Post published by One Eyed Owl

Hebrews, James, Jude and Revelation
Main article: Antilegomena

Luther made an attempt to remove the books of Hebrews, James, Jude and Revelation from the canon (notably, he perceived them to go against certain Protestant doctrines such as sola gratia and sola fide)[citation needed] but his followers did not generally accept Luther's personal judgment in this matter. However, these books are ordered last in the German-language Luther Bible to this day.[5]

So Luther was wrong to dismiss the canonized scripture. Peter was wrong to deny Christ. It doesn't mean God didn't use him for his purposes. The catholic church ruined any chance it had of being the one church by politics, indulgences, and overall wickedness. These are common to man especially men of power. The protestant church is guilty of its own sins as well.

This "universal aggrement" on matthew 16: 18 just isn't true.. I'm familiar with luther's comments... his actual comments. Few people realize that in all the editions of Luther’s Bible translation after 1522, Luther dropped the paragraphs at the end, of his general Preface to the New Testament which made value judgments among the various biblical books and which included the famous reference to James as an “Epistle of straw”. Want to know why? it's because he made a mistake. Just as much as you and i make mistakes every day. That's right... Luther took back his comments that you beat his grave with.

Luther dropped his comments about James after 1522? Just some years before his death (after the comments were removed from his "Bible" Luther said that the book of James should be thrown into the oven.......

Luther's "epistle of straw" comment came before 1522, and just a few years before his death, he said another comment, that "the epistle of James I toss into the fire". So he didn't change his position after 1522 like you are implying

Did you know that Martin Luther actually added the word "alone" to Paul's letter to the Romans, even though the word "faith alone"is not in Romans at all?

His arrogant reply to his deliberate addition to scripture? "If your Papist annoys you with the word [ his adding ‘alone’ in Romans 3:28], tell him straightaway, Dr. Martin Luther will have it so: Papist and ass are one and the same thing. Whoever will not have my translation, let him give it the go-by; the devil’s thanks to him who censures it without my will and knowledge. Luther will have it so, and he is doctor above all doctors in Popedom.”

Read his shameful comments about the Book of Revelation, that none of his followers will accept today: " “to my mind, it [the book of the Apocalypse/Revelation] bears upon it no marks of an apostolic or prophetic character…Everyone may form his own judgment of this book; as for myself, I feel an aversion to it, and to me this is sufficient reason for rejecting it.”

So just because Luther felt an aversion to it, he had the gall to actually reject a book from Holy Scripture...

You say that Martin Luther was a sinful man who was nevertheless used by God ... WHERE'S THE EVIDENCE FOR THAT? What miracles did he do, like the Apostles Peter or Paul? What is the sign that Luther was inspired by God when every one of his actions points to the contrary?

Luther was absolutely wrong about the books of James and Revelation (he wanted to reject those books)...... So how can he be right about his interpretations of the rest of scripture?

When Luther was woefully wrong in so much of his opinions ( about the book of James, about the apocalypse etc) what makes you think that his other doctrines were correct and inspired by God?

According to Martin Luther, justification by faith alone is the article on which the Church stands or falls. Thus, "faith alone" is foundational to Lutheranism and Reformed Christianity, and as a formula distinguishes it from other Christian denominations.

Yeah, but as I've said, the only place "faith alone" appears in the bible is in the line from James "we are justified by works and NOT BY FAITH ALONE"..... So"faith alone" is a false doctrine....

Paul says that "works of the law"- circumcision, animal sacrifice are not necessary, that's all...... Paul never says that good deeds (helping the poor, helping those in need etc are not needed). In fact, Jesus himself says that those who fail to do good deeds can face damnation. ( The rich man in the parable went to hell because he failed to do a good deed- he did not help the beggar lying at his gate)

just understand that for a protestant "by faith alone" is the foundation of our concept of the gospel. We believe as Calvinists God elects whom he will.

Luther did not "add" the word alone to Romans three. If you've read Luther, you would know that he addressed this issue in his Open Letter On Translating. He goes on to give a pretty in depth explanation about why he did as such. also, luther died in 1546... more than two decades long is not just a few years

“I know very well that in Romans 3 the word solum is not in the Greek or Latin text — the papists did not have to teach me that. It is fact that the letters s-o-l-a are not there. And these blockheads stare at them like cows at a new gate, while at the same time they do not recognize that it conveys the sense of the text -- if the translation is to be clear and vigorous [klar und gewaltiglich], it belongs there. I wanted to speak German, not Latin or Greek, since it was German I had set about to speak in the translation.” Open letter on Translating

the history of scriptural study, textual criticism, and manuscript tradition have been intense issues that the Body of Christ have had to sort through for centuries. Erasmus, Cardinal Cajetan, and Luther were a part of this ingrafting of understanding. thus, as men, they had doubts about things, weaknesses that we look back on from our Ivory towers and laugh at them for. That is not fair to them as image bearers

Adding "alone" (german-allein) is unnecessary even in German, and distorts the meaning of Paul's sentence... Paul says works of the old testament law ( animal sacrifices etc) are not necessary and that Faith is necessary..... That's what Paul says, nothing more... Adding "Faith alone" distorts the meaning of the sentence, as the Letter of James points out that faith alone isn't enough