I can't respond in your linked comment directly, James Curtis, but I would point to the opening slide as some evidence that the class is actually part of a course in a Protestant seminary. Also I'm really open to a strong dislike for Luther, especially from Catholics, but I would expect the debate to be healthier. You're not wanting Protestants to view Luther through a Protestant lens, which I assume means they can only have your lens to be rational or human. That's a bit like walking into a dentist office and asking why they care about teeth so much...

@MarkTrigsted

7 жыл бұрын

Ryan Reeves - The Dentist comment is a great one that I will steal for sure! Those of us that adore Luther also must be intellectually and historically honest. Although there certainly is a contextual element to be considered, much of Luther's late vitriol primarily against the Jews is sadly indefensible.

@jonathandoe1367

7 жыл бұрын

Well, they would seem significantly more defensible if you replace every instance of "Jew" with 'nonChristo-Judaist". He wasn't attacking the Hebrew race or any who embraced Christ, really. That's something in his defense. I just find how people seem to consider Christianity and Judaism separate faiths incomprehensible. Some Judaists reject Christ, and some Christians claim the Old Testament to be of no more than historical value and of proving the prophecies. This astonishes me. I cannot condone the rejection of either testament.

A lovely series of videos. I have to quibble though with the final assertion that to be Lutheran is to follow Luther. Rather it is to follow the Lutheran Confessions. Most of which were not authored by Luther.

"For a time Lutheranism was seen as just a German national faith." This is interesting as apparently it caught on in Scandinavia very quickly.

@RyanReevesM

9 жыл бұрын

Matthew McVeagh // But even in Scandinavia it was known as something that first came from Germany and so the loyalty was always (and remains) to Luther personally. This is the unique feature that I'm discussing.

Thanks for this. Learning so much from these lectures! :)

Spot on James Curtiss...Thank you. Shalom

In 1492 Ferdinand and Isabella dispossessed and expelled all Jews along with Muslims, from their newly united kingdom in a fury of ethnic cleansing. Many of the Jews from Spain fled to the Netherlands, then a Spanish satellite, and from there migrated into Germany. This all happened during Luther's adult life. Not hard to see a connection.

I would assume, that Luther's despising of the Jews has to be connected to the function of the Emperor as their protector, thus binding their welfare to the might and success of the catholic forces allied to that group. On the other hand I have to say, that it should/could be a north-german tradition (which will be the predominantly lutheran part of the Empire), because the Hanseatic League was very strict in banning the jews from their cities at all. I am maybe wrong, but there weren't much jews in Eisenach, Wittenberg or other thuringian and saxonian towns in Luthers time - so it may have been the combination of an experience by reading about and some sporadic real-life encounters with jewish individuals (Speyer, Heidelberg a.s.o.).

@jonathandoe1367

7 жыл бұрын

Honestly, I think the simpler explanation of him personally disliking them (as he did with anyone who disagreed with him, Melanchthon excluded) is more significant, but it's good to take those kinds of things into account.

@MarkTrigsted

7 жыл бұрын

11Kralle i

All Jews reject Jesus...how absurd are these comments...

I don't understand this at all. Every one of the Nazi leaders was a born baptized Roman Catholic including Hitler, Himmler, Goering, Goebbels, Heydrich. How can Luther be blamed for that. It is the RC Church that has been historically antisemitic and the Popes that put them in Ghettos, His antisemitism is just another belief he retained from the RC Church. I also don't understand how Luther could retain that view in light of his knowledge on the book of Romans. It doesn't make sense. I never could understand why he held those views. I had read that when the reformation began, he thought that the Jewish people would join him and when they didn't that was the reason for his hatred.

@RyanReevesM

8 жыл бұрын

+KJVNEWS // Great points; you summarize the frustration of many to grasp this. The bit about the Nazis is more how the leveraged Luther as a national hero to point bolster their own policies. Much of the criticism goes to the church who sat back and watched the events without speaking up--claiming that this is what good Lutherans should do. Luther's later antisemitism, though is frankly inexpiable. Some have suggested he was loosing his marbles by the end (he does get angry with everyone it seems). Some have tried to say he's not really antisemitic, even though his last comments on the subject are rants about removing them from Germany and taking their property, etc. In the end, we just don't know what drove him to this level of anger. I do agree that it was not racial cleansing, per se. Luther doesn't use language about them being an inferior race of people. He's mainly angered that they won't convert and so opens himself to harsh measures to remove their influence in society. It's still antisemitism but maybe it can be classed as a different sort (theological antisemitism). Again, though, all we have are guesses.

@LuvBorderCollies

7 жыл бұрын

I can reinforce the comments by KJVNEWS. I came from a very strong Reformed background and married into a Roman Catholic family. It really startled me how virulent the anti-semitism was. In other walks of life I ran into other strong RC believers who espoused an identical hatred. This lead me to believe this attitude is sponsored by the Vatican being so uniform in verbiage and tone. FWIW my mom's side was old time Lutheran. I never heard an anti-Semitic comment ever. From the Dutch Reformed side there was no sympathy for the Jews or Holocaust but they didn't spend time ranting about the Jews.

@jonathandoe1367

7 жыл бұрын

My only criticisms of Luther, as (somewhat Puritanical) supporter of Calvin, Zwingli, and Arminius, is that he didn't take the reformation effort far enough, and that whenever another reformer tried go further from Catholicism, he called them a heretic. I love the man, but I have some issues with his theology, and I think he did allow the Nazi Party plenty of room to claim support by his doctrines. (Not that he could have predicted the rise of Fascism, though.)

To think of Luther as this great German man is a very narrow view, that takes Luther out of context. To see him as such is to only view him with a Protestant lens or even just a Lutheran lens!

@jonathandoe1367

7 жыл бұрын

I think he was a great German in general. He showed unwavering devotion to his religion, and brought the Bible to the German language, which (even in secular terms) is a push to strengthening German culture, much as Grimm did. Furthermore, even many modern Catholics thank Luther for exposing the corruption within the Catholic church, which (despite being almost ubiquitous, from a cynic's perspective) most Catholics still oppose, when they're made aware of it. He was just a great man in general, and seemingly very devoted to his country.

@acortes7771

7 жыл бұрын

Jonathan Doe, there already existed a German Catholic Bible during Luther's time. Luther did the worst thing, which is to remove books from the Bible, he also wanted to remove the Epistle of James. There's nothing great about a heretic who did these things to the Holy Word of God! Corruption in all Church's has always existed and will continue to exist until Jesus comes again, its part of the human condition. Luther didn't expose anything that Catholics didn't already know! He was a disgruntled former monk, heretical, racist, anti-Semite, and a drunkard, that can hardly qualify someone as a great person, unless of course you live in the twilight zone.