Martin Luther. The name is mentioned in worshipful tones in most Protestant churches, not only in Lutheran churches, but in many evangelical churches as well. Considering that nearly all evangelical churches have a Calvinist heritage, which historically was at odds with Lutheranism, this is quite a development! Many churches celebrate special "Reformation days" to celebrate the great feats of the man for all of Protestantism. Evangelical film makers have produced film after film honoring the man. After viewing the adoration of Luther in most Protestant churches, a Roman Catholic might come to believe that Luther is the patron saint Protestantism!

However, even in Luther's day, not all Protestants agreed with Luther when he was formulating his doctrines. Zwingli, the founder of the Swiss Reformation (soon to evolve into Calvinism) disagreed with many of Luther's doctrines because he saw them as contrary to Scripture and hold-overs from Catholicism. But even more importantly, the first Anabaptists, which were contemporaries of Luther, clearly stated that he had fallen severely short of the mark in his efforts to "reform" Roman Catholicism and create a true Biblical Christian church. Who was right? A close examination of Luther's life and writings reveals the Anabaptists, which were hunted down and then tortured and executed by Lutherans, Calvinists and Roman Catholics alike had a doctrine that reflected the Bible more than any of them.

Luther's Life In A Nutshell

Luther was a man full of contradictions; a man who supposedly made a clean break with Catholicism, but ferociously hung onto some of the most blatant Roman Catholic heretical practices; a man that called the pope the Antichrist, but still offered to submit himself and his churches to the pope nearly 30 years after he nailed his theses to church door in Wittenberg; a man that liked to talk about the love of Christ, but yet produced such hateful writings that they became of tools in the hands of the Nazis to justify the murder of millions of Jews and physically & mentally handicapped in Hitler's holocaust; the first man to translate a complete Bible into his own language from the Greek manuscripts, but a man that used his last breaths chanting verses in Latin from the corrupt Roman Catholic Vulgate Bible; a man who called for those in his churches to stop worshipping Mary, but who wrote a book praising her with almost Catholic fervor; a man that became the symbolic head of Protestantism, yet a man that was buried, at his request, with a Catholic rosary clutched in his hands.

The religious life of Luther started in 1505, when caught in a violent thunderstorm, he cried out, not to God, but to "St. Anna," a Roman Catholic "saint" fashioned after the mother of Mary, that he would become of monk if he survived the storm. He did survive unharmed and so he kept his promise. Luther ended up at an Augustinian monastery, a monastery that followed the teachings of the father of Roman Catholic theology, Bishop Augustine of Hippo (see our article, "Augustine: A Church Full Of Heresies" for more information on Augustine).

Few can doubt that Luther truly wanted to please God, however. He went to extremes to find favor with Him, but believed all his pursuits were self-defeating because they were selfish--his only goal was to save his hide from hell; surely God would not be pleased by such self-serving actions. Furthermore, he had no love for God in his heart, in fact, he admitted that he hated Him because he had come to believe that serving and loving God unselfishly was practically impossible. Luther had become convinced the God would except nothing short of perfection from him, something that no person is capable of. Nevertheless, he struggled on.

While at the monastery, he read the writings of Augustine, some of which varied from the most common Roman Catholic doctrine of the day. In additional to Augustinianism, there were several other things that led to some changes in Luther's thinking. First, was a trip to the capitol of Catholicism, Rome. Luther was shocked at the depravity of those leading the Roman Catholic Church, it was worse than anything he had seen amongst the clergy in the in backwater villages of Germany. Second was his exposure to the new Greek manuscripts and Latin translations of the Bible from Erasmus (amazing as it may seem, it was possible for a man to become a Roman Catholic priest without even cracking open a Bible--even the corrupt Roman Catholic Vulgate translation--even once)! Third, his appointment as a teacher of theology at Wittenberg University and decision to study the New Testament letters to the Romans and Galatians; and lastly (and most famously), the presence of Johann Tetzel, who was aggressively selling indulgences to the Germans; indulgences were papal documents which would allow, the pope proclaimed, those purchasing them a reprieve of a few years in "purgatory" (the Roman Catholic invention of a sort of limbo where sinners could make up for their sins by suffering some time in torment before heading to the pearly gates).

It was Luther's objection to Tetzel that brought him onto the world stage. He found Tetzel's sale pitch so irritating that he created a protest listing 95 reasons why this practice was incorrect. Scholars debate whether he really nailed them to the church door (the community bulletin board of his day), but in any case, a printer found a copy of Luther's theses and quickly printed it for distribution to the masses. Luther initially objected to the printing of the theses, but after he saw that he had started a movement of sorts, he soon started producing works expressly for the printing press and became one of the most published authors of his time; in fact, half of all printing in Germany was devoted to Luther's writings ("Preaching," p. 34)!

Luther was probably the most popular media star of his time. Luther's many publications contained statements and doctrines which appeared to contradict each other, yet this did not bother Luther, he often called reason "the whore of the devil"! Once, when a student asked him what God was doing before creation of the universe, he replied that God was creating hell--for those people who ask too many questions!  Indeed, most scholars agree, that if it hadn't been for the reworking of his proclamations and doctrines by his good friend and theologian Philipp Melanchthon, there never would have been any kind of coherent expression of Lutheranism.

It was this fame that finally drew the attention of the Roman Catholic Church. By excommunicating him and his refusal to recant and conform to Roman Catholic teachings, he was more or less forced to create his own church (which was not his intent at the time). While in hiding from Roman Catholic authorities, he translated the New Testament (and the Old Testament about a decade later, though with some additional help). Luther's Bible was highly influential in that it influenced Tyndale's English translation (the first English translation based on original Greek manuscripts) and Tyndale's translation subsequently influenced every English translation since. Even some words that Luther coined made it into Tyndale's translation! Luther's translation was highly influential in spreading the Gospel in German-speaking countries and was even the translation of choice for the Apostolic Christian Church until they transitioned to the English King James translation in the early 20th century.

Luther's success can only be credited to the rulers he collaborated with. Initially, it was Elector Frederick the Wise, the ruler of the German lands where he lived. Frederick was willing to defy the pope and protect Luther, even to the point of hiding him in his castle. In return, Luther gave his total allegiance to his rulers, even when they joined with Catholic rulers in war to kill his fellow countrymen! It would be an understatement to say that Luther was blinded by his awe and devotion to rulers of the state.

To Luther's credit, after receiving protection from the state, he eventually used his time to abolish some heretical Roman Catholic practices such as the forbidding of translating, publishing or reading the Bible, the forbidding of clergy to marry, the forbidding of the laity to drink the wine during communion, the forbidding of the laity to sing in the church and the worship of Mary and dead saints. But like Zwingli & Calvin, his counterparts in the second branch of Protestantism, he stubbornly clung to many teachings of the father of Roman Catholic theology, Bishop Augustine of Hippo and heretical doctrines that Augustine popularized. These things included infant baptism, baptismal "regeneration" during infant baptism--the idea that infants were born again while being baptized (how this could be reconciled with Luther's all-consuming doctrine of being saved by faith only, he could never satisfactorily explain), denial of free will, predestination, the toleration of open sin in the lives of the laity and clergy and the doctrine that Christians should take up the sword and kill their enemies. And above all, Luther held to Augustine's doctrine of the unity of the state and the church; they were one in the eyes of Luther. Incidentally, this doctrine was also central to the theology of Calvin and those in the Reformed branch of Protestantism as Calvin was a devotee of Augustine as well.

The main dividing point between Luther and Zwingli (and subsequently Calvin) was Luther's was unwillingness to reject the Roman Catholic doctrine that held that the bread and wine were magically transformed into the actual blood and body of Christ during Communion. This doctrine led to the bizarre practices in the Catholic Church, where every crumb of the bread from the service is saved in a special container and adored by the Catholic faithful, because they believe these crumbs are literally the body of Christ! This is also why today priests in Roman Catholic churches insist that they place the bread directly on the tongue of the Catholic faithful (it minimizes the chance that the laity might drop or crumble it). Minimizing crumbs is also the reason the Roman Catholic Church adopted a small wafer instead of the traditional bread.

Luther relied not on a Biblical foundation for his doctrine of the Eucharist (Lord's Supper), but on the teachings of the pagan philosopher Aristotle (The History Of Lutheranism, p. 24). Those of the Reformed Church said the bread and wine were only symbolic and done in commemoration of Christ's sacrifice. The Anabaptists agreed with the Reformed Church on this point, though they emphasized that those participating in the communion must be true Christians and that they need to review their relationship with God before participating in this solemn ceremony (1 Corinthians 11:27-29).

By many accounts, Luther's last days were spent as a bitter man. Even though he often preached that "Every good work is sin" (Martin Luther, Marty, p. 77) based on his all-consuming doctrine of salvation by faith alone, he complained bitterly that he saw little or no change in the morals of the people in Lutheran lands, even his home town of Wittenberg! Strangely, this author of the doctrine of assurance of salvation through faith often went through periods of "Anfechtungen" when he doubted his own salvation. Even more puzzling, he advised those having similar feelings to console themselves by recalling that "I am baptized!" (Marty, p. 182)--his doctrine of salvation by faith alone was apparently irrelevant in these cases, instead one was somehow supposed to fondly remember the day when he was baptized as an infant! In 1546, with his health failing, he knew his end was near; he wanted to die, he told his friends, "so that this miserable body may return to its home in the ground and be consumed by worms." His wish was granted; Luther soon died and was buried in front of the pulpit of the Castle Church in Wittenberg where he had regularly preached.

Luther and his doctrines are still alive and well today. However, it is interesting that in America, Lutheranism could have been changed to look more like the teachings of Christ than the teachings of Luther! This change could have come about if the Lutheran church had chosen to follow the advice of Samuel Schmucker (1799-1873). Schmucker was the president of the U.S. General Lutheran Synod for 50 years and a leading professor at the Gettysburg Lutheran Seminary. Late in his career, he got up enough nerve to point out that much of Lutheran doctrine had originated with Roman Catholicism and that these doctrines needed to be removed from all Lutheran creeds and catechisms. He cited five major errors, namely: approval of the ceremony of the Mass, the practice of absolution of sins by a priest after confession, the denial of the Christian obligation to keep the Lord's Day holy, the continued affirmation of baptismal regeneration, and lastly, the affirmation of the real presence of the body and blood of Christ in communion. However, he underestimated the impact of the indoctrination through Luther's catechism, confirmation ceremonies and liturgy: the Lutheran rank and file overwhelmingly rejected his ideas and he was forced to resign as a defeated man.

Will The Real Luther Please Stand Up!

Jesus said that "By their fruits you shall know them" (Matthew 7:20) and therefore, not only Luther's doctrines, but how Luther lived his life reveals a lot about him. By taking a closer look at the true Luther, one will be able to be see that the real Martin Luther is strikingly different than the Luther venerated by Lutherans and many evangelical Christians. Indeed, it turns out that there is much more to the story of Martin Luther, a story of things so embarrassing and despicable, that for centuries, his biographers had to carefully censor them from their books in order to make Luther appear as the great model of true Christianity as he has been perpetually portrayed.

However, recently, a few daring souls have dared to expose the truth about Luther. We believe that most sincere Christians will find these things shocking and they may want to reconsider their reverence of the man. Let's now take a closer look at Luther's doctrines and how they played out in Luther's own life.

Sola Fide: Salvation By Faith Alone

It can not be denied that Luther's influence was great on Protestant Christianity. As earlier stated, Luther's Bible was a great influence on the German and English speaking people. However, many people could not afford his Bibles and were more influenced by the many pamphlets he published; they opened the eyes of many of the Roman Catholic faithful in Europe. They realized that they had been indoctrinated with lies for centuries by the Roman Catholic Church. Some became lifelong Lutherans, but even more of these turned to Calvinism; and some others, convicted by the Scriptures, were led to the Anabaptist faith.

Initially, there were talks between those of the German and Swiss Protestant Reformation movements, but after these broke down and animosity ensued between the two state church systems and lands. After this, Luther's influence became quite minimal in the lands controlled by the Reformed movement (Calvinists). And the so-called counter reformation by the Roman Catholic Church ensured that Luther's influence on remaining Catholic lands soon dissipated.

Until the 20th century, Luther's influence has largely been limited to Lutheran lands and the various Lutheran churches. That's because practically all other denominations, except the few Anabaptist denominations, had a Calvinist, not Lutheran heritage. The Anglicans, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Baptists, Congregationalists, Puritans and of course, Reformed churches all were built largely on Calvinist theology. The Methodists also inherited their practice of infant baptism from their Calvinist heritage (though they rejected the Calvinist doctrine of predestination). Also, a development in the late 1800's further separated many conservative evangelical denominations from Lutheranism: because of the influence of Methodist and other so-called Arminian evangelists, they renounced their previous belief in "eternal security" or "once-saved, always-saved" (a core tenet of Lutheranism, though also supported in a round-about way by Calvinism).

Why, one may wonder, have most evangelicals come to overwhelmingly embrace Luther? It was because of the influence of the Dispensationalists in the late 1800's and early 1900's. Dispensationalism was based on wild speculations about the radically different roles for Jews and Christians (as they saw it) in the different "dispensations" of time throughout history, especially in the end times. Amazingly, they were successful at introducing their bizarre heretical theology into conservative and fundamentalist churches and institutions in the late 19th and early 20th century. This was because that in this time period, there was much speculation about the end times in many conservative Christian circles. Many Dispensationalists taught "eternal security" or "once-saved, always-saved" as a core tenet of their new Dispensationalist theology. Many of them were in leading positions in conservative Christian seminaries and Bible schools and taught these new beliefs to future pastors, which in turn later taught these things to their congregations. Dispensationalists found that citing Luther's teaching of salvation by faith alone was a convenient tool to give their new doctrine an air of respectability.

Luther's formulation and acceptance of his doctrine of justification by faith alone through grace (which really meant, as he taught it, salvation by faith alone) was a real turning point for Luther. It came while he was, by his own account, as an Augustinian monk, meditating on two verses from Romans while sitting on the toilet in the tower of the monastery. Some Lutherans have tried to deny this by stating that Luther meant by this that he was "down in the dumps," not sitting on the toilet. However, in 2004, archaeological excavations of the Augustinian monastery where Luther had lived revealed a toilet (i.e., a seat over a pit) in the monastery tower, just where Luther said it was. It is not hard to believe Luther's account. He constantly and crudely complained about his constipation and hemorrhoids in letters to his friends; he probably spent a lot of time sitting on the toilet! There can be no doubt that this newly discovered lowly spot will be added to the itinerary of spots to visit on many Reformation tours in the future!

The two verses Luther meditated on consisted of just part of Romans 1:17, "the just shall live by faith" and Romans 3:28, "For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law" (NASB). Luther's epiphany, as he later explained in his preface to Romans (which was also used by Tyndale in his preface to Romans) was that the "Law" Paul discussed was not the Mosaic Law (as it would clearly appear to be from contextual evidence), but any kind of law, that is, any definition of right and wrong. Furthermore, despite that the fact that practically every book of the Bible refuted it, he came to believe that following the commandments of the Bible was irrelevant, at least as far as one's salvation was concerned; all that was required for salvation was faith in Christ. Thus "justification by faith alone" became the cornerstone of Lutheranism.

Psychologists could have a field day with what happened here. Luther had isolated two verses from the book of Romans, completely void of their original context, and impressed on them his own struggles with Catholic monastic perfectionism; he took a book which was written to make it clear that one does not have to become a Jew to become a Christian and turned it into a book which contradicted the words of Christ and every other book in the Bible! If Luther had been willing to reflect on these two verses in their original context, he would seen that the book of Romans (and the book of Galatians, as well) had been written to the Christians in those cities to explain that one does not have to become a Jew through the rite of circumcision (and subsequently follow the rest of the Mosaic Law) in order to become a Christian.

When one considers Luther's revelation in the context of Augustinian predestination, the doctrine ultimately means that if saving faith occurs when you first believe (ignoring Luther's contradictory belief in baptismal regeneration for a moment) and that following the commandments of God have no relevance or impact whatsoever on one's salvation, as Luther asserted, then you are guaranteed a home in heaven because of that belief and your salvation can not be taken away because the fact that you believed meant that you were predestined to do so! Your belief was an act of God and nobody can take that belief--or your salvation away from you. Of course, this scheme is lot less confusing and messy if one throws out the idea of baptismal regeneration; coincidentally, this doctrine is exactly what the dispensationalists believed and what most evangelicals believe today!

It is interesting that Calvin took the same verses and mixed it with Augustinian predestination and came to a different conclusion. Calvin insisted that a Christian should have good works and if he did not, it was a sign that he was one of those predestined to hell, not heaven! According to Calvin, a true faith was evidenced by good works. While both Calvin and Luther ideas were wrong because of their reliance on Augustinianism, Calvin was closer to what the Scriptures actually said. Ironically, the Roman Catholic scholars rightly pointed out that there was no evidence anywhere in the Bible or all of church history, not even from the leaders of the church in first and second century, of a belief in salvation by faith alone, or the idea that the Christian could disregard all of the commandments of God without endangering his salvation. Luther's doctrine, they said, was a 16th century invention. Luther seemed unperplexed when one of his doctrines of contradicted another of his doctrines, or when it was pointed out that certain Scriptures directly contradicted his doctrines; he was fond of saying things like, "To be a Christian, you must pluck out the eye of reason," or he would claim that such contradictions were a "divine mystery of God" and that we dare not even try to reconcile the contradictions!

The Anabaptists threw out the Augustinian doctrines and based their doctrine only on the Bible. They held that true faith comes when one is old enough to understand and be held accountable to the teachings of the Scriptures and that when this occurred, a true Christian could be recognized by his repentance of his sins, the evidence of a life changed by the Holy Spirit and his willingness to the follow the commandments of Christ. Unlike Luther and Calvin, they held that the act of believing was a free choice, not something predetermined by and forced upon you by God. And unlike Luther and Calvin, they held that one had free will and the ability to choose to believe or not and to choose to follow the commandments of God or not. Furthermore, the Anabaptists pointed to numerous Scriptures which showed that one could voluntarily abandon his faith and/or forsake His commandments and therefore forfeit his salvation.

Despite all of the problems with his new doctrine, he preached it with reckless abandon. Luther commonly made such shocking comments as:

"Be a sinner and sin boldly!"

"No sin will separate us from the Lamb, even though we commit fornication and murder a thousand times a day!"

"Whenever the devil harasses you, seek company of men or drink more, or joke or talk nonsense or do some other merry thing. Sometimes we must drink more, play sports, entertain ourselves, and even sin a little to spite the devil ... so when the devil says to you, 'Do not drink,' answer him, 'I will drink and right freely, just because you tell me not to.'"

"No sin can harm me."

"Your sin can not cast you into hell."

"Grace is like white snow covering a pile of manure."

Amazingly, Luther was taken aback when one of his most faithful followers, John Agricola, took his doctrine of salvation by faith alone to its logical conclusion: Agricola began preaching that teaching the moral concepts from the Bible was a waste of time since faith was all that was necessary for salvation. At first Luther ignored this development, but when he saw that Agricola was drawing many followers, he acted by writing a pamphlet against Agricola. He coined the word "antinomianism" (anti-law) to describe what Agricola taught. Luther, of course, could not say that antinomianism had any bearing on one's salvation, so he tried to defend the teaching of Biblical morality by citing its tangible benefits to the creation of an orderly society, and so forth.

To be fair, Luther did talk about morality in his catechisms and in some of his sermons, though he much preferred the Ten Commandments to the teachings of Christ, such as the Sermon On The Mount. While Agricola's group eventually died out, one can plainly see in churches that hold to Luther's doctrine of "justification by faith alone" a strong undercurrent of antinomianism--this is probably why in study after study, very little difference can be found between the moral behavior of most Protestants and those not attending any church.

Luther And The Bible: Sola Luther

Early in Luther's life as head of the new Lutheran church, Luther made it clear that he really did not believe in the principle of sola Scriptura that he espoused, that is, the finality of Scripture in determining church doctrine. After being excommunicated by the Roman Catholic Church, Luther had been hiding out in Wartburg castle. Then he got wind of the fact that Andreas Carlstadt, one of his closest followers, was making some bold changes in a church sympathetic to Luther's ideas. Carlstadt believed that Scripture should be the final authority for church doctrine and that the Roman Catholic Church was far removed from anything resembling a true Apostolic church. To conform with a more Biblical church, the clergy removed all of their Roman Catholic vestments and wore the same clothing as their parishioners; in addition to the bread, wine was also given to the laity at the communion service (Roman Catholic doctrine forbade the laity from drinking the wine, only the clergy were allowed to drink it), various statues and images, long a source of much idolatry, were removed from the church. Also, Carlstadt personally put his reforms into action by renouncing his priestly vows of celibacy and marrying. This was too much for Luther, despite that fact the Roman Catholic Church was looking to imprison and probably even kill him, he rushed out of his safe hiding place so that he could go to this church to rebuke Carlstadt, reassert his authority and condemn these new doctrines. Because of these reforms, he called Carlstadt a new "Judas" and a cousin to the Antichrist and a papist. Ironically, much of Carlstadt's doctrine later became part of official Lutheran doctrine.

Luther, of course, is famous for the Bible translation he authored. Luther's Bible was not a strict literal translation, but something more like today's English NIV translation. Like the NIV translators, he felt free to amend Scripture as he saw fit. For instance, he added the word "alone" to two verses in Paul's epistles so that they read that "we are saved by grace alone" instead of "we are saved by grace" as the Bible really said. It is no coincidence that these additions emphasized his pet doctrine, the cornerstone of Lutheranism. One scholar said that he found 1400 such errors in Luther's translation, so he created a more literal German translation, but it never came close to selling as well as Luther's. Interestingly, Samuel Froehlich, founder of the Apostolic Christian Church often pointed out these translation errors in his sermons.

However, more disturbing than this was his blasphemy against the books of the Bible that contradicted his pet doctrine. In his Bible, he took the books of James, Hebrews, Jude and Revelation and put them in an appendix at the end of his Bible to demonstrate that they were not true or holy books. In his preface to the book of James, Luther clearly stated why he thought the book was inferior: "I do not regard it [the book of James] as the writing of an apostle ... it is flatly against St. Paul and all of the rest of Scripture in ascribing justification by works ... this fault therefore proves that this epistle is not the work of any apostle." Luther added that James "mangles the Scriptures and thereby opposes Paul and all Scripture." Also in the preface, he called the epistle a "work of straw" meaning something only good for the fire or to bind the excrement of animals. In his other writings, Luther was even bolder; he said of the book of James: "I maintain that some Jew wrote it, who probably heard about Christian people, but never encountered any," and "We should throw the epistle of James out of this school [University of Wittenberg, premier Lutheran seminary]." Regarding the fact that James clearly contradicts his doctrine of salvation by faith alone, Luther said, "Many sweat to reconcile St. Paul and St. James, but in vain. 'Faith justifies' and 'faith does not justify' contradict each other flatly. If anyone can harmonize them, I will give him my doctor's hood [priestly vestments] and let him call me a fool."

Regarding the book of Hebrews, Luther stated, "The fact is that the book of Hebrews is not an epistle of St. Paul, or any other apostle" and of the book of Revelation he said, "I can in no way detect that the Holy Spirit produced it ... For me this is reason enough not to think highly of it: Christ is neither taught or known in it." He also claimed that the book of Jude was not written by Jude as one of the reasons for disregarding it. Of course, it is hardly a coincidence that these books are among those that most clearly contradict his pet doctrine of salvation by faith alone. However, even his favorite Biblical author Paul could not escape Luther's venomous tongue, "I don't think he believed as firmly as he talks. I cannot believe as firmly either, as I can talk and write about it," Luther wrote to a friend (Martin Luther, Marty, p. 181).

Luther was by no means in agreement with most modern evangelicals regarding the accuracy of the Scriptures. According to Luther, the writers of the Bible "could and did make mistakes" and the Old Testament authors "'often erred," however, he maintained, these errors never occurred where anything regarding salvation was concerned (Martin Luther, Marty, p. 83-84). According to Biblical scholar Peter Thuesen, Luther claimed that "the Gospel was codified in written words merely to prevent heresy ... the Lutheran maxim sola scriptura did not ... denote a thoroughgoing biblicism [literal following of the Scriptures]," (In Discordance With The Scriptures, p. 19).

Luther biographer Heiko Oberman concluded after his lengthy study of Luther's writings that Luther regarded the printed Bible as a "necessary evil" (Luther: Man Between God And The Devil, p. 173-174). Indeed, Luther conceded that the Bible was really too long and complicated for the typical believer; that is why he created his Short Catechism and encouraged all Lutherans to read it daily. This was (and sadly, still is) a common approach to the Bible in many Protestant churches; the Bible is treated like some dusty law book, only to be removed from the shelf on the rare occasions when one wants to flip the pages to point to this verse or that to prove the doctrine of their denomination's chief theologian and then quickly put it back on the shelf.

One might wonder what Luther thought of the Anabaptists and their strict reliance only on the Bible for doctrine. Reflecting on the Anabaptists, Luther said, "Formerly the devil made us too papistic and now he wants to make us too evangelical," (Martin Luther, Marty, p. 90). By claiming the Anabaptists were "too evangelical" he meant that they followed the Gospels "too much." Could it be that it was the other way around, Luther was not evangelical enough?

Lutheran historian Eric Gritsch does not disagree with this assessment of Luther's opinion of the Bible. In summarizing the content of the Book of Concord (the binding document of Lutheran creeds and doctrine, written in 1580), he says this document attests that Lutherans believe that "the Bible is 'not the living gospel of Jesus Christ' but just a match that ignites faith, assisted by the Holy Spirit; this view of scriptural authority rejects any notion of Biblical fundamentalism ... [and] the notion of a literal inspiration" of the Bible. Gritsch goes on to say that "the canon of Holy Scripture, church confessions and the office of the ministry are essential presuppositions and means of living communication in specific historical contexts, ... Lutherans reject any form of fundamentalism, be it Biblical, doctrinal or related to polity," (The History of Lutheranism, p. 106-107). If you read this statement carefully, you see it is exactly like the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church that Luther left, the word of theologians ("confessions") and clergy ('office of the ministry") supposedly have equal authority to Scripture; furthermore, Scripture can be ignored because it only applied to the time in which it was written ("specific historical contexts")!

Luther And Baptism

Although we have mentioned Luther's acceptance of the Roman Catholic doctrine of infant baptism in passing, you may find it interesting how he arrived at this doctrine. Luther always believed that the doctrine should be retained (it was hard to imagine how his vision of a state church could survive without it), but he struggled to justify it based on the Scriptures.

First, Luther settled on a scheme advocated by Zwingli and Calvin; he said that infant baptism replaced the required Jewish rite of circumcision and therefore should be practiced. However, he soon abandoned this idea; perhaps it was because it would be hard to explain how the rite of circumcision could ever apply to females, or maybe it was because of his devotion to the epistles of Paul: by reading them it should be clear to any reader that circumcision was the Jewish ritual Paul was most opposed to! Or perhaps it was his hatred of the Jews that forced him to dispense with this idea. In any case, he gave up the idea and then claimed that baptism had nothing to do with the Jewish rite of circumcision; instead, it was the faith of the parents, godparents and other believers in the church that somehow became faith for the infant. This idea was easier to reconcile with his doctrine of salvation by faith only. But even Luther soon admitted that the idea of the faith of an adult believer magically transferring to an infant was ridiculous!

Finally he gave up finding a Scriptural reason for the practice. Instead, he said that since the practice had been going on since the time of Augustine, it meant that God condoned it, otherwise He would have stopped the practice long ago. Why this reasoning did not apply to other doctrines Luther condemned from the same era, such as the prayers to and worship of Mary and dead Catholic saints, Luther never explained. It may be that his hatred for the Anabaptists stopped him from seriously considering the practice of believer's baptism, ironically, a practice that would have fit his doctrine of salvation by faith only like a glove.

In his Small and Large Catechisms, Luther cited 1 Peter 3:21 to show that infants were saved by infant baptism. How this could be reconciled with his belief of salvation by grace through faith only he never explained. Furthermore, Luther claimed that, "God makes a vow to believers in baptism" and that infant baptism was "a bath of the new birth and the Holy Spirit" (Martin Luther, Marty, p. 76). Of course, he could not explain how an infant could be a believer and why God would make a vow to a mere human, instead of the other way around in the baptismal ceremony! In his Large Catechism, he urged those with doubts about their salvation to remind themselves that they had been baptised and therefore "have the promise that I shall be saved and have eternal life," (Marty, p. 138). How one could remember a ceremony that occurred when one was an infant, he did not explain.

Luther's Church

What had to change to convert a Roman Catholic church into a Lutheran church in Luther's day? As amazing as it may sound, practically nothing. Yes, to be sure, the clergy had to agree to teach Lutheranism, but that was about it. One Sunday the parishioners would see the priest in full Roman Catholic clerical vestments teaching Roman Catholic doctrine, the next Sunday the same parishioners would see the same priest in Lutheran clerical garb teaching Lutheran doctrine. And as many modern day church visitors have noted, there is little difference in the ceremonies of the Lutheran and Catholic churches, so the change would have not been terribly shocking to the parishioners. In fact, Luther pointedly made sure that as few as changes as possible were made whenever a church made the change from Catholic to Lutheran; "radical" things like the removal of the Latin liturgy and reintroduction of wine during communion were done gradually.

Even less was expected of the parishioners. They were not asked to agree to a Lutheran creed or to show that they met any requirements for membership in the newly-Lutheran church because there were none; in fact, everyone in the vicinity of the church was automatically considered a member of that church. Like it or not; the Lutheran church was a state church, after all. Because it was a state church, any "church discipline" would be handled by the state (the police and the courts), not the church. The kind of church discipline commanded by the Bible was an unknown concept in Lutheran churches, dealing with immorality and heresy was the domain of the state.

This arrangement, however, was inherent with problems. Luther naively believed that there would be radical changes in his churches and morality would increase once they were taught his salvation by faith only doctrine, but that did not happen. After making his rounds to the new Lutheran churches, Luther was forced to admit that the clergy and laity in his churches were as drunken and immoral as they had been when a Roman Catholic shingle hung over the church door. That Luther found it necessary to publicly chide many of the former Roman Catholic priests (now Lutheran pastors) into marrying their "concubines" (mistresses from when they were "celibate" Roman Catholic priests) is a clear indication of the deplorable moral state of his pastors. How Luther dealt with the homosexual pastors, or those sexually abusing children is not known.

Not surprisingly, the poor moral state of the laity and pastors in the Lutheran church did not improve, but got worse over time; according to many accounts, their drunkenness, greed, fornication, and countless other sins, many practiced without shame in the open, exceeded that of the Roman Catholic Church by far. Luther's doctrine of salvation by faith only (thereby leaving man unaccountable for his sins after a profession of faith) was probably responsible for this trend; it continued for over a 100 years until temporarily checked by the Pietist movement (which not coincidentally, emphasized the Christian's accountability to Christ's teachings in the Scriptures and de-emphasized Luther's doctrine of salvation by faith only).

Luther also noted that his pastors did a terrible job of preaching; they knew little or nothing about the Bible and could not put together a sermon or preach extemporaneously. Luther solved this problem by encouraging them to read his own written sermons from the pulpit instead of trying to come up with their own, a practice still followed in many Lutheran churches today. Luther also then created his Large Catechism to teach the clergy and interested laity on the teachings of the Scriptures (as he understood them).

Luther also noted to his chagrin that many people chose not to attend his Lutheran churches. And even more distressing, their children were not coming either. He knew that his state church could not survive without the ability to indoctrinate children. So he had an edict issued in all Lutheran lands forcing children to attend their local Lutheran church or their parents would face the sword. Of course, continuing the Roman Catholic practice of infant baptism and of the state only recognizing marriages performed in the state (Lutheran) church helped keep people loyal to the local Lutheran church as well, at least outwardly.

Many of us may find it incredibly stupid to believe that by simply hanging a Lutheran shingle over the door of the Roman Catholic church where all citizens were forced to attend, Luther believed that the clergy and laity alike would suddenly become good Christians! However, it may be more understandable when one considers that Luther firmly believed in the Roman Catholic concept of the state church, which was largely based on the theology of Roman Catholic theologian Bishop Augustine of Hippo. According to Augustine, the only true church was a church where everyone in the land was forced to attend it. This practice, Augustine admitted, meant that some in the church may not be true Christians; however, he insisted, the church should make no attempt to separate true Christians from false ones, only God was allowed to do that. This concept also applied to the clergy, Augustine said. Luther accepted these Catholic concepts when creating his own church.

A Priesthood Of All Believers Or Just Those With Money And Political Connections?

Luther initially preached the "priesthood of all believers," meaning that one did not have to be a priest or pay a priest to act on your behalf to connect with God and receive forgiveness of sins, as taught in the Roman Catholic Church. In his early years, one of Luther's mantras was that the lowest layman was on par with the pope, as far as his potential spiritual state was concerned. By contrast, the Roman Catholic Church has always held that the pope and priests are much closer to God than the laity and that the laity need the pope and priests to intercede for them to ensure their salvation. However, when some of Luther's followers decided they would take Luther's words to heart and appoint pastors for themselves, Luther acted quickly; this was something Luther was not willing to tolerate.

Despite his many proclamations to the contrary, Luther believed in the Roman Catholic state church hierarchal system where bishops and archbishops appointed the pastors for individual churches. He was distressed because as a new church denomination, his Lutheran church had no bishops or hierarchy in place. At first, Luther appointed a few pastors himself, but soon came to see that such a practice was not practical in the long term. And, Luther admitted, he found so few true Christians in his visits to the various Lutheran churches he was able to visit, he feared there may be churches where not one man in the entire congregation was qualified for promotion to the pastorate! This admission by Luther directly contradicted one of his core doctrines about the church; Luther claimed that there was no such thing as a "visible church," in other words, it was impossible to tell who was a true Christian or not. In fact, he said that a pious appearing person was more likely to be a hypocrite than a true believer!

Luther's solution was to make the prince, king or queen in charge of the land ultimately responsible for appointing the clergy. This is not unlike the position of the King of England as the head of the Anglican church, where even today, the immoral Prince Charles may become the supreme head of the Church of England, should he become king! This scheme has puzzled his biographers to this day: they can not understand why he would decide that the seculars leaders of Lutheran countries would be the ones to choose the clergy! They apparently do not fully understand Luther's firm belief in the state church and how enamored he was with those in power. In any case, this became the law of all Lutheran lands and even applied to Lutheran churches not in Lutheran lands! Specifically, all Lutheran churches in non-Lutheran countries had to swear an oath of allegiance to the ruler of Germany (letting a non-Lutheran leader choose Lutheran clergy could not do); this oath ended with the words, "I will preach the Word as His Gracious Majesty dictates," (History, p. 213). The Missouri Lutheran Synod in America condemned the oath in 1917 because of anti-German sentiment during WWI. It is safe to assume that Hitler made good use of this oath of allegiance, as very few churches opposed him; the Lutheran church was a state church after all and therefore the state and church were one and the state was controlled by Hitler.

Luther And Predestination

Luther firmly clung to the Roman Catholic theologian Augustine's ideas about predestination and even expanded on them a little. Luther was forced to defend his beliefs about predestination when he was challenged by the scholar Erasmus of Rotterdam. Incidentally, Luther had based his New Testament translation of the Greek manuscripts Erasmus had compiled! Erasmus pointed out that Luther's doctrine that people are little more than puppets controlled by God would make God the author of sin. How could God condemn people to hell for actions they did not choose themselves? Erasmus said that the Bible made it clear that people had free will, which meant they had the choice to accept or deny God's grace.

Luther responded with a lengthy treatise he called "The Bondage Of The Will," (1525). In it, he reiterated that he fully believed his statements about predestination and claimed that they were based on Scripture. He said, "Free will in man is the realm of Satan," (Marty, p. 131). This followed Augustine's belief that man was free to do evil--but not good, nor could he choose to accept God's grace and become saved unless God had predestined it. That God would sentence man to eternal torment for nothing he did was not to be questioned, Luther went on to say, because "God must ... be left to Himself in His own majesty, for ... we have nothing to do with Him, nor has He willed that we should have anything to do with Him," (Marty p. 131).

Born Again Luther?

The myth that Luther taught what is commonly called today the necessity of a born-again experience must be put to rest. Many evangelicals that venerate Luther have pointed out that later in life Luther used the term "born again" describing his epiphany when he came to believe that he was saved by faith only, while sitting on the toilet in the monastery. However, it is interesting to note that Lutherans have never understood his experience as the kind of born-again experience evangelicals might describe, that is, a near immediate spiritual transformation and resulting emotional experience.

If Luther did have a born-again experience in the evangelical, Biblical sense, he must have quickly decided that it was not something to be taught as doctrine or to be experienced by anyone in his churches. Luther never taught that one had to be born again and have a radical spiritual transformation. In fact, Luther taught that spiritual progress in a true Christian was gradual and literally invisible to those looking on from outside! Furthermore, he assumed that spiritual development of a Christian began with the baptism of the person as an infant! According to Luther, this is when the person was regenerated (born again) and filled with the Holy Spirit. The idea that one could attend church all of during his childhood in an unregenerate state (not born again), and then only later becoming born again and filled with the Holy Spirit as a teen, or adult was completely foreign to him. His beliefs about regeneration were nearly identical to those of the Roman Catholic Church. Luther despised those, such as the Anabaptists, that claimed that a true Christian could or should have a sudden, spiritual transformation and that one could only be born again as an adult.

Luther And Mariology

Augustine was the champion of most of the heretical practices that have endured in the Roman Catholic Church to this day. Luther followed in Augustine's footsteps, so it should be no surprise that he varied little from Augustine in the veneration of Mary. While Luther did not openly condone the worship of Mary as the Roman Catholics did, he continued to hold dear many of the other heretical doctrines that had accompanied the worship of Mary. Luther continued to refer to Mary as the "Mother of God," and did not condemn the Catholic practice of saying the "Hail Mary" prayer using rosary beads. Furthermore, Luther did not object to the focus on Mary in worship, "The veneration of Mary is incribed on the very depths of the human heart," Luther said in a sermon in 1522 and in a sermon on Christmas day, 1531 he said, "We can never honor her [Mary] enough!"

Lutheran theologian Arthur C. Piepkorn (1907-1973) of Concordia Lutheran Seminary concluded from his study of Luther that Luther also continued to teach the Augustinian and Roman Catholic doctrines of Mary's "immaculate conception" and supposed "perpetual virginity." According to this doctrine, Mary was as sinless as Christ and never had any child but Jesus. "The infusion of Mary's soul was effected without original sin," Luther said in a sermon devoted wholly to the subject of Mary (1527), "from the first moment she began to live, she was free from all sin." In another sermon Luther said, "Christ ... was the only Son of Mary and the Virgin Mary bore no children beside Him." Following the lead of Catholic theologians, Luther claimed that in the numerious locations where the brothers of Jesus are mentioned in the New Testament, "'Brothers' really means 'cousins'." Here are a few other quotes from Luther praising Mary:

"God says . . . :'Mary's Son is My only Son.' Thus Mary is the Mother of God."

"Mary is the Mother of Jesus and the Mother of all of us . . . There where He is, we ought also to be and all that He has ought to be ours, and His Mother is also our Mother."

"Whoever possesses a good faith, says the 'Hail Mary' without danger."

Luther--Protestant Or Catholic?

Some seeing the heading above may think we have taken leave of our senses; isn't the very name of Luther synonymous with Protestantism? However when one considers the preponderance of Roman Catholic practices Luther was unwilling to let go of, one must question if Luther deserves his Protestant reputation. We have already talked about his reverence for Mary.  However, consider the fact that he retained the Roman Catholic practice of holding the Mass. To this day, Lutheran churches have an "altar" at the front of the church upon which the Mass is held. His insistence on teaching on the presence of the actual blood and flesh of Christ in the wine and bread of the Eucharist is nearly identical to that of the Roman Catholics, except he did not believe it was the priest's incantations that turned the bread and wine into the body of Christ. Luther made a great show by bowing in reverence before the bread and wine to demonstrate that he believed this doctrine.

From his catechisms (still used in the Lutheran church), Lutherans are taught the Mass is a means to forgiveness. And amazingly, another means of forgiveness is by confessing one sin's to the Lutheran pastor and receiving "absolution" of one's sins from that pastor. So much for the "priesthood of all believers"! These two means of forgiveness are exactly like those of the Roman Catholic Church. A look at Luther's catechisms show that he instructed all Lutherans to recite the Lord's Prayer instead of composing a heartfelt spontaneous prayer as is most common with evangelical Protestants. After this prayer, Luther instructed the person to sign himself with the cross. This, of course, is yet another Roman Catholic practice! Unlike his Reformed or Anabaptist counterparts, Luther did not feel it necessary to remove any pictures or statues from his churches. These had long been a source of idolatry in the Roman Catholic Church. Also, Luther did not feel it necessary to abandon the practice of calling Lutheran clergy "priests" (nowhere in the New Testament are clergy called priests); this practice only died out decades after Luther's death. The list could go on...

Luther And Marriage

Luther's ideas about marriage, divorce and adultery were quite shocking. Luther allowed for divorce in cases of adultery, desertion or even impotence (Marty, p. 63.)! Luther said that if a woman persistently denied her man, the husband might then turn to the housemaid or someone else for sexual pleasure.  Also, if a husband was to be found impotent, Luther said that the wife would be allowed to seek out another man (while still legally married and living with her husband). Even more amazing, Luther insisted that in these cases, the husband or wife (as the case may be) should keep their adulterous relationship a secret and in the case of children, they should to lie to the public and tell them that the child was the product of the legitimate father and mother! Luther plainly stated that those in such an ungodly union would be in a saved state and that these actions would not be displeasing to God (Marty, p. 108)! "I cannot forbid a person to marry several wives, for it does not contradict the Scripture," Luther proclaimed; of course, he had to go to the Old Testament to make this claim.

One of Luther's most embarrassing moments came from one incident where his doctrine was faithfully followed. He counseled nobleman Philip of Hesse, who wanted to marry his mistress, that he could not divorce his current wife; however, Luther said, he could take her as a second wife, but he must keep it a secret (Marty p. 159-161). Luther fondly referred to this as a "Turkish marriage" because of the Islamic tradition of keeping harems (History of Lutheranism, p. 61). Philip took Luther's advice and even held a "wedding" to celebrate his union with his mistress (while still married to his first wife). Luther was one of those that attended the wedding. Philip thanked Luther for his ear-pleasing advice by sending him a barrel of fine wine. However, word soon got out about this "wedding" and despite further pleas from Luther to lie about the wedding (Luther referred to this lie as a "Nutzleuge," a lie of expediency acceptable before God), Philip refused to lie to the public about his second marriage (History of Lutheranism, p. 61). Understandably, Luther's enemies made much hay out of this incident!

There is no record of Luther taking a second wife, but there is of him taking a first. He married a former nun, Katherine von Bora, in 1525. Apparently Luther was so anxious to marry, he decided to ignore the conventions of the day. In Luther's area, a pagan custom had survived where after the wedding, people were invited into the bedchamber of the new couple to witness them consummating the marriage. The marriage was not considered complete without it. Luther did not have any problems with the pagan custom, instead, he found it impossible to wait for his wedding day to perform it! Luther and his fiancee held the traditional betrothal ceremony (similar to an engagement today) and then immediately after invited his friend Justus Jonas up to his bedroom to witness him and Katherine thrash around on the bed and consummate their---betrothal. The wedding was held later (Martin Luther, Marty, p. 106).

Luther regularly made crude sexual remarks in conversation and in letters to his friends. He told one friend that when he was depressed, all he had to do is "hold God's instrument," that is, his wife's nude body to cheer him up (Marty, p. 106-7). He regularly counseled people to have sex, pig out at banquets or go hunting as a remedy for spiritual despair (Marty, p. 181). Even more appalling, in a letter to a newlywed couple he knew, he suggested that they and he & Katherine plan on having sexual intercourse at the same time and "think of the other couple having sex" while they were engaged in the sexual act (Marty, p. 107).

Luther, The Hater Of Jews And The Handicapped

Initially, Luther confessed of warm feelings toward the Jews. He believed that they would run in throngs to become Lutherans once they had read his writings. However, when that did not happen, he came to despise them with a fierce hatred. He wrote a 60,000 word tract in 1539 called "The Jews and their Lies." In the tract, he asserted that Jews poisoned wells, stole Gentile children and ritually murdered them so that their blood could be drained for cooking and sacrifice! He regularly referred to Jews as "mad dogs." He called for all civil authorities to see to it that no Jew is allowed to keep or use money and even to banish all Jews from their territories, burn their synagogues, their books and their homes. At another time he recommended that all Jews be forced to leave their homes and live in camps (History of Lutheranism, p. 63). He hated them so much that even his very last sermon included scathing remarks against the Jews (Marty, p. 171-3).  

Below are listed is a small sampling of the many infamous statements of Luther regarding the Jews, most of them from his tract, "The Jews And Their Lies":

"The Jews deserve to be hanged on the gallows, seven times higher than ordinary thieves."

"Jews are truly stupid, blind fools."

"Eject them forever from this country."

"They are nothing but thieves and robbers."

"What then shall we do with this damned, rejected race of Jews?"

"We are at fault for not killing them!"

"I shall give you my sincere advice: First, set fire to their synagogues and schools and bury and cover with dirt whatsoever will not burn, so that no man will ever again see a stone or cinder of them ... Second, I advise that their houses also be razed and destroyed ... I advise that safe-conduct on the highways for the Jews be completely abolished."

"Force them to work and deal harshly with them."

"If I had to baptize a Jew, I would take him to the river Elbe, hang a stone around his neck and push him over with the words 'I baptize thee in the name of Abraham.'" 

“Maybe mild-hearted and gentle Christians will believe I am too rigorous and drastic against the poor afflicted Jews, believing that I ridicule them and treat them with much sarcasm. By my word, I am far too weak.”

Perhaps more amazing than Luther's hatred of the Jews is the fact that Luther hated the physically and mentally handicapped. He thought they were possessed of the devil.  Luther said, "Mentally retarded, lame, blind, and dumb are men in whom the devils have established themselves; and all the physicians who attempt to heal these infirmities, as though they proceeded from natural causes, are ignorant blockheads."

These kinds of sentiments lived on in Germany until the day of the Nazis; it is no mystery where many of their ideas originated from. The Lutheran church overwhelmingly support the Nazis and in fact, many Lutherans argued that the Germany was being by inspired by a new "Luthergeist" ("Luther spirit") that would unite a racially pure German people (History of Lutheranism, p. 223-4).

Bloody Luther

The full impact of Luther's words against the Jews and physically and mentally handicapped would not come to full fruition until centuries later; however, his words against his own countrymen bore fruit in his own lifetime. In his early years, Luther wrote many pamphlets condemning the Catholic church and their clergy and their love of money. He even suggested that all of their churches should be razed to the ground! He liked to say that any man in the church was an equal with the pope (his doctrine of priesthood of the believer, which he later backed away from).

The peasants heard of Luther's statements and believed that finally someone with some power (Luther) understood their plight. In the medieval society of the day, peasants could not own land and were taxed ruthlessly to support the lavish lifestyles of church officials and the state; nearly all lived in abject poverty. When thousands of them decided to rebel against their masters and take control of their own lives, they believed Luther would be right there, backing them up. But they were wrong.

They did not realize how enamored Luther was with powerful leaders and his beloved doctrine of the unity of the state and church. Not only did Luther roundly condemn the peasants, but he even published a scathing pamphlet (Against Murderous And Thieving Peasants) to do it! He wrote, "They should be knocked to pieces, strangled and stabbed, secretly and openly, by everyone that can, just as one must kill a mad dog!" Sounding like a modern day Islamic terrorist, he said, "Anyone who is killed fighting on the side of the rulers may be a true martyr in the eyes of God ... anyone who perishes on the peasants' side is an eternal firebrand in hell," (History of Lutheranism, p. 41).

Luther quickly gave his official sanction for Lutheran kings and princes to unite their armies with those of Roman Catholic princes and kings in order to stamp out the peasant movement! And they put a stop to the movement quite quickly, in both Protestant and Roman Catholic lands, in what became known as the Peasant War (1524-1525). The peasants were practically defenseless against the armies, it is estimated that 100,000 of them were slaughtered. Women were raped, men were strung up on trees to die, children were slaughtered or left in the cold of winter without shelter to freeze to death.

One would think that Luther might have later considered his actions against the peasants a mistake, but it was not to be. He bragged about his involvement in the war until the end; he saw it as a medal of honor. "Not since the time of the apostles has the sword and government been so clearly described or praised, as by me," Luther proclaimed, "Even my enemies must admit that!" (Marty, p. 94). He even claimed that he did it because he was following the will of God: "Preachers are the greatest slayers; for they urge the authorities to execute their office strictly and punish the wicked. In the revolt I slew all the peasants; all their blood is on my head. But I pass it on to our Lord, who commanded me to speak thus," (Martin Luther, Marty, p. 98). Needless to say, after the war, the opinions of Luther amongst the remaining peasants changed drastically. It is no wonder that they had to be forced to attend Luther's churches by law.

Conclusion

Evangelicals have attributed many things to Luther that he is not deserving of. It is true that he once proclaimed such admirable principles as sola Scriptura and the priesthood of all believers, however, he did not follow through with either of them. The truth is that Luther was a man worried about being "too evangelical," meaning, too reliant on Scripture, as if there could be such a thing. Most of his doctrines can be traced directly back to the father of Roman Catholic theology, Bishop Augustine of Hippo. Not surprisingly, one of the premier American Lutheran scholars and leaders came to the same conclusion, but his fellow Lutherans would not listen to him.

Luther's insistence on following the Catholic model of the state church (instead of the Biblical model of a church separate from the state) resulted in the same kind of problems he venomously criticized in the Roman Catholic Church; that is church offices given by the state as political favors, church offices given to those with money and therefore clergy ignorant of the Scriptures and without any motive to be true leaders to their flock.

The cornerstone of Lutheran theology, salvation through grace by faith only, is much acclaimed by evangelicals. But it is a doctrine without any substantial Scriptural support and was unknown in Christianity until Luther invented it. Such a doctrine absolves believers of any consequences for their actions. Luther and Calvin's insistence on following the Augustinian doctrine of predestination also absolves believers of any responsibility for their actions. These doctrines have poisoned most Protestant denominations today, and their fruits can clearly be seen in the worldly and sinful life of their adherents.

Some biographers excuse Luther's many failings by pointing out he was just a man of his time; after all, who can completely divorce themselves from the beliefs and culture of their time? To that answer that, one only has to look at the Anabaptists. Unlike Luther, they followed through the Biblical principles of sola Scriptura and the priesthood of all believers. And unlike in Luther's churches, one could see a radical improvement in the lives of the Anabaptist believers. Unlike Luther's state churches, the Anabaptist churches were able to keep the Bible as the cornerstone of their church and to continue to live by its precepts.

On the other hand, even the Anabaptists in the Reformation may have found it impossible to survive without Luther's Bible translation, very few of the people could read the Bible in its original Greek and Hebrew. And Luther's (and Zwingli & Calvin's) success in keeping their denominations from collapsing under the great pressure from the pope and Roman Catholic Church and the countries it controlled meant that the various kingdoms eventually got to the used to the idea of the existence of Protestant denominations and it eventually extended to the Anabaptists in many countries.

This article is not meant to be a complete biography of Luther, by any means. ACCIC would encourage those looking to read more about Luther to pick up the recent biography "Martin Luther" by the eminent religious historian Martin Marty. Unlike many other biographies of Luther, it does not attempt to whitewash Luther, but reveals both the good and bad about the man (though Marty appears to be sympathetic towards his subject); it is small, not weighed down with boring scholarly, theological quotations, as with some biographies and is a quite interesting read. We also recommend our article on the history of the church (click on "History" above) for a perspective on the Protestant Reformation. Lastly, you may want to see our appendix below for a sampling of some of the colorful quotations from Luther we came across in our research.

Bibliography

Appendix

Little Known Statements Of Martin Luther

Luther On Luther

“God has appointed me for the whole German land, and I boldly vouch and declare that when you obey me you are without a doubt obeying not me, but Christ”

“Whoever obeys me not, despises not me, but Christ.”

“Whoever rejects my doctrine cannot be saved.”

“Not for a thousand years has God bestowed such great gifts on any bishop, such as those He bestowed on me!”

“Not even St. Augustine or St. Ambrosius can compare with me!”

“What I teach and write remains true even though the whole world should fall to pieces over it.”

“I have greater confidence in my wife and my pupils than I have in Christ.”

Luther And His Love Of Alcohol

“We eat and drink to kill ourselves; we eat and drink up to our last farthing.”

“God must count drunkenness as a minor sin, a small daily sin. We can really not stop it.”

"If our Lord is permitted to create nice large pike and good Rhine wine, presumably I may be allowed to eat and drink it."

"Up to now drunkenness has prevented me from writing, or reading anything readable; living with men, I had to live as they live.”

“If I drink one mug of beer, soon I want to drink the entire barrel as well!”

"We behave like scandalous disgusting brutes, thinking all day and night of nothing but how we can fill ourselves with drink and get rid of all our reason and wisdom.”

“Why, do you think, do I drink too much wine ...? It is when the Devil prepares to torment me and mock me and that I wish to take the lead.”

“I am but a man prone to let himself be swept off his feet by society, drunkenness, the torments of the flesh.”

On Marriage

"I confess that I cannot forbid a person to marry several wives, for it does not contradict the Scripture. If a man wishes to marry more than one wife he should be asked whether he is satisfied in his conscience that he may do so in accordance with the word of God. In such a case the civil authority has nothing to do in the matter."

"Chastity is not in our power. All are created for marriage. God does not permit that one be alone."

"Sexual desires cannot be controlled by anything, not even by marriage; for the majority of married couples live in adultery."

“The body has nothing to do with God. In this respect one can never sin against God, but only against one's neighbour.”

“It is true that he who does not marry must lead an immoral life, for how could it be otherwise?”

“Though womenfolk are ashamed to confess it, yet it is proved by Scripture and experience that there is not one among many thousands to whom God gives the grace of chastity.”

“Let it be known that marriage is an outward material thing like any other secular business. The body has nothing to do with God. In this respect one can never sin against God, but only against one’s neighbour.”

“The word and work of God is quite clear, specifically, that women are made to be either wives or prostitutes.”

“In spite of all the good I say of married life, I will not grant so much to nature as to admit that there is no sin in it. ... No sexual act is ever performed without sin. The matrimonial duty is never performed without sin.”

On Predestination

"Man is like a horse. Does God leap into the saddle? The horse is obedient and accommodates itself to every movement of the rider and goes whither he wills it. Does God throw down the reins? Then Satan leaps upon the back of the animal, which bends, goes and submits to the spurs and impulses of its new rider ... therefore, necessity, not free will, is the controlling principle of our conduct. God is the author of what is evil as well as of what is good, and, as He bestows happiness on those who merit it not, so also does He damn others who deserve not their fate."

“You must say my sins are not mine; they are not in me at all; they are the sins of another, they are Christ's and are none of my business.”

"With regard to God, and in all that bears on salvation or damnation, man has no 'free will', but is a captive, prisoner and bond slave, either to the will of God, or to the will of  Satan."

On The Peasants, Princes And War

“I have foolishly hoped for something superhuman from men, that they might be led by the Gospel. But experience has taught me that in contempt of the Gospel they need to be contained by laws and the sword.”

"Come, dearly-beloved lords and nobles, strike them [the peasants], transfix them, and cut their throats with all your might. Should you find death in so doing, you could not wish for one more divine, for you would fall in obedience to God and in defending your like against the hordes of Satan."

"If they say I am very hard and merciless, mercy be damned. Let whoever can, stab, strangle, and kill them [the peasants] like you would kill mad dogs.”

“Let them all be killed. In such circumstances is it not God Himself who by our hands, hangs, breaks on the wheel, blows to bits and decapitates?”

“Wherever the princes take their power from, it does not regard us. It is the will of God, irrespective of whether they have stolen their power or assumed it by robbery.”

“Christ himself and John the Baptist praised war. Wars are right and divine. According to Scripture, it has been ordained by God to make war and to strangle.”

“It is Christian and a work of love not to go slowly in a war. One must cut the throats of one's enemies, pillage them, burn them, do everything that may do them harm until one has beaten them.”

“Only a simpleton argues that it is not Christian to strangle and to rob and that it is not a work of love. But in truth it is a work of love.”

“The Christians as faithful and obedient servants, and with great joy, to go to wars to beat, murder, rob, and to commit any kind of damage as long as they can. Then we can be certain that they are true Christians.”

“No one must think that the world is governed without blood. The worldly sword must be red and bloody."

"I myself, Martin Luther, do my best by prayer and if needs be, with the fist.”

"Like the mules who will not move unless you perpetually whip them with rods, the civil powers must drive the common people, whip, choke, hang, burn, behead and torture them, that they may learn to fear the powers that be."

"A peasant is a hog, for when a hog is slaughtered it is dead, and in the same way the peasant does not think about the next life, for otherwise he would behave very differently."

"Human nature is like a drunken peasant. Lift him up onto the saddle on one side and he falls over on the other side."

"A prince may indeed be a Christian, but he must not rule as a Christian, and when he rules, he does so not as a Christian but as a prince. As an individual he is indeed a Christian, but his office or princedom is no business of his Christianity."

“If you are a prince, judge, man, woman, etc., and if you have people under your authority, and if you want to know how to act, then you must not ask Christianity, but ask the Emperor, local laws or customs about it. This will tell you how to behave towards your inferiors.”

“Peasants are no better than straw. They will not hear the word and they are without sense; therefore they must be compelled to hear the crack of the whip and the whiz of bullets; it is only what they deserve.”

On Satan

"Snakes and monkeys are subjected to the devil more than other animals. Satan lives in them and possesses them. He uses them to deceive men and to injure them."

"Some [demons] are also in the thick, black clouds, which cause hail, lightning and thunder and poison the air, the pastures and grounds."

"The devil can so completely assume the human form when he wants to deceive us, that we may well lie with what seems to be a woman, of real flesh and blood, yet all the while 'tis only the devil in the shape of a woman!"

"Women may think that a man is in bed with them, yet it is only the devil and the result of this is often an imp of darkness, half human, half demon."

"The devil too, sometimes steals human children; it is not rare for him to carry away infants within the first six weeks after birth and substitutes imps in their place!"

"Our bodies are always exposed to Satan. The maladies I suffer are not natural, but Satan's spells."

"In many countries there are special place where devils like to reside. In Prussia there is an infinite number of evil spirits."

"In Switzerland, on a high mountain not far from Lucerne, there is a lake they call Pilate's Pond, which the devil has set as one of the chief homes of his demons."

On The Bible

"The history of Jonah is so monstrous that it is absolutely incredible."  

"The book of Esther I toss into the Elbe.  I am such an enemy to the book of Esther that I wish it did not exist, for it Judaizes too much and has in it a great deal of heathen foolishness."

"If nonsense is spoken anywhere, this is the very place.  I pass over the fact that many have maintained, with much probability, that this epistle was not written by the Apostle James, and is not worthy of the spirit of the Apostle."

Luther writing regarding his addition of the word "alone" to verses in Romans in his New Testament translation: "If your papist wishes to make a great fuss about the word sola (alone), say this to him: 'Dr. Martin Luther will have it so, and he says that a papist and a donkey are the same thing.' 'Sic volo, sic iubeo, sit pro ratione voluntas.' Second, We are not going to be students and disciples of the papists. Rather, we will become their teachers and judges. For once, we also are going to be proud and brag, with these blockheads; and just as Paul brags against his mad raving saints, I will brag against these donkeys of mine! ...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."

“The Apostles themselves were sinners, yes, regular scoundrels … I believe that the prophets also frequently sinned grievously.”

"A simple layman armed with Scripture is to be believed more than a pope or cardinal without it."

On Works And Sin

“Christ committed adultery first of all with the women at the well about whom St. John tells us. Was not everybody about Him saying: ‘Whatever has He been doing with her?’. Second, with Mary Magdalene, and third, 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.”‡

“It does not matter what people do; it only matters what they believe.”

“God does not need our actions. All He wants is that we pray to Him and thank Him.”

“No other sin exists in the world except unbelief.”

“Every Christian leads a double life: One faithful and spiritual, the other as a citizen or a worldly one.”

“From the moment when you acknowledge that Christ bears your sins, He becomes a sinner in your stead.”

“Saints must be good, downright sinners.”

"Those pious souls who do good to gain the Kingdom of Heaven not only will never succeed, but they must even be reckoned as one of the heathen. It is more important to guard against good works than against sin."

“If Moses should attempt to intimidate you with his stupid Ten Commandments, tell him to run to the Jews with them.”

“'Thou shalt not covet’ is a commandment which proves us all to be sinners; since it is not in man’s power not to covet, and so is it for all of the other commandments, for they are all equally impossible to obey.”

“A person that has been baptized cannot lose his salvation by any sins however grievous, unless he refuses to believe. For no sins can damn him but unbelief alone.”

“It is more important to guard against good works than against sin.”

“It does not matter how Christ behaved, what He taught is all that matters.”

Misc.

“What harm could it do if a man told a good lusty lie in a worthy cause and for the sake of the Christian churches?”

"What lies there are about relics! One church claims to have a feather from the wing of the angel Gabriel, and the Bishop of Mainz has a flame from Moses' burning bush. And how does it happen that eighteen apostles are buried in Germany when Christ had only twelve!"

"Farewell to those who want a pure and holy church. This is plainly wanting no church at all."

‡ As hard as it may be to believe, we have substantiated this quote from several official Lutheran sources as well as some non-Lutheran sources. It was even the subject of a recent article in Time magazine regarding recent claims from liberal "Christians" that Jesus had sexual relations with Mary Magdalene! One Catholic publication claims that Luther said this while in one of his many drunken stupors, while some Lutheran sources insist that he was perfectly sober at the time. We'll give Luther the benefit of the doubt and assume he was drunk while making this blasphemous claim; even so, people are more prone to speak truthfully while drunk than to make up lies...