Zwinglius Redivivus

"… ein Wörtlein kann ihn fällen"

Archive for the ‘Luther’ Category

#ICYMI – Fun Facts From Church History: Luther Becomes a Member of the Wittenberg Faculty

leave a comment »

Johann von Staupitz had persuaded Luther to pursue advanced studies to qualify for the degree of Doctor in Biblia and had moved Frederick the Wise to provide funds for promoting Luther’s doctorate on the promise that Luther would be a great asset to the University of Wittenberg as lecturer on the Bible. Staupitz himself had held this position with distinction but was now vacating it because of his duties as vicar general of the Augustinians. On October 22, 1512, the new doctor was with appropriate ceremony received as a colleague by the faculty senate and apparently immediately began his preparations for lectures on the Psalms.

So the Editor of the American Edition of Luther’s Works.

Luther’s installation in the Wittenberg faculty would be, as you can guess, momentous.  He would still not become a ‘Reformer’ for five more years- two years after Zwingli began his efforts at reformation. From 1512 when he was installed until 1517 Luther was simply a Papist Professor of Scripture at a Catholic University in backwater Wittenberg.

Written by Jim

22 Oct 2018 at 5:40 am

Posted in Luther

Tagged with

Luther: On Atheists

leave a comment »

There was mention of a citizen of Wittenberg who was an atheist and who confessed publicly before the town council that he had not received communion for fifteen years. To this Dr. Martin Luther said, “We’ve been sufficiently forbearing with him. After a couple of admonitions I’ll publicly declare that he’s excommunicated and is to be treated like a dog. If in view of this anybody associates with him, let him do so at his own risk. If the unbeliever dies in this condition, let him be buried in the carrion pit like a dog. As an excommunicated person we’ll turn him over to the civil laws.”  –  Luther’s Table Talk

I love Luther’s honest forthrightness.  Sure, he was wrong about some stuff but you just can’t ever accuse him of pandering or equivocating and these days I find that refreshing.

Was he harsh?  You bet.  But so far as he was concerned there was something harsher- death and hell.  He was trying to keep people from experiencing the latter since the former was inevitable.  This makes him miles superior to the likes of Warren and Rob Bell and the other array of self-aggrandizing self promoters.

Written by Jim

17 Oct 2018 at 2:21 pm

Fun Facts From Church History: While Luther Was Away, Karlstadt Did Play

with 2 comments

According to the editor of Luther’s works (English),

After October 13, 1521, masses were no longer celebrated in the Augustinian monastery at Wittenberg; on October 17, Karlstadt presided at a disputation where it was, proposed that all masses be abolished. On other occasions he expressed himself about images, etc., in such phrases as: “Organs belong only to theatrical exhibitions and princes’ palaces”; “Images in churches are wrong”; “Painted idols standing on altars are even more harmful and devilish.”

He wasn’t wrong.  But those remarks didn’t calm things down.  On the contrary-

The impact of such ideas and sentiments upon a student body and a populace which had seen their famous professor publicly burn the volumes of canon law and even the papal bull which excommunicated him, inevitably led to demonstrations, some hilarious, others destructive. On October 5 and 6, 1521, a crowd of students jeered and threatened a monk of St. Anthony who had come to Wittenberg to collect alms for his order.  On November 12, the prior of the Augustinian cloister complained to the elector that some monks who had left the cloister had joined forces with citizens and students to stir up trouble for the monks who remained faithful, and that he himself hesitated to appear on the street for fear of being attacked.

Reports of extreme measures and consequent unrest in Wittenberg gave Luther such concern that he determined to pay a secret visit to Wittenberg in his assumed character of “Junker Georg,” wearing a beard and the trappings of a knight. Traveling by way of Leipzig, he arrived in Wittenberg on December 4, 1521, lodging at the home of his colleague, Amsdorf, where he was able to confer with a few of his most intimate friends. After a stay of three days, when rumors of his presence began to spread, he departed as quietly as he had come, reaching the Wartburg by December 11.

I like Karlstadt.  Sure, he went crazy eventually and joined the 16th century equivalent of the Montanists (Pentebabbleists), but early on, like Tertullian, he was super fun.

Written by Jim

17 Oct 2018 at 4:49 am

Posted in Church History, Luther

Tagged with

Fun Facts From Church History

leave a comment »

luther_bibel_revLuther lectured on 1 John and did so so meticulously that on October 16, 1527, he managed to cover four whole verses- 4:17–21.

Luther- the exegete.

Written by Jim

16 Oct 2018 at 8:24 am

Posted in Church History, Luther

I’m Not God…

leave a comment »

“God,” said Luther, “is patient, long-suffering, and merciful, in that He can keep silence, and can suffer so long the most wicked wretches to go unpunished; I could not do so,” said Luther. — Luther’s Table Talk

Written by Jim

12 Oct 2018 at 8:02 am

Posted in Luther

Luther’s Silly Literalistic Take on ‘hoc est’ and his Hypocrisy on the Topic

leave a comment »

Luther, famously, insisted that ‘hoc est’ in the Lord’s Supper had to be taken literally.  Funny, though, that he ignored the literality of ‘hoc est’ when it suited him.  For instance,

super inimicos meos instruis me mandata tua quia in sempiternum hoc est mihi (Ps. 118:98)

This ‘hoc est’ is ignored by Luther and yet to be consistent he is required to take it literally.  For the non-Latinists (i.e., Lutherans), here’s the verse in English:

You make me wiser than my enemies by your commandment which is mine for ever. (Ps. 119:98)

The context of Psalm 119:98 (118 in the Vulgate) is the glory of Torah.  Here the Psalmist says quite literally that the Torah is forever his, forever, that is, in force.

Naturally Luther presumed that the Gospel superseded the law.  And yet in the context of the Supper, again, he insists on the literalness of ‘hoc est’.  But he doesn’t here.

Hypocritical much, Martin?  Or just eisegetical?

Written by Jim

12 Oct 2018 at 7:21 am

Posted in Luther

Luther Was Glad When He Heard of Zwingli’s Death- Because He Hated Him

with 14 comments

In a most enlightening footnote, Schaff writes

The deepest ground of Luther’s aversion to Zwingli must be sought in his mysticism and veneration for what he conceived to be the unbroken faith of the Church. He strikingly expressed this in his letter to Duke Albrecht of Prussia (which might easily be turned into a powerful argument against the Reformation itself).

He went so far as to call Zwingli a non-Christian (Unchrist), and ten times worse than a papist (March, 1528, in his Great Confession on the Lord’s Supper). His personal interview with him at Marburg (October, 1529) produced no change, but rather intensified his dislike.

He saw in the heroic death of Zwingli and the defeat of the Zurichers at Cappel (1531) a righteous judgment of God, and found fault with the victorious Papists for not exterminating his heresy (Wider etliche Rottengeister, Letter to Albrecht of Prussia, April, 1532, in De Wette’s edition of L. Briefe, Vol. IV. pp. 352, 353).

And even shortly before his death, unnecessarily offended by a new publication of Zwingli’s works, he renewed the eucharistic controversy in his Short Confession on the Lord’s Supper (1544, in Welch’s edition, Vol. XX. p. 2195), in which he abused Zwingli and Oecolampadius as heretics, liars, and murderers of souls, and calls the Reformed generally ‘eingeteufelte [ἐνδιαβολισθέντες], durchteufelte, überteufelte lästerliche Herzen und Lügenmäuler.’ No wonder that even the gentle Melanchthon called this a ‘most atrocious book,’ and gave up all hope for union (letter to Bullinger, Aug. 30, 1544, in Corp. Reform. Vol. V. p. 475: ‘Atrocissimum Lutheri scriptum, in quo bellum περὶ δείπνου κυριακοῦ instaurat;’ comp. also his letter to Bucer, Aug. 28, 1544, in Corp. Reform. Vol. V. p. 474, both quoted also by Gieseler, Vol. IV. p. 412, note 38, and p. 434, note 37).*

You should always read the footnotes.  Luther could be the vilest of men, offensive even to his closest friends- and not just in his attitude towards the Jews.  Equally vile are all the modern haters of Zwingli, because they hate him without cause.  And nothing is more vile, more wicked, and more un-christian than hating someone with whom you aren’t even really familiar.

_____________________
*The Creeds of Christendom, with a History and Critical Notes: The History of Creeds (Vol. 1).

Written by Jim

11 Oct 2018 at 10:13 am

Posted in Luther, Zwingli

Today With Luther: On War Against the Muslims

leave a comment »

Luther’s concern throughout the book [On War Against the Turks] is to teach men how to fight with a clear conscience. In so doing he develops two major points. There are, he says, only two men who may properly fight the Turk [Muslims, in our terminology]. The first of these is the Christian, who by prayer, repentance, and reform of life takes the rod of anger out of God’s hand and compels the Turk to stand on his own strength. The second man who may wage war is the emperor. The Turk has wrongfully attacked the emperor’s subjects, and by virtue of the office to which God has appointed him, the emperor is duty-bound to protect and defend the subjects with whose care God has entrusted him.*

It’s a pretty sharp booklet.  Theologically, it gives priority to prayer and repentance so that war is avoided because God’s wrath is assuaged.  A brilliant theological move really.  And it was published on 9 October, 1528.

_____________
*Martin Luther, Luther’s Works, Vol. 46: The Christian in Society III, ed. Jaroslav Jan Pelikan, Hilton C. Oswald, and Helmut T. Lehmann, vol. 46 (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1999), 159.

Written by Jim

9 Oct 2018 at 7:19 am

Posted in Church History, Luther

Looking For Calvin’s Grave

leave a comment »

In case you didn’t know- Calvin was buried in an unmarked grave; Zwingli was hacked to bits and his body burned and the ashes scattered, and Luther was buried in the Church. So we know where Luther’s buried, we know where the Papists slaughtered and dismembered Zwingli, but we don’t know where Calvin was laid to rest. So this is an interesting foray into the quest for Calvin’s grave:

Written by Jim

9 Oct 2018 at 7:15 am

Posted in Calvin, Luther, Zwingli

Luther on the Exclusivity of the Christian Claim

leave a comment »

Christ is the only One who descended and then ascended again. And this He did to lead us up with Him.

Yet the world is so blind and stupid that it always seeks and explores other ways. It is gullible and willing to follow where anyone directs and leads it. It will try, and rely on, any method or any work suggested to it. But one thing it cannot do, namely, remain on this one safe way with firm and steadfast faith. And though it hears and is told that Christ is the Way, it adulterates this message and seeks bypaths and other ways. It does not let Him have the exclusive honor; but it usurps part of this for itself, as though it could contribute something and find the way to heaven by itself.

Therefore, even though we adduce these and similar verses, and persuade people to concede that these statements are true, Mr. Smart Aleck comes along; indeed, the devil himself meddles in with his clever reasoning. His purpose is to keep them on the wrong road and to invalidate these beautiful sayings. — Martin Luther

Meanwhile, modern Lutherans like Nadia Bolz-Weber are doing their best to join the Smart Aleck crowd and appease every deviant view.

Written by Jim

6 Oct 2018 at 8:57 am

Posted in Luther

Uplifting Thoughts from Luther

leave a comment »

Let this generation of vipers prepare itself for unquenchable fire!  — Martin Luther

Written by Jim

5 Oct 2018 at 10:12 am

Posted in Luther

Summarizing the Marburg Colloquy

leave a comment »

Walter Koehler wrote a fine essay for Zwingliana in 1930 on the colloquy which took place in Marburg at the behest of Philip.

It commences

„Um den Glauben wird der Streit gehen und um das Geheimnis des göttlichen Wirkens in uns” —• de fide erit contentio et de mysterio divinae operationis in nobis —, so schrieb im Frühjahr 1527, als das schon längst zusammengeballte Gewitter des Abendmahlsstreites zwischen Luther und Zwingli unmittelbar vor der Entladung zu stehen schien, der Süddeutsche Theobald Billikan nach Basel an Johannes Oekolampad.

The conclusion of the matter was agreement between the parties on 15 counts (though on the 15th they would continue to see things differently the moment the conference ended). They put their names on that agreement on 3 October, went home, and wrote very uncharitable things about each other.

If you’d like to read all about it, go here.

Written by Jim

3 Oct 2018 at 9:47 am

Fun Facts From Church History: Luther’s Letter to Katy about the Marburg Colloquy

leave a comment »

To my kind, dear lord, Catherine Luther, a doctor and preacher in Wittenberg

Grace and peace in Christ. Dear Sir10 Katie! You should know that our amiable colloquy at Marburg has come to an end, and we are in agreement on almost all points, except that the opposition insists on affirming that there is only simple bread in the Lord’s Supper, and on confessing that Jesus Christ is spiritually present there. Today the Landgrave is negotiating [to see] if we could be united, or whether, even though we continue to disagree, we could not nevertheless mutually consider ourselves brethren, and members of Christ. The Landgrave works hard on this matter.  But we do not want this brother-and-member business, though we do want peace and good [will]. I assume that tomorrow or the next day we shall depart from here and travel to our Gracious Lord in Schleiz/Vogtland, where His Electoral Grace has ordered us [to go].

Tell Mr. Pomer that the best arguments have been, in Zwingli’s case, that a body cannot exist without a location, therefore Christ’s body is not in the bread, [and] in Oecolampadius’ case, [that] this sacrament is a sign of Christ’s body. I assume that God has blinded them so that they had nothing else to offer.

I am very busy, and the messenger is in a hurry. Say “good night” to all, and pray for us! We are all still alert and healthy, and live like kings. Kiss Lenchen and Hänschen on my behalf.
October 4, 1529
Your obedient servant,
MARTIN LUTHER

John Brenz, Andrew Osiander, [and] Doctor Stephen from Augsburg have also come here.
The people here have become almost mad with fear of the English fever; about fifty people fell ill yesterday, of whom one or two have [already] passed away.

Luther… so smart so much of the time.  And so stupid the rest.

Written by Jim

2 Oct 2018 at 2:57 pm

The First Full Day of the Marburg Colloquy- And The Language Barrier

with one comment

marburgThe first general meeting of the conference occurred Saturday, October 2. At the very outset Luther gained an important advantage over Zwingli when, in deference to Luther’s wish, it was decided that the colloquy should be conducted in the German language. Compelled to rely upon his Swiss-German, Zwingli found himself seriously handicapped in the discussions, for the dialect which he spoke differed so from the German of his opponents that he found it difficult to understand and to make himself understood. He had all along hoped that the colloquy would be conducted in Latin.*

Swiss German in the 16th century was quite a bit different than Luther’s German. Here’s a snippet of Zwingli’s dialect:

Instruction uff die frommen, vesten, fürsichtigen unnd wysen unnser liebe getrüwen Alt Burgermeyster unnd mitträth herren Diethelm Röysten unnd Vly Fungken, was sy yetzt uff dem burgertag zuo Arow deß Straßburgischen burgrechten unnd anderer verständtnisen halb handlen unnd fürtragen söllenn, inen von Burgermeyster, den oberisten meysteren unnd heymlich verordneten räthen der statt Zürich zehandlen bevolchenn.

And here’s some Luther:

Gnad und frid von Gott unserm vater und herrn Ihesu Christo. Fuersichtigen weysen lieben herrn. Wie wol ich nu wol drey jar verbannet und ynn die acht gethan hette sollen schweygen, wo ich menschen gepott mehr denn Gott geschewet hett, wie denn auch viel ynn deutschen landen beyde gros und kleyn mein reden und schreiben aus der selben sach noch ymer verfolgen und viel blutts drueber vergiessen.

The use of such divergent dialects of German at Marburg was frustrating in the extreme to Zwingli, who frequently switched to Greek; and that annoyed Luther, who thought he was doing it to show off but he was simply striving to express himself in such a way that Luther and the others (all of whom knew Greek and Latin- it was their odd German which obfuscated things) could understand him.

Communication requires comprehension.  Things may have gone quite differently if the discussions had been held in Latin.  But, stubborn as he was, Luther wanted it in German…

________________________
S. Simpson, Life of Ulrich Zwingli: The Swiss Patriot and Reformer (pp. 190–191).

Written by Jim

2 Oct 2018 at 2:48 pm

Marburg, Day One

leave a comment »

The following record of the exchange of the first day is from Simpson’s volume on Zwingli’s life. Day One shows that days 2 and 3 were pointless. Luther was incapable of understanding anyone but himself. It was his greatest weakness.

lutherLuther opened the discussion, and in a long speech protested that he differed from his opponents on the doctrine of the Lord’s Supper, and furthermore, would always differ, since Christ clearly says, “Take, eat: this is my body.” “They must prove,” said he, “that a body is not a body.” He maintained that there could be no question about the meaning of words so plain. He refused to admit the validity of any arguments based on reason or mathematics. “God,” said he, “is above mathematics, and his words must be received with reverence and obeyed.”

Œcolampadius replied to Luther by quoting certain passages from the sixth chapter of John’s Gospel. With the words, “This is my body,” he compared, “I am the true vine.” From a carnal manducation he led up to a spiritual, and declared that his view was not groundless or isolated, but rested upon the faith of Scripture.

Luther admitted that Christ used figurative language in the sixth of John and elsewhere, but denied that the words “This is my body” were a figure of speech. “Since Christ says ‘This is,’ it must be so.”

oeco24Œcolampadius: To believe that Christ is in the bread is opinion, not faith. There is danger of attributing too much to the mere elements.

Luther: We are bound to listen not so much because of what is spoken, as because of Him who speaks. Since God speaks, let us pigmies of men listen; since He commands, let the world obey, and let all of us reverently kiss the Word.

Œcolampadius: Since we have the spiritual eating, what need is there of the corporal eating?

Luther: I care not about the need, but since it is written, “Take, eat: this is my body,” we must believe, and do it without question.

Œcolampadius quoted from the sixth chapter of John the words, “The flesh profiteth nothing.” “If the flesh,” said he, “when eaten profits nothing, it must appear to us”—here Zwingli interposed and accused Luther of prejudice, because he protested that he would not be driven from his views. “Comparison is necessary,” said he, “in the study of the Scriptures. It is the Spirit that gives life. The Spirit and the flesh are at enmity with each other. God does not propound to us things that are unintelligible. The disciples were mystified by the thought of the carnal eating. Therefore Christ explained to them the spiritual significance of his words.”

Luther: The words are not ours, but the Lord’s; let them be obeyed. By means of these words the hand of the priest becomes the hand of Christ. I will not argue as to whether is means signifies. It is enough for me that Christ says, “This is my body.” To raise questions about this is to fall away from the faith. Wherefore believe the plain words, and give glory to God.

Zwingli: We indeed implore that you glorify God by abandoning your main proposition. I would ask whether you believe that Christ in the sixth chapter of John desired to reply to the question addressed to him?

Luther: We take no account of that passage; it has no bearing on the subject in hand.

Zwingli: No? Why, that passage breaks your neck.

Luther’s proclivity for literalness of interpretation now took an amusing turn. He received Zwingli’s jocose remark as a threat of personal violence, and addressing his friends complained bitterly of the murderous intimation of his opponent. Zwingli laughingly explained that his language was figurative, and had reference to his opponent’s arguments.

Œcolampadius now gave the argument a Christological turn. “The Church,” said he, “was founded on the words, ‘Thou art the Son of God,’ and not on the words, ‘This is my body.’ ”

Luther: I do not hold to this in vain. To me it is sufficient that Christ says, “This is my body.” I confess that his body is in heaven, and that it is in the sacrament also. I care not if it be contrary to nature, provided it is not contrary to faith.

Œcolampadius: In all things He was made like unto us. As He is wholly like the Father in His divine nature, so He is wholly like us in His human nature.

Luther: “The poor always ye have with you; but me ye have not always,” is the strongest argument you have advanced to-day. Christ is as substantially in the sacrament as when He was born of the Virgin. Faith needs no figures of speech.

Œcolampadius: We know not Christ after the flesh.

Melanchthon: After our flesh.

Œcolampadius: You will not admit a metaphor in the words of institution, and yet contrary to the Catholic conception you allow a synecdoche.

Luther: In a sword and its scabbard we have an example of synecdoche. “This is my body.” The body is in the bread, just as the sword is in the scabbard.

Zwingli (quoting from the Epistles): “God sent his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh.” “He was made like unto his brethren.” Therefore we must conclude that Christ had a finite humanity, and if his body is on high it exists in one place. [He here quoted from Augustine, Fulgentius, and others.] We must affirm, therefore, that Christ’s body is in one place, and cannot be in many.

Luther: In like manner you might prove that Christ had a wife, and that his eyes were black.  As to his being in one place, I have already declared to you, and I now repeat, I care nothing for mathematics.

zwingliZwingli began quoting additional passages from the Greek text to prove the finiteness of Christ’s nature. Luther, interrupting him, requested that he employ either Latin or German instead of Greek. “Pardon me,” answered Zwingli, “for twelve years I have read the New Testament in Greek.”

Luther: As in the case of a nut and its shell, so in the case of Christ’s body. I concede its finiteness. But God can cause it to exist in a place and not in a place at the same time.

As soon as Luther conceded that Christ’s body was finite, Zwingli caught him up and said: “Therefore it is local, exists in a place, and if so, it is in heaven, and hence cannot be in the bread.” Luther would not admit that it existed in a place, saying: “Ich will es nicht gehebt haben, ich will sie nichts.” (I will not allow it, I positively will not.)

Zwingli retorted: “Muoss man dann grad alles, was ihr wollend?” (Must everything be as you will it?)

Fortunately, as Collin informs us, they were interrupted at this exciting juncture by a servant of the Prince, who announced that dinner was served.

When the theologians assembled at the next session, Zwingli resumed the discussion where they had left off. “Christ’s body is finite,” said he, “therefore it exists in a place.”

Luther: Although it is in the sacrament, it is not there as in a place. God could so dispose of my body that it would not be in a place; for the sophists say that a body can exist in several places at the same time; e.g., the earth is a body, yet it does not exist in one place.

Zwingli: You argue from the possible to the impossible. Prove to me that the body of Christ can exist in several places at the same time.

Luther: “This is my body.”

Zwingli: You repeatedly beg the question. I might thus contend that John was the son of Mary, for Christ said, “Behold thy son.” We must ever teach, forsooth, that Christ said, “Ecce filius tuus, ecce filius tuus!” Behold thy son, behold thy son!)

Luther: I do not beg the question.

Zwingli: Scripture must be compared with Scripture and expounded by itself. Tell me, pray, whether Christ’s body exists in a place.

melanchthonBrenz: It does not.

Zwingli: Augustine says that it must exist in a single place.

Luther: Augustine was not speaking of the Supper. The body of Christ is present in the Supper, but not locally present.

Œcolampadius: If that is so it cannot be a true body. [Œcolampadius began quoting from Augustine and Fulgentius.]

Luther: You have Augustine and Fulgentius on your side, but the rest of the Fathers support our views.

“Please name them,” said Œcolampadius. Luther refused, but afterward prepared a list of references to passages in the Fathers which he thought favorable to his views.

It became evident to all that further discussion would be vain, and it was agreed to close at this point. The fruitlessness of the conference was a great disappointment to the Landgrave. He urged the disputants to come to some partial agreement at least. “There is but one way to effect that,” said Luther. “Let our opponents accept our views.” “That we cannot do,” replied the Swiss. Thus ended the discussion. Zwingli had looked forward to this meeting with strong hope of a final settlement of the differences which divided the Protestant Church, and was now overcome with disappointment. He sat apart from his friends and shed tears in silence, while the Landgrave and the Hessian divines redoubled their activities in a final effort to bring about an amicable agreement.

Written by Jim

2 Oct 2018 at 5:56 am

Marburg, 1529, And the Colloquy There Held

leave a comment »

Huldrych Zwingli and Johannes Oecolampadius met with Martin Luther and Philipp Melanchthon in Marburg beginning October 1, 1529 till October 3.  They agreed on 14 of 15 points but, as everyone knows, they couldn’t come to agreement on the meaning of the Lord’s Supper.  Luther was far too ensconced in Roman Catholic theology to see with the clarity with which Zwingli saw. Consequently, Luther left the conference angry and Zwingli left depressed.

Walter Koehler wrote a fine essay for Zwingliana in 1930 on the colloquy which took place in Marburg at the behest of Philip.

It commences

„Um den Glauben wird der Streit gehen und um das Geheimnis des göttlichen Wirkens in uns” —• de fide erit contentio et de mysterio divinae operationis in nobis —, so schrieb im Frühjahr 1527, als das schon längst zusammengeballte Gewitter des Abendmahlsstreites zwischen Luther und Zwingli unmittelbar vor der Entladung zu stehen schien, der Süddeutsche Theobald Billikan nach Basel an Johannes Oekolampad.

They put their names on that agreement on 3 October, went home, and wrote very uncharitable things about each other.

Philip Schaff does a nice job of summarizing both the discussions and the viewpoints of the major actors.

Written by Jim

1 Oct 2018 at 8:16 am

Ending the Day With Luther’s Encouragement

leave a comment »

In appearance and words you simulate modesty, but you are so swollen with haughtiness, arrogance, pride, malice, villainy, rashness, superciliousness, ignorance, and stupidity that there is nothing to surpass you. — Martin Luther

Written by Jim

30 Sep 2018 at 7:58 pm

Posted in Luther

Quote of the Day

leave a comment »

“For some years now I have read through the Bible twice every year. If you picture the Bible to be a mighty tree and every word a little branch, I have shaken every one of these branches because I wanted to know what it was and what it meant.” Martin Luther  (LW 54:165)

Written by Jim

30 Sep 2018 at 3:46 pm

Posted in Luther

Fun Facts From Church History: Luther Only Preached From Revelation 3 Times

leave a comment »

Although Luther had often preached on the Festival of St. Michael and All Angels, he had usually taken up the appointed Gospel, Matt. 18:1–11, as his text. Only three times—on St. Michael’s day in 1534 and 1537, in addition to the present 1544 sermon—did Luther take up the appointed Epistle, and indeed those three sermons constitute the sum of Luther’s preaching on the Revelation of St. John.  – Luther’s Works: Sermons V, ed. Christopher Boyd Brown, trans. Matt Lundin, vol. 58, 171.

Written by Jim

28 Sep 2018 at 5:50 am

Posted in Church History, Luther

Where the Biblical Languages Are Forgotten, The Gospel is Lost

leave a comment »

“And let us be sure of this: we will not long preserve the gospel without [knowledge of] the [biblical] languages.” — Martin Luther

Written by Jim

25 Sep 2018 at 1:12 pm

Posted in Luther