Love your series on the Reformation. You go really in depth, without ever losing clarity. Is it going to continue, or have we seen the last of it? I feel it is lacking an overview of Zwinglianism and the Swiss reformation. Do you intend to address Zwingli at all?
@Morockiwi989 жыл бұрын
Hi - I am looking for direct sources of evidence which describe Melanchthon's support or ways of showing support for Luther, do you know of any? Cheers
@RyanReevesM
9 жыл бұрын
Hey Zahra. Do you have any particular issues or debates you have in mind? Or just in general his support for Luther?
@kjvnews83268 жыл бұрын
On the topic of works being necessary, it is alleged that at one time Luther stated that he would like to burn the epistle of James. As an early Christian 25 years ago, I felt like burning it myself because it (for a long time) appeared to contradict all of St Paul's letters. Do you know if he actually said that, and if so, do you know if he ever came to a resolution about this issue? Thanks.
@RyanReevesM
8 жыл бұрын
+KJVNEWS // Yeah the bits about Luther and James are half-remembered by folks today. And this usually means the story grows with the telling! Luther never said burn it or throw it out. The comments he makes are twofold: 1) he points out the issues of James in the early church along with the other minor epistles. He comments that the texts were not initially widely included in the canon. This is not a surprising problem, as Calvin and other reformers point this out, too, in their commentaries. 2) Luther comments that James is "an epistle of straw"--but this is using Paul's language about works by our own strength being straw that is burned up when we die (i.e. they accomplish nothing beyond Christ's work). Luther is going after those who use James to attack his understanding of justification. Everyone today seems to think this means Luther wanted to recreate the canon and throw out books he didn't like. But I always point out that he wrote a full commentary on the book as scripture. He also cites the book repeatedly in his other commentaries as scripture. He's just urging caution about how the book is used.
Пікірлер: 7
Love your series on the Reformation. You go really in depth, without ever losing clarity. Is it going to continue, or have we seen the last of it? I feel it is lacking an overview of Zwinglianism and the Swiss reformation. Do you intend to address Zwingli at all?
Hi - I am looking for direct sources of evidence which describe Melanchthon's support or ways of showing support for Luther, do you know of any? Cheers
@RyanReevesM
9 жыл бұрын
Hey Zahra. Do you have any particular issues or debates you have in mind? Or just in general his support for Luther?
On the topic of works being necessary, it is alleged that at one time Luther stated that he would like to burn the epistle of James. As an early Christian 25 years ago, I felt like burning it myself because it (for a long time) appeared to contradict all of St Paul's letters. Do you know if he actually said that, and if so, do you know if he ever came to a resolution about this issue? Thanks.
@RyanReevesM
8 жыл бұрын
+KJVNEWS // Yeah the bits about Luther and James are half-remembered by folks today. And this usually means the story grows with the telling! Luther never said burn it or throw it out. The comments he makes are twofold: 1) he points out the issues of James in the early church along with the other minor epistles. He comments that the texts were not initially widely included in the canon. This is not a surprising problem, as Calvin and other reformers point this out, too, in their commentaries. 2) Luther comments that James is "an epistle of straw"--but this is using Paul's language about works by our own strength being straw that is burned up when we die (i.e. they accomplish nothing beyond Christ's work). Luther is going after those who use James to attack his understanding of justification. Everyone today seems to think this means Luther wanted to recreate the canon and throw out books he didn't like. But I always point out that he wrote a full commentary on the book as scripture. He also cites the book repeatedly in his other commentaries as scripture. He's just urging caution about how the book is used.
Thanks