Did the obsession with the Bible start with Martin Luther?

Question

I said OBSESSION, not possesion. there's a very big difference!

Answer 1

The idea that all revealed truth is to be found in "66 books" is not only not in Scripture, it is contradicted by Scripture (1 Corinthians 11:2, 2 Thessalonians 2:15, 2 Thessalonians 3:6, 1 Timothy 3:15, 2 Peter 1:20-21, 2 Peter 3:16). It is a concept unheard of in the Old Testament, where the authority of those who sat on the Chair of Moses (Matthew 23:2-3) existed. In addition to this, for 400 years, there was no defined canon of "Sacred Scripture" aside from the Old Testament; there was no "New Testament"; there was only Tradition and non-canonical books and letters. Once Scripture was defined from the many competing books, Bibles were hand-copied and decorated by monks, were rare and precious, so precious they had to be chained down in the churches so that they would not be stolen.

In the 16th c., Luther, reacting to serious abuses and clerical corruption in the Latin Church, to his own heretical theological vision (see articles on sola scriptura and sola fide), and, frankly, to his own inner demons, removed those books from the canon that lent support to orthodox doctrine, relegating them to an appendix. Removed in this way were books that supported such things as prayers for the dead (Tobit 12:12; 2 Maccabees 12:39-45), Purgatory (Wisdom 3:1-7), intercession of dead saints (2 Maccabees 15:14), and intercession of angels as intermediaries (Tobit 12:12-15).


Protestants claim the Bible is the only rule of faith, meaning that it contains all of the material one needs for theology and that this material is sufficiently clear that one does not need apostolic tradition or the Church’s magisterium (teaching authority) to help one understand it. In the Protestant view, the whole of Christian truth is found within the Bible’s pages. Anything extraneous to the Bible is simply non-authoritative, unnecessary, or wrong—and may well hinder one in coming to God.

Catholics, on the other hand, recognize that the Bible does not endorse this view and that, in fact, it is repudiated in Scripture. The true "rule of faith"—as expressed in the Bible itself—is Scripture plus apostolic tradition, as manifested in the living teaching authority of the Catholic Church, to which were entrusted the oral teachings of Jesus and the apostles, along with the authority to interpret Scripture correctly

Answer 2

I wouldn't say that it started with Luther, but his work did help bring the Bible into the hands of the people and stressed the need for our worship and our faith to be biblically based.
Prior to the Reformation, even many of the Catholic priests were not very well versed in what was in the Bible. They were taught what the Vatican felt was right and what their tutors felt was right. Then left to their own devices in their parishes. Of course, there was greater control in some areas than in others, but on the whole, a lot of misinformation was being put out.
Also, the Bible, up until that time, was primarily printed in Latin. So the majority of the people couldn't even read it and think for themselves! They had to go strictly on whatever the local parish priest was telling them. Further, Mass was done in Latin and many people just went through the motions, never knowing what they were actually saying or doing. Remember... reading and learning other languages was not a big push for the common man.
Two of Luther's big issues were to put the Bible and the Mass (Lutheran Divine Service) into the language of the people. That way, those who could read, would be able to read the Bible. And every person would be able to understand everything that was being said at Mass.
And finally, Luther did believe that our faith, our doctrine, our worship, all had to be scripturally sound. Sola Scriptura. Even today, as you go through the LCMS Service Book, you will see scriptural references to every thing we do during Divine Service.

Answer 3

I would say that the early church was committed to the Bible. As far as the beginning of the reformation I would point to John Huss.

John Huss (a priest) was invited in 1414 at the Council of Constance to present his views - he was taken, declared a heretic, and burnt to death. The last words of John Hus were that, “in 100 years, God will raise up a man whose calls for reform cannot be suppressed.” Almost exactly 100 years later, Martin Luther nailed his the 95 Theses to the church door at Wittenberg

Answer 4

well around that time yes. Not because of Martin Luther but because of the printing press, which made bibles affordable for many more people.

edit: yeah, there is not a big difference. obsession and possession are in fact the same thing.

Answer 5

Yes. He said that the common man could interpret for themselves. Twenty per cent of Tucson is illiterate so we can count them out. Then you have the semi illiterate and so on. So yes, the common man have made quite a few common, and mundane assertions about the meanings of these arcane texts.

Answer 6

No, I believe it started with Tyndale's printing press and Wycliffe's translation of the Bible into the common language.

Answer 7

No, it began with the formation of christianity, and has continued ever since. The bible can be used to justify any acts of evil, such as rape, murder and slavery.

Answer 8

no i believe it began once people could actually read it for themselves. prior to that usually only the wealthy had enough $$$ to learn to read let alone own a bible.