Nothing. Why do't you try to stay on the subject and remember that I was repsonding to your "No, to return to the freedom that God has given us." Hence my reply was that we are not free to sin boldly, as Luther suggested.
The historical fact is that Luther's translation had James in it as part of the Canon (unlike the Apocrypha books which he knew were not part of the Canon)
The historical fact is that Luther wanted to exlcude it.
That's right-nothing!
Why do't you try to stay on the subject and remember that I was repsonding to your "No, to return to the freedom that God has given us." Hence my reply was that we are not free to sin boldly, as Luther suggested.
And again, what Luther suggested is irrelevant to the debate on the scriptural debate on Justification by Faith.
The historical fact is that Luther's translation had James in it as part of the Canon (unlike the Apocrypha books which he knew were not part of the Canon) The historical fact is that Luther wanted to exlcude it.
But the historical fact is that he didn't.
And the fact is that Luther's views on anything are irrelevant to what the scripture teach on the subject.
Luther's views would only be relevant if I were using him as a 'church father' and citing him as a final authority, which I have not done.