Questions about Martin Luther

  • Thread starter Thread starter Flowerchild
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
JoeyWarren said:
I will only withdraw the charge if you can provide the evidence I requested. This is not a court of law, so the burden of proof does not lie with the prosecutor. Burden of proof lies with the defender. I have provided two sources to serve as witnesses that he was challenged or influenced by his supporters. You have provided nothing.
Click to expand...
My evidence is Luther’s Deutsche Bibel.

Are you really asking me for a quote from Luther to the effect of “I’m going to include Hebrews in my translation because I think it’s a good idea.”?

How about a quote from Bonapart saying he was going to defeat the Austrians at Austerlitz? The fact that he did is evidence enough of the intention.

If someone came and said Bonapart didn’t really want to but was talked into it by Josephine, then there’d be something needing proof.

Do you think I’m stupid? Do you think I don’t know what you’re doing?

You haven’t a leg to stand on and you’re trying (again) to move the goal posts.

It seems that, in the interest of charity and integrity, you would require no conditions. For, surely, you are an honest man. Surely you don’t make things up. Surely you don’t just type the first thing that comes into your head because it seems to be damning of someone you despise. Surely it is nothing for you to back up your statements. Surely you don’t manipulate the words of people you despise in order to make them look bad.

It seems to me that just in the interest of maintaining your own integrity you’d be willing to prove your point without placing conditions on doing so because, after all, if it’s true, it costs nothing.

All this could be avoided if you’d merely began by saying, “I think…” or “I am of the opinion that…”, or, even, “What if…”

But you didn’t. You stated it as fact.

That Luther intended to include the books because he actually, in the event, did so is not necessary of proof. It is a reasonable assumption.

That he did so only because he was culled into it, is a reasonable assumption only to someone who enjoys pillorying dead Reformers.
 
Steadfast said:
My evidence is Luther’s Deutsche Bibel.

Are you really asking me for a quote from Luther to the effect of “I’m going to include Hebrews in my translation because I think it’s a good idea.”?

How about a quote from Bonapart saying he was going to defeat the Austrians at Austerlitz? The fact that he did is evidence enough of the intention.

If someone came and said Bonapart didn’t really want to but was talked into it by Josephine, then there’d be something needing proof.

Do you think I’m stupid? Do you think I don’t know what you’re doing?

You haven’t a leg to stand on and you’re trying (again) to move the goal posts.

It seems that, in the interest of charity and integrity, you would require no conditions. For, surely, you are an honest man. Surely you don’t make things up. Surely you don’t just type the first thing that comes into your head because it seems to be damning of someone you despise. Surely it is nothing for you to back up your statements. Surely you don’t manipulate the words of people you despise in order to make them look bad.

It seems to me that just in the interest of maintaining your own integrity you’d be willing to prove your point without placing conditions on doing so because, after all, if it’s true, it costs nothing.

All this could be avoided if you’d merely began by saying, “I think…” or “I am of the opinion that…”, or, even, “What if…”

But you didn’t. You stated it as fact.

That Luther intended to include the books because he actually, in the event, did so is not necessary of proof. It is a reasonable assumption.

That he did so only because he was culled into it, is a reasonable assumption only to someone who enjoys pillorying dead Reformers.
Click to expand...
And still no source provided…none. You make the claim that Luther acted alone, but you have not proven it. Produce a historical text that says “Luther acted alone…” Simple as that.

Or maybe not so simple…
 
sadie2723 said:
And still no source provided…none. You make the claim that Luther acted alone, but you have not proven it. Produce a historical text that says “Luther acted alone…” Simple as that.

Or maybe not so simple…
Click to expand...
Historical fact:

Luther translated the Bible into German while locked away in the Wartburg Castle.

He was quite alone except for some servants of Duke Frederick. Frederick himself was far away.

Luther’s followers thought he had been seized by the Emperor’s soldiers and was probably dead and anyway, even if they knew he was alive and where he was, they didn’t have email, telephones or carrier pigeons.
 
sadie2723 said:
And still no source provided…none. You make the claim that Luther acted alone, but you have not proven it. Produce a historical text that says “Luther acted alone…” Simple as that.

Or maybe not so simple…
Click to expand...
One is prone to wonder. He disliked several books and indexed them. I truly do wonder if he was persuaded to include them–even as an index? :hmmm:
 
Steadfast said:
Historical fact:

Luther translated the Bible into German while locked away in the Wartburg Castle.

He was quite alone except for some servants of Duke Frederick. Frederick himself was far away.

Luther’s followers thought he had been seized by the Emperor’s soldiers and was probably dead and anyway, even if they knew he was alive and where he was, they didn’t have email, telephones or carrier pigeons.
Click to expand...
Not really a historical fact. Your history is a little muddy.

1511 to 1522 - On the trip home, Elector Friedrich the Wise allowed Luther to be kidnapped on May 4 (Luther knew about it beforehand). This took place on the one hand to guarantee Luther’s safety and on the other hand to let him disappear from the scene for a short while; there were even rumors of Luther’s death. This action also helped the Elector not to endanger himself because he could have been held liable for protecting an outlaw and heretic. LIES AND DECIET GENERATED TO PROTECT HIM

Luther devoted himself to a new task. He translated the New Testament from its original Greek into German within eleven weeks; the work was later edited by Melanchthon and other specialists and printed in 1522. This so-called “September Testament” was tremendously popular in Protestant areas and as a result made a large contribution to the development of a standardized written German-language. JUST THE NEW TESTAMENT NOT THE ENTIRE BIBLE AS YOU STATED.

Reformation theories were put into practice in Wittenberg which had become the center of the Reformation. In protest, three priests married in 1521 and the worship service was also altered. Luther watched these changes favorably from a distance, however, he stayed in close contact with his supporters in Wittenberg through letters. NO CONTACT YOU SAY?

Matter of fact read the history yourself here:
luther.de/en/wartburg.html

and no, it’s not a Catholic site. It is dedicated to Luther by Lutherans and his country.
 
JoeyWarren said:
Not really a historical fact. Your history is a little muddy.

1511 to 1522 - On the trip home, Elector Friedrich the Wise allowed Luther to be kidnapped on May 4 (Luther knew about it beforehand). This took place on the one hand to guarantee Luther’s safety and on the other hand to let him disappear from the scene for a short while; there were even rumors of Luther’s death. This action also helped the Elector not to endanger himself because he could have been held liable for protecting an outlaw and heretic. LIES AND DECIET GENERATED TO PROTECT HIM

Luther devoted himself to a new task. He translated the New Testament from its original Greek into German within eleven weeks; the work was later edited by Melanchthon and other specialists and printed in 1522. This so-called “September Testament” was tremendously popular in Protestant areas and as a result made a large contribution to the development of a standardized written German-language. JUST THE NEW TESTAMENT NOT THE ENTIRE BIBLE AS YOU STATED.

Reformation theories were put into practice in Wittenberg which had become the center of the Reformation. In protest, three priests married in 1521 and the worship service was also altered. Luther watched these changes favorably from a distance, however, he stayed in close contact with his supporters in Wittenberg through letters. NO CONTACT YOU SAY?

Matter of fact read the history yourself here:
luther.de/en/wartburg.html
Click to expand...
I must be getting slow in my old age…Joey got in here ahead of me!

Plenty of contact there…and of course the fact that you are a bit off on your facts about the what Luther translated.
 
sadie2723 said:
I must be getting slow in my old age…Joey got in here ahead of me!

Plenty of contact there…and of course the fact that you are a bit off on your facts about the what Luther translated.
Click to expand...
Infact, not only that but Luther entered into formal heresy by teaching through his letters and his works that certain book, he deemed were not to be consider canonical. He held the view that certain books were not true and proceeded to teach and proclaim those ideals. To say that Luther privately held these ideas is a bit of a farce as he was communicating his teachings with Melancthon and other followers through letters.
 
…this is part of a justification process that has been going on for 500 years.

The deal is, we can argue about the little things…or we could focus on the BIG thing: Luther broke with Christ’s church and he took people with him when he did. Now he has to answer for not only what he did, but what he caused others to do.

Man…that is a tall order.
 
Turtullian said:
Infact, not only that but Luther entered into formal heresy by teaching through his letters and his works that certain book, he deemed were not to be consider canonical. He held the view that certain books were not true and proceeded to teach and proclaim those ideals. To say that Luther privately held these ideas is a bit of a farce as he was communicating his teachings with Melancthon and other followers through letters.
Click to expand...
Excellent point. And, let us not forget that he spawned an entire movement of people that believe in things like Sola Scriptura, Sola Fide, and OSAS…None of which, by the way, have a bit of Biblical validity.

So people are going to have to pardon me if I think this guy is a little less than a saint.
 
I’m done now.

I beg everyone’s pardon for any offensive thing I’ve ever said here, especially you, JoeyWarren.

I hope you can see your way to forgiving me.

God bless you all.
 
Thanks to all who have answered, and will continue to. It makes me wonder how many college thesis’s and dissertations have been written on these questions. WOW, I am speechless.

Flowerchild
 
sadie2723 said:
And still no source provided…none. You make the claim that Luther acted alone, but you have not proven it. Produce a historical text that says “Luther acted alone…” Simple as that.

Or maybe not so simple…
Click to expand...
That’s a rather weird claim. Normally one assumes that people are responsible for their actions. The burden of proof is on those who claim otherwise.

Edwin
 
JoeyWarren said:
I honestly don’t know the who. Does anyone know for sure. Speculation and common sense would say it was his closest supporters that I have listed.
Click to expand...
Speculation with no backing.
No one yet has given any proof that Martin Luther decided to include them on his own with out influence from his supporters.
Click to expand...
That’s ridiculous. I could say that Pope Paul VI really wanted to allow birth control but was persuaded otherwise by some nebulous “advisors.” Anyone could claim this about any decision in history.

You have made the claim. You have failed to support it. You obviously aren’t interested in truth or you would at least try to support your claim, instead of engaging in the ludicrous ploy of demanding that your opponents prove a negative. When people start playing games of this kind, it’s obvious that their position is bankrupt.
If you look at his history, He was helped out by his close supporters a lot during most of his life. To rule out that he was not counciled by his close supporters to retain the 3 or 4 books in question is nonsense givng the overwhelming evidence of guidance and support he recieved from his close supporters.
Click to expand...
I don’t see how this is even relevant. You are claiming that Luther’s intentions were to cut the books out, and that his actions to the contrary don’t count. No one is claiming that Luther acted in a vacuum. All we are claiming is that when he did something he did it because he thought it was the right thing to do. And if you are making a specific claim about Luther being persuaded to change his mind on a specific point, then you need specific evidence.

Now that’s common sense!
And exactly what is reputable?
Click to expand...
Who is reputable and who is not reputable?
Click to expand...
Do you have any guildelines to what is reputable and what is not?
Click to expand...
Sure. It’s not that difficult. A historical work by a scholar with a Ph.D. in the field, which has been published by an academic press and/or reviewed in an academic journal (Church History, Sixteenth Century Studies, Journal of Ecclesiastical History, etc.).

Historians of all persuasions–Catholic, Protestant, atheist, Jewish–meet these criteria.

Edwin

Edwin
 
Thanks, Edwin,

I just couldn’t continue.

The process of learning who to talk to and who to avoid is grinding.
 
You have made the claim. You have failed to support it. You obviously aren’t interested in truth or you would at least try to support your claim, instead of engaging in the ludicrous ploy of demanding that your opponents prove a negative. When people start playing games of this kind, it’s obvious that their position is bankrupt.
Click to expand...
Yes I have backed it with quotes and website references. Steadfast has not provided one iota of refutable reference.
 
I don’t see how this is even relevant. You are claiming that Luther’s intentions were to cut the books out, and that his actions to the contrary don’t count. No one is claiming that Luther acted in a vacuum. All we are claiming is that when he did something he did it because he thought it was the right thing to do. And if you are making a specific claim about Luther being persuaded to change his mind on a specific point, then you need specific evidence.
Click to expand...
Steadfast has not provided any counter specific evidence either. It’s a stalemate until one provides something. I have provided quotes and references.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top