Luther the movie

I review CDs & movies for a heathen website. I liked the Luther movie so much I reviewed it for that (but he still hasn't posted my review yet, haha, I wonder why!)

I can't believe people are trying to make Luther to be a hero.
Why can't people see the truth about Luther he was a foul mouth, alcoholic, he taught it's ok to commit adultery, ok to marry more then one wife, who taught we should burn the Jews, he was responsible for the death of more then 100,000 peasants, who didn't believe in many of the books of the bible.

orthedoxy said:

I can't believe people are trying to make Luther to be a hero.
Why can't people see the truth about Luther he was a foul mouth, alcoholic, he taught it's ok to commit adultery, ok to marry more then one wife, who taught we should burn the Jews, he was responsible for the death of more then 100,000 peasants, who didn't believe in many of the books of the bible.

Click to expand...

Those are some wild claims; I think you should back them up with some facts.



Also, I would hope you think Paul is a hero. He killed Christians, drank wine, had a divorce and ate meat sacrificed to idols!!!

BTW what is "COPTIC"???

johnny_redeemed said:

Those are some wild claims; I think you should back them up with some facts.



Also, I would hope you think Paul is a hero. He killed Christians, drank wine, had a divorce and ate meat sacrificed to idols!!!

Click to expand...

Not to mention that Moses was a murderer. Abraham a liar; Jacob a coniving con man;Joseph a big head; Rahab a prostitute , Isaiah a self confessed man of unclean lips; Peter, a bumbling oaf who regularly stuck his foot in his mouth. Oh yeah,nearly forgot to mention that Paul and Barnabas had a blazing row over John Mark's sutability as a missionary partner.
And heres another little jucy piece of gossip. Did you know that Paul used the S word when he spoke of counting all things as dung in comparison to knowing Christ. Tut tut You just cant get perfect saints these days

orthedoxy said:

can't believe people are trying to make Luther to be a hero.
Why can't people see the truth about Luther he was a foul mouth, alcoholic, he taught it's ok to commit adultery, ok to marry more then one wife, who taught we should burn the Jews, he was responsible for the death of more then 100,000 peasants, who didn't believe in many of the books of the bible.

Click to expand...

No one here has made Luther out to be a hero any more than the list of misfits mentioned above. He was merely an instrument in the hands of Almighty God who delights in taking the most unlikely characters and turning them into vessels for his use!

Quotes from Martin Luther
'On Jews and their Lies'

First, to set fire to their synagogues or schools and to bury and cover with dirt whatever will not burn, so that no man will ever again see a stone or cinder of them. This is to be done in honor of our Lord and of Christendom, so that God might see that we are Christians, and do not condone or knowingly tolerate such public lying, cursing, and blaspheming of his Son and of his Christians. For whatever we tolerated in the past unknowingly_and I myself was unaware of it_will be pardoned by God. But if we, now that we are informed, were to protect and shield such a house for the Jews, existing right before our very nose, in which they lie about, blaspheme, curse, vilify, and defame Christ and us (as was heard above), it would be the same as if we were doing all this and even worse ourselves, as we very well know.

Click to expand...

Here are more quotes from Luther
What would it matter if, for the sake of greater good and of the Christian Church, one were to tell a good, downright lie?
(Lenz, Luther's Letters, Leipzig, 1891, vol. 1, 382)

Luther believed that polygamy was sanctioned in Scripture:
I cannot forbid a person to marry several wives, for it does not contradict the Scripture.
(De Wette, vol. 2, 459)

In regard the books of the bible and Luther.
http://www.christianforums.com/t1174196-luther-and-the-book-of-james.html.

No one denies his foul language and him teaching it’s good to drink heavily.
Luther also believe the book of John was the only important gospel.
Luther also believed in baptismal regeneration, infant baptism, he prayed to Mary( the mother of God), he believed the real presence of Christ in the communion among other things.

By the way cajun can you show me why would you say he is a reformer?
I also disagree with that it was acceptable at that time to kill jews.

Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?
How can anyone pick anything from Luther?
Peace

Romans 11

Content of the eleventh chapter: The Apostle rebukes the reviling of the Jews by the heathen, shows the present blinding of the Jews, and the depth of divine wisdom.

THE HEATHEN SHOULD NOT DESPISE THE JEWS, BUT REMEMBER THAT THEY ARE SAVED BY GRACE AS ARE THE ELECT IN ISRAEL.

I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying, Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life. But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal. Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. And if by grace, then it is no more of works; otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no more work. What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded according as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear; unto this day. And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompence unto them: let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back away. I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy. Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more the fulness? For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify my office: If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save some of them. For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead? For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches. And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert grafted in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree; boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou hearest not the root, but the root thee. Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in. Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not high-minded, but fear: for if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee. Behold therefore the goodness and severity of god: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off. And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again. For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree? (11:1-24)

I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid (11:1). The Apostle now reaches the end of his discussion and concludes what he began in Chapter 9, where he said: "Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect" (v.6). Or, already in Chapter 3, where he said: "Shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect" (3:3)? He treats this subject with such great earnestness in order that he may destroy the arrogant boasting of the Jews regarding their merits by emphasizing the firm and immutable faithfulness of God. The Jews might have answered (the Apostle): God will not cast away His people, because He has given them His promise. But if what you say is true, then God has truly rejected His people, because He has given them His promise. But if what you say is true, then God has truly rejected His people. In this way they wanted to support their arrogance by an appeal to the faithfulness of God; and this they do to this very day.


Galations 11:22

Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God (11:22). From this passage we learn that when we see the fall of the Jews, heretics, and others, we should not so much regard them that fall, as rather the work of God which He does regarding them, so that we may learn from the example of misfortune befalling others to fear God and not boast arrogantly in any way. In contradistinction to this many exalt themselves in an amazingly stupid manner and call the Jews either dogs or accursed, or they insult them with other abusive words, though they themselves do not know what kind of people they are and what is their standing in God's sight. They want to convert the Jews by force or invective. May God resist them.

Regardless of whatever claims may be made about Luther the person, his place in history is undeniable.

orthedoxy said:

Quotes from Martin Luther
'On Jews and their Lies'

Click to expand...

Hello there.

Luther was born into a society in which anti-Judaic feeling ran high. The Jews were said to be the only, “outsiders.” They were frequent scapegoats in medieval Europe. Luther was born into a society that was anti-Judaic, but it was not the current anti-Judaic type of society that bases it racism on biological factors. Luther had no objections to integrating converted Jews into Christian society. He had nothing against Jews as “Jews.” He had something against their religion because he believed it denied and blasphemed Christ.

Luther began his career favorably to the Jews. In 1523 he published Jesus Christ was born a Jew. He expressed his sympathy to them saying that he would not have become a Christian either if he had been born a Jew under the papacy. He had high hopes that a proper understanding of the gospel would bring the Jews to faith. Luther was very naïve in this, not taking into account the situation of medieval Jewry in Europe. After twenty years of failing to convert the Jews through his writings, Luther became rather virulent in his criticism of the Jews. He believed the stories about the Jews attempts to convert Christians and he saw them as disturbers of the Christian faith. He wrote things no Christian should have written. It should be kept in my mind though that he wrote them from a position far different than current anti-Semitism.

I would not go so far as to malign the entire career of Luther based on Luther’s comments about the Jews. Luther did direct abusive language against these groups: Anabaptists, lawyers, the papacy, and the Jews. Luther felt these four groups were united in the conviction that men were ultimately made right before God by the law. Anabaptism held a moralistic view of the gospel with an emphasis on the heavy burden of righteousness placed upon men in order to be accepted before God. Lawyers made their living by imposing the law. The papacy was viewed as the antichrist, which promoted a false religion with a false view of salvation through obedience to the law. The Jews had a religion based upon works righteousness. When Luther attacked these groups it was an attack on the devil who is the underlying spirit of works righteousness.

Further, “On the Jews and Their Lies” was a response to a letter from Count Schlick of Moravia. The letter contained a Jewish attack against Jesus, the Virgin Mary, and Christian exegesis of the Old Testament that the Count wanted answered. Unfortunately, this letter and attack have been lost, so we are unaware of the exact tone of argument Luther was responding to.

The first few sections were Biblical in nature, dealing with biblical arguments put forth by Jews (allegedly). Luther defended Mary in the third section against charges that the Holy Mother was a prostitute, and that her offspring was a demon’s child.

Luther wrote in a polemical tone that used vulgarity and harshness as a deliberate rhetorical tactic. The language used was usually consistent with the tenor of whichever polemical contest he was engaged in. It is also important to understand that Luther thought he was living in the last days, and that the papists, Anabaptists, Jews, and Turks were the Devil’s servants attacking the true church.

It should be immediately pointed out that scores of Christians (including Lutherans) were killed in the Holocaust. Luther never believed that a ruler could do whatever he wanted. He believed all rulers were subject to the Bible. Luther never wavered from his acceptance of Romans 13 as the classic statement of the Christian attitude toward civil government. He was against oppressive dictatorships.


Regards,
James Swan

orthedoxy said:

Here are more quotes from Luther
What would it matter if, for the sake of greater good and of the Christian Church, one were to tell a good, downright lie?
(Lenz, Luther's Letters, Leipzig, 1891, vol. 1, 382)

Click to expand...

I would take a look at James 2:25 at this point.

orthedoxy said:

Luther believed that polygamy was sanctioned in Scripture: I cannot forbid a person to marry several wives, for it does not contradict the Scripture.
(De Wette, vol. 2, 459)

Click to expand...

You have DeWette vol. 2? Amazing. The book has not been in print for well over 100 years, and it's in German. Your translation of this quote into English from the German is very good. It is true Luther allowed for polygamy, but only in a very narrow sense. Luther scholar Heinrich Boehmer points out that it was only to be in cases of “severe necessity, for instance, if the wife develops leprosy or becomes otherwise unfit to live with her husband… But this permission is always to be restricted to such cases as severe necessity. The idea of legalizing general polygamy was far from the reformers mind. Monogamy was always to him the regular form of matrimony…” (Luther And The Reformation in Light of Modern Research, 213-214).

Most often, Luther detractors point out Luther’s involvement in the bigamy of Phillip of Hesse. Of course, Luther got himself into a mess here. Roland Bainton explains,

“There are several incidents over which one would rather draw the veil, but precisely because they are so often exploited to his discredit they are not to be left unrecorded. The most notorious was his attitude toward the bigamy of the landgrave, Philip of Hesse. This prince had been given in marriage with no regard to his own affections—that is, for purely political reasons—at the age of nineteen to the daughter of Duke George. Philip, unable to combine romance with marriage, found his satisfaction promiscuously on the outside. After his conversion his conscience so troubled him that he dared not present himself at the Lord s Table. He believed that if he could have one partner to whom he was genuinely attached he would be able to keep himself within the bounds of matrimony. There were several ways in which his difficulty could have been solved. If he had remained a Catholic, he might have been able to secure an annulment on the grounds of some defect in the marriage; but since he had become a Lutheran, he could expect no consideration from the pope. Nor would Luther permit recourse to the Catholic device. A second solution would have been divorce and re-marriage. A great many Protestant bodies in the present day would countenance this method, particularly since Philip had been subjected in his youth to a loveless match. But Luther at this point interpreted the Gospels rigidly and held to the word of Christ as reported by Matthew that divorce is permissible only for adultery. But Luther did feel that there should be some remedy, and he discovered it by a reversion to the mores of the Old Testament patriarchs, who had practiced bigamy and even polygamy without any manifestation of divine displeasure. Philip was given the assurance that he might in good conscience take a second wife. Since, however, to do so would be against the law of the land, he should keep the union a secret. This the new bride's mother declined to do; and then Luther counseled a lie on the ground that his advice had been given as in the confessional, and to guard the secrete of the confessional a lie is justified. But the secret was out, and the disavowal was ineffective. Luther's final comment was that if anyone thereafter should practice bigamy, let the Devil give him a bath in the abyss of hell.

Source: Here I Stand, 292-293.

Click to expand...

Note Luther’s final comment, “that if anyone thereafter should practice bigamy, let the Devil give him a bath in the abyss of hell.” A profound aspect of the Bible is its commitment to telling us about the sins of the human condition; even in those characters considered the greatest of God’s people. David was described as “a man after God’s own heart,” yet within his life one finds adultery and murder. Jesus called Peter “blessed,” yet not long after, Peter denied that he even knew him. Examples could be multiplied, and could go beyond the pages of Scripture into the halls of church history. God’s people struggle with sin, and sometimes take great falls. Such is the case of Martin Luther and his involvement with Hesses' bigamy. Luther's life shows many high peaks and some deep valleys: profound success for God’s kingdom, along with human failure. With Luther’s attitude on Bigamy, and his involvement with Phillip of Hesse, we see one of the warts of Luther. Luther had to learn the hard way with his attitude on Bigamy.

orthedoxy said:

In regard the books of the bible and Luther.
http://www.christianforums.com/t1174196-luther-and-the-book-of-james.html.

Click to expand...

Just for you:Luther's View of the Canon of Scripture

orthedoxy said:

No one denies his foul language and him teaching it’s good to drink heavily.

Click to expand...

In regards to Luther’s language, I strongly suggest the popular book by Heiko Oberman, Luther: Man Between God and the Devil (around $16). I refer you to chapter three. Briefly, Oberman points out, “In the total historical context, …Luther’s scatology-permeated language has to be taken seriously as an expression of the painful battle fought body and soul against the Adversary, who threatens both flesh and spirit” (p.108-109). He gives a detailed analysis of Luther’s language in context of his continued attacks against him, as well as his strong medieval understanding of Satan’s presence in raging battle against the gospel. Luther saw his opponents as tools of the Devil, and would oppose them with ferocious language. Without truly seeking to understand Luther in his context, his words can be twisted multiple ways. This is for you to pursue and study; I can only point you in the direction of historical truth.


Also Roland Bainton (perhaps Luther’s most famous biographer) points out in regards to Luther’s use of foul language, “The volume of coarseness, in his total output is slight. Detractors have sifted from the pitchblende of his ninety tomes a few pages of radioactive vulgarity” (From, Here I Stand p.232).

In regards to drinking, Luther preached ofton against getting drunk. Second, I know of no primary source documenting Luther being an alcoholic, or ever being drunk.

orthedoxy said:

Luther also believe the book of John was the only important gospel.

Click to expand...

Not Quite. Luther says,

In a word St. John’s Gospel and his first epistle, St. Paul’s epistles, especially Romans, Galatians, and Ephesians, and St. Peter’s first epistle are the books that show you Christ and teach you all that is necessary and salvatory for you to know, even if you were never to see or hear any other book or doctrine.

Luther is making a comparrison. John Warwick Montgomery raises an important point:

“…In fairness to Luther, is not this frank attitude just the recognition of what we all must admit, however high our view of scriptural inerrancy, namely that the biblical books do not all present the gospel with equal impact? Even the fundamentalist of fundamentalists distributes portions of the Gospel of John and not II Chronicles. Wesley was saved at Aldersgate listening to the reading of Luther’s Preface to Romans; it would not have surprised Luther — nor should it surprise us — that the effect was not produced by the reading of the Preface to Obadiah. To paraphrase George Orwell, all the Bible books are equal, but some are more equal than others. Moreover, the successive editions of Luther’s German Bible show the Reformer concerned that the general public not be led away from any portion of Scripture by his own personal opinions or prejudices.”

Click to expand...

Regards,
James Swan

orthedoxy said:

No one denies his foul language and him teaching it’s good to drink heavily.

Click to expand...

I agree with him; to be frank!

cygnusx1 said:

Just watched the new Luther film .............. great , wonderful and inspiring , I think it should be played in every school throughout the world ........

Click to expand...

Where did you get it? I thought it wasn't released in the UK till February

oworm said:

Where did you get it? I thought it wasn't released in the UK till February

Click to expand...

February ?

availability: Due for release on 06/06/2005


My copy is an import Region 1 ............. http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/B0002C9D9U/qid=1106487182/sr=1-4/ref=sr_1_11_4/202-5792761-4700667

BTW ,

I am waiting for the best version of the story to come out , it has been adapted from a Play by John Osbourne ..... LUTHER . I have it on video , but I have ordered it on DVD . I have seen 4 Martin Luther films and the dialog , rhythm and impact of the Stacy Keach one I find to be the best.It got to the point when I could and did recite chuncks of it .......... (it even has a brief appearance of Leanord Rossiter )

...

http://www.play247.com/play247.asp?page=title&r=R2&title=172220