Luther and the Jews

Cypress

"Cypress you motherfucking whore!"
No assessment of Martin Luther’s legacy can neglect his hateful and violent polemics against the Jews.

A. Luther’s writings against the Jews are distinctive.
1. They are not like modern racist anti-Semitism.
2. They are not like the genteel anti-Judaism of many 19th-century Protestant liberals, who regarded the Old Testament as a Jewish book, too primitive to be relevant to Christians.
3. Medieval Christian superstitions and libels are present in Luther’s writings against the Jews but not central.
4. Yet Luther’s recommendations (to burn synagogues, confiscate property, and expel the Jews) are more violent than those of any other major Christian theologian.

A full understanding of Luther’s motives for writing against the Jews must explain the contrast between the hatefulness of his treatises in the 1540s and the friendly approach he took 20 years earlier.

A. Luther’s 1523 treatise “That Jesus Christ Was Born a Jew” argued against Christian persecution of the Jews.
1. He regarded persecution of the Jews as one of the bad ideas of the papist church.
2. He expresses the hope that, if treated kindly and presented with true scriptural teaching, many Jews will convert to Christianity.
3. He argues that because the original apostles were Jews who did good to Gentiles by preaching Christ and converting them, Gentiles should now do good to the Jews in the same way.
4. He concludes the treatise by presenting Scripture passages that can be used in discussions with Jews to show them that Jesus is the messiah.

B. By 1543, Luther had decided that (like the pope and Zwingli) the Jews spoke for the devil.
1. He began to see Jews not as neighbors to be loved but as theological enemies who threaten to undermine faith in the Gospel.
2. He had heard rumors of Jews converting Christians to Judaism.
3. He gave up hope for their conversion and recommended that Christians cease trying to preach or argue with them about Scripture.
4. He came to think of the Jews as a threat to the health of the Christian body politic, which the German princes should not tolerate.
C. He also was convinced that their “lies” (like the beliefs of the Anabaptists) were blasphemy and, therefore, could not be tolerated.



Source credit: Phillip Carey, professor of religious studies
 
No assessment of Martin Luther’s legacy can neglect his hateful and violent polemics against the Jews.

A. Luther’s writings against the Jews are distinctive.
1. They are not like modern racist anti-Semitism.
2. They are not like the genteel anti-Judaism of many 19th-century Protestant liberals, who regarded the Old Testament as a Jewish book, too primitive to be relevant to Christians.
3. Medieval Christian superstitions and libels are present in Luther’s writings against the Jews but not central.
4. Yet Luther’s recommendations (to burn synagogues, confiscate property, and expel the Jews) are more violent than those of any other major Christian theologian.

A full understanding of Luther’s motives for writing against the Jews must explain the contrast between the hatefulness of his treatises in the 1540s and the friendly approach he took 20 years earlier.

A. Luther’s 1523 treatise “That Jesus Christ Was Born a Jew” argued against Christian persecution of the Jews.
1. He regarded persecution of the Jews as one of the bad ideas of the papist church.
2. He expresses the hope that, if treated kindly and presented with true scriptural teaching, many Jews will convert to Christianity.
3. He argues that because the original apostles were Jews who did good to Gentiles by preaching Christ and converting them, Gentiles should now do good to the Jews in the same way.
4. He concludes the treatise by presenting Scripture passages that can be used in discussions with Jews to show them that Jesus is the messiah.

B. By 1543, Luther had decided that (like the pope and Zwingli) the Jews spoke for the devil.
1. He began to see Jews not as neighbors to be loved but as theological enemies who threaten to undermine faith in the Gospel.
2. He had heard rumors of Jews converting Christians to Judaism.
3. He gave up hope for their conversion and recommended that Christians cease trying to preach or argue with them about Scripture.
4. He came to think of the Jews as a threat to the health of the Christian body politic, which the German princes should not tolerate.
C. He also was convinced that their “lies” (like the beliefs of the Anabaptists) were blasphemy and, therefore, could not be tolerated.



Source credit: Phillip Carey, professor of religious studies

Your point is??
 
Your point is??

It's a trial balloon. Assuming there's even any interest, I would rather people respond to what they think of Martin Luther rather than responding to what I wrote.

To me the question is, can the founder of Protestantism be excused for his vile writings on the Jews; can his historical importance and contributions be viewed as standing apart from his antisemitism?
 
It's a trial balloon. Assuming there's even any interest, I would rather people respond to what they think of Martin Luther rather than responding to what I wrote.

To me the question is, can the founder of Protestantism be excused for his vile writings on the Jews; can his historical importance and contributions be viewed as standing apart from his antisemitism?

Their church dismissed his more extremist views a very long time ago.

Today he is not regarded as their leader but simply the guy that formed their church.

Everything you just stayed has already been settled.
 
Their church dismissed his more extremist views a very long time ago.

Today he is not regarded as their leader but simply the guy that formed their church.

Everything you just stayed has already been settled.

It's not just easily dismissed and ignored as ancient history.

Many German Lutheran Churches supported the Nazis, but there also were notable exceptions of moral courage.


Trump's white Christian Protestant nationalist cults are peppered with antisemites and Islamophobes


Luther is a complex character who probably can't be caricatured as either completely evil, nor completely virtuous.
 
Religious bigotry has been with us for a long time.

Bigotry easily exists independently of religion as well. Hitler and Stalin were not in the least bit religious,, but were driven by hate and grievance
 
Bigotry easily exists independently of religion as well. Hitler and Stalin were not in the least bit religious,, but were driven by hate and grievance

I can't disagree with you, religion is a factor, but not the whole story.
 
It's not just easily dismissed and ignored as ancient history.

Many German Lutheran Churches supported the Nazis, but there also were notable exceptions of moral courage.


Trump's white Christian Protestant nationalist cults are peppered with antisemites and Islamophobes


Luther is a complex character who probably can't be caricatured as either completely evil, nor completely virtuous.
much of the catholic church supported the nazis.
 
much of the catholic church supported the nazis.

Define "much".

My understanding is that German Catholics were generally more suspicious of the rise of Nazism than were German Lutherans, and German Catholics tended to be a target of Nazi persecution.
 
Back
Top