Martin accuses Jesus of sexual sins

[Authentic Nouveau]

Christ committed adultery first of all with the woman at the well about whom St. John tells us. Was not everybody about Him saying: "Whatever has he been doing with her?" Secondly, with Mary Magdalene, and thirdly with the woman taken in adultery whom he dismissed so lightly. Thus even Christ, who was so righteous, must have been guilty of fornication before He died. (D. Martin Luthers Werke, kritische Gesamtausgabe [Hermann Bohlau Verlag, 1893], vol. 2, no. 1472, April 7 - May 1, 1532, p. 33)

Jesus was The Innocent Lamb and had not sinned.

1 Peter 2:22​

He committed no sin, neither was deceit found in his mouth.

Not so with Martin.

 

[CrowCross]

Jesus was The Innocent Lamb and had not sinned.

1 Peter 2:22​

He committed no sin, neither was deceit found in his mouth.

Not so with Martin.

We will always have scripture twisters amongst us.

 

[BJ Bear]

Jesus was The Innocent Lamb and had not sinned.

1 Peter 2:22​

He committed no sin, neither was deceit found in his mouth.

Not so with Martin.

That is an odd post. Where in that post did you cite your source? Was it from a website or secondary source book? The stated source citation is either incorrect or incomplete.

In any case, if a person reads the contextless claim of what Luther purportedly said it refers to what some people said about Jesus rather than what He actually did.

If you're not interested in repeating malicious gossip then check your sources before posting whatever tickles your fancy.

 

[Tertiumquid]

Christ committed adultery first of all with the woman at the well about whom St. John tells us. Was not everybody about Him saying: "Whatever has he been doing with her?" Secondly, with Mary Magdalene, and thirdly with the woman taken in adultery whom he dismissed so lightly. Thus even Christ, who was so righteous, must have been guilty of fornication before He died. (D. Martin Luthers Werke, kritische Gesamtausgabe [Hermann Bohlau Verlag, 1893], vol. 2, no. 1472, April 7 - May 1, 1532, p. 33)

Ever hear of Google? It is possible to actually look up stuff before you post.

 

[Tertiumquid]

That is an odd post. Where in that post did you cite your source? Was it from a website or secondary source book? The stated source citation is either incorrect or incomplete.

This reference floating around cyberspace as "D. Martin Luthers Werke, kritische Gesamtausgabe [Hermann Bohlau Verlag, 1893], vol. 2, no. 1472, April 7 - May 1, 1532, p. 33."......
This reference appears to be the work of one of Rome's cyber-apologists from early in the 2000's. The reference neglects "Nachfolger" from the title page, the year appears to be wrong (it was 1913, not 1893)... though maybe there was an earlier edition... and the page number was not 33 (it was page 107).

 

[Authentic Nouveau]

Martin spent too much time drinking.

 

[Authentic Nouveau]

We will always have scripture twisters amongst us.

Really? The serpent twisted what God said in Genesis 3.

 

[BJ Bear]

This reference floating around cyberspace as "D. Martin Luthers Werke, kritische Gesamtausgabe [Hermann Bohlau Verlag, 1893], vol. 2, no. 1472, April 7 - May 1, 1532, p. 33."......
This reference appears to be the work of one of Rome's cyber-apologists from early in the 2000's. The reference neglects "Nachfolger" from the title page, the year appears to be wrong (it was 1913, not 1893)... though maybe there was an earlier edition... and the page number was not 33 (it was page 107).

Thanks. The division in the printing of the WA made for an obvious tell that the citation was from a misguided or incompetent secondary source.

 

[Tertiumquid]

Thanks. The division in the printing of the WA made for an obvious tell that the citation was from a misguided or incompetent secondary source.

Also of interest:

The sole manuscript containing this item is a quarto volume that found a final resting place in the State Library at Munich, where it was catalogued as Codex latinus 943. The page containing our item was copied from an earlier copy - possibly Schlaginhaufen's original manuscript-between November 4, 1551, and some time in 1567. The copyist may have been Schlaginhaufen's son-in-law, the Rev. John Oberndorfer of Ratisbon.

Thus the "hair-raising blasphemy" turns out to be an inaccurately translated version of a somewhat uncertain, uncontrolled and unverifiable quotation of an offhand remark of blessed Martin Luther, without a shred of context or any indication of the circumstances that evoked the words it purports to reproduce. Since the item was destined to remain in manuscript form for 356 years after it was set down, it is quite probable that blessed Martin Luther himself never saw what Schlaginhaufen had written down.

 

[Tertiumquid]

Martin spent too much time drinking.

In my Christian world, slandering dead people is still... like... not all that cool.

 

[Authentic Nouveau]

In my Christian world, slandering dead people is still... like... not all that cool.

Martin slandered Jesus and put it in writing. I see you have no problem with that.

You don't like an icon fact checked using scripture?

 

[Tertiumquid]

Martin slandered Jesus and put it in writing. I see you have no problem with that.

You don't like an icon fact checked using scripture?

LOL. Luther didn't write the quote you cited. I could hit Luther with a lot of bullets. You're shooting into the air.

 

[Bonnie]

I seem to remember that Luther said something to the effect that on the cross, Jesus became a murderer, adulterer, thief, etc. because God put our sins upon Him on the cross, so that, as Paul wrote, "He who knew no sin BECAME SIN FOR US." From 2 Corinthians. Do you remember that, Tertium?

 

[Tertiumquid]

I seem to remember that Luther said something to the effect that on the cross, Jesus became a murderer, adulterer, thief, etc. because God put our sins upon Him on the cross, so that, as Paul wrote, "He who knew no sin BECAME SIN FOR US." From 2 Corinthians. Do you remember that, Tertium?

Luther said things like that a lot. It's his theology of the atonement, the "great exchange" or the "happy exchange" in which Christ's righteousness becomes ours and our sins become Christ's sins. LW 54 speculates a context for the outrageous remark:

The probable context is suggested in a sermon of 1536 (WA 41, 647) in which Luther asserted that Christ was reproached by the world as a glutton, a winebibber, and even an adulterer.

On the other hand, the actual textual criticism of the comment is so spurious that it's absurd to even put it forth as a genuine comment from Luther. There are many actual genuine comments from Luther that people can take issue with. It's an act of desperation to use "Christ, who was so righteous, must have been guilty of fornication before He died." But, that's the nature of the Internet and information. People demonstrate their sinful nature and need for a savior by what they post here and on Facebook and other places.

 

[Bonnie]

Luther said things like that a lot. It's his theology of the atonement, the "great exchange" or the "happy exchange" in which Christ's righteousness becomes ours and our sins become Christ's sins. LW 54 speculates a context for the outrageous remark:


On the other hand, the actual textual criticism of the comment is so spurious that it's absurd to even put it forth as a genuine comment from Luther. There are many actual genuine comments from Luther that people can take issue with. It's an act of desperation to use "Christ, who was so righteous, must have been guilty of fornication before He died." But, that's the nature of the Internet and information. People demonstrate their sinful nature and need for a savior by what they post here and on Facebook and other places.

Thanks. And I like your last sentence, too. This isn't the first time someone from other boards who has opposed my views has posted stuff like this, in an effort to discredit me and my beliefs. They fail to realize that Luther isn't our "pope" and we don't need to believe each and everything thing he wrote. He wasn't infallible. But Jesus is, and over and over again, Luther pointed us to Christ Jesus and the Bible.

 

[Tertiumquid]

Thanks. And I like your last sentence, too. This isn't the first time someone from other boards who has opposed my views has posted stuff like this, in an effort to discredit me and my beliefs. They fail to realize that Luther isn't our "pope" and we don't need to believe each and everything thing he wrote. He wasn't infallible. But Jesus is, and over and over again, Luther pointed us to Christ Jesus and the Bible.

The "Luther is awful" group is fascinating. It would be interesting to interview the Luther-haters / Luther-obsessed and do a study on them to see what sort of common denominators surface. It's interesting in that it's all different people, many which oppose each other, yet they're unified in hating Luther and blaming him for all the evils of the world.

One basic common denominator is lack of critical thinking. Typically, the Luther-haters have knee-jerk reactions based on their feelings. Another common denominator is the lack of seeing their own double standards in their own argumentation.

 

[Authentic Nouveau]

Old Martin is a judgmental character.

 

[Nic]

Old Martin is a judgmental character.

Sin abounds in all of us.
Romans 7, ESV
We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin. I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For I do not do the good I want to do, but the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.
So I find this law at work: Although I want to do good, evil is right there with me. For in my inner being I delight in God’s law; but I see another law at work in me, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within me. What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body that is subject to death? Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord!
So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God’s law, but in my sinful nature a slave to the law of sin.
Romans 8, ESV
There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.

 

[Authentic Nouveau]

Jesus was The Innocent Lamb and had not sinned.

1 Peter 2:22​

He committed no sin, neither was deceit found in his mouth.

Not so with Martin.

Clear picture of Martin not being filled with the Holy Ghost.

 

[Nic]

Clear picture of Martin not being filled with the Holy Ghost.

Clearly you fail in following Christ's example like the rest of us sinners.