Talk:Martin Luther

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

[edit] Martin Luther and The Book of Revelation

I've seen claims that Luther a) did not want Revelation included in the Bible at all b) when it was included, he argued it should not be taught as prophecy

Can someone more versed in history than I am comment on that? MDB (talk) 18:48, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

I am unsure about Revelation, but he did want the Epistle of James cut because of its assertion that "Faith without works is dead," which rather got in the way of his sola fide. Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 18:50, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
I guess that you mean "wanted it removed" MDB? But I've no idea it it's true.--BobNot Jim 19:35, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Luther did seem to think it was apocryphal. [1] Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 19:40, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
I thought Luther was part of the Council that determined which books would actually constitute the New Testament. MDB (talk) 20:07, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
You're thinking of the Council of Nicaea. Luther wanted another council to sort out the Roman Catholic Church and frequently referred to Nicaea, but no, the First Council of Nicaea was in the fourth century CE. Picon small.pngLiquid Blue 05:07, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Juicy quotes

Wikiquote has another good one about "Reason":

But since the devil's bride, Reason, that pretty whore, comes in and thinks she's wise, and what she says, what she thinks, is from the Holy Spirit, who can help us, then? Not judges, not doctors, no king or emperor, because [reason] is the Devil's greatest whore.

--ZooGuard (talk) 09:59, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Community
Tools
support