E
Eruvande
Guest
I’ve been told that Martin Luther rejected the epistle of James, calling it an epistle of straw. can anyone verify this? Could you give any insights as to why he rejected it?
- Status
C
Classicist
Guest
I believe Luther’s first preface to his first Bible rejected James. Later, the reformer retracted this statement, added James to the Bible, and apologized for his error.
S
Salusa
Guest
He didn’t reject it, he included it with all the other books of the NT.
Here is Luther’s actual quote from his preface to the 1522 translation of the bible:
"In a word St. John’s Gospel and his first epistle, St. Paul’s epistles, especially Romans, Galatians, and Ephesians, and St. Peter’s first epistle are the books that show you Christ and teach you all that is necessary and salvatory for you to know, even if you were never to see or hear any other book or doctrine. Therefore St. James’ epistle is really an epistle of straw, compared to these others, for it has nothing of the nature of the gospel about it. But more of this in the other prefaces.”
Luther was saying it was straw only as compared to the other epistles. He is making a comparison. Even so he did retract the statement in subsequent generations of the bible and it doesn’t appear in the prefaces of subsequent translations.
M
MaryT777
Guest
Interesting thread.
E
Eruvande
Guest
but why straw? I find it to be a book of great wisdom.
P
Porknpie
Guest
So which was he saying by saying “straw” ?
a) James is inerrant and the inspired Word of God
b) or not?
M
MarcoPolo
Guest
Copying this from another thread regarding the book of James, for example:
There may be some conjecture out there about what Luther said about this or that book, but it does seem according to my research, at least with regard to the book of James, that he would like to have nixed it from teaching use if not throw it out of the canon:***We should throw the epistle of James out of this school **Wittenberg], for it doesn’t amount to much.*It contains not a syllable about Christ. Not once does it mention Christ, except at the beginning.*I maintain that some Jew wrote it who probably heard about Christian people but never encountered any.*Since he heard that Christians place great weight on faith in Christ, he thought, ‘Wait a moment!*I’ll oppose them and urge works alone.’*This he did. He wrote not a word about the suffering and resurrection of Christ, althought this is what all the apostles preached about. Besides, there is no order or method in the epistle. No he discusses clothing and then he writes about wrath and is constatntly shifting from one to the other.*He presents a comparison: ‘As the body apart from the spirit is dead, so faith apart from works is dead.’ O Mary, mother of God!! What a terrible comparison that is!!!!LW, 54, 424-425
*Elsewhere he explicitly said James had errors in his theology:*James argues in his letter (Jas. 2:21) that Abraham was justified on the basis of his works. Because the text says:
P.s. you can see the epistle of straw quote in this same link
matt1618.freeyellow.com/james2.html
But the above quotes give you his rationale. He had doctrinal problems with James.
There may be some conjecture out there about what Luther said about this or that book, but it does seem according to my research, at least with regard to the book of James, that he would like to have nixed it from teaching use if not throw it out of the canon:***We should throw the epistle of James out of this school **Wittenberg], for it doesn’t amount to much.*It contains not a syllable about Christ. Not once does it mention Christ, except at the beginning.*I maintain that some Jew wrote it who probably heard about Christian people but never encountered any.*Since he heard that Christians place great weight on faith in Christ, he thought, ‘Wait a moment!*I’ll oppose them and urge works alone.’*This he did. He wrote not a word about the suffering and resurrection of Christ, althought this is what all the apostles preached about. Besides, there is no order or method in the epistle. No he discusses clothing and then he writes about wrath and is constatntly shifting from one to the other.*He presents a comparison: ‘As the body apart from the spirit is dead, so faith apart from works is dead.’ O Mary, mother of God!! What a terrible comparison that is!!!!LW, 54, 424-425
*Elsewhere he explicitly said James had errors in his theology:*James argues in his letter (Jas. 2:21) that Abraham was justified on the basis of his works. Because the text says:
Now I see that you are righteous', he wants to conclude from this that previously Abraham was not righteous. . . . .Abraham was righteous by faith before God acknowledged him as such. Therefore **James*concluded falsely that now at last he was justified after that obedience**,*for faith and righteousness are known by works as by the fruit. But it does not follow, as James raves: Hence the fruits justify’ just as it does not follow: 'I know a tree by its fruit; therefore the tree becomes good as a result of its fruit.Therefore let our opponents be done with their James, whom they throw up to us so often(Luther 4:134).**I believe that last quote is from Luther’s Works.Saw these quotes here a while back. I’ve also seen part of the latter quote cited as LW 4.26)P.s. you can see the epistle of straw quote in this same link
matt1618.freeyellow.com/james2.html
But the above quotes give you his rationale. He had doctrinal problems with James.
D
Deconi
Guest
Because St James destroys his theology of, faith, alone by itself, is sufficient to attain salvation.This is actually true!..BUT incomplete as St James elaborates for the life of the Christian person. Luther missed that.
Either pointed out during his ‘dialogues’ (back and forth) with The Catholics, or through his own examinations,that St James EXPLICITLY taught that “…Faith, without WORKS, is dead.” Luther became obstinate and began equating his thoughts to the authorship of Holy Writ. That is when he commenced to ‘compare’ the books of Holy Writ and differentiate each from another, forgetting that God is the Author through men, and as such, ALL of Holy Writ is God-Breathed and therefor NOT A WORD can be compared to another, as if to say, this word is less meaningful than another because it appears less than another…etc etc.
It took awhile for Luther to be excommunicated and MUCH effort was ‘suffered’ to correct him, (back and forth) just as it would for ANY Catholic that misunderstands something about what the CC teaches or proclaims.
E
Eruvande
Guest
So really, he was reading into scripture what he’d already decided to believe and if it didn’t match, he wasn’t keen on it?
D
Deconi
Guest
It seems that way, but ultimately, you’re gonna have to ask Luther about that.
IMO, Luther was HONESTLY trying to find answers in Scriptures, but because his ‘conclusions’ were incorrect, according to Rome, he got distracted in thinking it was him against Rome, and it quickly deteriorated into “No, you’re wrong!” “No, YOU’RE wrong!” “NO! YOU are WRONG!”…blah blah blah
E
Eruvande
Guest
Hmm, you’re right, no point trying to work out what was in his heart. I’ve also read that he was very concerned about his sins and being forgiven, which I identify with. Thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut.
S
sennincatholic
Guest
Interesting!
To say that he “added James to the Bible” is not accurate. He never excluded it in the first place. It was in his first translation of the NT, where the preface appeared.
Luther’s greatest concern about James, and some other books, was focused on authorship, and if the writings reflect the apostolic focus of the NT, that being the Gospel, as opposed to the law.
Luther said that he praised the Book of James because it promulgates the law, and introduces no man-made ideas, though its focus is not on Gospel. Hence, his preference for the books he mentioned in the comparison. He often preached from James throughout his life, however.
Jon
J
Jerry-Jet
Guest
Did Luther praise James 2:24 and the TRUTH that we are saved by works and NOT by “faith alone” or did he think that the Holy Spirit who inspired that to be written was LYING and the truth was EXACTLY opposite?
Who’s right and who is wrong–(Edited)-Luther or the Holy Spirit?
Who’s right and who is wrong–(Edited)-Luther or the Holy Spirit?
G
gcnuss
Guest
Let’s take a look at Luther’s later writing on the connection between faith and works. From his Smalcald Articles:
False faith will never save. Therefore, from a Lutheran perspective, good works are a fruit of the faith that saves. This is sort of a “which came first, the chicken or the egg?” sort of puzzle. Needless to say, though, good works are to be expected from Christians whether they produce salvation or not.
Your post sets up a false dichotomy, as neither are lying.
Adding to Pastor Gary’s quote from Luther about faith and works:
From Luther’s commentary on Galatians 5:6
Idle faith is not justifying faith!! I think this responds exactly to what James is saying.
Jon
J
Jerry-Jet
Guest
I don’t think that there is any contradiction between Paul and James–I think there is disagreement from Luther that salvation is a process that Necessarily includes works in an inextricable way.
Salvation is not by faith alone or works or alone or faith + works–it is faith through God willed works until death without being interrupted by mortal sin just prior to death with no repentance.
The attraction of Luther’s justification is that without MORTAL sin no one has to worry about what state there soul is in after initially being saved.
That is where Luther went wrong–that is WHY we have to WORK out our salvation with “FEAR and TREMBLING”. We don’t get the luxury of not particularly worrying about our salvation after sinning say “BOLDLY” like Luther would say.
For Luther one BOLD sin and immediately after an unexpected death would not equal Hell.
Catholics know it would equal Hell.
Luther and his followers get a false peace because of believing that one mortal sin followed by an unexpected death would not mean Hell.
That is exactly what the devil wanted to accomplish.
Now to be sure Lutherans don’t believe in once saved always saved though it is unclear exactly what type of sinning it would take after justification for a Lutheran to lose their faith, would it take apostasy only? I don’t know–maybe some of the Lutherans here would inform me.
“Justification by faith alone” was the rallying cry of the Reformation. Now I don’t want to give the impression that Lutherans believe like Calvin or the anabapatists or others.
The Lutherans and Catholics do have some things in common when it comes to justification and to be sure–sometimes the differences are ones in the type of language used and are not substantial differences.
What is different is the understanding of MORTAL sin and of purgatory.
Lutherans DO BELIEVE that a person can enter heaven like dung if they are wearing the robe of Christ.
Catholics say the dung on the inside must be transformed unto perfection.
I don’t know–maybe Lutherans would say that God does make the justified perfect and transforms that dung unto perfection the second after they die–Catholics would believe that that sancitification would be a PROCESS that would happen in purgatory.
Anyway you look at it Lutheranism and Protestantism is an EASIER way.
I think that much of the mistake of Luther came from his nominalist tendencies in philosophy and I also think Luther was obsssive compulsive and scrupulous–that’s why the AHA moment for him where he thought he didn’t have to WORRY anymore about mortal sin and salvation worked for him–but of course it wasn’t true.
Satan used the perfect temptation that coincided with Luther’s spiritual struggles and mental health weaknesses.
This of course came at the right time in history so that Satan could also interweave politics into the rebellion against civil authority which morphed into rebellion against papal authority.
Why did God allow this abomination to happen? God gives us free will–God won’t MAKE us see the light and be docile to the authority of his church.
In other words the bondage of the will is a crock! Free will is TRUE!
The Catholic Church on Earth has always been Holy but there are always members of it that sin and Satan will always use their sins in his effort to bring down the church.
Protestantism has netted many souls for Satan.
The reason Luther thought that James was just “STRAW” is it was directly OPPOSITE of him on “Faith alone”. The ONLY place in the whole scriptures where the words “faith” and “alone” are together as “faith alone”–James tell us that “faith alone” DOES NOT SAVE!
Try having the Reformation without the rallying cry of “Justification by faith alone”. And don’t tell me that any of Luther’s written attempts at NUANCE later matched in any way the countless times in his life when he would orally say “faith alone”!
The real problem with Protestants though isn’t about faith + works-- it’s faith CONTINUING THROUGH God willed works.
What they really don’t like is the CONTINUING part.
See as long as faith has to CONTINUE THROUGH then a person has to worry about salvation–the whole point of the Reformation is so you DON’T have to wory anymore–get rid of the notion of mortal sin and then WORKING OUT salvation is not necessary–sure they’ll talk about be vigilent and trying to live a good life but this of course wouldn’t result in frequent confession–
WHY?!–Because you don’t have to worry about that anymore–which is exactly what Satan wants you to do! Satan wants you to slip up and mortally sin before unexpected death. See–Satan KNOWS that mortal sin is TRUE–Satan knows that being in a state of mortal sin at death = Hell!
Anyway you stack it Luther and Protestantism’s way is EASIER which ultimately is what is INTRINSICALLY wrong and EVIL about it.
Now I wouldn’t say that all the Protestants in the world are evil–I used to be one myself. I will say that they a lot of Protestants simply DON’T KNOW the truth–especially that there is such a thing as MORTAL sin–they believe there is sin–they just don’t know that it can send you to Hell!.
God will judge them by how much knowledge they do have.
The ones most in peril are those that have heard the teachings of the Catholic faith and reject them–it is harder and harder for those people to be invincibly ignorant.
Pray for them–they are the ones most in danger of Hell but don’t be smug–if you’re Catholic you have to work out your own salvation with fear and trembling and can also go to Hell.
Pray for God’s mercy whoever you are!
Salvation is not by faith alone or works or alone or faith + works–it is faith through God willed works until death without being interrupted by mortal sin just prior to death with no repentance.
The attraction of Luther’s justification is that without MORTAL sin no one has to worry about what state there soul is in after initially being saved.
That is where Luther went wrong–that is WHY we have to WORK out our salvation with “FEAR and TREMBLING”. We don’t get the luxury of not particularly worrying about our salvation after sinning say “BOLDLY” like Luther would say.
For Luther one BOLD sin and immediately after an unexpected death would not equal Hell.
Catholics know it would equal Hell.
Luther and his followers get a false peace because of believing that one mortal sin followed by an unexpected death would not mean Hell.
That is exactly what the devil wanted to accomplish.
Now to be sure Lutherans don’t believe in once saved always saved though it is unclear exactly what type of sinning it would take after justification for a Lutheran to lose their faith, would it take apostasy only? I don’t know–maybe some of the Lutherans here would inform me.
“Justification by faith alone” was the rallying cry of the Reformation. Now I don’t want to give the impression that Lutherans believe like Calvin or the anabapatists or others.
The Lutherans and Catholics do have some things in common when it comes to justification and to be sure–sometimes the differences are ones in the type of language used and are not substantial differences.
What is different is the understanding of MORTAL sin and of purgatory.
Lutherans DO BELIEVE that a person can enter heaven like dung if they are wearing the robe of Christ.
Catholics say the dung on the inside must be transformed unto perfection.
I don’t know–maybe Lutherans would say that God does make the justified perfect and transforms that dung unto perfection the second after they die–Catholics would believe that that sancitification would be a PROCESS that would happen in purgatory.
Anyway you look at it Lutheranism and Protestantism is an EASIER way.
I think that much of the mistake of Luther came from his nominalist tendencies in philosophy and I also think Luther was obsssive compulsive and scrupulous–that’s why the AHA moment for him where he thought he didn’t have to WORRY anymore about mortal sin and salvation worked for him–but of course it wasn’t true.
Satan used the perfect temptation that coincided with Luther’s spiritual struggles and mental health weaknesses.
This of course came at the right time in history so that Satan could also interweave politics into the rebellion against civil authority which morphed into rebellion against papal authority.
Why did God allow this abomination to happen? God gives us free will–God won’t MAKE us see the light and be docile to the authority of his church.
In other words the bondage of the will is a crock! Free will is TRUE!
The Catholic Church on Earth has always been Holy but there are always members of it that sin and Satan will always use their sins in his effort to bring down the church.
Protestantism has netted many souls for Satan.
The reason Luther thought that James was just “STRAW” is it was directly OPPOSITE of him on “Faith alone”. The ONLY place in the whole scriptures where the words “faith” and “alone” are together as “faith alone”–James tell us that “faith alone” DOES NOT SAVE!
Try having the Reformation without the rallying cry of “Justification by faith alone”. And don’t tell me that any of Luther’s written attempts at NUANCE later matched in any way the countless times in his life when he would orally say “faith alone”!
The real problem with Protestants though isn’t about faith + works-- it’s faith CONTINUING THROUGH God willed works.
What they really don’t like is the CONTINUING part.
See as long as faith has to CONTINUE THROUGH then a person has to worry about salvation–the whole point of the Reformation is so you DON’T have to wory anymore–get rid of the notion of mortal sin and then WORKING OUT salvation is not necessary–sure they’ll talk about be vigilent and trying to live a good life but this of course wouldn’t result in frequent confession–
WHY?!–Because you don’t have to worry about that anymore–which is exactly what Satan wants you to do! Satan wants you to slip up and mortally sin before unexpected death. See–Satan KNOWS that mortal sin is TRUE–Satan knows that being in a state of mortal sin at death = Hell!
Anyway you stack it Luther and Protestantism’s way is EASIER which ultimately is what is INTRINSICALLY wrong and EVIL about it.
Now I wouldn’t say that all the Protestants in the world are evil–I used to be one myself. I will say that they a lot of Protestants simply DON’T KNOW the truth–especially that there is such a thing as MORTAL sin–they believe there is sin–they just don’t know that it can send you to Hell!.
God will judge them by how much knowledge they do have.
The ones most in peril are those that have heard the teachings of the Catholic faith and reject them–it is harder and harder for those people to be invincibly ignorant.
Pray for them–they are the ones most in danger of Hell but don’t be smug–if you’re Catholic you have to work out your own salvation with fear and trembling and can also go to Hell.
Pray for God’s mercy whoever you are!
On the first, I agree. On the second I disagree. While we clearly believe that justification is by grace through, we also recognize that a saving faith is a faith that works through love.
That’s a lot more complicated than, “he that believes and is baptized shall be saved.”
But I understand the importance of repentence and confession, and striving to live the godly life.
Are you of the impression that Luther had no concept of mortal sin? It seems you are misinterpreting , or confusing Luther with others. “Initially being saved” is not terminology a Lutheran would use, and we are quite aware that saving faith can be lost.
Are you aware of the context of the “sin boldly” phrase?
I don’t have the luxury of not working out my salvation with fear and trembling, either.
That’s a precarious notion. And n o, I don’t think one mortal sin just before death necessarily means damnation.
False peace? How about a trust in grace.
And yet you seem to explain it that way above. But to answer your question, repeated, unrepented sin can lead to loss of saving faith. The confessions use the phrase “intentionally persevere in sin”.
Thank you.
continued
Agreed.
No. Lutherans believe we are cleansed at the moment of death for entry into heaven. What we don’t believe in is an intermediate state/place.
And you know these things how?
Sure free will is true, just not a free will to choose to seek out God.
The Catholic Church on Earth has always been Holy but there are always members of it that sin and Satan will always use their sins in his effort to bring down the church.
Again, you know this how?
Source, please, where Luther said this. James is not in opposition to sola fide.
No nuancing. I posted it earlier.
Did you read what I posted earlier?
Source, where we say this.
Ok. You have me in the position to defend things we don’t believe. This is not something I can do. That makes dialogue difficult. If, in the future, you want to ask what we believe, and not try to tell us, that would be great.
Jon
Z
zz912
Guest
I think it is a reference to one of Paul’s letters where he discusses how our works will be tested as by fire. Our good works (gold, silver, gems) will survive the fire, but our evil works (hay, straw, wood) will be burned up.
- Status