[boatbums]

Thanks for your comments. I did some searching as well and found that this polemical hit piece against Luther is based on such little evidence as to be laughable and those who would use it to condemn Luther are grasping at straws.

From http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/search?q=Christ+committed+adultery+first+of+all+with+the+women+at+the+well, I found:

In both instances we have reproduced the item completely. There is no context. It is simply a briefly scribbled note of part of a conversation, none too intelligibly recorded or transmitted, with several important words illegible. 

And also:

The sole manuscript containing this item is a quarto volume that found a final resting place in the State Library at Munich, where it was catalogued as Codex latinus 943. The page containing our item was copied from an earlier copy - possibly Schlaginhaufen's original manuscript-between November 4, 1551, and some time in 1567. The copyist may have been Schlaginhaufen's son-in-law, the Rev. John Oberndorfer of Ratisbon. 

Thus the "hair-raising blasphemy" turns out to be an inaccurately translated version of a somewhat uncertain, uncontrolled and unverifiable quotation of an offhand remark of blessed Martin Luther, without a shred of context or any indication of the circumstances that evoked the words it purports to reproduce. Since the item was destined to remain in manuscript form for 356 years after it was set down, it is quite probable that blessed Martin Luther himself never saw what Schlaginhaufen had written down. 

Conclusion
How does one respond to this? The quote appears outrageous. First, the quote has no context. One does not know what exactly Luther had in mind. Was he kidding? Was he summarizing someone else's argument? Was he using hyperbole? It's really hard to say. If taken literally, it certainly is at odds with his other statements about Christ. Thus, even though one can't know exactly why he said this, we can have a strong assurance he didn't mean it literally. The editors of Luther's Works include a footnote for this comment of Luther's, and they offer the following speculation:

This entry has been cited against Luther, among others by Arnold Lunn in The Revolt Against Reason (New York: Sheed & Ward, 1951), pp. 45, 257, 258. What Luther meant might have been made clearer if John Schlaginhaufen had indicated the context of the Reformer’s remarks. The probable context is suggested in a sermon of 1536 (WA 41, 647) in which Luther asserted that Christ was reproached by the world as a glutton, a winebibber, and even an adulterer.

Be careful with Luther’s Table Talk. The Table Talk is a collection of comments from Luther written down by Luther’s students and friends. It is not in actuality an official writing of Luther's and should not serve as the basis for interpreting his theology.

How telling that, instead of addressing the answer to the initial challenge, a new one gets tossed out - and a bogus one at that.

[Fantasywriter]

Thanks for the additional info. When I first saw the quote, attributed to Luther, I knew there was a backstory. No one even glancingly familiar with him believes he ascribed adulterous acts to Jesus.

Then, when I read the actual origin of the comment, all I could do was shake my head. The lengths some will go to, in an attempt to smear a believer in Christ, is incredible.

Incidentally, from what I have seen, many Catholics DO believe Luther is the protestant pope. They pounce if we fail to believe every single thing Luther himself believed, as if such a position discredits everything Luther said, wrote and did, and everything connected to the Reformation.

This goes to the heart of the issue. Luther and all Catholic popes are sinful humans—as are we all. Only Christ was perfect. The Holy Spirit “breathed,” the Scriptures to those selected for the task of transmitting them. So we know the Holy Scriptures are trustworthy.

Anything beyond that is open to question. If it’s not God-breathed, then where does its authority derive from? To make any utterances of mere, fallible humans the equivalent of God-breathed Scripture is a fundamental error—and a fundamentally dangerous one. Anyone can claim divine inspiration, but the Holy Spirit doesn’t contradict Himself, nor does Jesus. Jesus in fact did described the true church, and His is the only word on the subject that matters.