Replies

Some speculate that Luther didn't write The Jews and Their Lies.

I haven't studied the matter, but there's apparently a case to be made that it's a work of forgery. Someone other than Luther wrote it, either to trade on his name, or to discredit him

One theory is that the book was written by an unknown rabbi, who sought to discredit Luther among the Jews, and thus stifle his conversion attempts.

A reason for this theory is that the book apparently denies the canonical status of Jeremiah, which Luther never denied.

I haven’t studied the issue closely either, but the theory that the pamphlet was a forgery would perhaps be somewhat stronger if it were some kind of “one off.” But my understanding is that in the 1530s-1540s, ML was pretty consistent in his efforts to have Jews expelled from various towns in Saxony and Brandenburg.

Some speculate that Luther didn't write The Jews and Their Lies.

I haven't studied the matter, but there's apparently a case to be made that it's a work of forgery. Someone other than Luther wrote it, either to trade on his name, or to discredit him

Feel free to toss up any links you have that expand on this theory.

To put it mildly: I am highly skeptical of it.

Martin Luther lived from 1483–1546. To say he was an important and prominent man at the end of his life would be an understatement.

The Book On the Jews and Their Lies was published in 1543. Several years before his death. If it was a forgery it would have been refuted at the time, but it was not.

Facsimile of the first editon:

The entire first edition of the book is available in facsimile here:

https://www.digitale-sammlungen.de/en/view/bsb00023847?page=,1

From the Encyclopedia Britanica:

Luther’s role in the Reformation after 1525 was that of theologian, adviser, and facilitator but not that of a man of action. Biographies of Luther accordingly have a tendency to end their story with his marriage in 1525. Such accounts gallantly omit the last 20 years of his life, during which much happened. The problem is not just that the cause of the new Protestant churches that Luther had helped to establish was essentially pursued without his direct involvement, but also that the Luther of these later years appears less attractive, less winsome, less appealing than the earlier Luther who defiantly faced emperor and empire at Worms.
Repeatedly drawn into fierce controversies during the last decade of his life, Luther emerges as a different figure—irascible, dogmatic, and insecure. His tone became strident and shrill, whether in comments about the Anabaptists, the pope, or the Jews. In each instance his pronouncements were virulent: the Anabaptists should be hanged as seditionists, the pope was the Antichrist, the Jews should be expelled and their synagogues burned. Such were hardly irenic words from a minister of the gospel, and none of the explanations that have been offered—his deteriorating health and chronic pain, his expectation of the imminent end of the world, his deep disappointment over the failure of true religious reform—seem satisfactory.

The issue of Martin Luther's increasing anti-Semitism was an issue during his life. He published his screeds during his life, some in multiple editions.

I see no evidence whatsoever for the odd claim that he really didn't write this book. It seems very convenient for advocates of Luther to claim this in our era, but the facts simply do not support it.