Martin Luther: The Unfinished Reformation

Beyond Today Magazine ^ | October 2017 | Gary Petty

[Luircin]

The last point is extremely misleading.

According to my research it’s more like the Jewish communities were forcing Jewish converts to Christianity away from Christ.

Luther didn’t like that. And so he did whatever he did when someone was attacking the Gospel.

[DouglasKC]

According to my research it’s more like the Jewish communities were forcing Jewish converts to Christianity away from Christ. Luther didn’t like that. And so he did whatever he did when someone was attacking the Gospel.

Well they're strong words to be sure. But animosity and hatred of Jews didn't start or end with Luther unfortunately which is a shame.

[boatbums]

Moreover, Paul himself said that “the doers of the law will be justified” (Romans 2:13)—that is, made right before God. We must understand that we receive initial justification from God whenever we repent, apart from any deeds of obedience (Romans 3:28). But remaining justified before God is conditioned upon continuing to actively obey Him. There is no contradiction.

Consider this...if our justification before God is based upon His grace towards us and our faith in His sacrifice for our sins, then how is adding the "conditioned upon works" so that we remain justified any different than saying we are saved by faith PLUS works? And if our works play any part in our salvation, how then can it be by grace? The promise comes by faith BECAUSE of grace. Grace is unearned, undeserved, unmerited favor. Regarding Abraham, Paul said:

Therefore, the promise comes by faith, so that it may be by grace and may be guaranteed to all Abraham’s offspring—not only to those who are of the law but also to those who have the faith of Abraham. (Romans 4:16)

Paul reiterates in Romans chapter 11 that if it is by grace, then it is not by works because grace would not BE grace and vice versa. Luther worked out his objections to James (it may surprise you that other church fathers had doubts about its inspiration in centuries past). He learned that there IS no contradiction between Paul and James because a genuine, living faith WILL bring about a change in ones very soul and a person cannot help but be drawn towards pleasing God and living a holy life.

From http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/search?q=faith+is+a+living+thing:

In Luther's Disputation Concerning Justification, Luther answered this spurious proposition: “Faith without works justifies, Faith without works is dead [Jas. 2:17, 26]. Therefore, dead faith justifies.” Luther responded:
“The argument is sophistical and the refutation is resolved grammatically. In the major premise, “faith” ought to be placed with the word “justifies” and the portion of the sentence “without works justifies” is placed in a predicate periphrase and must refer to the word “justifies,” not to “faith.” In the minor premise, “without works” is truly in the subject periphrase and refers to faith. We say that justification is effective without works, not that faith is without works. For that faith which lacks fruit is not an efficacious but a feigned faith. “Without works” is ambiguous, then. For that reason this argument settles nothing. It is one thing that faith justifies without works; it is another thing that faith exists without works.”

In The Sermons of Martin Luther 2:2:308, Luther offers the harmonizing solution quite clearly: “This is what St. James means when his says in his Epistle, 2:26: ‘Faith without works is dead.’ That is, as the works do not follow, it is a sure sign that there is no faith there; but only an empty thought and dream, which they falsely call faith.”

But here's the citation that provoked this blog entry. Recently I've been reading Luther's early Commentary on Romans. Here's a very interesting passage:

Here the question arises: How can a person be justified without the works of the Law, or how can it be that justification does not flow from our works? For St. James writes: 'We see how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only" (Jas. 2:24). So also St. Paul: "Faith . . . worketh by love" (Gal. 5:6); and: "The doers of the law shall be justified" (Rom. 2:13). To this we reply: As the Apostle distinguishes between the law and faith, the letter and grace, so also he distinguishes between the works resulting from these. He calls those deeds "works of the Law" that are done without faith and divine grace, merely because of the law, moved either by fear of punishment or the alluring hope of reward. But works of faith he calls those deeds which are done in the spirit of (Christian) liberty and flow from love to God. These can be done only by such as are justified by faith. Justification, however, is not in any way promoted by the works of the Law, but they rather hinder it, because they keep a person from regarding himself as unrighteous and so in need of justification. When James and Paul say that a man is justified by works, they argue against the false opinion of those who think that (for justification) a faith suffices that is without works. Paul does not say that true faith exists without its proper works, for without these there is no true faith. But what he says is that it is faith alone that justifies, regardless of works. Justification therefore does not presuppose the works of the Law, but rather a living faith, which performs its proper works, as we read in Galatians 5:6 [Commentary on Romans (Michigan: Kregel, 1976), 75].

[Campion]

Several times, when Paul uses the term “works of the law” (ergon nomou), he clearly is speaking only of the ceremonial law of the Old Covenant. If you understand that, those verses take on a different meaning. They do not mean that you can continue to be “justified by faith” while continuing to hate your brother and making no effort to avoid sin.

[circlecity]

"They do not mean that you can continue to be “justified by faith” while continuing to hate your brother and making no effort to avoid sin."

If someone continues to hate his brother and makes no effort to avoid sin then they have never been justified by faith in the first place. True faith generates a grateful heart which acts in accordance with that faith. Just as heat follows the flame.

[Cronos]

Luther exacerbated it. He was not a Nazi anti-semite. He didn't hate Jews for their race. The problem is that he was a gifted and passionate thinker and when people disagreed with him, he got, well a bit out of hand words wise -- read what he said about Zwingli and Calvin.

But the Nazis took these diatribes to justify something that Luther would have abhorred.

[Albion Wilde]

Other practices included the selling of “indulgences.” An indulgence was a promise by the church that when a person paid a sum of money to the church, he could reduce the amount of time a loved one spent in purgatory.

Now it's called "buying a mass card."

[Albion Wilde]

In our world of books and instant Internet access to information, it’s difficult to understand just how monumental it was for Luther to complete this translation [of the Bilble into German]. For more than a thousand years the Catholic Church had maintained ecclesiastical power by making sure the Bible was not translated into common languages. The study of the Bible was mainly reserved for monks and priests either in Latin or the original languages of Hebrew and Greek. Even the regular mass, the everyday worship service centered on the Eucharist or communion rite, was said in Latin. This meant that most people throughout Christendom didn’t even understand the words of the mass.
Through the relatively new technology of printing, Luther’s supporters published many copies of the New Testament. It was now possible for literate people throughout Germany to obtain a copy of the Scriptures in their own language.

This was the turning point. And it describes also the state of Islam at this time, when the vast majority of its adherents do not speak Arabic and cannot read it, yet their scripture is only taught in Arabic. Thus they are in a stew of received and often corrupted teachings from mere human clergy, much as Christendom was in the time of Luther.

Luther was the chariot driver, but Gutenberg built the chariot.

[Albion Wilde]

Martin Luther exposed the avarice, ritualistic enslavement of the common person, and some of the unbiblical dogmas of Catholicism. He stood up to a religious system that had misinterpreted and misused Scripture. It was an awakening that unleashed the Protestant Reformation.

But is the movement he inadvertently spawned that much better? Five centuries after Luther presented the Ninety-five Theses, it’s time for Protestants to examine if their teachings have degenerated into a watered-down and corrupted version of what the Bible actually teaches. Has the idea that belief is all that’s needed for salvation led many to use God’s grace as a license to sin?

How many times do Christians excuse living with a boyfriend or girlfriend out of wedlock, disregarding one of the Ten Commandments, or living a lifestyle like unbelievers with the simple argument, “I’m justified without works; I’m saved by grace; God loves me just the way I am”?

This way of thinking is nothing more than using God’s grace as a license to sin. It has serious consequences. Jesus gives this warning in the Sermon on the Mount:

"Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven."

[DouglasKC]

Consider this...if our justification before God is based upon His grace towards us and our faith in His sacrifice for our sins, then how is adding the "conditioned upon works" so that we remain justified any different than saying we are saved by faith PLUS works? And if our works play any part in our salvation, how then can it be by grace? The promise comes by faith BECAUSE of grace. Grace is unearned, undeserved, unmerited favor. Regarding Abraham, Paul said: Therefore, the promise comes by faith, so that it may be by grace and may be guaranteed to all Abraham’s offspring—not only to those who are of the law but also to those who have the faith of Abraham. (Romans 4:16)

The faith of Abraham consisted of lots of "works". His act of faith with Isaac was preceded cutting wood for the offering, traveling three days on donkey, putting Isaac on the altar etc etc etc. All kinds of "works" that are of course the evidence of his faith. The author was making the same point.

[DouglasKC]

Luther exacerbated it. He was not a Nazi anti-semite. He didn't hate Jews for their race. The problem is that he was a gifted and passionate thinker and when people disagreed with him, he got, well a bit out of hand words wise -- read what he said about Zwingli and Calvin. But the Nazis took these diatribes to justify something that Luther would have abhorred.

Well I think that there was animosity by the Roman church against the Jews that was present for centuries before that. But this was mostly based upon the fact that in the first and second centuries there were a series of Jewish revolts against Rome. It was likely at that point that the serious Jew hating started. One could make the argument that it wasn't because they were "Jews" but because they were traitors against Rome and later, by extension, the Roman church.

[DouglasKC]

This was the turning point. And it describes also the state of Islam at this time, when the vast majority of its adherents do not speak Arabic and cannot read it, yet their scripture is only taught in Arabic. Thus they are in a stew of received and often corrupted teachings from mere human clergy, much as Christendom was in the time of Luther. Luther was the chariot driver, but Gutenberg built the chariot.

That's a good analogy. Along those same lines any good Christian would poop their pants if they knew what the Muslim call to prayer was saying.

[Cronos]

Well yes and no

Jews revolted against the Roman Empire, but that didn't tie in to the anti-Jewish (not anti-semitic) feeling.

Jewish revolts - in AD 68-69 Judeans revolted against Rome and their sheer fanaticism disgusted Romans

The Kitos War (115–117 AD) was what triggered Roman reaction against the Jews. In Cyrenaica, the rebels were led by one Lukuas or Andreas, who called himself "king" (according to Eusebius of Caesarea). His group destroyed many temples, including those to Hecate, Jupiter, Apollo, Artemis, and Isis, as well as the civil structures that were symbols of Rome, including the Caesareum, the basilica, and the public baths. Orosius recorded that

"The Jews ... waged war on the inhabitants throughout Libya in the most savage fashion, and to such an extent was the country wasted that, its cultivators having been slain, its land would have remained utterly depopulated, had not the Emperor Hadrian gathered settlers from other places and sent them thither, for the inhabitants had been wiped out."

"'Meanwhile the Jews in the region of Cyrene had put one Andreas at their head and were destroying both the Romans and the Greeks. They would cook their flesh, make belts for themselves of their entrails, anoint themselves with their blood, and wear their skins for clothing. Many they sawed in two, from the head downwards. Others they would give to wild beasts and force still others to fight as gladiators. In all, consequently, two hundred and twenty thousand perished. In Egypt, also, they performed many similar deeds, and in Cyprus under the leadership of Artemio. There, likewise, two hundred and forty thousand perished. For this reason no Jew may set foot in that land, but even if one of them is driven upon the island by force of the wind, he is put to death. Various persons took part in subduing these Jews, one being Lusius, who was sent by Trajan."

and "In Cyprus a Jewish band under a leader named Artemion took control of the island, killing tens of thousands of Cypriot Greek civilians. The Cypriot Jews participated in the great uprising against the Romans under Trajan (117), and massacred 240,000 Greeks"

---

But then the Christian Church was not anti-Jewish at this point, indeed it was during this point that it was separated out instead of being considered just another Jewish sect

Anti-Jewish feelings in the first christian millenium were triggered in the East when these areas fell under Arab control and in some cases, like Spain, local Jewish populations did actively help the Arabs take over -- their actions made logical sense at the time as the Arabs were semitic speakers like them and seemingly strict monotheists like them

But anti-Jewish feeling dialed up after the Black Plague -- Jews would perform regular ablutions (ritual washing) and were not as affected by the plague. But people (neither Jew nor gentile) knew this, so they attributed "black magic" to the Jews.

THAT was when Jewish pogroms started in Germany. They were triggered by locals, not by the Church

The largest anti-Jewish pogroms were in Germany and hence many Jewish moved to the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth where they had religious freedom right up until the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth was partitioned between russia, prussia and austria.

When Martin Luther came along there was still this last medieval anti-Jewish feeling, but Luther's "hatred" (note the "") of the Jews is different -- if you read his initial tracts, he was initially very pro-Jew, because he believed that he could convince them to convert to his point of view. When Luther could NOT do that, that's when the diatribes started. But note that Luther also abused fellow Protestants like Zwingli (and of course Catholics) in very harsh terms "devils etc." for Zwingli and Calvin.

So I do NOT call Luther an anti-Semite -- he did not hate a Jew who converted to Luther's way of thinking, he probably loved him. An anti-semite would still have the converted Jew. Luther just didn't like anyone who disagreed with him :)

The Nazis took his diatribes and raised them to another level, a level Luther would not have imagined and definitely would not have approved of.

REmember Luther was not only a religious figure -- he standardized the German language in the same way Hus did the Czech language or Muhammad the Arabic language -- he was a collossus of a figure in the literary world heavily influencing German. So his diatribes carried weight

[Cronos]

There is a world of difference between the two examples:

the Bible is the word of God, but Jesus is to us, the actual WORD of God. The Bible is a set of inspired books written by men.

The Qur'an is a completely different kettle of fish -- this is supposedly dictated word for word by Gabriel to Mohammad. The Qur'an in Islam = Jesus in Christianity! Really -- the Qur'an is supposedly never created, it always existed.

Also note -- I've read the Quran, in English and in Arabic -- even in Arabic it's bloody indecipherable -- you can pick up a bible and it is chronological, it has explanations and characterisation

Have you read the Quran? It has a number of suras (chapters) -- and these are NOT arranged chronologically, rather they are arranged by length. really. So the longest ones are in front and the shortest at the end

Next, the Quran has a rule called Abrogation, which means the later verses cancel out the earlier verses. YEAH. How this reconciles with a non-created text I don't know. Then you ask, how do you know which is earlier and which is later? You don't. you need to check the Hadiths for that. the Quran's verses of peace? They are all earlier verses (the Meccan verses) while the ones about violence are all the later (Medina suras)

Finally, the Qur'an at times doesn't use Arabic but uses Persian, etc. words and sometimes words that are never used in any other Arabic book and no one knows exactly what the meanings are supposed to be.

And finally -- the Quran is not even in modern day Arabic, but in Old Arabic -- as decipherable to a modern day Arabic speaker, even one from Saudia as Beowulf or Chaucer is to a modern English speaker

for your reference -- this is chaucer " WHAN that Aprille with his shoures soote 1 The droghte 2 of Marche hath perced to the roote, And bathed every veyne in swich 3 licour, Of which vertu engendred is the flour;" -- somewhat understandable eh - the words but not the meaning. AND, this is Beowulf "HWÆT, WE GAR-DEna in geardagum, þeodcyninga þrym gefrunon, hu ða æþelingas ellen fremedon! " which is "LO, praise of the prowess of people-kings of spear-armed Danes, in days long sped, we have heard, and what honor the athelings won!"

[Cronos]

well the Muslim call to prayer, the adhan isn't that bad:

the God is greatest. I bear witness that there is no god but the God. I acknowledge that Muhammad is the Messenger of God. Hasten to worship. Hasten to success. God is greatest. there is no god but the God"

[Albion Wilde]

Get thee behind me with that.

[Albion Wilde]

I was not comparing the content of the Q’ran to the content of the Bible, or what they stand for. I am aware of the difference. I was compariing the state of literacy and access to the textual meaning of the scriptures of muslims now as being comparable to Christians then— the vast majority of muslims cannot read and understand their scriptures TODAY. The vast majority of Christians could not read and understand their scriptures 500 YEARS ago — which is what Luther’s translation into the vernacular and his use of Gutenberg’s invention rapidly overcame, centuries ago.

[af_vet_1981]

The last point is extremely misleading.

According to my research it’s more like the Jewish communities were forcing Jewish converts to Christianity away from Christ.

Luther didn’t like that. And so he did whatever he did when someone was attacking the Gospel.

It seems to me that Luther's antisemitic hatred of the Jewish people is defended because he became the foundation for a new theology. If he is condemned to everlasting shame, so is his theology.

It seems to me like doubling down on Balaam.

[Luircin]

What, you’re bringing this shit up again? That’s funny.

Dude, you realize that Catholics were ten times worse than Luther ever was, right?

Luther just wrote something nasty when he found out that Jewish converts to Christianity were being forced back to Judiasm.

You Catholics tortured, TORTURED Jews AND Protestants and forced them to become Catholic.

Sounds more like Catholics took a page from the Muslim handbook.

IL PAPA ACKBAR!