I must have missed that challenge. But here you go, and remember you asked for it.
MARTIN LUTHER ON THE DIGNITY AND MAJESTY OF GOD
“I look upon God no better than a scoundrel” (ref. Weimar, Vol. 1, Pg. 487. Cf. Table Talk, No. 963).
“Christ committed adultery first of all with the women at the well about whom St. John tell’s us. Was not everybody about Him saying: ‘Whatever has He been doing with her?’ Secondly, with Mary Magdalen, and thirdly with the women taken in adultery whom He dismissed so lightly. Thus even, Christ who was so righteous, must have been guilty of fornication before He died.” (ref. Trishreden, Weimer Edition, Vol. 2, Pg. 107. – What a great blasphemy from a man who is regarded as “great reformer”!).
“I have greater confidence in my wife and my pupils than I have in Christ” (ref. Table Talk, 2397b).
“It does not matter how Christ behaved – what He taught is all that matters” (ref. Erlangen Vol. 29, Pg. 126).
Some (38) errors or heresies of Martin Luther
Care to rebut any of them?
Care to rebut any of them?
***
I’ll rebut every one that you’ve posted, but only if you’ll promise to actually read my rebuttals instead of throwing your little whiny ebby tantrums.
You promise that?
“I look upon God no better than a scoundrel” (ref. Weimar, Vol. 1, Pg. 487. Cf. Table Talk, No. 963).
***
Tell me when you’ve read the whole thing and I’ll move onto the next.
Your source (Peter Weiner, who is a Luther-hating fanatic much like you) contains a brutal mistranslation of the German, assuming a mistranslation at all because nothing of the sort actually appears.
Here’s a proper translation: “God is very foolish [or stupidest], for the most powerful enemy Satan opposes is a sick man that is like a shaken reed. It must irk the devil terribly that he, such a great, powerful and intelligent spirit should not be able to overcome or hurt man, such a lowly and weak creature, without God’s permission. Therefore, angry Satan throws fiery darts at us, to which the remedy is the shield of faith. This certainly often has been undertaken with me.”
The only time that Luther refers to God as a ‘scoundrel’ was when he was speaking about his debates with Calvinists. I quote:
“Do Not Brood About the Mysteries Connected with Election. A dispute about predestination should be avoided entirely. Staupitz said: if you want to dispute about predestination, begin with the wounds of Christ, and it will cease. But if you continue to debate about it, you will lose Christ, the Word, the sacraments, and everything. I forget everything about Christ and God when I come upon these thoughts and actually get to the point to imagining that God is a rogue. We must stay in the word, in which God is revealed to us and salvation is offered, if we believe him. But in thinking about predestination, we forget God. Then the laudate (praise) stops, and the blasphemate (blaspheme) begins. However, in Christ are hid all the treasures (Col. 2:3); outside Him all are locked up. Therefore, we should simply refuse to argue about election. (W-T 2, No. 2654a - SL 22, 832, No. 75).”
So in other words, a misquote, a misplaced quote, and a lie of omission on the part of your stupid, stupid cherry-picked sources of hate. Luther is speaking of God being a ‘scoundrel’ when one abandons Scripture to follow one’s own itching ears.
Considering that your very first attack was an outright and total lie from your source, I would think that you’d be ashamed for being taken in by such propaganda.
“Christ committed adultery first of all with the women at the well about whom St. John tell’s us. Was not everybody about Him saying: ‘Whatever has He been doing with her?’ Secondly, with Mary Magdalen, and thirdly with the women taken in adultery whom He dismissed so lightly. Thus even, Christ who was so righteous, must have been guilty of fornication before He died.”
***
Have a bonus. No more treats until you actually can prove that you’ve read what I’ve written instead of whining ‘I reject it.’
Cherry-picked bullshit coming from the same bullshit artist as the first one.
Here’s the Bible verse that Luther is referring to. “God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.”
So of course that makes sense, by taking the adultery of the women onto himself and to the cross, he was punished for that sin of adultery.
Oh, and lest we forget, this quote was from the volumes of Table Talk, which are little more than scribbled notes of Luther’s students and have no context whatsoever.
Considering all the other places where Luther praises the holy sinless Son of God, your source is full of crap.
Heck, you’re not even using Luther’s theological works to justify your hatred. You’re using hearsay.
And just because the next one is so, so easy...
“It does not matter how Christ behaved – what He taught is all that matters”
Not only is this quote never found in Luther’s works but only in Erlangen and Wiener (neither of whom can possibly be considered unbiased sources, especially considering their rampant cherry-picking, misquotes, and outright stated goals of bashing Dr. Luther).
In context, they’re probably referring to Dr. Luther’s reply to Dr. Karlstadt, in which Karlstadt was arguing that the Sacrament of Holy Communion should not be honored because Christ never honored it in the way that the Catholics do.
And Luther says, paraphrased, ‘Did Christ forbid the elevation of the Sacrament? No? Then pay attention to what Jesus teaches.’
The irony for this part is that you’re hating Dr. Luther for defending a Roman Catholic position.
I see that you never play defense.