Martin Luther taught that confession and absolution, the real presence of Christ during the Eucharist, infant baptism, etc are all very biblical practices. Many Christian fundamentalists hail Martin Luther as the Father of the Reformation, yet denounce many of his teachings, calling them unscriptural. Why is it that fundamentalists hold Dr. Luther in such high regard, yet deny the most basic things he taught?
2007-12-05 02:23:21 · 4 answers · asked by That Guy Drew 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I wouldn't say they denounce his teachings--they just don't agree. The disagreement is over words and how they translate. For example: Martin Luther taught that we are baptized FOR the remission of sins--in other words to get rid of sins--to wash them away.
Baptists teach that the word FOR above means "because". As in: FOR (because) God so loved the world.... John 3:16. When you plug that word "because" (instead of the word "for") into being baptized "because" of remission of sins--you have the reason for the disagreement about baptism.
Luther didn't really teach confession and absolution as the Catholics believe did he? My understanding is that he taught that we should examine ourselves before communion. I've never heard of a Lutheran going to confession...
As for the real presence of Christ during the Lord's Supper... I haven't figured out their reasoning for their thoughts on that subject. ;-) The Bible is very clear. I think they are slowly coming around to Luther's view (and the Bible's) though. One of our Sunday School lessons (in a Baptist church) talked about getting sick and dying if you didn't see the Lord's Body in the bread of communion. :-) (If anyone wants Bible passages to support the Lord's Body being a real food and His Blood being a real drink, please email. I'll look them up. John 6 is only part of the equation.)
Other reasons they do not agree with some of Luther's teaching is that he was very antisemetic. He also said that Revelations should be thrown out of the Bible because he couldn't understand it.
My feeling? Luther was a man of God--but there were certain things that he wasn't correct about. He led the way in translating the Bible and put things down in a wonderful and understandable way in Luther's Catechism. Yet I believe Luther would be the first to agree that he was a sinner, and that he needed Jesus to save him from his sins too.
.
2007-12-05 11:59:16 · answer #1 · answered by oooooolala! 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Luther marked the beginning of the reformation away from the Roman Catholic Church which gave the common man the ability to interpret the Bible for himself. He was a very important historic figure. If not for Martin Luther, would William Tyndale ever have come to the forefront of history? Would the Bible ever have been printed? Many men have done great things, who I disagree with on certain points.
George Washington had slaves.
Albert Einstein was a liberal.
J. Edgar Hoover wore a dress.
Mother Teresa was Catholic.
2007-12-05 06:28:16 · answer #2 · answered by Caveman 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't exalt Martin Luther. He was wrong on many things. But God still used him to expose much of the wrong in the catholic cult. That doesn't ever mean that Luther is right on all things he himself taught.
2007-12-05 02:26:30 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
He also thought you had no free will. He was right, but for the wrong reason.
2007-12-05 02:28:47 · answer #4 · answered by Meat Bot 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋