Where did the Reformers get the Authority to Change the Bible?

[Monk Brendan]

A simple question, perhaps, but let's take a closer look. First of all, I am not going to dispute the excesses and injustices that SOME Roman Catholics visited upon other people. This is NOT a forum on the Inquisition or the Crusades. Here, we are only speaking of Authority.

With that in mind, Luther was a Roman Catholic, Augustinian priest-monk. His ordination gave him the authority to do certain things. Celebrate the Mass, hear confessions, anoint the sick, and so on. He was also held a position as Theology Professor at the Wittenberg University 'Leucorea'. He gave lectures over the Psalms (1514-15), Letter to the Romans (1515-16), Letter to the Galatians (1516-17), and Letter to the Hebrews (1517-18). Here he obviously had the authority to lecture, grade papers, and all of the other things that most professors do.

He was also a composer, and he did several other things. However, nowhere in my research have I seen him receiving the authority to change the Bible--WHICH HE DID! What I want to know is, where did he get such authority.

Did he get it from God? No, because when the Bible was being codified in the third and fourth centuries, the Early Christian Fathers who were doing the job would have heard from God not to put this or that book in the Bible, just as they heard from God about The Shepherd of Hermes. These were holy men, true believers in Jesus Christ, following Him alone, trusting in the Holy Spirit to guide them to the Truth. If God had not wanted the Apocrypha in the Bible in the 15th century, do you think He would have put it in at the beginning?

Don't try to say that not all the Jews accepted those books, because, as we have already seen, the Early Church Fathers, guided by the Holy Spirit had accepted them. And if we can't accept the authority for their decisions, then we must begin by throwing the whole Bible out the window and start again. I don't want to do that, and I don't believe any other Christian does.

Did Luther get his authority to change the Bible from the Pope? NO! Any other authority within the Church? Nope, not that either.

So, where did he (or any other Reformer) have the authority to change the Bible?

Please discuss.

 

[Monk Brendan]

As an addition, when someone asked Luther why he made a change, he said, "Because Dr. Luther would have it so."

That sounded awfully proud, didn't it?

 

[Albion]

With that in mind, Luther was a Roman Catholic, Augustinian priest-monk. His ordination gave him the authority to do certain things. Celebrate the Mass, hear confessions, anoint the sick, and so on. He was also held a position as Theology Professor at the Wittenberg University 'Leucorea'. He gave lectures over the Psalms (1514-15), Letter to the Romans (1515-16), Letter to the Galatians (1516-17), and Letter to the Hebrews (1517-18). Here he obviously had the authority to lecture, grade papers, and all of the other things that most professors do.

He was also a composer, and he did several other things. However, nowhere in my research have I seen him receiving the authority to change the Bible--WHICH HE DID! What I want to know is, where did he get such authority. .

In short, that is a false charge. It is a popular one with opponents of Luther or of the Reformation, but it simply isn't so. Being that he was the foremost Bible scholar in Germany, any skeptic today ought at least to realize that there are a lot of nuances and intricacies involved and it's not as easy as saying 'He changed the Bible.'

 

[JoeP222w]

A simple question, perhaps, but let's take a closer look. First of all, I am not going to dispute the excesses and injustices that SOME Roman Catholics visited upon other people. This is NOT a forum on the Inquisition or the Crusades. Here, we are only speaking of Authority.

With that in mind, Luther was a Roman Catholic, Augustinian priest-monk. His ordination gave him the authority to do certain things. Celebrate the Mass, hear confessions, anoint the sick, and so on. He was also held a position as Theology Professor at the Wittenberg University 'Leucorea'. He gave lectures over the Psalms (1514-15), Letter to the Romans (1515-16), Letter to the Galatians (1516-17), and Letter to the Hebrews (1517-18). Here he obviously had the authority to lecture, grade papers, and all of the other things that most professors do.

He was also a composer, and he did several other things. However, nowhere in my research have I seen him receiving the authority to change the Bible--WHICH HE DID! What I want to know is, where did he get such authority.

Did he get it from God? No, because when the Bible was being codified in the third and fourth centuries, the Early Christian Fathers who were doing the job would have heard from God not to put this or that book in the Bible, just as they heard from God about The Shepherd of Hermes. These were holy men, true believers in Jesus Christ, following Him alone, trusting in the Holy Spirit to guide them to the Truth. If God had not wanted the Apocrypha in the Bible in the 15th century, do you think He would have put it in at the beginning?

Don't try to say that not all the Jews accepted those books, because, as we have already seen, the Early Church Fathers, guided by the Holy Spirit had accepted them. And if we can't accept the authority for their decisions, then we must begin by throwing the whole Bible out the window and start again. I don't want to do that, and I don't believe any other Christian does.

Did Luther get his authority to change the Bible from the Pope? NO! Any other authority within the Church? Nope, not that either.

So, where did he (or any other Reformer) have the authority to change the Bible?

Please discuss.

By and large, this seems like a Strawman fallacy. However, even if Luther or anyone did attempt to change the word of God (I am not saying that evidence has been shown that he did), they do so at their own peril.

Likewise, the Magisterium also has no authority to change the word of God. Nor does the Magisterium define what the word of God is. God defines what the word of God is and no one else.

 

[amariselle]

As an addition, when someone asked Luther why he made a change, he said, "Because Dr. Luther would have it so."

That sounded awfully proud, didn't it?

Not that Martin Luther got everything right, but I don't think he was even close to as prideful as various Popes.

Something I think any Catholic who chooses to vilify Luther needs to be honest about.

 

[Seejer]

These were holy men, true believers in Jesus Christ, following Him alone, trusting in the Holy Spirit to guide them to the Truth.

So you don't believe this august body of men had personal ambitions mixed up with their deliberations for a period of time spanning centuries?

 

[Monk Brendan]

In short, that is a false charge. It is a popular one with opponents of Luther or of the Reformation, but it simply isn't so. Being that he was the foremost Bible scholar in Germany, any skeptic today ought at least to realize that there are a lot of nuances and intricacies involved and it's not as easy as saying 'He changed the Bible.'

But this thread is not about the changes themselves. This is about the AUTHORITY to make those changes. To begin by disputing or defending the changes is not what this thread is about, and the actual changes themselves are not germane. Let's not get sidetracked.

 

[Monk Brendan]

Not that Martin Luther got everything right, but I don't think he was even close to as prideful as various Popes.

You recently accused me of not reading the OP on another thread. Please READ the OP. I am pointing out that Luther (and others) made changes to the Bible on their own authority, and not by the Authority of God.

 

[Monk Brendan]

Something I think any Catholic who chooses to vilify Luther needs to be honest about.

Needs to be honest about...what? I am not vilifying Luther. I am asking where he got the AUTHORITY.

 

[Albion]

But this thread is not about the changes themselves. This is about the AUTHORITY to make those changes. To begin by disputing or defending the changes is not what this thread is about, and the actual changes themselves are not germane. Let's not get sidetracked.

All right. Then let's not kick off the thread by denouncing Luther for things he didn't do--or by focusing on him in any way. Instead, let's ask about who has the authority to determine doctrine.

 

[ViaCrucis]

A simple question, perhaps, but let's take a closer look. First of all, I am not going to dispute the excesses and injustices that SOME Roman Catholics visited upon other people. This is NOT a forum on the Inquisition or the Crusades. Here, we are only speaking of Authority.

With that in mind, Luther was a Roman Catholic, Augustinian priest-monk. His ordination gave him the authority to do certain things. Celebrate the Mass, hear confessions, anoint the sick, and so on. He was also held a position as Theology Professor at the Wittenberg University 'Leucorea'. He gave lectures over the Psalms (1514-15), Letter to the Romans (1515-16), Letter to the Galatians (1516-17), and Letter to the Hebrews (1517-18). Here he obviously had the authority to lecture, grade papers, and all of the other things that most professors do.

He was also a composer, and he did several other things. However, nowhere in my research have I seen him receiving the authority to change the Bible--WHICH HE DID! What I want to know is, where did he get such authority.

Did he get it from God? No, because when the Bible was being codified in the third and fourth centuries, the Early Christian Fathers who were doing the job would have heard from God not to put this or that book in the Bible, just as they heard from God about The Shepherd of Hermes. These were holy men, true believers in Jesus Christ, following Him alone, trusting in the Holy Spirit to guide them to the Truth. If God had not wanted the Apocrypha in the Bible in the 15th century, do you think He would have put it in at the beginning?

Don't try to say that not all the Jews accepted those books, because, as we have already seen, the Early Church Fathers, guided by the Holy Spirit had accepted them. And if we can't accept the authority for their decisions, then we must begin by throwing the whole Bible out the window and start again. I don't want to do that, and I don't believe any other Christian does.

Did Luther get his authority to change the Bible from the Pope? NO! Any other authority within the Church? Nope, not that either.

So, where did he (or any other Reformer) have the authority to change the Bible?

Please discuss.

Without an Ecumenical Council to define the Canon once and for all leaves the issue of the Canon open. Trent settled that from Rome's POV; but that is only relevant to Rome. In Luther's time there had not yet been church-wide synod to decide once and for all the contents of the Canon. Luther, fundamentally, did little more than participate in a 1600 year old conversation on the matter.

It's also worth noting that Luther's position and opinion is not regarded as "official" by Lutherans; for Lutherans the question of the Canon is still, technically, open. There is a certain irony in this, as virtually every other Protestant group accepted Luther's opinion on the Deuterocanonicals (generally)--though not his opinion on the Antilegomena--the churches which are called "Lutheran" have never established an official position one way or the other.

But without an Ecumenical Council (and yes, Rome regards Trent as such, but only Rome receives it) there simply isn't any final ecclesiastical authority to reach a final and full conclusion to the matter. Neither Luther nor the Pope have this authority; only by the full consent of the Church in Council can something this important be determined.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Rick Otto]

A simple question, perhaps, but let's take a closer look. First of all, I am not going to dispute the excesses and injustices that SOME Roman Catholics visited upon other people. This is NOT a forum on the Inquisition or the Crusades. Here, we are only speaking of Authority.

With that in mind, Luther was a Roman Catholic, Augustinian priest-monk. His ordination gave him the authority to do certain things. Celebrate the Mass, hear confessions, anoint the sick, and so on. He was also held a position as Theology Professor at the Wittenberg University 'Leucorea'. He gave lectures over the Psalms (1514-15), Letter to the Romans (1515-16), Letter to the Galatians (1516-17), and Letter to the Hebrews (1517-18). Here he obviously had the authority to lecture, grade papers, and all of the other things that most professors do.

He was also a composer, and he did several other things. However, nowhere in my research have I seen him receiving the authority to change the Bible--WHICH HE DID! What I want to know is, where did he get such authority.

Did he get it from God? No, because when the Bible was being codified in the third and fourth centuries, the Early Christian Fathers who were doing the job would have heard from God not to put this or that book in the Bible, just as they heard from God about The Shepherd of Hermes. These were holy men, true believers in Jesus Christ, following Him alone, trusting in the Holy Spirit to guide them to the Truth. If God had not wanted the Apocrypha in the Bible in the 15th century, do you think He would have put it in at the beginning?

Don't try to say that not all the Jews accepted those books, because, as we have already seen, the Early Church Fathers, guided by the Holy Spirit had accepted them. And if we can't accept the authority for their decisions, then we must begin by throwing the whole Bible out the window and start again. I don't want to do that, and I don't believe any other Christian does.

Did Luther get his authority to change the Bible from the Pope? NO! Any other authority within the Church? Nope, not that either.

So, where did he (or any other Reformer) have the authority to change the Bible?

Please discuss.

Truth is the source of authority.
Churchianity believes authority is the source of truth.
I'm like a native American watching whitemen argue over who owns God's earth.
smh

 

[Rick Otto]

All right. Then let's not kick off the thread by denouncing Luther for things he didn't do--or by focusing on him in any way. Instead, let's ask about who has the authority to determine doctrine.

mhm.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

A simple question, perhaps, but let's take a closer look. First of all, I am not going to dispute the excesses and injustices that SOME Roman Catholics visited upon other people. This is NOT a forum on the Inquisition or the Crusades. Here, we are only speaking of Authority.

With that in mind, Luther was a Roman Catholic, Augustinian priest-monk. His ordination gave him the authority to do certain things. Celebrate the Mass, hear confessions, anoint the sick, and so on. He was also held a position as Theology Professor at the Wittenberg University 'Leucorea'. He gave lectures over the Psalms (1514-15), Letter to the Romans (1515-16), Letter to the Galatians (1516-17), and Letter to the Hebrews (1517-18). Here he obviously had the authority to lecture, grade papers, and all of the other things that most professors do.

He was also a composer, and he did several other things. However, nowhere in my research have I seen him receiving the authority to change the Bible--WHICH HE DID! What I want to know is, where did he get such authority.

Did he get it from God? No, because when the Bible was being codified in the third and fourth centuries, the Early Christian Fathers who were doing the job would have heard from God not to put this or that book in the Bible, just as they heard from God about The Shepherd of Hermes. These were holy men, true believers in Jesus Christ, following Him alone, trusting in the Holy Spirit to guide them to the Truth. If God had not wanted the Apocrypha in the Bible in the 15th century, do you think He would have put it in at the beginning?

Don't try to say that not all the Jews accepted those books, because, as we have already seen, the Early Church Fathers, guided by the Holy Spirit had accepted them. And if we can't accept the authority for their decisions, then we must begin by throwing the whole Bible out the window and start again. I don't want to do that, and I don't believe any other Christian does.

Did Luther get his authority to change the Bible from the Pope? NO! Any other authority within the Church? Nope, not that either.

So, where did he (or any other Reformer) have the authority to change the Bible?

Please discuss.

Why do you suppose they lack the authority? After all, their choices were accepted. If their choices were accepted, its another thing to question or accept their authority. What human has the right to determine such authority?

 

[amariselle]

Needs to be honest about...what? I am not vilifying Luther. I am asking where he got the AUTHORITY.

I was responding to your second post....

Never mind.

 

[amariselle]

You recently accused me of not reading the OP on another thread. Please READ the OP. I am pointing out that Luther (and others) made changes to the Bible on their own authority, and not by the Authority of God.

I did read it.

 

[Monk Brendan]

By and large, this seems like a Strawman fallacy. However, even if Luther or anyone did attempt to change the word of God (I am not saying that evidence has been shown that he did), they do so at their own peril.

Likewise, the Magisterium also has no authority to change the word of God. Nor does the Magisterium define what the word of God is. God defines what the word of God is and no one else.

Both good points! But what I am asking is who gave Luther the authority to make the changes, and not what changes he made, or any modern person making changes.

Also, the Magersterium DOES have the authority, but they have never done so. The Pope is still the successor of Peter, and he carried God's blessing that He gave to Peter “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” (Matt 16:18 KJV) So when the Pope and the bishops of the Church claim the Authority of God, they can do so. So can the Orthodox bishops of the world.

 

[Monk Brendan]

Likewise, the Magisterium also has no authority to change the word of God. Nor does the Magisterium define what the word of God is. God defines what the word of God is and no one else.

And God would change His mind from the 4th century to the 15th century?

 

[amariselle]

Both good points! But what I am asking is who gave Luther the authority to make the changes, and not what changes he made, or any modern person making changes.

Also, the Magersterium DOES have the authority, but they have never done so. The Pope is still the successor of Peter, and he carried God's blessing that He gave to Peter “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” (Matt 16:18 KJV) So when the Pope and the bishops of the Church claim the Authority of God, they can do so. So can the Orthodox bishops of the world.

Well, the authority of the Pope and the Magisterium is another topic altogether. I would think that the entirely corrupt history of such would cause at least some doubts and honest questions in this regard.

It does for me anyway.

So, I have to agree that the Magisterium does not have the power to change God's word, which is also why He has never let that happen.

 

[Monk Brendan]

So you don't believe this august body of men had personal ambitions mixed up with their deliberations for a period of time spanning centuries?

Prove that they did, give me book, chapter and verse of the Bible, (You're Sola Scriptura, aren't you?) and show me biographical information to prove that proposition.