Maybe you could give us a link so we could read the context.
Secondly, he did take seven (not six) books out of the Bible: Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, I and II Maccabees, and Esther. Those books were accepted as canonical in both the East and the West, up until the point in time that Fr. Luther relegated them to a status of apocrypha.
Third, he did denigrate several of the books of the NT in his writings.
For example, on the Epistle of James, he did say:
In a word, St. John’s Gospel and his first Epistle, St. Paul’s Epistles—especially Romans, Galatians, and Ephesians—and St. Peter’s first Epistle are the books that show you Christ and teach you all that it is necessary and good for you to know—even though you were never to see or hear any other book or doctrine. Therefore St. James’ Epistle is really an epistle of straw, compared to them. For it has nothing of the nature of the Gospel about it.
Preface to the New Testament (1524 ed)
In the introduction to the Epistles of James and Jude, he said (about Jude):
Concerning the epistle of St. Jude, no one can deny that it is an extract or copy of St. Peter's second epistle, so very like it are all the words. He also speaks of the apostles like a disciple who comes long after them [Jude 17] and cites sayings and incidents that are found nowhere else in the Scriptures [Jude 9, 14]. This moved the ancient Fathers to exclude this epistle from the main body of the Scriptures. Moreover the Apostle Jude did not go to Greek-speaking lands, but to Persia, as it is said, so that he did not write Greek. Therefore, although I value this book, it is an epistle that need not be counted among the chief books which are supposed to lay the foundations of faith.
In regards to the book of Revelation, Luther said:
Finally, let everyone think of it as his own spirit leads him. My spirit cannot accommodate itself to this book. For me this is reason enough not to think highly of it: Christ is neither taught nor known in it. But to teach Christ, this is the thing which an apostle is bound above all else to do; as Christ says in Acts 1, "You shall be my witnesses." Therefore I stick to the books which present Christ to me clearly and purely.
So what is a person supposed to think about Luther's attitude to much of the Scriptures? I'm not trying to be insulting to you or Lutherans; but those are Luther's own words.
Even more telling is not the books Martin Luther removed but the books he actually authored. (On the Jews and Their Lies, Vom Schem Hamphoras, Warning against the Jews) His extreme antisemitism were the basis for much of the agenda and propaganda of the Nazi Party.
I personally think Luther was iffy by reading those comments.
But, to get to the point of this thread, I don’t see your comments or citations as Protestant-bashing or Lutheran-bashing.
They aren’t particularly hateful. You are just giving your point of view, and using true quotes, and so on.
Similarly, any time anyone criticizes the RC church - whether over the child abuse revelations or anything else - it doesn’t necessarily mean they are Catholic bashing.
Most are shocked and/or horrified over these abuse allegation, many of which have been proven, and have good questions to ask and good points to make. In no cases that I have read has the priest denied the charges! Although there may be such cases. There are legitimate concerns there. I think most of us know that not every allegation could possibly be true; that not all abuse was necessarily covered up; and that most priests are good guys.
But it is in the news and it is a big deal, a very big deal. So people are talking about it. Hopefully, and I actually think this is happening, the RC church in America will get some really good guidelines in place in the present and future to deal with wolves in priest’s clothing.
Like officers who kill someone in the line of duty. We most of us love our police and know they are good guys. But, if they kill somebody, they get put on paid administrative leave, before they are convicted of anything or disciplined, while those in charge look into things and make sure they are innocent of murder.
Similarly, I’d think that those in the clergy, if accused of child abuse, could reasonably be told to stay away from unsupervised minors until the charges are explored. Then the clergyman could be restored as before, or taken away in handcuffs, as appropriate.