[jo kus]

I have never given credit to the Church Fathers for putting together the Bible in the sense that the Church Fathers "created the Bible". You just can't tell me that the Deuterocanonical books were not controversial among the Apostolics. Why is there such a thing as the "Deuterocanon"? If Luther had banned the book of John, do you really think a new Council would have had to be called to "reinsert" it? I don't think so.

Apply that same logic to the New Testament Deuterocannonicals like 2 Peter, 2 John and Revelation and then ask yourself "why did Luther remove the OT Deuterocannonicals and not the NT Deuterocannonicals?" Are you still willing to deny it had nothing to do with the theology of Martin Luther?

Regards

[Forest Keeper]

Apply that same logic to the New Testament Deuterocannonicals like 2 Peter, 2 John and Revelation and then ask yourself "why did Luther remove the OT Deuterocannonicals and not the NT Deuterocannonicals?" Are you still willing to deny it had nothing to do with the theology of Martin Luther?

Apparently, Luther DID try to remove what you call the NT Deuterocannonicals, and he was wrong. Thankfully, his own followers wouldn't let him (admittedly according to Wiki). This is another example of the Spirit working through the laity rather than the hierarchs (Luther being a de facto hierarch). So, on this point Luther (one man) was wrong and was overruled by the laity. That's how I think God works.