Martin Luther

  • Thread starter Thread starter MarysGirls
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
“Here I Stand” by Roland Bainton is, IMO, the best Luther book ever. I’ve read it cover to cover so many times that I wore the book out. It’s really awesome.
Ah yes, I’m currently in the process of finishing that. It is a very nice read, and seems to explain Luther’s concepts nicely and in an often neutral fashion. I bought it because I had finished reading Sir Thomas More’s Dialogue Concerning Heresies and decided I need to read the other side’s point of view. 😃
I’m glad you noted the ELCA’s statement rejecting these writings. Nobody defends these writings by Luther now. But, I’ve always found it somewhat anachronistic to single out Luther on this subject when St. John Chyrsostom and others had been writing things just as bad regarding the Jews long before Luther came along. What I’m getting at is that if Luther’s writings have “shaken your faith in the Protestant sector”, I’m afraid you won’t find it any better elsewhere.
Many times writings that are supposedly “antisemitic” are actually simply theological in nature. I don’t want to sound mean (and those who know me know I support the state of Israel and Jews as a people), but many times I’ve noticed any criticism of Jews or Judaism, even in theology or similar, is immediately taken as “antisemitic” when race isn’t even an issue. It’s like those people who say criticizing Islam as a religion is racist.
 
. . I’m glad you noted the ELCA’s statement rejecting these writings. Nobody defends these writings by Luther now. But, I’ve always found it somewhat anachronistic to single out Luther on this subject when St. John Chyrsostom and others had been writing things just as bad regarding the Jews long before Luther came along. What I’m getting at is that if Luther’s writings have “shaken your faith in the Protestant sector”, I’m afraid you won’t find it any better elsewhere.

My intention was not to single out Luther. This Thread is entitled, “Martin Luther.”

If as you say, “I won’t find it any better elsewhere.” Then I would say we have a very serious problem. If our Protestant heritage is rooted in antisemitism, what does that say for us?
Byzantine_Wolf;5491226:
Ah yes, I’m currently in the process of finishing that. It is a very nice read, and seems to explain Luther’s concepts nicely and in an often neutral fashion. I bought it because I had finished reading Sir Thomas More’s Dialogue Concerning Heresies
and decided I need to read the other side’s point of view. 😃

Many times writings that are supposedly “antisemitic” are actually simply theological in nature. I don’t want to sound mean (and those who know me know I support the state of Israel and Jews as a people), but many times I’ve noticed any criticism of Jews or Judaism, even in theology or similar, is immediately taken as “antisemitic” when race isn’t even an issue. It’s like those people who say criticizing Islam as a religion is racist.

I do not see how you could justify Martin Luther’s writings as “theological.”

Have you read “On the Jews and Their Lies”?

Here are a few quotes from Luther’s Works, Volume 47, in which Luther gave his solution for the Jews:
**Luther: **
First to set fire to their synagogues or schools and to bury and cover with dirt whatever will not burn, so that no man will ever again see a stone or cinder of them. This is to be done in honor of our Lord and of Christendom, so that God might see that we are Christians, and do not condone or knowingly tolerate such public lying, cursing, and blaspheming of his Son and of his Christians. . .”

Second, I advise that their houses also be razed and destroyed. For they pursue in them the same aims as in their synagogues. Instead they might be lodged under a roof or in a barn, like the gypsies. . .”

Third, I advise that all their prayer books and Talmudic writings, in which such idolatry, lies, cursing and blasphemy are taught, be taken from them. . .”

Fourth, I advise that their rabbis be forbidden to teach henceforth on pain of loss of life and limb. . .”

Fifth, I advise that safe*conduct on the highways be abolished completely for the Jews. For they have no business in the countryside, since they are not lords, officials, tradesmen, or the like. Let they stay at home. . .”

Sixth, I advise that usury be prohibited to them, and that all cash and treasure of silver and gold be taken from them and put aside for safekeeping. . .”

Seventh, I commend putting a flail, an ax, a hoe, a spade, a distaff, or a spindle into the hands of young, strong Jews and Jewesses and letting them earn their bread in the sweat of their brow, as was imposed on the children of Adam (Gen 3:19]}. For it is not fitting that they should let us accursed Goyim toil in the sweat of our faces while they, the holy people, idle away their time behind the stove, feasting and farting, and on top of all, boasting blasphemously of their lordship over the Christians by means of our sweat. No, one should toss out these lazy rogues by the seat of their pants.”

“But what will happen even if we do burn down the Jews’ synagogues and forbid them publicly to praise God, to pray, to teach, to utter God’s name? They will still keep doing it in secret. If we know that they are doing this in secret, it is the same as if they were doing it publicly. for our knowledge of their secret doings and our toleration of them implies that they are not secret after all and thus our conscience is encumbered with it before God.”

“First, that their synagogues be burned down, and that all who are able toss in sulphur and pitch; it would be good if someone could also throw in some hellfire. . .”

“Burn down their synagogues, forbid all that I enumerated earlier, force them to work, and deal harshly with them, as Moses did in the wilderness, slaying three thousand lest the whole people perish. They surely do not know what they are doing; moreover, as people possessed, they do not wish to know it, hear it, or learn it. There it would be wrong to be merciful and confirm them in their conduct. If this does not help we must drive them out like mad dogs, so that we do not become partakers of their abominable blasphemy and all their other vices and thus merit God’s wrath and be damned with them. I have done my duty. Now let everyone see to his. I am exonerated.”

Is this just “theology” mistaken as antisemitism?

Statements of Adolf Hitler (a big fan of Luther) in 1924 at a Christian gathering in Berlin:
“I believe that today I am acting in accordance with the will of Almighty God. As I announce the most important work that Christians could undertake and that is to be against the Jews and get rid of them once and for all. We are doing the work of the Lord and let’s get on with it.” Hitler stated, “Martin Luther has been the greatest encouragement of my life. Luther was a great man. He was a giant. Within one blow he heralded the coming of the new dawn and the new age. He saw clearly that the Jews need to be destroyed and we’re only beginning to see that we need to carry this work on.
 
I do not see how you could justify Martin Luther’s writings as “theological.”

Have you read “On the Jews and Their Lies”?
Yes I have, and it’s a hideous piece of work. But I think I should have worded my original post better, because I was talking about everyone but Martin Luther (St John Chrysostom, Tertullian, etc).
 
Ah yes, I’m currently in the process of finishing that. It is a very nice read, and seems to explain Luther’s concepts nicely and in an often neutral fashion. I bought it because I had finished reading Sir Thomas More’s Dialogue Concerning Heresies and decided I need to read the other side’s point of view. 😃

Many times writings that are supposedly “antisemitic” are actually simply theological in nature. I don’t want to sound mean (and those who know me know I support the state of Israel and Jews as a people), but many times I’ve noticed any criticism of Jews or Judaism, even in theology or similar, is immediately taken as “antisemitic” when race isn’t even an issue. It’s like those people who say criticizing Islam as a religion is racist.
I tend to agree Wolf. Luther’s language, adjectives and hyperbole in “The Jews and Their Lies” is pretty sickening and over-the-top but essentially he makes it clear that he is frustrated and disgusted with their refusal to accept Christ as the Messiah, the Saviour of the World. He doesn’t hate them for their genetics, their race, but rather sees them as rebels from the truth. Still, his criticisms and forementioned hyperbole is so strong and it gets personal to a point that it could be taken as anti-semitic. I tend to think it was just a poor choice of words and about as politically incorrect as humanly possible! LOL:eek:
 
I once researched a lesser known Church figure that many accused of antisemitism. The only comment made by him against Jews amounted to, “Jews foolishly do not accept Christ.” I could only sit there, staring at the page, thinking, “…seriously? That’s it?”
 
I once researched a lesser known Church figure that many accused of antisemitism. The only comment made by him against Jews amounted to, “Jews foolishly do not accept Christ.” I could only sit there, staring at the page, thinking, “…seriously? That’s it?”
Sounds more like Cliff Notes or Reader’s Digest! lol:p
 
MarysGirls

Hands down the best beginner book on Luther is Here I Stand by Roland Bainton. This book will give you a good overview of Luther and it should be available at your local library.

Better, but more af a challange to read is Luther and his Times by E. G. Schwiebert

The three most important books Luther wrote are: The Babylonian Captivity, Table Talk and Address to the Nobility. Read them.

If you are interested in church history then buy Phillip Schaff’s 8 volume set for less than $60.00 at christianbook.com Volume 7 concerns Luther and the German Reformation and will be helpfull to you. You can buy single volumes for about $10.00.

From the same source you can get Luthers 7 volume sermon set $45.00

Doesn’t “The Bondage of the Will” count 🙂 ?​

 
Actually, many Christians bookstores carry the compilation of Luther’s writings by Tim Lull (see my earlier post in this thread), and it does include “On the Jews and their Lies.”

I’m glad you noted the ELCA’s statement rejecting these writings. Nobody defends these writings by Luther now. But, I’ve always found it somewhat anachronistic to single out Luther on this subject when St. John Chyrsostom and others had been writing things just as bad regarding the Jews long before Luther came along. What I’m getting at is that if Luther’s writings have “shaken your faith in the Protestant sector”, I’m afraid you won’t find it any better elsewhere.

Luther was anything but unusual in his views on the Jews. It’s absurd & unjust to single him out because of them - in holding them, he was no worse (if no better) than others. And by his time, German Christianity had centuries of anti-Jewish venom in its bloodstream. He would have been unusual if he had not held such views - it is anything but surprising that he did. Anti-Judaism & Judaeophobia, with burning of Talmuds, ransacking of synagogues, pogroms, the “blood libel” & other such things, were part of Jews had to put up with centuries before Luther, & for centuries after. It’s grotesque to single him out.​

 
Yes I have, and it’s a hideous piece of work. But I think I should have worded my original post better, because I was talking about everyone but Martin Luther (St John Chrysostom, Tertullian, etc).
Byzatine_Wolf: thanks for the clarification.
I tend to agree Wolf. Luther’s language, adjectives and hyperbole in “The Jews and Their Lies” is pretty sickening and over-the-top but essentially he makes it clear that he is frustrated and disgusted with their refusal to accept Christ as the Messiah, the Saviour of the World. He doesn’t hate them for their genetics, their race, but rather sees them as rebels from the truth. Still, his criticisms and forementioned hyperbole is so strong and it gets personal to a point that it could be taken as anti-semitic. I tend to think it was just a poor choice of words and about as politically incorrect as humanly possible! LOL:eek:
gurneyhalleck1: I appreciate your comments. However, I’m not sure we can assume that Luther only saw the Jews as “rebels from the truth.” There is so much hatred in his writing. I think no one can really know the intentions of Luther’s heart, except Luther. We do, however, have his written word.
I once researched a lesser known Church figure that many accused of antisemitism. The only comment made by him against Jews amounted to, “Jews foolishly do not accept Christ.” I could only sit there, staring at the page, thinking, “…seriously? That’s it?”
Byzantine_Wolf: This was not the case with Luther. His was vehemently antisemitic. But, even to say “Jews foolishly do not accept Christ,” is still a statement of judgment.

Why would the Jews want to convert to a religion that persecuted and slaughtered their people for so long?

Luther was anything but unusual in his views on the Jews. It’s absurd & unjust to single him out because of them - in holding them, he was no worse (if no better) than others. And by his time, German Christianity had centuries of anti-Jewish venom in its bloodstream. He would have been unusual if he had not held such views - it is anything but surprising that he did. Anti-Judaism & Judaeophobia, with burning of Talmuds, ransacking of synagogues, pogroms, the “blood libel” & other such things, were part of Jews had to put up with centuries before Luther, & for centuries after. It’s grotesque to single him out.​

Gottle of Geer: I agree that there was plenty of “Anti-Judaism & Judaeophobia” in the centuries leading up to Luther’s day.

You misunderstand me. My intention is not to “single Luther out.” This Thread is entitled Martin Luther. I am offering information on Martin Luther, because I think if one is going to write about his life, one should consider the whole picture.

I do agree that it would absolutely be important to include the antisemitic views of Luther’s contemporaries, and the centuries leading up to his day. I have never said he was the only one espousing antisemitism.

In my studies of the history of Judaism and Christianity, I have read a number of Jewish authors. I think it is important to read the Jewish perspective, since they have endured centuries of persecution at the hands of those who called themselves Christian, and other religions as well.

I think my writing here is a way of expressing an issue that is deeply disturbing to me. When I look back over history, I can see why so few Jews converted to Christianity.

Again, why would they want to convert to a religion that persecuted and slaughtered their people for centuries?

I have Jewish friends and we have had many long discussions. I am actually amazed at their ability to forgive the past. Their devotion to God surpasses that of many Christians I know. God is woven into every part of their lives.

So, again, let me say that it is not my intention to “single out” Luther. I know he had plenty of company, and centuries of antisemitism to draw from.
 
Actually, many Christians bookstores carry the compilation of Luther’s writings by Tim Lull (see my earlier post in this thread), and it does include “On the Jews and their Lies.”

I’m glad you noted the ELCA’s statement rejecting these writings. Nobody defends these writings by Luther now. But, I’ve always found it somewhat anachronistic to single out Luther on this subject when St. John Chyrsostom and others had been writing things just as bad regarding the Jews long before Luther came along. What I’m getting at is that if Luther’s writings have “shaken your faith in the Protestant sector”, I’m afraid you won’t find it any better elsewhere.
I just wanted to add this statement from the LCMS, as well. It reads, in part:
While The Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod holds Martin Luther in high esteem for his bold proclamation and clear articulation of the teachings of Scripture, it deeply regrets and deplores statements made by Luther which express a negative and hostile attitude toward the Jews. In light of the many positive and caring statements concerning the Jews made by Luther throughout his lifetime, it would not be fair on the basis of these few regrettable (and uncharacteristic) negative statements, to characterize the reformer as “a rabid anti-Semite.” The LCMS, however, does not seek to “excuse” these statements of Luther, but denounces them (without denouncing Luther’s theology).
lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=2166

Jon
 
I just wanted to add this statement from the LCMS, as well. It reads, in part:
*While The Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod holds Martin Luther in high esteem for his bold proclamation and clear articulation of the teachings of Scripture, it deeply regrets and deplores statements made by Luther which express a negative and hostile attitude toward the Jews. In light of the many positive and caring statements concerning the Jews made by Luther throughout his lifetime, it would not be fair on the basis of these few regrettable (and uncharacteristic) negative statements, to characterize the reformer as “a rabid anti-Semite.” The LCMS, however, does not seek to “excuse” these statements of Luther, but denounces them (without denouncing Luther’s theology).
*
 
JonNC: Please see my Post #50 of today.
Jon: thank you for your response. I did want to make sure I was not misunderstood.

You are right about Luther’s compassion for the Jews in his early years. It is difficult to understand why he seemed to turn on the Jews near the end of his life.

I think that one of the most damaging things for Luther was the fact that Hitler quoted him. Luther would have no way of knowing how his writings would be used, long after his death. I would hope he would not have agreed with Hitler.

I agree with what you said, “one’s reputation is only as good as the next comment you make, or action you take.” I think this is something we all should ponder. Ironically, the worst of Luther actually taught us all a lesson. Tragically, the Jewish people suffered greatly, because of the words of Luther and others throughout history.

Anna
 
I think that one of the most damaging things for Luther was the fact that Hitler quoted him.
I am not sure of the quote you are referring to but without knowing it I don’t see how that is too big of a concern. After all the Devil quoted scripture. Maybe if you provided the quote?

God bless
 
I am not sure of the quote you are referring to but without knowing it I don’t see how that is too big of a concern. After all the Devil quoted scripture. Maybe if you provided the quote?

God bless
Quotes from Adolf Hitler in 1924 at a Christian gathering in Berlin:
“I believe that today I am acting in accordance with the will of Almighty God. As I announce the most important work that Christians could undertake and that is to be against the Jews and get rid of them once and for all. We are doing the work of the Lord and let’s get on with it.” Hitler stated, “Martin Luther has been the greatest encouragement of my life. Luther was a great man. He was a giant. Within one blow he heralded the coming of the new dawn and the new age. He saw clearly that the Jews need to be destroyed and we’re only beginning to see that we need to carry this work on.”
To them belong, not only the truly great statesmen, but all other great reformers as well. Beside Frederick the Great stands Martin Luther as well as Richard Wagner.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
Holocaust
Part 4: Catholic Reaction To The Nazi Holocaust
By Michael Hakeem, Ph.D.
The specter of Martin Luther was a haunting presence in Nazism and was in attendance at the Holocaust. Numerous scholars have taken note of that fact.
For example, Professor Robert J. Wistrich, one of the profoundest students of worldwide anti-Semitism, writes: “The seed of hatred sown by Luther would reach its horrible climax in the Third Reich when German Protestants showed themselves to be particularly receptive to Nazi antisemitism.”
ffrf.org/fttoday/back/hakeem/holocaust4.html
The Lutheran editor of the American translation of Luther’s works comments: “It is impossible to publish Luther’s treatise today . . . without noting how similar to his proposals were the actions of the National Socialist regime in Germany in the 1930’s and 1940’s.”
The Nazis would now and then pay tribute to their mentor by staging an event on a date or at a place associated with him. They declared, for example, that their first large-scale pogrom against the Jews in November, 1938 was a pious operation performed in honor of the anniversary of Luther’s birthday.
To cite but one more example, the installation of Ludwig M�ller as Reich Bishop was conducted with great fanfare in the church at Wittenberg where Luther had preached. Hitler, in Mein Kampf, names Luther as one of the great heroes of the German people. The historian, Professor Friedrich Heer, is authority for the knowledge that Hitler “was prepared to concede that Luther had prepared the way for his own work.” He quotes Hitler as saying, as early as 1918: “He saw the Jew as we are only now beginning to see him today.” (Ominous.)
What was it that Luther offered that made him so attractive to the Nazis? It was a book-length treatise, On the Jews and Their Lies, in which he gave expression to his unbridled, not to say utterly maniacal, detestation of Jews, and which contained more than a hint of genocidal intentions toward them. Luther’s vehement attacks on the Jews were frequently recalled and widely disseminated by the Nazis. The original edition of Luther’s loathsome volume was exhibited in a special glass case at party rallies in Nuremberg.
In page after page of Hitler’s ranting against the Jews in Mein Kampf, one soon comes to realize that echoes of Martin Luther are being heard. Julius Streicher, the chief party ideologist of anti-Semitism, argued in his defense at the Nuremberg trials that he had never said anything about the Jews that Martin Luther had not said four hundred years earlier.
During the Nuremberg trials, Julius Streicher (one of Hitler’s top henchmen & publisher of Der Sturmer) was asked if there were any other publications in Germany which treated the Jewish question in an anti-Semitic way. Streicher stated:** “Dr. Martin Luther would very probably sit in my place in the defendants’ dock today, if this book had been taken into consideration by the Prosecution. In the book ‘The Jews and Their Lies,’ Dr. Martin Luther writes that the Jews are a serpent’s brood and one should burn down their synagogues and destroy them…”**
Other quotes involving Martin Luther:
Walter Buch, the head of the Nazi Party court: “When Luther turned his attention to the Jews, after he completed his translation of the Bible, he left behind “on the Jews and their Lies” for posterity.”-cited from Richard Steigmann-Gall’s The Holy Reich]
Hans Hinkel (Nazi who worked in Goebbels’ Reich Chamber of Culture) said: “Through his acts and his spiritual attitude he began the fight which we still wage today; with Luther the revolution of German blood and feeling against alien elements of the Volk was begun.” -cited from Richard Steigmann-Gall’s The Holy Reich
 
Other quotes involving Martin Luther:
Anna I may have missed it in my first read but is there a direct quote of Luther’s that Hitler used? Those are just quotes of Hitler talking about Martin Luther.

God bless you
 
Why not a historical nonfiction? If you teach fiction about Luther, that means means you are teaching lies. Why not stick to the truth about Luther? 🙂
 
Anna I may have missed it in my first read but is there a direct quote of Luther’s that Hitler used? Those are just quotes of Hitler talking about Martin Luther.

God bless you
No you didn’t miss anything. Thank you for catching my error.

I was in a hurry and misspoke. I had quoted Hitler, in an earlier post, making reference to Luther. I have not found Hitler directly quoting Luther.

It is good to clarify this.

I will add, that Hitler would probably use anything, even taken out of context, to justify his actions.

Thanks,
Anna
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top