Was Martin Luther anti-Semitic?

[Runningman]

Probably the most famous religious figure in Protestantism is Martin Luther. This was the same man who started the Protestant Reformation leading the movement to reformulate certain basic tenants of Catholic belief.

There is also a lesser-known side to Martin Luther and it was that he was a raging anti-Semite.

He wrote a 65,000 word book called On the Jews and Their Lies. It is divided up into four parts and the part that contains most of the anti-Semitic things that Martin Luther believed about Jews like Jesus Christ is part four.

His writings were often quoted by Hitler and, in the present day, quoted by neo-Nazis.

Some of the things he said about Jews like Jesus Christ are:

“an idle and lazy people, such a useless, evil, pernicious people, such blasphemous enemies of God.”​

​

“we let them get rich on our sweat and blood, while we remain poor and they suck the marrow from our bones.”​

Martin did not stop with verbal attacks against Jews, but he also made many calls to violence as well:

"set fire to their synagogues or schools and to bury and cover with dirt whatever will not burn."​

​

“their houses also be razed and destroyed.”​

​

“all their prayer books and Talmudic writings, in which such idolatry, lies, cursing, and blasphemy are taught, be taken from them.”​

​

“rabbis be forbidden to teach henceforth on pain of loss of life and limb.”​

​

“safe-conduct on the highways be abolished completely for the Jews.”​

​

“usury should be prohibited to them, and that all cash and treasure of silver and gold be taken from them and put aside for safekeeping.”​

​

“putting a flail, an ax, a hoe, a spade, a distaff, or a spindle into the hands…letting them earn their bread in the sweat of their brow.”​

​

“if we wish to wash our hands of the Jews’ blasphemy and not share in their guilt, we have to part company with them. They must be driven from our country…like mad dogs.”​

So is the founder of Protestantism an anti-Semite? Yes, I would say he absolutely is. @mikesw here's your chance to continue defending him or rescind your claims that he's a Christian.

source: https://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1012&context=constructing

 

[Jay]

Dietrich Bonhoeffer would be my pick for a German theologian

Dietrich Bonhoeffer (1906–1945) was a Lutheran pastor and theologian living in Germany during World War II. He was one of the organizers of the Confessing Church in Germany, along with Karl Barth and others who actively opposed the regime of Adolf Hitler and the Nazi oppression of the Jews. Bonhoeffer spent time in America and the United Kingdom as a teacher but eventually felt called to return to the German church in its time of need. At one point, Bonhoeffer made the controversial decision to participate in a plot to assassinate Hitler, and he was eventually executed for that offense and for helping Jews escape Nazism. He was hanged on April 9, 1945, just before the end of the war. Dietrich Bonhoeffer was a symbol of hope to many Christians during the war, and his classic book, The Cost of Discipleship (1937), is still widely read by Christians.

As a teacher, Dietrich Bonhoeffer balanced a mix of theological rigor and compassion for his fellow man, especially the oppressed. His time in America gave him a new perspective on civil rights issues. He taught Sunday school at the Abyssinian Baptist Church in Harlem and gained a love for African-American spirituals. He found the black perspective on Christ refreshing in its passion and clarity, and his experiences there changed him as a person and as a theologian and perhaps contributed to his later commitment to ecumenism. He also taught systematic theology at the University of Berlin. Eventually, Bonhoeffer took a ministry position in London and hoped to use ecumenical teachings to inspire English support for the Confessing Church in Germany. He was also offered an opportunity to study under Gandhi, but he decided instead to return home to Germany to teach in underground seminaries in support of the Confessing Church.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer was arrested in 1943 and spent two years in prison, where he remained as active as he could in serving the Lord. After his execution, his writings in prison were collected and eventually published as Letters and Papers from Prison (1953).

Bonhoeffer’s book The Cost of Discipleship is a study on Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount and focuses on the concept of “cheap grace” versus “costly grace.” Bonhoeffer asserted that salvation will radically change a person’s life and that a faith without obedience is no faith at all (see James 2:17). Bonhoeffer wrote, “Cheap grace is preaching forgiveness without requiring repentance, baptism without church discipline, Communion without confession.… Cheap grace is grace without discipleship, grace without the cross, grace without Jesus Christ, living and incarnate.” Bonhoeffer defined costly grace, in contrast, as “the kingly rule of Christ, for whose sake a man will pluck out the eye which causes him to stumble, it is the call of Jesus Christ at which the disciple leaves his nets and follows him” (quoted in Christianity Today, February 7, 1994, p. 39).

Bonhoeffer’s message sometimes causes controversy because of its emphasis on works and his perspective that it is Christ’s weakness and suffering, not His strength, that saves us. Of course, we are not justified by works (Galatians 3:10; Romans 3:28), and Christ is all-powerful (Colossians 1:17). But without the suffering of Christ there can be no salvation (2 Corinthians 13:4), and Jesus called for radical sacrifice from His disciples: “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross daily and follow me. For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will save it” (Luke 9:23–24).

Bonhoeffer definitely lived out his commitment to Christ and placed love for God above all other loves or worldly concerns. His life as a Christian was challenged deeply by one of the most frightening anti-Christ regimes in history, but he remained faithful to the end.


Got Questions Ministries

 

[mikesw]

Probably the most famous religious figure in Protestantism is Martin Luther. This was the same man who started the Protestant Reformation leading the movement to reformulate certain basic tenants of Catholic belief.

There is also a lesser-known side to Martin Luther and it was that he was a raging anti-Semite.

He wrote a 65,000 word book called On the Jews and Their Lies. It is divided up into four parts and the part that contains most of the anti-Semitic things that Martin Luther believed about Jews like Jesus Christ is part four.

His writings were often quoted by Hitler and, in the present day, quoted by neo-Nazis.

Some of the things he said about Jews like Jesus Christ are:

“an idle and lazy people, such a useless, evil, pernicious people, such blasphemous enemies of God.”​

​

“we let them get rich on our sweat and blood, while we remain poor and they suck the marrow from our bones.”​

Martin did not stop with verbal attacks against Jews, but he also made many calls to violence as well:

"set fire to their synagogues or schools and to bury and cover with dirt whatever will not burn."​

​

“their houses also be razed and destroyed.”​

​

“all their prayer books and Talmudic writings, in which such idolatry, lies, cursing, and blasphemy are taught, be taken from them.”​

​

“rabbis be forbidden to teach henceforth on pain of loss of life and limb.”​

​

“safe-conduct on the highways be abolished completely for the Jews.”​

​

“usury should be prohibited to them, and that all cash and treasure of silver and gold be taken from them and put aside for safekeeping.”​

​

“putting a flail, an ax, a hoe, a spade, a distaff, or a spindle into the hands…letting them earn their bread in the sweat of their brow.”​

​

“if we wish to wash our hands of the Jews’ blasphemy and not share in their guilt, we have to part company with them. They must be driven from our country…like mad dogs.”​

So is the founder of Protestantism an anti-Semite? Yes, I would say he absolutely is. @mikesw here's your chance to continue defending him or rescind your claims that he's a Christian.

source: https://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1012&context=constructing

Okay. You relied on some opinion document for your view. You failed to say what was correctly noted in "The Jews and their lies."

Then you are referring to Hitler's era and neo-Nazis, which was not something Luther anticipated as a use of his writing. Do you know what the purpose of his writing was? Nope. Did you see if Luther's concerns were real or not? He explains their horrific views of the Jews and their writings concerning gentiles. Was it harsh? sure. Was it worse than (doctrinal) views found among Jews? I'm not yet, but the deeper doctrines are evil against gentiles. Were battles based on religion happening? Yes. Was Luther unique in this? No -- he as not for violence but something triggered it about Jews. So far it seems more the ways of that era if not as explicitly detailed as Luther's point.

I am not sure that if later generations have treated Luther fairly on this. Maybe someone has written more on the basis of Luther's concerns. I do not hold anything against typical Jewish people. I just think you have followed unthinking reaction to Luther and thus your observations about him are unsubstantiated or imbalanced.

 

[Runningman]

Okay. You relied on some opinion document for your view. You failed to say what was correctly noted in "The Jews and their lies."

Then you are referring to Hitler's era and neo-Nazis, which was not something Luther anticipated as a use of his writing. Do you know what the purpose of his writing was? Nope. Did you see if Luther's concerns were real or not? He explains their horrific views of the Jews and their writings concerning gentiles. Was it harsh? sure. Was it worse than (doctrinal) views found among Jews? I'm not yet, but the deeper doctrines are evil against gentiles. Were battles based on religion happening? Yes. Was Luther unique in this? No -- he as not for violence but something triggered it about Jews. So far it seems more the ways of that era if not as explicitly detailed as Luther's point.

I am not sure that if later generations have treated Luther fairly on this. Maybe someone has written more on the basis of Luther's concerns. I do not hold anything against typical Jewish people. I just think you have followed unthinking reaction to Luther and thus your observations about him are unsubstantiated or imbalanced.

The source is easier to read and quotes directly from his book. Do you agree with Martin Luther?

 

[mikesw]

The source is easier to read and quotes directly from his book. Do you agree with Martin Luther?

Do you agree with everything said in Time magazine?

I do agree with the arguments he has against the deception of the Jewish writings that mess up the interpretations about the arrival of Christ Jesus. There is a balancing concept about burning synagogues. His recommendation to governments for that was to purge the Jewish religions from the lies about Christ -- as far as I could tell in a quick reading. He also condemns the Babylon/Chaldean Talmud as despicable, which is quite accurate. The significance of his proposal may depend on the border between what he experienced and what was uncertain information he gained. {Though, he got some information from a book by Margaritha, who was part of a rabbi's family and became a Christians. So Luther likely gained concerns through that source.} Generally though, we do not accept a merge of government with religious cleansing in modern times. So his recommendation on that is too severe for today's vantage point.
So, it is obvious in the present era that it would be wrong to pursue his recommendations for the government action. Also, it seems apparent that his concern is not bloodline related but rather is the religious material and doctrines of hatred toward gentiles and all Christians that underlies Luther's concerns.

 

[Runningman]

Do you agree with everything said in Time magazine?

I do agree with the arguments he has against the deception of the Jewish writings that mess up the interpretations about the arrival of Christ Jesus. There is a balancing concept about burning synagogues. His recommendation to governments for that was to purge the Jewish religions from the lies about Christ -- as far as I could tell in a quick reading. He also condemns the Babylon/Chaldean Talmud as despicable, which is quite accurate. The significance of his proposal may depend on the border between what he experienced and what was uncertain information he gained. {Though, he got some information from a book by Margaritha, who was part of a rabbi's family and became a Christians. So Luther likely gained concerns through that source.} Generally though, we do not accept a merge of government with religious cleansing in modern times. So his recommendation on that is too severe for today's vantage point.
So, it is obvious in the present era that it would be wrong to pursue his recommendations for the government action. Also, it seems apparent that his concern is not bloodline related but rather is the religious material and doctrines of hatred toward gentiles and all Christians that underlies Luther's concerns.

You seem to offer no condemnation for him, but rather downplay his evil words and even agree with him. The founder of your organization isn't a Christian. Why do you follow his teachings?

 

[mikesw]

You seem to offer no condemnation for him, but rather downplay his evil words and even agree with him. The founder of your organization isn't a Christian. Why do you follow his teachings?

Maybe God has not chosen me to be a judge of those in Christ like the heathen would love me to do. However, like you commonly do, you have read out of context of the era Luther wrote. Are you justifying the Babylon Talmud and the evil things said against Christ and Christians? His purpose was the protection of Christians of warning them of dangerous beliefs of Judaism based on testimony of someone who was of descent of a rabbinic family. He possibly over-emphasized the influence on the general Jewish population. So that would be an error on his part. But you do not concern yourself with the historical context, only the modern secular animosity toward Christ and Christians.

 

[Runningman]

Maybe God has not chosen me to be a judge of those in Christ like the heathen would love me to do. However, like you commonly do, you have read out of context of the era Luther wrote. Are you justifying the Babylon Talmud and the evil things said against Christ and Christians? His purpose was the protection of Christians of warning them of dangerous beliefs of Judaism based on testimony of someone who was of descent of a rabbinic family. He possibly over-emphasized the influence on the general Jewish population. So that would be an error on his part. But you do not concern yourself with the historical context, only the modern secular animosity toward Christ and Christians.

The founder of your religion hated Jews like Jesus Christ. If you can't see that from his writings and you still find the need to defend him then it's up to you.

 

[mikesw]

The founder of your religion hated Jews like Jesus Christ. If you can't see that from his writings and you still find the need to defend him then it's up to you.

Ah. Now you say Jesus hated Jews --okay I'm interpreting things the way you do it. If you think Jesus did evil things so as to deserve to be hated by Martin Luther, you are off your rocker. That is the evil accusation your make, as if that is your job.

If people were using at least a bit closer term to reality, they could say they felt that Luther was anti-Judaism. He was against any distortion of the conception of God, especially when that corruption promulgated evil statements about Jesus and the Father or promoted evil action against the followers of God. It would only be anti-Semitism if he were saying that no Semite deserves to live -- or more mildly (from a secular point of view) that no Semite should be considered a true Christian. That does not appear in this text -- not in what I have read so far.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Men of God can be mistaken in many things.
Mistakes are mistakes, and Luther was WRONG in his views towards the Jews.

Now, how we judge a man, a man as a whole, is a different thing.
I would not like to judge Luther with criteria that God could use to judge me.
I would like to be as merciful to Luther as I want God to be merciful with me.

 

[TOTHALORDBEALLGLORY]

The source is easier to read and quotes directly from his book. Do you agree with Martin Luther?

i suggest we put calvin , luther and the unholy RCC as well as scores of men docrtrines and denomiantions
IN THE REAR VIEW MIRROR to NEVER LOOK back .
TIME we got a SNOOTFULL of THE BIBLE and fast . MEN be FLEECING THIS GENERATION
and the ulitmate lie to merge all has come to merge the decieved of men and the false religoins
to be as one under what they all believe is GOD and HIS LOVE . ONLY IT BE SATAN .
THE LIE to merge has come to merge the tares to be as one . SADLY we got many tares even in Christendom .
THE GOLDEN BULL of the all inclusive interfaith delusoin will gather the dead unto the day of perdition
Though they believe it is the way to peace and world safety . IT has them hooked
and many now love it and run to it . BIBLE TIME one , BIBLE TIME all cause MEN BE FLEECING .

 

[Runningman]

Ah. Now you say Jesus hated Jews --okay I'm interpreting things the way you do it. If you think Jesus did evil things so as to deserve to be hated by Martin Luther, you are off your rocker. That is the evil accusation your make, as if that is your job.

If people were using at least a bit closer term to reality, they could say they felt that Luther was anti-Judaism. He was against any distortion of the conception of God, especially when that corruption promulgated evil statements about Jesus and the Father or promoted evil action against the followers of God. It would only be anti-Semitism if he were saying that no Semite deserves to live -- or more mildly (from a secular point of view) that no Semite should be considered a true Christian. That does not appear in this text -- not in what I have read so far.

Martin Luther hated Jews. Jesus is a Jew. Therefore there is a powerful argument to make that Martin Luther was anti-Christ.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Martin Luther hated Jews. Jesus is a Jew. Therefore there is a powerful argument to make that Martin Luther was anti-Christ.

Hi Runningman

Do you believe that Jews who die like Jews, deserve to be either annihilated or tortured day and night for not believing in Jesus penal substitutionary atonement?

 

[mikesw]

Martin Luther hated Jews. Jesus is a Jew. Therefore there is a powerful argument to make that Martin Luther was anti-Christ.

Wow. You really have to make everyone seem ungodly so you can claim some high exaltation among men. Like we see regarding your eisegesis of scripture, you like to disregard context.
Which Jewish views of gentiles did you like most, as found in early 1500s? There have been extremist Jews just like any other broad cultures who have had extremists arise. Underlying a point earlier, Luther was against extremist teachings among Jews. He was against such extremist Judaism, not against the people for their race or ethnicity -- based on the details I read.

 

[Dizerner]

Yes, he was.

But he is not the "founder" of anyone who believes what some call "Protestant" theology, that is just a misnomer.

Non-Catholic theology existed before Luther.

 

[Runningman]

Hi Runningman

Do you believe that Jews who die like Jews, deserve to be either annihilated or tortured day and night for not believing in Jesus penal substitutionary atonement?

No.

 

[Runningman]

Wow. You really have to make everyone seem ungodly so you can claim some high exaltation among men. Like we see regarding your eisegesis of scripture, you like to disregard context.
Which Jewish views of gentiles did you like most, as found in early 1500s? There have been extremist Jews just like any other broad cultures who have had extremists arise. Underlying a point earlier, Luther was against extremist teachings among Jews. He was against such extremist Judaism, not against the people for their race or ethnicity -- based on the details I read.

Provided there is proof that Martin Luther hated Jews, do you think he is a trustworthy source about Protestantism or Trinitarianism?

 

[Dizerner]

No.

Do you believe the Bible is inspired?

Do you believe hell exists as the Bible describes it?

 

[mikesw]

Provided there is proof that Martin Luther hated Jews, do you think he is a trustworthy source about Protestantism or Trinitarianism?

suppose that unicorns actually breathe in water...

suppose King David murdered Uriah, do you think that God should send his son birthed under the bloodline of King David?

Maybe you have heard that the Trinitarian doctrine was a refinement over several centuries rather than something that popped up in Martin Luther's time. Maybe you have heard of all the destructive doctrines of the Roman Catholics that led to the division. Your question is very confused.

 

[Runningman]

Men of God can be mistaken in many things.
Mistakes are mistakes, and Luther was WRONG in his views towards the Jews.

Now, how we judge a man, a man as a whole, is a different thing.
I would not like to judge Luther with criteria that God could use to judge me.
I would like to be as merciful to Luther as I want God to be merciful with me.

For the record, I am not judging his salvation. Lord knows we all need His mercy and grace or we can't make it, but i want to know if we can trust Martin Luther as a shepherd over the church. I firmly believe we cannot. I don't know who hurt Martin, or who poisoned his mind with evil, but I would like people to know who he publicly portrayed himself to be, with his writings, for their safety.

Provided what seemed to motivate Martin to rebrand the established norm at the time was hatred, I just think it's best to throw a word of caution to the wind; he shouldn't be trusted.