Replies

But the fact that he wanted to remove ANY of them is telling, isn’t it? (He considered James to be “an epistle of straw”, for example.) Unfortunately, that is the genesis of Protestant thought. Protestants claim to follow sola scriptura and sole fide, yet they have removed books from the canon of the Bible, and there is no basis in scripture for either of those doctrines. (Luther added the word “alone” to the German translation of Romans 3:28.)

"But the fact that he wanted to remove ANY of them is telling, isn’t it?"

Actually, Catholic theologians of the time, including some of those who opposed Luther, expressed the same doubts about certain books.

"(He considered James to be “an epistle of straw”, for example.)"

This is always bandied about, but nobody ever cites the complete quote, which shows that Luther was comparing the character and tone of James to other books of Scripture and not making a judgment about it in and of itself.

"Unfortunately, that is the genesis of Protestant thought. Protestants claim to follow sola scriptura and sole fide, yet they have removed books from the canon of the Bible, and there is no basis in scripture for either of those doctrines."

Don't think we have time for the entire kernel of the Catholic-Protestant debate tonight. :-)

"(Luther added the word “alone” to Romans 3:28.)"

He wasn't the first.

BTW, followup thought: your use of James as an example of Luther's "telling" desire to "remove" certain books doesn't make much sense when one considers that Luther actually DID include James as inspired Scripture in his German translation, whatever other comments he may have made about it. :-) If Luther was capriciously throwing out books willy-nilly because they didn't suit his beliefs, surely he would have given James the axe.