Thread: Oh, that Luther!

“Whenever the devil harasses you, seek the company of men or drink more, or joke and talk nonsense, or do some other merry thing. Sometimes we must drink more, sport, recreate ourselves, and even sin a little to spite the devil, so that we leave him no place for troubling our consciences with trifles. We are conquered if we try too conscientiously not to sin at all. 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.” --- Martin Luther

What do you think of this quote from Luther?

He was a very smart man! Now, where's my brandy....

It appears to be authentic, as best I can tell at this point.

Everyone's thoughts?

-----Added 5/21/2009 at 06:19:09 EST-----

Originally Posted by TranZ4MR

He was a very smart man! Now, where's my brandy....

I was going to give you a "thanks" but the button was gone with your post.
HMMM?!?!

Anyway, thanks!

We need a June Cleaver type to look askance with her head tilted to the right and one hand on her hip saying 'Luther!'

I wonder what my fellow SBC brethren would think if they knew I looked favorably on this quote! I mean other then those who are here....

I remember watching this old movie about Luther wherein he said that we need to joke and laugh in order to drive the devil away. I used to think that that was perhaps a misrepresentation of Luther but now, I'm beginning to wonder.

Luther was prone to over speak.

I think it could be taken in a way that renders it rather similar to what Lewis said in his Preface to Paradise Lost:

If Mr. Eliot disdains the eagles and trumpets of epic poetry because the fashion of this world passes away, I honour him. But if he goes on to draw the conclusion that all poetry should have the penitential qualities of his own best work, I believe he is mistaken. As long as we live in merry middle earth it is necessary to have middle things. If the round table is abolished, for every one who rises to the level of Galahad, a hundred will drop plumb down to that of Mordred. Mr. Eliot may succeed in persuading the reading youth of England to have done with robes of purple and pavements of marble. But he will not therefore find them walking in sackcloth on floors of mud –he will only find them in smart, ugly suits walking on rubberoid. It has all been tried before. The older Puritans took away the maypoles and the mince-pies: but they did not bring in the millennium, they only brought in the Restoration. Galahad must not make common cause with Mordred, for it is always Mordred who gains, and he who loses by such alliance.

We may take "sin" as in ignore a scruple, rather than as "break a commandment".

"Sin Boldly"

-Martin Luther

I agree with Ruben.

Sounds like Luther in his later years, his bad physical health and love of alcohol made him very short-tempered and extremely harsh in his writings and comments. Just read what he had to say about the Jews. His wife Katharina tried to help him but he even pushed her off when she told him that she thought that he was becoming very rude and bad tempered. It is always a reminder that Great man can still fall.

Originally Posted by ReformedChapin

"Sin Boldly"

-Martin Luther

now the quote in context..

“If you are a preacher of grace, then preach a true and not a fictitious grace; if grace is true, you must bear a true and not a fictitious sin. God does not save people who are only fictitious sinners. Be a sinner and sin boldly,  but believe and rejoice in Christ even more boldly, for he is victorious over sin, death, and the world. As long as we are here [in this world]  we have to sin. This life is not the dwelling place of righteousness,  but, as Peter says,  we look for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells. It is enough that by the riches of God’s glory we have come to know the Lamb that takes away the sin of the world.  No sin will separate us from the Lamb, even though we commit fornication and murder a thousand times a day. Do you think that the purchase price that was paid for the redemption of our sins by so great a Lamb is too small? Pray boldly—you too are a mighty sinner.”[23]

Luther's "sin boldly"

OP, could I get a precise citation for that quote?

Those of us who have read Luthers works know that he had a knack for using hyperboles and exaggerating things. I still remember reading bondage of the will the first time and being shocked how the called Erasmus an idiot over and over again. Erasmus was probably one the prime scholars of his time and you had little monk calling him a fool! Oh that Luther!

Both of those quotes by him are priceless. I'm sure he nipped many self-righteous people.

not gunna lie i kinda like it... but im 17 so thats why lol

The closest I could come was in the Table Talk, transcriptions by Luther's students of his banter and repartee over beer.

I will have none of Moses with his law, for he is an enemy to my Lord and Saviour Christ. If Moses will go to law with me, I will give him his dispatch, and say: Here stands Christ.

At the day of judgment Moses will doubtless look upon me, and say: Thou didst understand me rightly, and didst well distinguish between me and the law of faith; therefore we are now friends.

We must reject the law when it seeks to affright the conscience, and when we feel God’s anger against our sins, then we must eat, drink, and be cheerful, to spite the devil. But human wisdom is more inclined to understand the law of Moses, than the law of the Gospel. Old Adam will not out.

Together with the law, Satan torments the conscience by picturing Christ before our eyes, as an angry and stern judge, saying: God is an enemy to sinners, for he is a just God; thou art a sinner, therefore God is thy enemy. Hereat is the conscience dejected, beaten down, and taken captive. Now he that can make a true difference in this case, will say: Devil! thou art deceived, it is not so as thou pretendest; for God is not an enemy to all sinners, but only to the ungodly and impenitent sinners and persecutors of his Word. For even as sin is two-fold, even so is righteousness two-fold.

Table Talk "Of the Law and the Gospel"

Originally Posted by ReformedChapin

“If you are a preacher of grace, then preach a true and not a fictitious grace; if grace is true, you must bear a true and not a fictitious sin. God does not save people who are only fictitious sinners. Be a sinner and sin boldly,  but believe and rejoice in Christ even more boldly, for he is victorious over sin, death, and the world. As long as we are here [in this world]  we have to sin. This life is not the dwelling place of righteousness,  but, as Peter says,  we look for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells. It is enough that by the riches of God’s glory we have come to know the Lamb that takes away the sin of the world.  No sin will separate us from the Lamb, even though we commit fornication and murder a thousand times a day. Do you think that the purchase price that was paid for the redemption of our sins by so great a Lamb is too small? Pray boldly—you too are a mighty sinner.”[23] [emphasis mine]

Luther's "sin boldly"

In terms of the "already/not yet" schema, it seems to me that Luther places too much emphasis on the "not yet" in this quote.

Originally Posted by CharlieJ

OP, could I get a precise citation for that quote?

Here ya go The Life and Letters of Martin Luther - Google Book Search

Originally Posted by TranZ4MR

Originally Posted by CharlieJ

OP, could I get a precise citation for that quote?

Here ya go The Life and Letters of Martin Luther - Google Book Search

WOW! I'm truly impressed!

I agree with the general sentiment of the quote, but it is definitely overstated. "and even sin a little"?!?!?! What was he thinking?

If one is combating an Epicurian view of life (outside of Christ, of course) or an attitude of monastic denial (something he knew well) then this quote is reasonable... in moderation. As already noted, Luther did tend to go a bit overboard in his diatribes at times, but the underlining principle of freedom in Christ and the end of guilt (within a healthy context of prayerful relationship with the Lord) is a good one.

Theognome

Originally Posted by Ivan

Originally Posted by TranZ4MR

Originally Posted by CharlieJ

OP, could I get a precise citation for that quote?

Here ya go The Life and Letters of Martin Luther - Google Book Search

WOW! I truly impressed!

Google is my buddy!

If you want an even more difficult Luther quote, Ivan, how about this one:

No. 1472: Christ Reproached as Adulterer Between April 7 and May 1, 1532

[Martin Luther said,] “Christ was an adulterer for the first time with the woman at the well, for it was said, ‘Nobody knows what he’s doing with her’ [John 4:27]. Again [he was an adulterer] with Magdalene, and still again with the adulterous woman in John 8 [:2–11], whom he let off so easily. So the good Christ had to become an adulterer before he died.”

Martin Luther, vol. 54, Luther's Works, Vol. 54 : Table Talk, ed. Jaroslav Jan Pelikan, Hilton C. Oswald and Helmut T. Lehmann, Luther's Works (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1999, c1967), 54:154.

The editor's notes are helpful here: "This entry has been cited against Luther, among others by Arnold Lunn in The Revolt Against Reason (New York: Sheed & Ward, 1951), pp. 45, 257, 258. What Luther meant might have been made clearer if John Schlaginhaufen had indicated the context of the Reformer’s remarks. 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."

As has already been noted the Tabletalk is a difficult source of Luther quotes for a few reasons . . .

* Luther "liked" his beer and could wax somewhat out of bounds when given to drink.
* The students who record his tabletalk do not provide adequate context for many of his sayings, this one for example.
* The students who represent these comments were also drinking at the time.

Originally Posted by DMcFadden

If you want an even more difficult Luther quote, Ivan, how about this one:

No. 1472: Christ Reproached as Adulterer Between April 7 and May 1, 1532
[Martin Luther said,] “Christ was an adulterer for the first time with the woman at the well, for it was said, ‘Nobody knows what he’s doing with her’ [John 4:27]. Again [he was an adulterer] with Magdalene, and still again with the adulterous woman in John 8 [:2–11], whom he let off so easily. So the good Christ had to become an adulterer before he died.”

Martin Luther, vol. 54, Luther's Works, Vol. 54 : Table Talk, ed. Jaroslav Jan Pelikan, Hilton C. Oswald and Helmut T. Lehmann, Luther's Works (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1999, c1967), 54:154.

This blog seems to be helpful in giving some background information about the quote. Based on what I read there is a lot of mystery as to the context of the quote.

Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: Luther Said: Christ Committed Adultery?

Well how does one respond to this? The quote is indeed outrageous. First, The quote has no context. One does not know what exactly Luther had in mind. Was he kidding? Was he summarizing someone else's argument? Was he using hyperbole? It's really hard to say. If taken literally, it certainly is at odds with his other statements about Christ. Thus, even though one can't know exactly why he said this, we can put our Columbo hats on and have a strong assurance he didn't mean it literally.


The editors of Luther's Works include a footnote for this comment of Luther's, and they offer the following speculation:

"This entry has been cited against Luther, among others by Arnold Lunn in The Revolt Against Reason (New York: Sheed & Ward, 1951), pp. 45, 257, 258. What Luther meant might have been made clearer if John Schlaginhaufen had indicated the context of the Reformer’s remarks. 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."

If the didactic/third use of the law is minimized then . . .

Unless he really means something else . . .

Regardless if the quotation is true or not, we do not follow Luther for He is not the Author of Our Faith. Luther was not a super Christian. He was a man, like all of us. Even if the above quotations are true, who will question Luthers work to the church? No one.

It seems to me that it is most natural to take Luther's words with a kind of ellipsis. Christ became an adulterer ... in the popular estimation.

Originally Posted by py3ak

It seems to me that it is most natural to take Luther's words with a kind of ellipsis. Christ became an adulterer ... in the popular estimation.

Or, at the very least, unless contextual evidence is brought forth to the contrary, we can in a spirit of Christian charity and "hoping the best" assume of this great teacher of the gospel that he meant it in this (or some other proper) manner. We owe him the benefit of the doubt, unless we have reason to so doubt.

I do think that the most charitable interpretation is the one we are to adopt, unless other evidence rules it out of court. I think we should apply that in our reading of and about our brethren, even the ones in Scripture.

But I know sometimes we fall into a mindset where we worry that the attacks from hostile elements are true, and it can awkward to come across such a quote because we feel it as a toehold for them; but if their petty attacks didn't concern us, I suspect we would be less likely to perceive the words in question as being problematic to begin with. Perhaps that is not very clear. The way we perceive words has a certain dependence upon our emotional condition, and if we were cheerful and untroubled I think we would perceive fewer things as being careless or damaging or whatever.

This only illustrates we must be careful in speculating and focusing on 500 year old hearsay evidence, quoted without complete context, and interpreted centuries later. The difficulty is only further complicated if the parties were under the influence of intoxication.

A charitable esteem for our neighbor and for the cause of truth would cause us to stay away from speculating based on things like this. Who among us would want to be evaluated on bases like this?

Originally Posted by Scott1

This only illustrates we must be careful in speculating and focusing on 500 year old hearsay evidence, quoted without complete context, and interpreted centuries later. The difficulty is only further complicated if the parties were under the influence of intoxication.

A charitable esteem for our neighbor and for the cause of truth would cause us to stay away from speculating based on things like this. Who among us would want to be evaluated on basis like this?

I gave a link to his writings that have this quote in it.

Yes, I see a link to a book that has taken quotes attributed to Mr. Luther. It's understandable how that can be cited as a basis for discussing his views.

It appears though, these were not original writings of the esteemed Reformer, but transcriptions written by others, apparently in a beer tavern atmosphere. They are being selectively quoted, in and out, around the author's commentary.

Also, what we do know of Mr. Luther's writings, these statements do not seem consistent and it is not at all clear their context. That doesn't mean he did not say these things exactly as quoted (though we still do not seem to have their context)- it is possible.

The only point being, knowing how prone we are to misunderstand and reflect what others say attributing our own motives, how careful we must be, particularly in attributing his overall character and motives.

Hearsay is often repeated to slander, impugn or scandalize people and it is communicated as if it had a high degree of reliability. Such is not the case, that's why hearsay evidence, for example, is not generally admissible in court. Yet we receive it as truth in our discourse.

When we reflect on what the ninth commandment requires, it is convicting- because we all violate it... and so readily.

Question 144: What are the duties required in the ninth commandment?

Answer: The duties required in the ninth commandment are, the preserving and promoting of truth between man and man, and the good name of our neighbor, as well as our own; appearing and standing for the truth; and from the heart, sincerely, freely, clearly, and fully, speaking the truth, and only the truth, in matters of judgment and justice, and in all other things: Whatsoever; a charitable esteem of our neighbors; loving, desiring, and rejoicing in their good name; sorrowing for, and covering of their infirmities; freely acknowledging of their gifts and graces, defending their innocency; a ready receiving of a good report, and unwillingness to admit of an evil report, concerning them; discouraging talebearers, flatterers, and slanderers; love and care of our own good name, and defending it when need requires; keeping of lawful promises; studying and practicing of: Whatsoever things are true, honest, lovely, and of good report.

So you are saying those are not his writings? I didn't see where it had another author listed.

Originally Posted by Ivan

“Whenever the devil harasses you, seek the company of men or drink more, or joke and talk nonsense, or do some other merry thing. Sometimes we must drink more, sport, recreate ourselves, and even sin a little to spite the devil, so that we leave him no place for troubling our consciences with trifles. We are conquered if we try too conscientiously not to sin at all. 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.” --- Martin Luther

What do you think of this quote from Luther?

He's talking in regard to the relationship between faith and a clear conscience before God. See pp. 287-288 in Luther The Reformer, The Story of the Man and his Career, by James M. Kittelson, Professor of Church History at Luther Seminary, St. Paul, Mn. "Disasters and bizarre occurances were indeed the work of Satan. But they paled to insignificance by comparison with faith or the absence of faith. Faced with an attack on faith, Luther even had little regard for common morality, at least if it was used to make believers feel guilty. He frequently was very explicit on this subject. 'Sometimes it is necessary to drink a little more, play, joke, or even commit some sin in defiance and contempt of the devil in order not to give him an opportunity to make us scrupulous about small things. We will be overcome if we worry too much about falling into some sin...What do you think is my reason for drinking wine undiluted, talking freely, and eating more often if it is not to torment and vex the devil who has made up his mind to torment and vex me? Would that I could commit some token sin simply for the sake of mocking the devil, so that he might understand that I acknowledge no sin and am conscious of no sin. When the devil attacks and torments us, we must completely set aside the Ten Commandments.' (Weimar edition of Luther's works 1930 Volume 5, p. 519 [Letters of Spiritual Counsel, p. 86]). Nothing, absolutely nothing was more important to Luther than faith and, with it, a free conscience."

Many of Luther's sermons and works are filled with exhortation to holiness and obedience to God's commands. But, when it comes to defending justification by faith alone, and the clear conscience that one may have before God by faith alone, statements like this from him come up. He drew the line so clear when it came to justification, that, to impress upon his hearers just how far removed faith was to be from works in having any part in it, bold statements like this were made by him. And, to help those who were being pressed upon and tormented by Satan with a guilty conscience, who struggled to cling to Christ by plain faith, such statements, I'm sure, brought a sigh of relief.

TranZ4MR
So you are saying those are not his writings?

I don't know- it appears some of the quotations were transcriptions made by others (his students). They are selectively quoted. The sections I just scanned are generally, brief excerpts. That doesn't mean they are of no value, but are not a firm basis to evaluate the great Reformer's Theology.

The book is not one written by Mr. Luther, but about him, and with the viewpoint of the author, and he states his agenda (the author's) in his preface:

The present work aims to explain that personality; to show him in the setting of his age ; to indicate what part of his work is to be attributed to his inheritance and to the events of the time, but especially to reveal that part of the man which seems, at least, to be explicable by neither heredity nor environment, and to be more important than either, the character, or individuality.

Don't know much about the author's biases, whether he is a Christian, a theologian, or focused on presenting Mr. Luther in a provocative or controversial manner or what.

Sarah,

Luther's Tabletalk, part of his "Complete Works," was not composed by him in the conventional manner. It consists of a series of topical vignette's recorded and reported by his students who took them down, edited them, and collated them into a single work. In this sense, yes they are Luther's words. However, they do not come from his "pen."

Imagine that a group of your friends made notes about things you said, in the breakroom, in the bathroom, over dinner, while just "hanging out." Then, after your death, an admirer pulled them together, selected some, and printed them in a book without giving much sense of context or background. See the problem?

I prefer to think that Luther was a pioneer. His excesses are real, but understandable when taken in the context in which they were given. Calvin, remember, was a second generation reformer who had the benefit of Luther, Zwingli, Oecolampadius, Bucer, and others who went before him.

Second, the Lutheran system is flawed (IMO) by his too radically polarized oppositional thinking about law and grace. Without Calvin's third use of the law (which he comes close to embracing in several places but never quite does), Luther is bound to err in his antinomian-sounding rants.

Third, please take into account the fact that these are the remembered words of students who were also in an environment of various levels of intoxication. They were not shown to Dr. Luther for revision and correction. Nor did he have the benefit of explaining himself. Like Barth, Luther makes MANY "over the top" comments that seem outrageous until explained.

Fourth, there are good reasons why those of us on the PB are Calvinists (sorry Josh, I don't have the energy after a MISERABLE day at work to quibble and parse whether Baptists can be Calvinists) rather than Lutherans. Yes, they are our brethren and co-religionists in the war of Reformational confessional Christianity against shallowanity in its various isms and varieties. But, there are significant hermeneutical and theological reasons for being in the Calvin camp rather than the Luther camp.

Just wondering ... will there be a thread of "embarrassing" Calvin quotes?

I understand and see your position on this particular thread concerning his quotes taken down by his students. However, like Sproul, I would consider Luther one of our giant spiritual forefathers and not just a "lutheran" who Calvin had to correct on every point. I'm sure that's not what you are saying and I'm sure people here value him highly, but many people with whom I have spoken underestimate his value to our doctrinal foundations. They believe he only began the reformation and others like Calvin really gave the teachings.