The Infamous Martin Luther

The Infamous Martin Luther

By Joram Roubique

It seems to be the vogue thing to do these days – pick a favorite scientist, historian, theologian, etc., and run with it. In Christian circles, this is being done, but with reformists. It must be the growing concern with the way modern “churchianity” has changed scriptural and historical context in order to flex more authority than what was initially given.

Martin Luther seems to remain the most popular poster child of the Reformation, and rightfully so, given that he basically sparked the movement. The reshaping of history has led most of us to remember his great quotes. “Here I stand. I can go no further,” and “Peace if possible, truth at all costs,” ring like a sounding gong through the consciousness of many Christians, including myself. These are impressive statements, but what other scrumptious bits of wisdom did he provide?

Luther’s Views on the Virgin Mary

“There can be no doubt that the Virgin Mary is in heaven. How it happened we do not know. And since the Holy Spirit has told us nothing about it, we can make of it no article of faith . . . It is enough to know that she lives in Christ. The veneration of Mary is inscribed in the very depths of the human heart.” (Sermon, September 1, 1522).

What? Mary is in heaven? I would hope so, but no one knows for sure seeing as how the Bible never states what happened to her after the resurrection. This is assuming that Mary, like Jesus, ascended into Heaven, as the Catholics believe.

“Still honor and praise must be given to her in such a way as to injure neither Christ nor the Scriptures.” (Sermon, Christmas, 1531)

Honor and praise is for Christ Jesus alone who is alive and well and seated at the right hand of the Father, not for the earthly mother of the Lord.

“Mary does not wish that we come to her, but through her to God.” (Explanation of the Magnificat, 1521)

I’m not sure if Mr. Luther ever read the bible in its entirety (I’m quite certain he did), but he seems to have missed one specific thing. In John 14:6, Jesus says, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.” And remember that no one comes to Jesus unless the Father who sent Him draws him (John 6:44). There are only two entities in this picture – the Father and the Son.

How could such a revered church father, revisionist and reformer miss this? And better yet, how can today’s Protestants overlook this glaring mistake?

“It is the consolation and the superabundant goodness of God that man is able to exult in such a treasure. Mary is his true Mother.” (Sermon, Christmas, 1522)

“Mary is the Mother of Jesus and the Mother of all of us…” (Sermon, Christmas, 1529)

Here, Luther is stating that due to the goodness of God, Mary has been given as a spiritual mother to all Christians. Most Catholics refer to John 19:26-27 when Jesus, now on the cross, speaks to the “disciple whom He loved,” John, and basically tells him to take care of her. At that moment, the scripture says that John took her in as his own.

Despite the loving kindness that John had shown, it does not require that any of us consider her our spiritual mother. Using reason and understanding, we can conclude that by John taking care of Christ’s earthly mother, he took care of her as his own earthly mother.

Actually, if you read Matthew 12:47-50, it appears that Jesus is almost discounting His family as being more important than His spiritual one. After someone brings attention to Jesus that his family wanted to speak with him, He said, “whoever does the will of My Father who is in heaven, he is My brother and sister and mother.” If anything, we should consider Mary a faithful, godly servant and sister in the Lord, but nothing more.

It is a sweet and pious belief that the infusion of Mary’s soul was effected without original sin; so that in the very infusion of her soul she was also purified from original sin and adorned with God’s gifts, receiving a pure soul infused by God; thus from the first moment she began to live she was free from all sin” (Sermon: “On the Day of the Conception of the Mother of God,” 1527)

In this statement, Luther is saying that Mary, like Jesus, was conceived by the Holy Spirit. Catholics believe that her body was created by the union of her parents just like we are; however, her soul was conceived without being stained by ‘original sin.’

According to one online Catholic encyclopedia regarding the immaculate conception of Mary it states that “no direct or categorical and stringent proof of the dogma can be brought forward from Scripture,” but they go one to say that Genesis 3:15, Proverbs 8, Ecclesiastes 24, and Luke 1:28 proves her complete abstinence from sin, which is an incredible stretch even for their standards. What’s fascinating is that they admit that the majority of their ‘proof’ comes from tradition, not scripture.

However, Luther and the Catholics forget that the Scriptures plainly state that everyone who is capable of sinning has sinned. Nowhere is Scripture does it say that Mary was incapable. Romans 3:23 says, “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,” and 1 John 1:10 says, “If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us.” If we go back to the Old Testament, we see that the writer of Ecclesiastes says in chapter 7, verse 20, “Indeed, there is not a righteous man on earth who continually does good and who never sins.”

“Christ… was the only Son of Mary, and the Virgin Mary bore no children besides Him… I am inclined to agree with those who declare that ‘brothers’ really mean ‘cousins’ here, for Holy Writ and the Jews always call cousins brothers.” (Pelikan, ibid., v.22:214-15 / Sermons on John, chaps. 1-4, 1539)

“A new lie about me is being circulated. I am supposed to have preached and written that Mary, the mother of God, was not a virgin either before or after the birth of Christ . . .”

(Pelikan, ibid.,v.45:199 / That Jesus Christ was Born a Jew, 1523)

“Scripture does not say or indicate that she later lost her virginity… When Matthew [1:25] says that Joseph did not know Mary carnally until she had brought forth her son, it does not follow that he knew her subsequently; on the contrary, it means that he never did know her . . . This babble . . . is without justification . . . he has neither noticed nor paid any attention to either Scripture or the common idiom.” (Pelikan, ibid.,v.45:206,212-3 / That Jesus Christ was Born a Jew, 1523)

Obviously, Luther held a common Catholic belief that Mary remained a perpetual virgin, which also means that Jesus had no earthly, blood brothers. What is most disturbing is that many of our ‘prestigious’ reformers believed the same. John Calvin, Huldreich Zwingli, Heinrich Bullinger, and even John Wesley held to this doctrine of perpetual virginity, which begs the question: what was reformed?

It should also be noted that along with his views on Mary, Luther believed in Real Presence during the Eucharist, or what’s commonly know by Protestants as the Lord’s Supper. Real Presence is the belief that the bread literally becomes the body of Christ and that the wine literally becomes the blood of Christ when partaken.

Luther reportedly nailed his 95 Theses on the Wittenberg Castle Church doors in 1517, but it’s obvious that most of Luther still belonged to the Catholic church long after. Why don’t his followers mention more of this?

Luther’s Views on the ‘Disputed Books’ – James, Jude, and Revelation

“St. James’ Epistle is really an epistle of straw… for it has nothing of the nature of the Gospel about it.”

“Though this epistle of St. James was rejected by the ancients, I praise it and consider it a good book, because it sets up no doctrines of men but vigorously promulgates the law of God. However, to state my own opinion about it, though without prejudice to anyone, I do not regard it as the writing of an apostle…” (Preface to the Epistles of St. James and St. Jude, 1522)

Luther rejected the Book of James as being written by an apostle. To him, James contradicted Paul’s teachings on the justification of faith, but fortunately, most Christians today understand that Paul’s writings of faith and James’ writings of works coincide with one another. He goes on saying that James “throws things together so chaotically.”

“Moreover he cites the sayings of St. Peter: ‘Love covers a multitude of sins,’ and again, ‘Humble yourselves under the hand of God;’ also the saying of St. Paul in Galatians 5, ‘The Spirit lusteth against envy.’ And yet, in point of time, St. James was put to death by Herod in Jerusalem, before St. Peter. So it seems that this author came long after St. Peter and St. Paul.”

Here, we can see how confused Luther is about the authorship. He believed that the author of this book was James, the brother of John, who was martyred by Herod in Acts 12:2. Most scholars believe that the James who was Christ’s brother (Matt. 13:55, Galatians 1:19) actually wrote this book, but if you remember correctly, Luther didn’t believe Jesus had any earthly brothers, because he believed Mary remained a perpetual virgin.

“Concerning the epistle of St. Jude, no one can deny that it is an extract or copy of St. Peter’s second epistle, so very like it are all the words. He also speaks of the apostles like a disciple who comes long after them and cites sayings and incidents that are found nowhere else in the Scriptures. This moved the ancient fathers to exclude this epistle from the main body of the Scriptures. Moreover the Apostle Jude did not go to Greek-speaking lands, but to Persia, as it is said, so that he did not write Greek. Therefore, although I value this book, it is an epistle that need not be counted among the chief books which are supposed to lay the foundations of faith.” (Preface to the Epistles of St. James and St. Jude, 1522)

Luther believed that the Book of Jude was a copycat epistle of 2 Peter, noting that he thought the words were very similar between the two. One of his problems with Jude is that Jude is quoting and using text about Enoch and other happenings that aren’t mentioned anywhere else in Scripture. Finally, because tradition teaches that Jude went to Persia, Luther assumes that there is no way that Jude could have learned to write in Greek, thus dismissing it as a book not to be counted along side the rest of the epistles.

“I miss more than one thing in this book, and this makes me hold it to be neither apostolic nor prophetic…and I can in no way detect that the Holy Spirit produced it…there are many far better books available for us to keep.” (Preface to the Revelation of St. John, 1522)

One of Luther’s main concerns in his critique of these epistles is that they did not “speak clearly of Christ and his deeds.” Because Revelations focused heavily on symbolism and visions, he claimed, “The apostles do not deal with visions, but prophesy in clear and plain words, as do Peter and Paul.” Luther also suggests that John is being arrogant when he “commends his own book so highly.” To be fair, he says that everyone should think of Revelations in ways that his own spirit leads him, but Luther admits to finding no way of detecting inspiration from the Holy Spirit in John’s account.

Luther’s Views on Science

The Reformation slowed scientific progress, but surprisingly, Luther, to some extent, appreciated science and is quoted as saying:

“We are at the dawn of a new era, for we are beginning to recover the knowledge of the external world that was lost through the fall of Adam. We now observe creatures properly, and not as formerly under the papacy. By the grace of God we already recognize in the most delicate flower the wonders of divine goodness and omnipotence.” (Quoted by L. W. Spitz, The Renaissance and Reformation Movements, 1971)

But when it came to astronomy, Luther’s views weren’t the same. He believed, along with many other astronomers at the time, that the moon was the smallest and lowest of the stars and used the mention of “great lights” as stated in Genesis 1:16 to give credence to this belief. It was Luther’s strict compliance to biblical literalism that restricted his thought process.

Nicolaus Copernicus, also a Catholic clerk, was the first astronomer to formulate a scientifically based heliocentric cosmology, which suggested that the earth was not at the center of the universe. His views conflicted with that of Luther, which was the astronomical view of Geocentricity — the belief that the earth is at the center of the universe. The following is a quote from Luther about Copernicus four years before Copernicus published his book:

“People gave ear to an upstart astrologer who strove to show that the earth revolves, not the heavens or the firmament, the sun and the moon. Whoever wishes to appear clever must devise a new system, which of all systems is, of course, the very best. This fool [or ‘this fellow’ as mentioned in other versions] wishes to reverse the entire science of astronomy; but sacred scripture tells us that Joshua commanded the sun to stand still, and not the earth.” (Luther’s Table Talks, 1539)

First of all, if Luther used the term ‘fool,’ he should have been fully aware that Jesus said that calling someone a ‘fool’ is a serious affair (Matthew 5:22). Secondly, it is Luther who comes across as the fool. Due to his literalism in interpreting scripture, he tries to prove the story of Joshua through astronomy, rather than proving astronomy through the story of Joshua. Is it possible that Joshua could have held the sun in place from his perspective, but was actually holding the earth still from God’s? Not if you ascribe to Lutheran literalism.

Luther’s scathing, condescending remarks towards Copernicus are rarely heard or remembered by his followers. Those who do remember, hold to it in blatant ignorance, albeit in small groups, as seen in the geocentric publication The Biblical Astronomer.

Luther’s Views on the Jews

Early on in his endeavors, Martin Luther was somewhat sympathetic with the Jewish people because of their resistance to the Catholic Church. Initially, he believed that the Jews were “blood-relations of our Lord” and because of this, the Jews “belong more to Christ than we.” Soon after his separation from the Catholic Church, his sympathy towards the Jewish people changed when they wouldn’t adhere to his version of Christianity.

In 1543, Luther wrote a treatise entitled On the Jews and Their Lies. In his writings we will find some of the most vile and racist propaganda ever written by anyone claiming to be a Christian, and being a German, his religious writings would influence the likes of Adolph Hitler and the ensuing holocaust.

The following is a small list of only a few of the excerpts from Luther’s 65,000-word treatise:

The introduction: “I had made up my mind to write no more either about the Jews or against them. But since I learned that these miserable and accursed people do not cease to lure to themselves even us, that is, the Christians, I have published this little book, so that I might be found among those who opposed such poisonous activities of the Jews who warned the Christians to be on their guard against them. I would not have believed that a Christian could be duped by the Jews into taking their exile and wretchedness upon himself. However, the devil is the god of the world, and wherever God’s word is absent he has an easy task, not only with the weak but also with the strong. May God help us. Amen.”

“Therefore the blind Jews are truly stupid fools…”

“Now just behold these miserable, blind, and senseless people.”

“Moreover, they are nothing but thieves and robbers who daily eat no morsel and wear no thread of clothing which they have not stolen and pilfered from us by means of their accursed usury. Thus they live from day to day, together with wife and child, by theft and robbery, as arch-thieves and robbers, in the most impenitent security.”

“Alas, it cannot be anything but the terrible wrath of God which permits anyone to sink into such abysmal, devilish, hellish, insane baseness, envy, and arrogance. If I were to avenge myself on the devil himself I should be unable to wish him such evil and misfortune as God’s wrath inflicts on the Jews, compelling them to lie and to blaspheme so monstrously, in violation of their own conscience. Anyway, they have their reward for constantly giving God the lie.”

“Over and above that we let them get rich on our sweat and blood, while we remain poor and they suck the marrow from our bones.”

“In brief, dear princes and lords, those of you who have Jews under your rule– if my counsel does not please your, find better advice, so that you and we all can be rid of the unbearable, devilish burden of the Jews, lest we become guilty sharers before God in the lies, blasphemy, the defamation, and the curses which the mad Jews indulge in so freely and wantonly against the person of our Lord Jesus Christ, this dear mother, all Christians, all authority, and ourselves. Do not grant them protection, safe-conduct, or communion with us.”

“First, that their synagogues be burned down, and that all who are able toss sulfur and pitch; it would be good if someone could also throw in some hellfire…Second, that all their books, their prayer books, their Talmudic writings, also the entire Bible, be taken from them, not leaving them one leaf, and that these be preserved for those who may be converted…Third, that they be forbidden on pain of death to praise God, to give thanks, to pray, and to teach publicly among us and in our country…Fourth, that they be forbidden to utter the name of God within our hearing. For we cannot with a good conscience listen to this or tolerate it…”

“He who hears this name [God] from a Jew must inform the authorities, or else throw sow dung at him when he sees him and chase him away.”

“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.”

“My essay, I hope, will furnish a Christian (who in any case has no desire to become a Jew) with enough material not only to defend himself against the blind, venomous Jews, but also to become the foe of the Jews’ malice, lying, and cursing, and to understand not only that their belief is false but that they are surely possessed by all devils. May Christ, our dear Lord, convert them mercifully and preserve us steadfastly and immovably in the knowledge of him, which is eternal life. Amen.”

Wow, what an incredible conclusion, and I haven’t even mentioned his second anti-Semitic work, Vom Schem Hamphoras (read this also). If you can honestly stomach to read through his quotes, or if you are brave enough to endure the torture that is reading in totality his treatise, you would be an ignorant fool to say that this doesn’t mirror Nazism. It sends shrills up and down my spine to hear phrases such as “their synagogues be burned down” and “behold these miserable, blind, and senseless people” and “He who hears this name [God] from a Jew must inform the authorities, or else throw sow dung at him when he sees him and chase him away.” Not that it would make him any less of a racist, but I wish he were being figurative. He wasn’t.

What separates Luther from Hitler? Not much. Yes, Luther would much rather convert the Jews than slaughter them, as far as we know, but the similarities in ideologies are striking. The Jews are viewed as evil, vile and subhuman.

In Conclusion

So what makes Luther the heroic icon of the Protestant reformation? Yes, he was a brave, vocal man who railed against the Catholic papacy with his 95 theses, but if any Protestant without bias actually took the time to read about Luther, they would be appalled, or at least they would be if the Holy Spirit were alive within them.

Luther is an incredible example of someone who had done some good but more bad, yet is almost worshipped by some who see him as a type of messiah. Luther was a reformist, but also a sinner and a racist. These are the very reasons we should let go of titles and denominations such as Lutheran, Calvinist, Armenian, and any others. We are to follow the teachings of Jesus Christ and His Apostles, not corrupt, vile men of a distant period.

The Apostle Paul said it best:

“Now I mean this, that each one of you is saying, ‘I am of Paul,’ and ‘I of Apollos,’ and ‘I of Cephas,’ and ‘I of Christ.’ Has Christ been divided? Paul was not crucified for you, was he? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?” 1 Corinthians 1:12-13

“Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?” 1 Corinthians 1:20

I will leave you, my fellow brothers and sisters in Christ, with a few more quotes from the esteemed Martin Luther:

“Sin cannot tear you away from him [Christ] even though you commit adultery a hundred times a day and commit as many murders.” (Martin Luther, letter to Melanchton, Aug. 1, 1521)

“Many demons are in woods, in waters, in wildernesses, and in dark poolly places ready to hurt and prejudice people; some are also in the thick black clouds, which cause hail, lightning and thunder, and poison the air, the pasture and grounds. (Luther’s Table Talk’s)

“Snakes and monkeys are subjected to the demon more than other animals. Satan lives in them and possesses them. He uses them to deceive men and to injure them.”

“The best way to get rid of the Devil, if you cannot kill it with the words of Holy Scripture, is to rail at and mock him. Music, too, is very good; music is hateful to him, and drives him far away. “

“If the peasants are in open rebellion, then they are outside the law of God. Therefore let all who are able slash, strike down, and kill (those who rebel) openly and secretly, remembering that there can be nothing more venomous, harmful, or devilish than a rebel. It is exactly like killing a mad dog.”

Wake up, people.