Library
|
||||
| Martin Luther’s Comments on the Canon of the Bible Luther on the Canon of the New Testament In 1522 Martin Luther wrote a German Translation of the New Testament. He wrote a preface to the epistles. However, he placed four New Testament Books, Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation in a separate index in the back of his translation. He separated them from the rest just as he had done with the Deuterocanonical books (called Apocryphal by Protestants) of the Old Testament Canon. Below are quotations of Martin Luther taken from the following book: “Martin Luther:
Selections from His Writings” “Although it would
be possible to SAVE the epistle by a gloss giving it a correct
explanation of Justification here ascribed to works, it is impossible to
deny that it does refer Moses word in Genesis 15 (which speaks not of
Abraham's works but of his faith , just as Paul makes plain in Romans 4)
to Abraham's works. This defect proves
that the epistle is not of Apostolic provenance.” “In sum, he wished
to guard against those who depended on faith without going on to works,
but he [St. James] had neither the
spirit nor the thought nor the eloquence equal to the task.”
“He
does violence to Scripture and so contradicts Paul and all scripture.”
“I
therefore refuse him [James] a place among the writers of the true canon
of my bible”
“Hence,
although I value the book, yet it is NOT essential to reckon it among
the canonical books that lay the foundation of faith.” Comparing the Epistles of Paul to the Romans and to Galatians with the Epistle of James, Luther states:
“In
comparision with these, the Epistle of James is an Epistle full of straw.”
On the Book of Revelation :
“Everyone may form his own judgement of this book; as for myself, I feel
an aversion to it, and to me this is sufficient reason for rejecting it” Another source on
the Book of Revelation:
Quotes from the book
entitled, Even of the books Luther retained in the Bible, he gave some rather harsh judgments.
Of the
Pentateuch he
says: ' Job spoke not as it stands written in his book, but only had such thoughts. It is merely the argument of a fable. It is probable that Solomon wrote and made this book.' The book of Esther I toss into the Elbe. I am such an enemy to the book of Esther that I wish it did not exist, for it Judaizes too much and has in it a great deal of heathenish naughtiness.' ' The history of Jonah is so monstrous that it is absolutely incredible.' (P. 202) ' Of very little worth is the book of Baruch, whoever the worthy Baruch may be.' ...”
Luther biographer Hartmann Grisar, S.J. (author of a massive six-volume biography), writes:
Now, compare Martin Luther’s position on the Sacred Scriptures of the Bible with the Catholic Church’s position :
Catechism of the Catholic Church : 136
|
||||
|
Return to Martin Luther on Canon of the Bible Return to : THE BOOKS OF THE BIBLE Sections :
1. Deuterocanonical books - what they are
|
||||
|
|
|