[boatbums]

It is noticeable that you failed to cite the references for these "quotes" of Luther's as well as the Pope's. What is missed when people do this is the context of those words as well as the full statement. There is a very good site that can be used to look up presumed quotes of Luther, it is http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/p/obscure-luther-quotes.html. Though I do not follow Luther, I find that much of the vehemence thrown at him is due to misquotes, manufactured quotes, misunderstandings and a desire to degrade him personally so that what he taught can be summarily dismissed as well.

So, what you may not realize is that I have not arrived at the position of the Catholic Church WRT justification since I know full well what they teach and I find it both unscriptural and irrational. It fits Paul's definition of an accursed Gospel since it misses the whole point of grace. Something Luther understood pretty well.

[dangus]

Actually, I didn’t fail to cite the references. Those are the charges of his excommunication; perhaps I wasn’t clear enough.

As for Beggars All: Luther wrote many volumes, many are an embarrassment to modern Luthers, like his calls for the severe repression of the Jews, that commonfolk were born to be fodder for cannons, that Christians should welcome the destruction of Western nations by Islamic Turks. So just because it’s not in Beggars All, I’m hardly going to withhold referencing it.

>> It fits Paul’s definition of an accursed Gospel since it misses the whole point of grace. Something Luther understood pretty well. <<

From those quotes, not too well at all.

The Catholic Church told Luther: Here is where we find out doctrines, in James, in Revelation, in Wisdom of Sirach, in 2 Peter, in Hebrews, in the books of the Maccabees. Luther did not refute the Catholic Church, but condemned books such as these, yes, including Revelation, James, Hebrew, etc. Luther considered these works of scripture to be what Paul was calling an accursed Gospel.