Neither will happen assuming the Bishops have prudence.

The differences in beliefs will make inter-Communion impossible. 😦
 
Sariaru said:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...anches.svg/500px-ChristianityBranches.svg.png

The Eastern Churches were being schismatic way before it was cool and hip in the Reformation days. 👍
Click to expand...
I just have to say, this graph is terrible. It must be from Wiki 😃 They are notorius for inaccuracy.

Just working backwards from 451, the Catholic Church has been there in writing, from the beginning.
 
TertiumQuid said:
Yes, I bothered. The majority of the quotes posted are direct cut-and-pastes from a web page entitled, “Luther, Exposing the Myth.” I did the work of looking up the quotes: A Review of Luther, Exposing the Myth.

As to the book by “Trishreden Wiemer,” this isn’t a person.

“Tischreden” is the German word for Luther’s Table Talk. The Table Talk is a lengthy collection of second hand statements Luther is purported to have said. That is, it isn’t something Luther wrote. Some of the utterances are more reliable than others. At times there isn’t enough context to really know why Luther said what he said (if indeed he said it). A good Reformation scholar (either Protestant or Catholic), knows not to use this as a primary source for an historical study.

“Weimer” Refers to the largest collection of Luther’s writing in German.
Click to expand...
This is mildly humorous and makes quite a bit of sense now. I have been searching for this “person” on and off for awhile. A Lutheran acquaintance mentioned “Tischreden Weimer” in conversation and I searched in every book store available to me, not knowing the correct spelling. I had even come across four different ways to spell Luther’s TableTalk on different websites that were trying to spread the “myth”. I am not of Luther’s background, so had not come across this in the past. Thank you. I learn something new everytime I am on this site. This was an interesting thread.🙂
 
ephesians2 said:
This is mildly humorous and makes quite a bit of sense now. I have been searching for this “person” on and off for awhile. A Lutheran acquaintance mentioned “Tischreden Weimer” in conversation and I searched in every book store available to me, not knowing the correct spelling. I had even come across four different ways to spell Luther’s TableTalk on different websites that were trying to spread the “myth”. I am not of Luther’s background, so had not come across this in the past. Thank you. I learn something new everytime I am on this site. This was an interesting thread.🙂
Click to expand...
My pleasure. There was a time when I wasn’t sure either about certain references. The problem with many historical figures is that citations and documentation were a lot looser in previous centuries, and also if one is limited to English, that makes it even harder to figure out references in other languages. .
 
steve_b said:
I just have to say, this graph is terrible. It must be from Wiki 😃 They are notorius for inaccuracy.
Click to expand...
Yup, thanks, that is where the image is from (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations). I removed it last night, and then someone restored it, and then I removed it again and started a talk page to come to a consensus about it. This will probably start an editing war, because I’m going to keep removing it if anyone restores it. LOL
 
steve_b said:
But I’ll be happy to explain. What part needs explaining?
Click to expand...
I think you could easily get a dozen different answers to that question. For example, I doubt any Oriental Orthodox person would be very happy with that diagram. And, to some extent, Lutherans probably wouldn’t either, given the way they are lumped under “Protestantism”. (Btw, keep in mind that I didn’t read every post of this thread … sorry if I’m unknowingly repeating something said earlier.)

Personally, I guess I find the Eastern Catholicism portion of the diagram to be the most obviously problematic.

(I’m not even sure I want to touch Sariaru’s statement “The Eastern Churches were being schismatic way before it was cool and hip in the Reformation days.” :ouch: – but of course that’s not part of the original diagram anyhow.)
 
yosephdaviyd said:
Yup, thanks, that is where the image is from (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations). I removed it last night, and then someone restored it, and then I removed it again and started a talk page to come to a consensus about it. This will probably start an editing war, because I’m going to keep removing it if anyone restores it. LOL
Click to expand...
As an aside

I looked at the disaster on that page called “Christian denominations”. And I think of the story Jesus told His apostles.

Lk 14: 28 For which of you, desiring to build a tower, does not first sit down and count the cost, whether he has enough to complete it? 29 Otherwise, when he has laid a foundation, and is not able to finish, all who see it begin to mock him, 30 saying, ‘This man began to build, and was not able to finish.’

Jesus builds His Church on Peter the Rock…the Catholic Church. There are no
  • denominations of this Church.
  • No divisions allowed from this Church.
  • There is no such thing as seperate but equal.
  • Division from this Church is condemned as are those who do it and remain in that state.
But Satan does what Satan does best, he divides so he can conquor. ALL those divisions and ALL that confusion, makes Jesus, as He said, look to the world like he can’t finish what He started. And the world as a result, mocks Jesus. And that makes Satan real happy. He’s got a two-fer going. He gobbles up souls like the ravenous lion he is [1 Peter 5:8 (Douay-Rheims Bible, 1 Peter Chapter 5), [Romans 16:17-20 (Douay-Rheims Bible, Romans Chapter 16) , [Galatians 5:19-21 (Douay-Rheims Bible, Galatians Chapter 5) AND He and the world mock Jesus.
 
steve_b said:
But I’ll be happy to explain. What part needs explaining?
Click to expand...
P.S. Taking this question a bit more literally, I guess it’s the last part of “I just have to say, this graph is terrible.” The “is terrible” part. I know what you mean by “I just have to say” and “this graph”.

😉 😉
 
steve_b said:
There are no
  • denominations of this Church.
  • No divisions allowed from this Church.
  • There is no such thing as seperate but equal.
  • Division from this Church is condemned as are those who do it and remain in that state.
Click to expand...
You’re not a closet-Orthodox, are you?

Just kidding. 😉 🙂
 
Peter_J said:
I think you could easily get a dozen different answers to that question. For example, I doubt any Oriental Orthodox person would be very happy with that diagram.
Click to expand...
Did you look at the quotes I gave with the dates? I’m defending the Catholic Church and I give quotes going backward in time, all referenced, with dates, back to the apostles. It shows how rediculously innaccurate that wiki graph is

I’ve asked this question many times and unfortunately have yet to get anyone to respond. The question is,

Q: When is the first time we see “Orthodox Church” in writing? Exact references please

Maybe you can help me out here. 😉
P:
And, to some extent, Lutherans probably wouldn’t either, given the way they are lumped under “Protestantism”. (
Click to expand...
Luther is the father of Protestantism. Not just Lutheranism
P:
Personally, I guess I find the Eastern Catholicism portion of the diagram to be the most obviously problematic.

(I’m not even sure I want to touch Sariaru’s statement “The Eastern Churches were being schismatic way before it was cool and hip in the Reformation days.” :ouch: – but of course that’s not part of the original diagram anyhow.)
Click to expand...
I wish people would stop quoting from wiki. But that’s just me.
 
steve_b said:
Did you look at the quotes I gave with the dates? I’m defending the Catholic Church and I give quotes going backward in time, all referenced, with dates, back to the apostles. It shows how rediculously innaccurate that wiki graph is

I’ve asked this question many times and unfortunately have yet to get anyone to respond. The question is,

Q: When is the first time we see “Orthodox Church” in writing? Exact references please

Maybe you can help me out here. 😉

Luther is the father of Protestantism. Not just Lutheranism

I wish people would stop quoting from wiki. But that’s just me.
Click to expand...
I think many many Protestants would cringe at your assertion. Part of the horrible history of Lutherans attacking other Protestants was due to Martin Luther’s anger over Calvin, Knox, Zwingli, etc going too far away from Catholic teachings.
 
EvangelCatholic said:
I think many many Protestants would cringe at your assertion. Part of the horrible history of Lutherans attacking other Protestants was due to Martin Luther’s anger over Calvin, Knox, Zwingli, etc going too far away from Catholic teachings.
Click to expand...
I wasn’t talking about what one Protestant did to other Protestants. Over the last 500 years, we’ve seen division on steroids.

And Luther is the father of Protestantism.
 
steve_b said:
Did you look at the quotes I gave with the dates? I’m defending the Catholic Church and I give quotes going backward in time, all referenced, with dates, back to the apostles. It shows how rediculously innaccurate that wiki graph is

I’ve asked this question many times and unfortunately have yet to get anyone to respond. The question is,

Q: When is the first time we see “Orthodox Church” in writing? Exact references please

Maybe you can help me out here. 😉
Click to expand...
I sympathize … in fact, I’ve spoken of this topic before myself. I don’t want to spend a lot of time here right now, but perhaps later today I can say more about it.

On the other hand, lest we be unfair to our Orthodox brethren, let me just say that (in my experience) if you really “corner” a knowledgeable Orthodox and insist that there be no hedging, he/she will almost certainly say that they themselves (and not us) are “the Catholic Church”.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top