I have previously read everything that Luther had to say about Jews.
Luther thought that the reformation of the church would allow Jews to see Christianity properly presented, and that that would cause them to turn to their Messiah. Luther was very disappointed. He then saw Paul’s admonition that Judaism is an “enemy of the gospel.”
To suggest that Luther’s disappointment would in any manner have him condone Hitler’s contempt for and rejection of the scripture is utter prejudice and total ignorance of what Luther represented.
As already stated....Godwin’s Law rules regarding this article.
BTW, I am NOT a Lutheran.
Godwin’s Law?
You think you can brush this all aside with “Godwin’s Law?”
Good grief, man: facts are facts. If you apply Godwin’s Law in this way, no historian can ever assess responsibility for Nazism ever again.
Godwin’s Law applies in discussions of Ford v. Chevy, Vanilla v. Chocolate, Dallas v. Green Bay, liberal v. conservative, linux v. windows, etc. It cannot apply to the study of WWII, or the history of that time disappears in a black hole of logical paradox.
Mind you, I can certainly understand why adherents to the Traditions of Men like Luther would want that.
But it is not to be.
Luther’s statements about Jews go far beyond disappointment and were far more insidious than you are stating. Much of what he said about the Jews would be closer to an Islamic Imam in the Middle East than any Christian leader.