Everyone of your links were to the same numskulls' website, which I have already been very aware of. I quote Luther; you link to numskulls.
There was introduction to the explanations I had alluded to earlier. It seems obvious to me you did not read any of what was linked to, or at the least you cannot point to what is wrong about it.
So far, other than a link to Amazon.com., you've provided nothing but spit, and insults.
Among commentary under VI, Joseph Loretz F. Criticism of Luther by Lortz
Jared Wicks comments:
“[Lortz] pointed out extremes in Luther, such as a lack of restraint in fulminating against his opponents. Lortz found in Luther an extravagance ill-befitting a teacher submissive to the word of God. Impulsive in interpreting the Scriptures, Luther distorted the full message of the New Testament by subjective selectivity. But there is for Lortz a large reservoir of Catholic content in Luther, and not just in the young Luther. Even the elder Luther, often bitter and crude in attacking the priesthood and papacy, was a teacher of the sovereignty of God, a defender of the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, and an effective teacher of faith in Christ the Savior. Lortz's account of Luther was critical, but his criticism was penetrated by amazement over Luther's pulsating spiritual richness, the wide range of his talents, the vastness of his productive labor for the new community, and the concentration of all his thought on God's grace revealed in Christ and transmitted by the Gospel. Lortz gave Catholics an image of Luther marked by prophetic greatness.”[56]
As to the alleged subjectivity;
Johannes Hessen (1947)
A. Overview of J. Hessen’s Attitude toward Luther
Johannes Hessen was a Catholic professor in philosophy of religion at Cologne. Perhaps the most startling observation put forth by Hessen is his denial of Luther’s ultimate subjectivity. As noted above, Joseph Lortz accuses Luther of subjectivism and individualism. Hessen rejects this:“[Luther’s] great experience was a meeting with God, with the God who encountered him in Christ and his Gospel. It means a complete attachment to God’s Word, which contains the witness about Christ and possesses for Luther the character of an unassailable, absolute norm.”[59]
Scholars explain Hessen’s denial of Luther’s subjectivism:
“[Luther’s] fundamental experience may have been subjective, but only formally; in content it was without doubt objective, for, by the mediation of Christ, it was a real meeting with God. Thus Luther was not an individualist. He was a reformer in the true sense of the word, that is, a restorer whose sole aim was to bring back the pure Gospel from which, in his eyes, the Church had strayed.”[60]
“[Luther’s] own agonizing struggle about a "gracious God" was the same path Paul had trod, and it brought Luther to the same childlike trust in the undeserved grace of God. Not pride or ego but God and his grace were the basic forces at work in Luther. His experiences, although subjective in form, were actually an objective confrontation with God, because Luther's faith was grounded so completely in Christ and grew so completely out of Word and Sacrament. Hessen disagrees thoroughly with Lortz's charge that Luther was subjectivistic to the core. He sees no similarity at all between Luther and modern subjectivism or individualism.”[61]
“Hessen contends that Luther was no individualist, but a reformer in the true sense of that word—that is to say, a restorer of the God-given Gospel from which the Church had strayed.”[62]