"Playing the Luther Card"

[A. believer]

Here's a link to an excellent article by a Lutheran seminary student that should be of interest to all Christians, but I decided to post it here first for your benefit. When I get time (probably not before next week) I'll probably post a link on other forums. If anyone is so inclined, though, feel free to do so yourself.

Luther's View of the Canon of Scripture (http://www.ntrmin.org/Luther%20and%20the%20canon%202.htm#a1)

Happy reading!

[IowaLutheran]

What a great article! I've read Dave Armstrong's site and was impressed with his scholarship, so it is nice to see even better scholarship from a Lutheran point of view.

There seems to be an epidemic of Catholic apologists (i.e., laypersons without degrees who apparently have a lot of time on their hands) with websites. While generally I applaud their work, a little less vitriol toward Luther would go a long way to more fruitful dialogues.

[theologia crucis]

Thanks, A. Believer!

I've wanted to do something similar to that for a while, but now, I don't have to!!! And I don't think I could do it in that much depth!

Wunderbar!

RCC response will be ultimately interesting...

[I can eat 50 eggs]

Theo,

do I have to do my little Q&A session with you to show you how silly this stance is?

:)

give me a call, and shoot me an email, icaneat50eggs@verizon.net

[theologia crucis]

How silly what stance?! The Catholic one regarding Luther?! Or the Catholic one regarding sola fide?!

[theologia crucis]

P.S. Check your e-mail...

[A. believer]

Theo,

do I have to do my little Q&A session with you to show you how silly this stance is?

:)


Pardon me if it's none of business, but I'm also curious as to what stance you're calling silly. Surely you aren't calling Mr. Swan's thesis that, contrary to the assertion of Roman Catholic polemicists, Luther was not some kind of Marcion-like radical heretic trying to authoritatively define the limits of the canon for the church silly, are you?

[SPALATIN]

Pardon me if it's none of business, but I'm also curious as to what stance you're calling silly. Surely you aren't calling Mr. Swan's thesis that, contrary to the assertion of Roman Catholic polemicists, Luther was not some kind of Marcion-like radical heretic trying to authoritatively define the limits of the canon for the church silly, are you?
Actually,

I can't tell what they think is silly by the direction of the conversation in this thread. Maybe they will come out and say what it is that is silly now.

[theologia crucis]

Honestly, I'm not quite sure!

But I bet it's sola scriptura that he thinks is silly (we've discussed it before!). I'm workin' on him, though!

[Victrixa]

Hi everyone! :wave:

From the article:

I question Roman Catholics continually playing the “Luther- card” in canon discussions. Catholics are fond of criticizing Luther’s Christocentric understanding of the canon, to the exclusion of considering Luther’s historical concerns. Ours is not a generation in which information remains out of reach. There is a wealth of information available discussing Luther’s views. I have only “scratched the surface.” Interesting further studies would include Luther’s concept of tradition (and the abuse of tradition) within the determination of the canon, Luther’s concept of the “canon within the canon,” and a comparison of Luther and Erasmus on the Christocentric interpretive principle. My goal has been to encourage both Catholics and Protestants to at least seek to understand Luther’s view as completely as possible, even if one ultimately disagrees with it

Anyone have any online documents concerning Luther's concept of tradition and the abuse of tradition? I would be very interested to read that! :)

That was a very interesting article, by the way... hmmmmm (again!)

Pax Christi,

Caroline

[A. believer]

Hi everyone! :wave:

From the article:



Anyone have any online documents concerning Luther's concept of tradition and the abuse of tradition? I would be very interested to read that! :)

That was a very interesting article, by the way... hmmmmm (again!)

Pax Christi,

Caroline
Hi Caroline,

I don't know of any resources, but I'll ask the author of this article if he knows of any. I'd suggest, though, that you might want to read Keith Mathison's book The Shape of Sola Scriptura to get a better grasp of the difference between the Reformers attitude toward and understanding of tradition and that of much of modern-day evangelicalism. Just going by what I know offhand, though, Luther did not subscribe to the notion of Scripture as a stand-alone book apart from the context of the church. Luther didn't reject all extra-Biblical traditions (he held to the perpetual virginity of Mary, for example). He rejected the idea of a papal led magisterium, though, whose teachings were not normed by Scripture.

[A. believer]

Caroline,

I linked this thread to James Swan so that he could address your question and he tried to post a response here, but for some reason, he wasn't able to, so he e-mailed his response to me to post for him. He wrote:

Hi Caroline and A. Believer (and all the others here),

Just a few comments-

Thanks to all who looked over my paper on Luther and the Canon. Indeed, I only did scratch the surface. Just a quick correction, I am not a Lutheran, nor a Lutheran seminary student. I am Reformed and I take classes via Westminster Seminary. It's not uncommon for people to think I'm a Lutheran, it happens all the time!

I do have deep interests in Luther, and I've spent a lot of time studying him. I have other papers available at ntrmin.org also about Luther:

http://www.ntrmin.org/rccorner-reformation.htm (http://www.ntrmin.org/rccorner-reformation.htm)

Caroline, for perhaps the best book on Luther's theology ever written, pick up a copy of The Theology of Martin Luther by Paul Althaus. He discusses Luther's concept of tradition in chapter 24. This book is probably the standard by which Luther's theology is best understood. It is considered a great book by both Catholics and Protestants. I have some other sources in mind that would also discuss this, but I'm not near my personal library at the moment. If you have any particular question in mind, feel free to e-mail me (my address is contained in all my papers).

God Bless,
James Swan

[Victrixa]

Thank you A. believer! :hug:

[A. believer]

Thank you A. believer! :hug:
You're welcome, Caroline, and thank you, Jim Swan. :)

[filosofer]

In addition to Paul Althaus on The Theology of Luther, whom I agree is very good, consider: Marc Lienhard, Witness to Jesus Christ: Stages and Themes of the Reformer's Christology. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1982. He discusses the role of tradition in each stage of Luther's Christological development. Excellent complement to Althaus.

[filosofer]

And see this site for more on Luther:

Luther Bibliography - Short (http://www.biblicaltraining.org/classes/luther/bibliography.html)