How do Protestants view Martin Luther?

  • Thread starter Thread starter CatholicNUFC
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

CatholicNUFC

Guest
I’ve never really understood Protestant’s views of Martin Luther. How can they argue the fact he took seven books out of the Old Testament.

Revelation 22-18-19 “I warn everyone who hears the prophetic words in this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book,
and if anyone takes away from the words in this prophetic book, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city described in this book.” That kind of sums it up…

He also added to Romans 3:28
"Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law.

Someone please explain how Protestants really view him,and the fact there theology is based on his?
 
As stated in Sacred Scripture, Catholics believe in salvation through God’s grace, through our continued faith in God and through our works.
 
I’d say he was misguided… he let satan have too much power in his life.
 
Barbkw said:
As stated in Sacred Scripture, Catholics believe in salvation through God’s grace, through our continued faith in God and through our works.
Click to expand...
Catholics do not believe in justification through works of law, just as it says in Scripture. Works of law refers to circumcision, hand-washings, abstaining from pork, offering animal sacrifices, etc. But the kind of faith that saves is always accompanied by works of love.
 
CatholicNUFC said:
I’ve never really understood Protestant’s views of Martin Luther. How can they argue the fact he took seven books out of the Old Testament.

Revelation 22-18-19 “I warn everyone who hears the prophetic words in this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book,
and if anyone takes away from the words in this prophetic book, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city described in this book.” That kind of sums it up…

He also added to Romans 3:28
"Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law.

Someone please explain how Protestants really view him,and the fact there theology is based on his?
Click to expand...
Romans 3:28 or we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law. Luther concluded from this passage that we are justified by faith in Christ, not by works of the Law which we cannot do.
 
I find the title of this thread amusing. Are Protestants supposed to acquiesce in someone asking if Luther was evil? It is like asking a Catholic if the Pope is the anti-Christ.
 
Barbkw said:
As stated in Sacred Scripture, Catholics believe in salvation through God’s grace, through our continued faith in God and through our works.
Click to expand...
Lutherans believe in good works, but our good works are only to serve our neighbor. God doesn’t need our good works. They are as filthy rags before God as Isaiah said.
 
Teresita99 said:
Catholics do not believe in justification through works of law, just as it says in Scripture. Works of law refers to circumcision, hand-washings, abstaining from pork, offering animal sacrifices, etc. But the kind of faith that saves is always accompanied by works of love.
Click to expand...
Correct, I should have written as you did, “works of love.”
 
hn160 said:
Lutherans believe in good works, but our good works are only to serve our neighbor. God doesn’t need our good works. They are as filthy rags before God as Isaiah said.
Click to expand...
Here on Earth, Christians are God’s hands and feet.
 
My readings of Luther tell me he was a man who loved Christ, had a troubled soul and a strong sense of guilt about his sins. He sought very hard to please his God and felt the machinery of the Catholic Church had turned to mush. He felt that the original Gospel message had become muddied and mired in corruption in the curia and with the papacy and with the Church at all levels. He felt that within the vast machinery of all the devotions, what he perceived as guilt trips and misguided notions like indulgences and the treasury of merit that GRACE and faith were an afterthought.

While I don’t necessarily agree with several key tenents of Luther’s credo, I would never seek to brand him “evil” or a villain. I think he truly felt that he was saving Catholicism and bringing Christ’s message to people in a more meaningful, powerful, direct way. We can disagree with him but I don’t believe he was listening to Satan or full of malicious malice. I think he was genuine…
 
Martin Luther was a severely misguided and impatient reformer. He helped spark the firestorm that led many thousands upon thousands away from the One Holy Apostolic Church.

But…

He was most definitely not evil. We all do evil. But that does not make us so.

Luther is/was a child and creation of the Most High, and the Lord does not create evil.

By our free will, we can do evil deeds. Fortunately our bad actions can not reduce us to being evil.

Luther was not evil; he was a sinner–as we are all.

PS: Pardon me if I took the thread title too seriously. 😊
 
He still added,and subtracted to the bible…how can anyone justify that? There’s no possible way a lutherian could defend him on that. He tried to make it fit with HIS personal VIEWS.
 
gurneyhalleck1 said:
My readings of Luther tell me he was a man who loved Christ, had a troubled soul and a strong sense of guilt about his sins. He sought very hard to please his God and felt the machinery of the Catholic Church had turned to mush. He felt that the original Gospel message had become muddied and mired in corruption in the curia and with the papacy and with the Church at all levels. He felt that within the vast machinery of all the devotions, what he perceived as guilt trips and misguided notions like indulgences and the treasury of merit that GRACE and faith were an afterthought.

While I don’t necessarily agree with several key tenents of Luther’s credo, I would never seek to brand him “evil” or a villain. I think he truly felt that he was saving Catholicism and bringing Christ’s message to people in a more meaningful, powerful, direct way. We can disagree with him but I don’t believe he was listening to Satan or full of malicious malice. I think he was genuine…
Click to expand...
This is also my understanding of Luther’s motives and character.
 
I’ll try to give a Lutheran perspective –
CatholicNUFC said:
I’ve never really understood Protestant’s views of Martin Luther. How can they argue the fact he took seven books out of the Old Testament.
Click to expand...
Luther certainly questions the canonicity of the Deuterocanonical books, but he did find them to be useful for study.
Revelation 22-18-19 “I warn everyone who hears the prophetic words in this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book,
and if anyone takes away from the words in this prophetic book, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city described in this book.” That kind of sums it up…
Click to expand...
At the time Revelation was written it was not part of the canon of Scripture. This warning could only apply to Revelation itself.
He also added to Romans 3:28
"Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law.
Click to expand...
Others have already shown that this phrase is not unique to Luther’s translation of the Bible.
Someone please explain how Protestants really view him,and the fact there theology is based on his?
Click to expand...
As a Lutheran, I view Luther as a man of many facets – some admirable and some not so admirable. Growing up, the first introduction to Luther, as it is for most who are raised as Lutherans, was through his Small Catechism. I doubt that anyone could read through this and take issue with any of his teachings on the Ten Commandments, the Lord’s Prayer, the Apostles’ Creed, and the Sacrament of Baptism.

As a Lutheran who has developed a great deal of respect for the Catholic Church, I suspect that if Luther was alive today he would see the Church in a much different light than he did in his own time. If Luther had been able to experience the pontificates of John Paul II and Benedict XVI his views of the Church probably would not have become as antagonistic as they did. Instead, he had to deal with Leo X (who, according to the Catholic Encyclopaedia, was one of the lesser lights among the successors of Peter).

As far as his theology goes, it was not as radically different from Catholicism as that of some of the other reformers – Zwingli, Calvin, etc. I don’t mean to minimize the differences that did (and do) exist – just to point out that Luther didn’t set out to separate himself from the Church, although as things developed he became separated.

Just a few thoughts.
 
As a new Catholic who was brought up in short spurts in the Lutheran church (baptised in the Lutheran church, several years spent away from the church, then back again into the Lutheran church in late elementary years through high school including Lutheran confirmation) I had the idea that the Septuagint WAS the books of the Bible that I was familiar with and so I didn’t think that the “other” books were supposed to be part of the Bible. It wasn’t until I started to really look at the Catholic church that I began to question whether or not Luther had it right on that point. It’s not that I did no study on the point, it is just that the sources I used pointed me in a different direction.

As far as Luther himself, I thought of him as a man who pointed out the problems in the Catholic church and reached a point where he had to break away from the church. I didn’t understand excommunication and what that really means in the Catholic faith. I didn’t look for the answer because I was reasonably content. I didn’t think Luther was perfect, I read a book that revealed some of his flaws fairly early on in my life, but I simply looked at him as a sinner like everyone else is a sinner and who saw some things that needed changing. I just didn’t understand the ramifications of his actions - at least not until a LOT of years went by.

I think a lot of Protestants who haven’t really examined the Catholic church and the history in great depth probably think similar to the way I did about Luther. They are content where they are at and are just trying to live their faith and juggle what we all juggle in our days between work and personal lives.
 
I think a common problem is that Catholics think Protestants, particularly Lutherans, view Luther as a type of pope when in reality Lutherans did not canonize every single view and theological speculation that Luther sold? Lutherans cling to the Augsburgh Confession, the formulas of concord, the Large and Small Catechisms, and confessions of the Lutheran faith influenced by not only Luther but guys like Melancthon and Martin Chemnitz, etc. Luther was a central, vital figure in Protestantism, but not many Protestants see him in the way many Catholics think they do IMO…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top