MARTIN LUTHER’S GERMAN BIBLE

Ernst R. Wendland

Written in commemoration of the 500th anniversary of the Reformation (October 31, 1517)
Das Wort sie sollen lassen stahn
und kein’ Dank dazu haben…
The Word they still shall let remain
nor any thanks have for it… (M.L.)

‫ם־ע ָשׂ ֙ה‬
ָ ‫שׁר יֵ ֵצ֣א ִמ ִ֔פּי ֽל ֹא־ ָי ֥שׁוּב ֵא ַל֖י ֵרי ָ ֑ קם ִ ֤כּי ִא‬
֣ ֶ ‫ֵכּ֣ן יִ ְֽה ֶי֤ה ְד ָב ִר֙י ֲא‬
‫שׁר ָח ַ֔פ ְצ ִתּי וְ ִה ְצ ִ ֖ל ַיח ֲא ֶ ֥שׁר ְשׁ ַל ְח ִ ֽתּיו׃‬
֣ ֶ ‫ת־א‬
ֲ ‫ֶא‬
So is my Word that goes out from my mouth;
It will not return to me empty,
But will accomplish what I desire
And achieve the purpose for which I sent it. (Isaiah 55:11)

1
 Outline

MARTIN LUTHER’S GERMAN BIBLE ............................................................................... 1

Outline .................................................................................................................................................... 2

Overview ................................................................................................................................................ 6

Historical Introduction....................................................................................................................... 7

Methodology of a Master ................................................................................................................. 13

1. Confessional ................................................................................................................................ 14

2. Communicative .......................................................................................................................... 16

3. Creative ........................................................................................................................................ 22

4. Comprehensive .......................................................................................................................... 35

5. Contextual ................................................................................................................................... 40

6. Collaborative .............................................................................................................................. 51

7. Continuative ............................................................................................................................... 54

8. Consequential............................................................................................................................. 56

Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................... 61

APPENDIX A—from Philip Schaff's History of the Christian Church................................. 68

Luther's Translation of the Bible.................................................................................. 69

Earlier Versions............................................................................................................... 69

Luther's Qualifications.................................................................................................... 71

Progress of his Version ................................................................................................... 71

Editions and Revisions ................................................................................................... 73

The Success...................................................................................................................... 74

The Pre-Lutheran German Bible .................................................................................... 75

A Critical Estimate of Luther's Version ............................................................................. 80

2
 The Original Text ............................................................................................................ 81

The German Rendering .................................................................................................. 82

The Protestant Spirit of Luther's Version ...................................................................... 84

NOTES .............................................................................................................................. 87

BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................... 93

APPENDIX B – Articles on Luther’s Gift for Communicating God’s Word ....................... 96

The Bible Translation That Rocked the World........................................................................... 96

The Most Dangerous Thing Luther Did ...................................................................................... 100

Changing the Tempo of Worship ................................................................................................. 106

The Weak Man Behind a Mighty Fortress ................................................................................. 110

Powerful Preaching ......................................................................................................................... 111

How Martin Luther became the first Christian pop star ............................................... 113

The art that built Martin Luther’s brand ........................................................................ 121

Quotes by Martin Luther ................................................................................................................ 133

Appendix C: An Open Letter on Translating, by Martin Luther, 1530 ............................ 137

APPENDIX D—Links to Selected Works of Martin Luther ............................................ 163

Table of Contents: ........................................................................................................................ 163

About Luther: ................................................................................................................................ 163

Bible Commentaries by Luther ................................................................................................. 164

Famous Passages From the Writings of Martin Luther: ..................................................... 164

Selected Hymns of Martin Luther:........................................................................................... 164

Selected Sermons from Martin Luther: .................................................................................. 165

Selected Prayers of Martin Luther:.......................................................................................... 166

Concerning Christian Liberty (1520):..................................................................................... 166

Disputation On the Divinity and Humanity of Christ (1540): ......................................... 166

3
 The German Mass and Order of Divine Service (1526): .................................................... 166

A Treatise on Good Works... (1520): ...................................................................................... 166

Let Your Sins Be Strong (1521): ............................................................................................... 167

An Open Letter to the Christian Nobillity (1520): .............................................................. 167

To Several Nuns (1524): ............................................................................................................. 167

On Translating (1530): ............................................................................................................... 167

The Prefaces From Martin Luther's German Bible Version: ............................................. 167

Martin Luther's 95 Theses:......................................................................................................... 168

Latin version: .................................................................................................................................. 168

English translation: ........................................................................................................................ 168

Dutch translation:........................................................................................................................... 168

Turkish translation: ........................................................................................................................ 168

Related Correspondence: ........................................................................................................... 168

Martin Luther's Large Catechism (1530): .............................................................................. 169

Martin Luther's Small Catechism (1529): .............................................................................. 170

In English: ........................................................................................................................................ 170

In French:......................................................................................................................................... 170

In Japanese ...................................................................................................................................... 170

In Swedish: ...................................................................................................................................... 170

The Smalcald Articles of Martin Luther (1537): .................................................................. 170

The Last Written Words of Luther (1646): ............................................................................ 170

Preface to Luther's Latin Writings: .......................................................................................... 171

External References:.................................................................................................................... 171

Additional Luther Translations .................................................................................................... 172

Revisions of Luther’s Bible after 1534 ....................................................................................... 176

4
 The history of the Luther Bible and its revisions ...................................................... 177

The familiar sound of the Bible shall continue to resonate ..................................... 177

Luther's language enabled many people to find access to God in the first place .. 178

The Luther Bible shapes German Protestantism and literature .............................. 179

(http://www.lexikus.de/pics/manager/mode_19-1/reformationszeit/luther_die_bibel.jpg )

5
 Overview

After a brief historical introduction, eight characteristics that define Martin Luther’s
monumental German Bible translation are described and exemplified. Luther’s
translation was, first of all, confessional because Luther wanted his rendition to accurately
express the truths of Scripture based on a thorough exegesis of the original text. This
made his version also controversial since it presented an important vernacular alternative
to the prevailing translation of that age, the Latin Vulgate of the Catholic Church. The
“Luther Bible,” as it came to be known, was eminently communicative—intended to be
widely understood by the common laity of the day—and creative, in that Luther desired
his text to “speak German” as idiomatically as possible. Thus, he often departed from the
dead literalisms of the Vulgate and earlier German versions and enlivened the oral-aural
quality of the text so that it could be easily proclaimed in public. Luther’s practice was
also comprehensive in the sense that it applied the craft of translation to all aspects of the
biblical text—from the individual words to the literary genres of entire books.

Four additional characteristics define Luther’s translation approach: It was

contextual since, in addition to his text-determined sensitivity to lexical selection, he
supplied a variety of paratextual aids to assist readers in their understanding and
application of Scripture. Luther’s work was collaborative, involving a closely-working
team of exegetes and co-translators, and it was also continuative in that Luther was never
finished—he kept working on different editions of his ever-improving Bible right up until
his death. Finally, and now considerably broadening its scope of influence, the Luther
Bible was consequential: it served to significantly shape the nascent German language,
subsequent German translation history, later English translations, as well as Bible
translation theory and practice throughout the ages.

To round out this study, Luther’s translation of Psalm 23 is presented as an

example that illustrates many of the preceding qualities, along with a modern rendition
in Chewa that it inspired. Yes, Luther lives—in the thousands of translations throughout
the world that his German Bible broke ground for and helped plant the Seed!1

1
I am here referring to Luther’s general attitude towards the Scriptures and their translation, as
discussed in the principles outlined below.

6
 Historical Introduction

Luther's Bible introduced mass media, unified a nation, and set the standard for future
translations. … No other work has had as strong an impact on a nation's development and
heritage as has this Book.2

It is difficult for someone who does not know the German language or the literary, social,
and political setting of Central Europe in the early 1500s to appreciate just how
revolutionary Martin Luther's translation of the German Bible was. Not that it always
involves a radical departure from the original; in fact, Luther's wording is often quite
close. But this was his genius. He seemed to be able to sense just how far he needed to
push his mother tongue in order “to make these Hebrew writers talk German,” as he put
it,3 and yet at the same time preserve the essential content of the Holy Scriptures.

The aim of this study is to focus on the features that made Luther’s translation “a
literary masterpiece against which all subsequent German Bibles would be measured.”4
This opening historical survey will set the stage. It is followed by a more detailed

2
Henry Zecher, “The Bible Translation that Rocked the World” (Notes on Translation 7:2, 12-15,
1993) 12. This article was originally published in Christian History 34 (Vol. XI, No. 2), and later republished
in Christianity Today 34, 1992 (available at: http://www.christianitytoday.com/history/issues/issue-
34/bible-translation-that-rocked-world.html?share=bKZg2PB9reWoylX73Ay7NpksubMA2Yjh).
3
Arnold J. Koelpin, “Preparing a New Bible Translation in Luther's Day” (essay delivered at the
1977 WELS Synod Convention).
4
Leonard J. Greenspoon, “Between Text and Community: A Characteristic Feature of Jewish Bible
Versions,” (Open Theology 2:476-493, special edition on “Bible Translation,” 2016), 482. This assessment
of Luther’s work is even more significant in the light of the person who made it. Greenspoon is the Klutznick
Professor in Jewish Civilization at the Jesuit Creighton University (Omaha). He continues: “Martin Luther
produced his landmark German version of the Bible in the early sixteenth century, laboring on the Old
Testament from 1522 to 1534. . . . As part of Luther’s efforts to reform Christianity, he shaped a German
text characterized by forceful language and direct diction…” (ibid., 482).
Luther’s Bible translation “remains a literary and biblical hallmark” to the present day. … It has
been said that in most libraries, books by and about Martin Luther occupy more shelves than those
concerned with any other figure except Jesus of Nazareth. Though difficult to verify, one can understand
why it is likely to be true” (http://www.christianitytoday.com/history/people/theologians/martin-
luther.html; accessed 24/06/2016, no author listed).

7
overview of the qualities that distinguished Luther as a skilled, sensitive, and Spirit-led
interpreter and translator, presented largely through what the Reformer himself had to
say about his work and what may be actually observed in his German translation. It will
become clear that Luther's policies, principles, and procedures presaged and accordingly
influenced the approach of all meaning-oriented translators that followed him in
hundreds of languages that he never knew about.

We look back then briefly to 1521. The theological revolution against Rome seems
to be defeated. Only the final “sacrifice” of its instigator, Martin Luther, is yet to be
accomplished. This, at the climax of his dramatic appearance before Emperor Charles V
and the Imperial Diet of Worms in April 1521, was his magnificent confession of faith:5

Unless I can be instructed and convinced with evidence from the Holy Scriptures or with
open, clear, and distinct grounds and reasoning-and my conscience is captive to the Word
of God-then I cannot and will not recant, because it is neither safe nor wise to act against
conscience. Here I stand. I can do no other. God help me! Amen.

Yes, the Holy Scriptures were the rock-solid foundation for Luther’s faith, and this fact
also suggests why their translation into idiomatic German remained a passionate and
persistent aspect of his ministry. In spite of his formidable word of testimony, however,
Luther's powerful enemies were unmoved. The imperial assembly formally declared him
to be a public outlaw, and all the might and resources of the Empire were now ranged
against him. But they failed to take into account the plan and purpose of God. So it
happened that while Luther was on his way home to Wittenberg, he was “kidnapped” by
agents of his political patron, Elector Frederick of Saxony, and taken to Wartburg Castle
for safekeeping. Here Luther, dressed as a knight and armed with a sword, became known
as “Knight George.” But he never used the sword; for, as he demonstrated throughout his
life, the pen is far mightier. At first, the ever-active Luther was not very happy to be
confined in this place that he called “my Patmos.” “Here I sit,” he complained, “all day

5
James M. Kittelson, Luther the Reformer: The Story of the Man and His Career (Minneapolis, MN:
Augsburg, 1986), 161.

8
long, lazy and full of food.”6 But Luther and laziness were incompatible. So it was that
during his ten-month stay at Wartburg he wrote and published a dozen works. He also
had the opportunity to continue with a crucial literary and theological endeavor that was
going to occupy his attention periodically for the rest of his life—a verbal transformation
of the entire Bible into German.

When he was forcibly seized from his wagon transport to be secretly taken to
Wartburg Castle (see above),7 Luther had the presence of mind to grab his Hebrew Old
Testament and Greek New Testament. These became his constant companions as he
embarked upon the translation of the Scriptures.8 Luther realized that if his nascent

6
Frederick Nohl, Martin Luther: Hero of Faith (St. Louis, MO: Concordia, 1962), 165.
7
Photo of Wartburg Castle https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=2158182.
8
This was not Luther’s first work as a Bible translator: “As early as 1517 Luther had already
translated parts of the Bible, such as the penitential psalms, the Ten Commandments, the Lord’s Prayer

9
religious reformation was going to succeed, it had to have the right biblical footing. His
aim was to make it possible for many others to perceive and utter the same confession
of faith that he had been so graciously led to proclaim. After all, how could one's
conscience be held “captive to the Word of God” unless that person could actually read
and understand the Scriptures in his or her mother tongue? But for the vast majority of
the population at this time, the Bible was either a closed book written in Latin or a book
of little meaning, a literal rendering from the Vulgate into dialectal German. Luther's was
not the first German translation, but all of its textual predecessors were either very
wooden, hence hard to understand, and/or provincial, thus well understood only in a
limited region of the language area.9

Luther set to work with typical zeal. Averaging more than 1,500 words a day, he
translated the entire New Testament in less than three months, from late December 1521
to March 1522.10 This “September Testament” as it came to be known, was published in

and the Magnificat. Melanchthon was astounded by the quality of the translation and persuaded Luther to
do a more systematic job” (“Martin Luther: Translator of the Bible,” accessed on July 8, 2016 at
http://www.museeprotestant.org/en/notice/martin-luther-translator-of-the-bible/; on this point, see also
Aaron C. Denlinger, “Luther the Bible Scholar,” in R. C. Sproul and Stephen J. Nichols, eds., The Legacy of
Luther [Orlando: Reformation Trust, 2016, 193-212], 194).
9
Following upon the 4th century Bible translation of Wulfila (Ulfilas) in the east Germanic Gothic
language, partial translations of Scripture became available in western (Frankish) German dialects during
the time of Charlemagne the Great (ca 800) (Eric W. Gritsch, “Luther as Bible Translator,” in Donald K.
McKim, ed., The Cambridge Companion to Martin Luther [Cambridge University Press, 2003, 62-72], 62).
“Eighteen German translations in various dialects had been published since the time Gutenberg had
invented the printing press in the mid-1400s, but none gained wide acceptance. The German rendering
was poor. They were poor translations also because they were made from the Latin Vulgate, another
translation that was far from perfect” – Armin Schuetze, Martin Luther: Reformer, 2nd ed. (Milwaukee, WI:
Northwestern Publishing House, 2005), 81.
10
How could Luther complete this prodigious task so quickly? We remember that he was living in
virtual isolation during this time, and the Bible was his principal writing project. Furthermore, preparing
an understandable German Bible for his people was one of the most important goals that he wanted to
accomplish for the church during his lifetime, which, under the circumstances, could easily be ended at
any time.

10
September 1522. Hasty though it was, composed in the white heat of evangelistic zeal,
Luther's rendering was not careless or loose. He produced a remarkably accurate version
readily understood by the masses, but also an exemplary literary work that came to play
“a major role in shaping the modern German language.”

However, there is another theory concerning Luther’s rapid rate of progress, one that I have not
seen widely supported: “P. Schaff points out that Luther’s Bible was preceded by a Middle High German
translation based on the Vulgate made by unknown scholars during the fourteenth century, and that this
version was widely printed (Schaff, 1888:342). He also points out that the fact that Luther finished his
New Testament in three months indicates that he made use of the older translation (344), a fact that Schaff
points out was substantiated by W. Krafft in his 1883 work entitled: ‘Die deutsche Bibel vor Luther, sein
Verhältniss zu derselben und seine Verdienste um die deutsche Bibelübersetzung’ (340). This suggests a practice
that seems to have been a norm in the time of the Reformation, taking a previous translation and revising
it…” (Glenn J. Kerr, “Twentieth- and Twenty-First Century Bible Translation Theories: Synthesis and
Systematization,” PhD. Dissertation draft, 2016, p. 74-75; he cites Phillip Schaff, The History of the Christian
Church [New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1888]. Kerr presents a detailed text analysis of several passages
from the Luther Bible (Genesis 30:31-43, Judges 5:6-15, 2 Samuel 5:6-10, Job 36:26-33, and Daniel 9:24-
27; 79-87); he also adds a broad, “systemic,” contextual perspective on the translation using a “Frames of
reference” paradigm as well as a “Polysystem model” (88-92).

11
 Luther, now assisted by a team of scholarly collaborators, took more time to
produce the Old Testament. This work was published in sections until the complete
“Wittenberg Bible” became available in September of 1534. However, Luther never
considered his translation to be final—his last word on the subject. He continued to make
improvements whenever he had the chance, revising the text right up until his death in
1546 (a photo of the “Wartburg Room” in Wartburg Castle is displayed above).11 It is
believed that the last page of print upon which Luther looked in this life was a printer's
proof of the final revision of his translation of Genesis.12 Luther knew that a new,
vernacular translation of the Bible was absolutely essential at this time. A return to the
true teachings of Scripture required a meaningful rendering in the language of the
people; humanly speaking, the Reformation could not have continued without it.13

Martin Luther's German translation was no accident of history. It was the God of
history and Scripture who clearly had prepared the way (for example, through the prior
invention of type-printing about 1400), and whom God calls, he appropriately equips.
Nowhere better is this illustrated than in the life of the man Martin himself—his pastoral
and scholarly training, his personal temperament and interests, and his spiritual gifts.

11
Heiko A. Oberman, Luther: Man between God and the Devil (New York: Doubleday, 1989), 305.
PHOTO of The Wartburg room where Luther translated the New Testament into German. Credit: By Unknown
- Original image: Photochrom print (color photo lithograph); Reproduction number: LC-DIG-ppmsca-01151
from Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division, Photochrom Prints Collection. Reproduction
by Photoglob AG, Zürich, Switzerland or Detroit Publishing Company, Detroit, Michigan, Public Domain,
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=85924.
12
Morton A. Schroeder, Martin Luther: Man of God (Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House,
1983), 50.
13
“The Bible played a key role in the unfolding of the Protestant Reformation…Recent scholarship
reaffirms that Scripture supplied the raw material from which medieval Christian theology was
constructed” – Robert Kolb, “The Bible in Reformation and Protestant Orthodoxy,” in The Enduring
Authority of the Christian Scriptures, D. A. Carson, ed., 89-114 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2016), 89.
According to Schaff: “The German Bible of Luther was saluted with the greatest enthusiasm, and became
the most powerful help to the Reformation. . . . Hans Lufft at Wittenberg printed and sold in forty years
(between 1534 and 1574) about a hundred thousand copies—an enormous number for that age—and these
were read by millions. The number of copies from reprints is beyond estimate” (History of the Christian
Church, 350).

12
Luther himself spoke of the necessary attributes as “artistry, industry, good judgment,
and intelligence with regard to the practice of translation”;14 but it further requires “a
genuinely pious, faithful, diligent, God-fearing, experienced, practiced heart.”15 Certainly
Luther recognized this, as he said:16

Because someone has the gift of languages and understands them, that does not enable
him to turn one into the other and to translate well. Translating is a special grace and gift
of God.

All this must be coupled with genuine humility. In Luther's words:17

I have undertaken to translate the Bible into German. This was good for me; otherwise I
might have died in the mistaken notion that I was a learned fellow.

Methodology of a Master

We turn now to consider the key concepts and consequences of Luther's approach to
translating—allowing the superb practitioner to present the case in his own words as
much as possible.18 It soon becomes evident that Luther's procedures are much in keeping
with the modern principles of meaning-oriented Bible translation, even though they pre-
date them by five hundred years!19 Eight complementary principles of evangelical Bible

14
M. L. as cited in Ann E. Hirst, “Luther's ‘Sendbrief vom Dolmetschen’: His Theory and Practice of
Translation,” The Linguist 25:4, 1986, 2.
15
Ewald M. Plass, ed., What Luther Says: An Anthology, 3 vols., (St. Louis, MO: Concordia, 1959),
I:105.
16
Cited in Ewald M. Plass, This Is Luther: A Character Study (St. Louis: Concordia, 1948), 333.
17
Plass, What Luther Says, 105.
18
For a somewhat wider frame of reference for the present study, see Ernst R. Wendland, “Luther’s
Insights on Language in relation to Translation, Mission, and Leadership Training,” essay presented at the
World Seminary Conference, August 7-11, 2006, Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary. For many insightful
observations on Luther’s “controlled dynamic” translation methodology that complement and greatly
enrich my own, see Paul O. Wendland, “Bible Translations for the 21st Century, Lecture II: Formal and
Functional Equivalence in Bible Translation,” Bjarne Wollan Teigen Reformation Lectures, October 25-26,
2012, especially pages 13-19.
19
These principles are abundantly reflected in the following basic books on the theory and practice
of meaning oriented Bible translation: Katharine Barnwell, Bible Translation: An Introductory Course in
Translation Principles (Dallas, TX: Summer Institute of Linguistics, 1986); John Beekman and John Callow,

13
translation will be presented,20 all of which were amply exemplified by Martin Luther.
These qualities naturally overlap and merge at various points, but they serve to provide
a range of perspectives from which Luther’s genius might be explored, evaluated, and
emulated today.

1. Confessional
This first principle is the shortest, but undoubtedly the most consequential.
“Confessional” Bible translation has reference to the basic presupposition that every true
translator brings with him to the task—that he/she is handling the inspired Word of God.
“The Bible is the special, very own Book, Writing, and Word of the Holy Spirit”21 This
provides the translator with an all-embracing framework and an ongoing perspective and
guide to follow during the translation process. Luther underscores the importance of this
when he states: "I hold that a false Christian or a sectarian spirit is unable to give a
faithful translation."22 Certainly an errant faith and/or a misguided motivation will
always adversely affect exegesis; for wherever one's interpretation of the original is off
the mark, the translation inevitably follows. “Luther believed that the Holy Spirit played

Translating the Word of God (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1974); Eugene A. Nida and Charles R. Taber,
The Theory and Practice of Translation (Leiden, NL: E. J. Brill, 1969); Jan de Waard and Eugene A. Nida,
From One Language to Another: Functional Equivalence in Bible Translating (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson,
1986); Ernst R. Wendland, Language, Society, and Bible Translation (Cape Town: Bible Society of South
Africa, 1985). These characteristics have been abstracted from Martin Luther's methodology as expressed
in his writings on the subject and exemplified in his successive German versions from September 1522 to
his death in 1546. It is indeed remarkable how many of these modern translation principles were conceived
of and put into practice by Luther so many years ago.
20
By “evangelical” I am speaking of Luther’s ultimate hermeneutical “frame of reference,” namely,
that “…the entire Scripture exists for the sake of the Son…[and] the principal reason why the Scripture
was given by God. Men are to study and search in it and to learn that He, He, Mary’s Son, is the One who
is able to give eternal life to all who come to Him and believe on Him” (Plass, What Luther Says, 69).
21
Plass, What Luther Says, 663. “For [Luther] Scripture held unique, supreme authority in
dispensing God’s Word and delivering its life-changing impact to sinners. … This view of Scripture rested
upon his belief that God’s Word, as the agent of his creating power, established and still determines reality.
… In Scripture and the contemporary delivery of its message, human language stands under the creative
direction of the Holy Spirit… (2 Pet. 1:21)” (Kolb, “The Bible in Reformation,” 93).
22
Plass, What Luther Says, 105.

14
a vital role in translation work,”23 and hence “Scripture alone” (sola Scriptura) must be
the concrete guide.24 This inspired resource trumps all the revered church fathers and
their writings, for as he said, “I will take their books and go with them to Christ and his
Word as the touchstone and compare the two.”25

Luther, then, was passionately Christ-centered and evangelical in his approach to

hermeneutics. To him it was foundational to “have the understanding of Christ without
which even the knowledge of the language is nothing.”26 Perhaps the best-known
example of a confessional, yet text-faithful rendering is in Romans 3:28, where he
includes the word “alone” (allein) to emphasize Paul’s point: “We hold that a man is
justified without the works of the law, by faith alone.”27 Luther would argue that this is
not a “Lutheran” rendering.28 Rather, the little adverb allein is necessary in German to
“convey the sense of the [original] text. [Furthermore] it belongs there if the translation

23
Milton L. Watt, “More on Luther’s Bible Translation Principles,” Notes on Translation 11:3 (25-
37), 27. “Luther maintains…only through trust in the flowing of the Spirit may God in His mercy grant
man the true understanding of His words” (Watt, ibid., 27, citing Werner Schwarz, Principles and Problems
of Bible Translations [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1955], 199). In speaking of what he referred
to as “the inspiration of translation,” experienced consultant Jacob Loewen cites a prayer uttered by one
of his translators: “God, how would you have said this if you had spoken in our language in the first place?”
Loewen comments: “I realized that not only had God’s Spirit been active in the original giving of the Word,
but is still active in its transmission through translation into other languages” (The Bible in Cross-Cultural
Perspective [Pasadena: William Carey Library, 2000], 249).
24
See the section “Sola Scriptura” (193-194) in Marijke de Lang, “The Reformation Canon and the
Development of Biblical Scholarship,” The Bible Translator 67:2, 2016, 184-201.
25
This includes all creeds and confessions of the church; to be considered correct and authoritative,
these must be in complete agreement with Scripture; cited in James R. Payton, Jr., Getting the Reformation
Wrong: Correcting Some Misunderstandings (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2010), 139. “The German
Bible reflects [Luther’s] commitment to the Reformation principle of sola Scriptura; it stands as a legacy of
his desire to recapture the centrality of the Word for the church” – Stephen J. Lawson, Martin Luther
(Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2002), 53.
26
Martin Luther, Luther's Works, ed. E. T. Bachmann, vol. 35, Word and Sacrament (Philadelphia:
Muhlenberg Press, 1960), 249.
27
Luther, LW 35, 182. See the discussion in Denlinger, “Bible Scholar”, 199.
28
“I do not like it that folk call our doctrine and people ‘Lutheran’ and that I must suffer them to
disgrace God’s Word with my name in the shameful manner. … God’s Word is above all” (Plass, What
Luther Says, 1368).

15
is to be clear and vigorous.”29 One’s confession of course has to have a strong biblical
and theological basis. In Luther’s case, there was never any doubt about this matter; as
suggested above, his perspective was completely Christological:

He regarded the entire Bible as a unit. … He believed that the Gospel message was
contained in the Old and New Testament… The story of the Cross, Christ and Him
crucified, was the central theme of the entire Bible, and this fact the translator must ever
keep in mind.30

More specifically then, Luther appears to have worked with a guiding Law-Gospel
hermeneutical framework when carrying out his task:

If some passage is obscure, I consider whether it treats of grace or of law, whether wrath
or the forgiveness of sin, and with which of these it agrees better. By this procedure I have
often understood the most obscure passages.31

Finally, we must appreciate the life-threatening public profession that Luther made in
the very words of his confessional translation—that is, in a day and age when for the
church at large throughout the Western world, “the Latin Vulgate was the authentic text,
and any departure from it was heretical.”32 In a real sense then, with his German
translation, Luther was publishing his own death warrant.

2. Communicative

Every translation continually fluctuates between the two poles of “form” and “meaning.”
It encompasses an exegetical task that is made even more difficult in the case of Hebrew
or Greek because one must work with a sacred, “high value” document that is
situationally (linguistically, semantically, historically, and culturally) remote, yet whose

29
Luther, LW 35, 188. In other words, Luther’s rendering was motivated by both semantic and
pragmatic (contextual) considerations.
30
E. G. Schwiebert, Luther and His Times (St. Louis: Concordia, 1950), 661.
31
Helmut T. Lehmann, “Table Talk,” LW 54 (trans. Theodore G. Tappert, Philadelphia: Muhlenberg
Press, 1967), 35, cited in Watt, “Bible Translation Principles,” 31.
32
Schuetze, Martin Luther, 86. “Jerome Emser [the chaplain and secretary of Duke George] asserted
in a written condemnation of Luther’s New Testament, that he could prove Luther guilty of 1,400 ‘heretical
errors and lies’” (ibid., 86).

16
contemporary translation is often naively assessed comparatively on the basis of
literalistic formalism. The principle that the meaning of the biblical message has priority
over the linguistic form whereby it is conveyed is the foundation of a “functional
equivalence” methodology (see below). Form, then, refers to the overt and language-
specific phonological, lexical, morpho-syntactic, and macro-structural elements whereby
a given oral or written message is conveyed from source to receptor. Meaning embraces
not only denotative (cognitive, referential, conceptual, propositional) content, but also
the connotative aspects of feeling, intensity, and beauty, as well as the intentional
(illocutionary, functional) facets that pertain to authorial purpose, for example, warning,
rebuke, encouragement, instruction, commission, and condemnation. Determining
meaning in its fullest sense further embraces a careful study of discourse structure, for
the larger, genre-governed linguistic forms of a language also become meaningful, in
terms of impact and appeal, especially when shaped by a wordsmith like Luther.33

Certain translations may be more form based or meaning oriented with respect to
the source language (SL) text than others.34 A version that emphasizes form is referred
to as a “literal” translation, while one that strives to express the original meaning in
natural receptor language (RL) verbal forms is an “idiomatic” translation. An extremely
literal version used for specific scholarly purposes is termed “interlinear”; it attempts to
reproduce all of the SL forms (except the phonological) as closely as possible, but most
of the text’s content is lost in the process. At the opposite end of the spectrum is a
“paraphrase”—a rendering that is so devoted to being meaningful in a local language

33
I highlight the meaningful aspects of biblical forms through a “literary functional equivalence”
(LiFE) approach to translation theory and practice, e.g., LiFE-Style Translating: A Workbook for Bible
Translators, 2nd ed. (Dallas: SIL International, 2011), 95-115. The nature and extent of “functional
equivalence” to be applied in any given project may be determined by adopting the analytical framework
provided by Skopostheorie, as described by Christiane Nord, Translating as a Purposeful Activity: Functionalist
Approaches Explained (Manchester: St. Jerome, 1997), 15-26. The “Skopos” is defined as the primary
communicative “purpose” intended (and hopefully achieved) by a given translation (ibid., 28-30).
34
As Friedrich Schleirmacher (1768-1834) puts it: “Either the translator leaves the author in peace,
as much as possible, and moves the reader towards him; or he leaves the reader in peace, as much as
possible, and moves the author towards him” – cited in Daniel Weissbort and Astradur Eysteinsson,
translation—theory and practice (sic): A Historical Reader (Oxford: Oxford UP, 2006), 207.

17
and cultural setting that it often drastically alters both the form and the content of the
original.

“As a translator, Luther was distinctly reader-oriented”;35 he thus generally

exemplifies a “functional equivalence” approach to the translation of Scripture, as noted
above.36 This also has reference to the “natural,” “idiomatic,” or “communicative” style
of translating that Eugene A. Nida and others pioneered in the early 1960s.37 Originally
called “dynamic equivalence,”38 the method was later renamed in order to prevent
misunderstanding and also to reflect a somewhat broader conception of the strongly
socioculturally influenced process of interlingual communication. According to de Waard
and Nida, the essence of translation may be summarized as follows:39

An expression in any language consists of a set of forms that signal meaning on various
levels: lexical, grammatical, and rhetorical. The translator must seek to employ a
functionally equivalent set of forms that will match, insofar as possible, the meaning of
the original source-language text.

With more specific reference to the special rhetorical features that convey the original in
the most meaningful way, these theorists add that the goal is:40

35
Weissbort and Eysteinsson, A Historical Reader, 57. More significantly though, Luther was also
“hearer”-oriented, that is, with reference to an oral-aural setting of communication (see below).
36
Kerr concludes that, from a modern critical perspective, Luther tended to be rather more literal
in his renderings—generally a more of a “copyist,” at least in the Old Testament: “Even though Martin
Luther was a champion in his day of a more idiomatic style of translation, it was still a small move from
the copyist’s role, and would still clearly remain close to that heritage” (Bible Translation Theories, 89). On
the other hand, another contemporary scholar asserts that through modern linguistic studies “new light
also has shone on Martin Luther’s creative writing. The rhetorical tradition in which he stood, the natural
talent with which he mastered it and adapted it to German usage, the timeless validity and the archaic
resonance of his style can all be more clearly recognized within this frame of reference” (Birgit Stolt,
“Luther’s Translation of the Bible,” Lutheran Quarterly, pp. 373-400 [374], 2012?, accessed on October 1,
2017 at: http://www.lutheranquarterly.com/uploads/7/4/0/1/7401289/lq-_stolt_28-4.pdf ).
37
On this issue, see Paul Ellingworth, “Translation Techniques in Modern Bible Translations,” in
A History of Bible Translation, Phillip Noss, ed., 307-334 (Rome: Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura, 2007), 314.
38
Nida and Taber, Theory and Practice, 24.
39
De Waard and Nida, Functional Equivalence, 36.
40
De Waard and Nida, Functional Equivalence, 119, 25.

18
 To attempt to discover in the receptor language the closest functional equivalent of the
rhetorical structure in the source text. The particular set of forms used for different
rhetorical functions is largely language-specific, but the functions [that is, expressive,
cognitive, interpersonal, informative, imperative, performative, emotive, aesthetic, and
metalingual] … are universals, and it is for this reason that one can aim at functional
equivalence.

There is no doubt which side of this form-function polarity Luther favored. He vigorously
opposed literalism,41 as he clearly asserts:42

I wanted to speak German, not Latin or Greek, since it was German I had undertaken to
speak in the translation … Therefore I must let the literal words go and try to learn how
the German says that which the Hebrew [or Greek] expresses … Words are to serve and
follow the meaning, not meaning the words.

It is important to point out that the “meaning” that Luther focused upon during
translation was the essential content intended by the biblical author. Luther tried to
imagine himself in the place of the original writer and compose his text accordingly—in
natural German forms.43 He stressed the fact that a literal rendering often turns out to be
not only awkward and difficult to understand in the RL, but also patently wrong. In his
comments on Judas’ criticism of Mary in Matthew 26:8 and Mark 14:4, Luther says:44

If I follow these literalistic asses [that is, his critics] I would have to translate it thus: “Why
has this loss of ointment happened?” But what kind of German is that? What German says,
“Loss of ointment has happened”? If he understands that at all, he thinks that the ointment
is lost and must be looked for and found again; though even that is still obscure and
uncertain … But a German would say … “Why this waste?” Or, “Why this extravagance
[schade]?” Indeed, “It's a shame about the ointment.” That is good German, from which it
is understood that Magdalene had wasted the ointment that she had poured out and had
been extravagant. That was what Judas meant …

41
Heinz Bluhm, Martin Luther: Creative Translator (St. Louis: Concordia, 1965), 151.
42
Luther, LW 35, 189, 193, 213. He also declared: “Sententia et phrasis dominator super omnes leges
et praecepta grammatica—meaning and expression hold sway over all laws and grammatical precepts”
(Tischreden 4764, as quoted in Reu, 269—P. Wendland, “Bible Translations,” 17).
43
See the extended discussion of Romans 3:28 in Luther, LW 35, 95ff.
44
Luther, LW 35, 190.

19
In fact, if one takes the content of the Holy Scriptures seriously (as Luther did), then a
literal translation is really no option. In his preface to the Book of Job, he concludes:45

If it were translated everywhere word for word … and not for the most part according to
the sense, no one would understand it. So, for example, when he [Job] says something
like this, “The thirsty will pant for his wealth” [Job 5:5], that means “robbers shall take it
[wealth] from him.” … Again, by “light” he means good fortune, by “darkness” misfortune
[Job 18:5] … We have taken care to use language that is clear and that everybody can
understand, without perverting the sense and meaning.

Thus, for Luther, a communication of the author-intended meaning of Scripture was the
crucial task and responsibility of the translator. To fail in this vital respect would be to
make himself the proverbial “traitor” (as per the Italian saying, traduttore traditore).

It was also Luther's desire to make his translation sound like the original text in
German. Plass gives a good summary of the result:46

His translation is the German Bible rather than the Bible in German. The German language
was like clay in his hands, like a violin played by a virtuoso. The sighs and sobs of some
of the Psalms; the high hallelujahs of others: hymns to the God of salvation; the majestic
cadences of Isaiah; the lamenting notes of Jeremiah; the profound depth beneath the
simple diction of John; the tremendous power of the tense, stormy, telescopic style of
Paul—Luther's translation has all of these in German.

The rhetorical feature that Luther seemed to appreciate the most about the Scriptures
was its conciseness, a quality that tends to move its hearers to think more deeply about
what is being said—yet not always so easy to reproduce in a fulsome language like
German. He said, for example, concerning the story of David's life:47

The words are few, but the import is great … That means we have to imagine David's
thoughts when he slew the lion, or when he had to fight Goliath: “What if I shall be killed?
But it shall not be so. My right hand is the hand of God.” That’s what you call rhetoric!

45
Luther, LW 35, 252-253.
46
Plass, This Is Luther, 336. See also the comments in Beekman and Callow, Translating the Word
of God, 24.
47
Cited in H. G. Haile, Luther: An Experiment in Biography (Princeton: Princeton University Press,
1983) 331.

20
 Luther was convinced that a person could not properly understand the Scripture
“unless it is brought home to him, that is, unless he goes through the same experience.”48
So it was that he translated the Bible as German literature with the purpose of providing
better access to the diverse feelings, emotions, and attitudes of the biblical participants.
Thus the readers veritably shudder when they read the soldiers' slander in Matthew
27:29: “Gegrueszet seiest du, der Juden Koenig!”

For Luther, Christ—the living Word—was the most effective communicator of all:
“He combines heaven and earth into one morsel when he speaks.”49 Therefore, the good
Doctor paid special attention to the explicit words of our Lord; he wanted Christ, if
nobody else, to speak German:50

For example, Christ says …, “Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks” [Matt.
12.34, Luke 6.46] … If I am to follow these asses [his critics], they will lay the original
before me literally and translate thus … Tell me, is that speaking German? What German
could understand something like that? What is “the abundance of the heart”? No German
can say that; unless, perhaps, he was trying to say that someone was altogether too
magnanimous or too courageous, though even that would not yet be correct. For
“abundance of the heart” is not German, any more than “abundance of the house,”
“abundance of the stove," or “abundance of the bench” is German. But the mother in the
home and the common man say this, “What fills the heart overflows the mouth.” That is
speaking good German, the kind I have tried for—and unfortunately not always reached
or hit upon.

There are many other such examples of meaning-oriented correspondence in the Luther
Bible—all illustrations of Luther's profound grasp of the dynamics of discourse and how
to communicate it effectively from one language and literature to another.

On the other hand, as the Scripture message is being communicated, it must be

continually monitored, via various testing procedures, to determine how well it is
“getting through” to the intended audience. And not only the message, but also the

48
Haile, Luther, 335.
49
Haile, Luther, 331.
50
Luther, LW 35, 189-190.

21
medium needs to be closely evaluated in this way. In the electronically-enhanced,
Internet-captivated West, for example, what will happen to “The Book”—the written
“Scriptures” when nobody reads books anymore? However, in many parts of the world,
the problem is quite different—a case of where nobody, or very few, can read, fluently.

That was the pressing issue in Luther's day. The level of functional literacy in one
or another of the many local dialects was very low and complicated by the fact that no
regional dialect of speech dominated “Germany” at the time.51 Moreover, printed
literature was so expensive that it was beyond the means of most ordinary readers. Luther
realized that most, by far, of his potential audience would hear, rather than actually read,
his translation. He therefore sensibly formulated his text with this important factor in
mind: How does the Word sound when it is read? This is a prominent aspect of Luther’s
“creativity,” which is considered next.

3. Creative

This broad topic will be treated in terms of four sub-headings expressing principles that
characterize different aspects of Luther’s “creativity” when translating the Bible.

a) Change the linguistic form whenever necessary.

In order to convey the meaning of the message in the source language (SL), its varied
linguistic forms in the receptor language (RL) often have to be changed so that God's

51
“The Bible - its events, teachings, and meanings - would have little impact on human
thought if no one read it. But after Martin Luther's Reformation people did read it - and, more
heretically, they debated its meaning. Consider that in 1525 in northern Germany, only 5 percent of
the population was literate - most from the learned classes. … Access to the Bible by large numbers
of ordinary people for the first time - one of Luther's reforms - is a key to these dynamics. Luther
demanded that all have direct access to the Word of God in their own language” (Robert Marquand,
“The Bible and Literacy,” Christian Science Monitor, November 13, 1991, accessed at:
http://www.csmonitor.com/1991/1113/13111.html).

22
Word sounds clear and natural to an average audience.52 This principle is actually implied
by the preceding one, “communicative,” but it is necessary to state the case plainly, lest
there be any misunderstanding. Something inevitably has to “give” in any translation:
either the form of the original (in the case of an idiomatic, functional-equivalence version)
or the meaning of the original (in the case of a literal version). That is why a translator
always becomes a “traitor” in one respect or another—s/he cannot have it both ways and
so cannot, except in a relatively few fortuitous cases, retain both form and meaning.
Therefore, a priority of one or the other has to be established from the beginning of the
project.

Luther expressed himself quite frequently and forcefully on this issue. His various
writings on translation are permeated with the thought expressed below with reference
to Psalm 68:53

What is the point of needlessly adhering so scrupulously and stubbornly to words which
one cannot understand anyway? Whoever would speak German must not use Hebrew
style. Rather he must see to it-once he understands the Hebrew author [hence the need for
a careful exegesis!]-that he concentrates on the sense of the text, asking himself, “Pray tell,
what do the Germans say in such a situation?” Once he has the German words to serve
the purpose, let him drop the Hebrew words and express the meaning freely in the best
German he knows.

Luther cites Psalm 63:5 as one, among many examples, where he was forced to put this
general principle into practice:54

“Let my soul be filled as with lard and fat, so that my mouth may make praise with joyful
lips.” By “lard and fat” the Hebrews mean joy, just as a healthy and fat animal is healthy
and grows fat, and conversely, a sad animal loses weight and grows thin … However since

52
There are always certain aspects of the biblical message that will not be familiar to many
readers/hearers—people, places, customs, foreign objects and practices, etc. But these should be rendered
in as natural a style as possible so that the form of the language itself does not present a barrier to one’s
understanding. Explanatory background for any potentially unknown content may be supplied in
introductions, footnotes, or a glossary.
53
Luther, LW 35, 213-214.
54
Luther, LW 35, 212.

23
 no German can understand this expression, we have relinquished the Hebrew words and
rendered the passage in clear German like this, “It would be my heart's joy and gladness,
if I were to praise thee with joyful lips.”

Not even the smallest details escaped Luther's sharp, sense-focused eye, as we see in his
handling of Psalm 91:9:55

We changed the pronoun mea into tua, making “your” out of “my”, because the verse is
obscure if one says, “For the Lord is my refuge,” inasmuch as throughout the psalm the
psalmist uses the word “your” and speaks to or about someone else … Now since an
ordinary German will hardly understand this sudden change in speaking [from second to
first person], we tried to put the matter clearly and plainly. After all, one is not accustomed
to speaking this way in German as in Hebrew We have made changes of this sort several
other times as well.

Observe next how Luther “Germanized” the blasphemous insult of the crowd,
mocking Christ beneath his cross (Mark 15:29): "Pfui dich, wie fein zerbrichst du den
Tempel, und bauest ihn in drei Tagen!" In place of the original Greek exclamation oua!
(NRSV has “aha!”), Luther inserts the idiomatic Pfui dich! He also considers the natural
flow of speech and cuts the long sentence spanning verses 29-30 into two. In addition,
he expertly brings out the sarcasm implied in these words by means of the initial
connotative marker wie fein.56

This manner of translation is not easy: first the meaning of the original must be
accurately determined, and then it must be expressed not only correctly, but also clearly
in the RL. Luther compares the job to farming:57

One now runs his eyes over three or four pages and does not stumble once—without
realizing what boulders and clods had once lain there where he now goes along as over a
smoothly-planed board. We had to sweat and toil there before we got those boulders and
clods out of the way, so that one could go along so nicely. The plowing goes well when
the field is cleared. But rooting out the woods and stumps, and getting the field ready—
this is a job nobody wants.

55
Luther, LW 35, 218.
56
Cf. P. Wendland, “Bible Translations,” 19.
57
Luther, LW 35, 188.

24
In another place, Luther likens the work of translation to that of trying to teach a bird to
sing a new song:58

We are now sweating over the translation of the prophets into German. O God, what great
and hard toil it requires to compel the writers against their will to speak German. They do
not want to give up their Hebrew and imitate the barbaric German. Just as though a
nightingale should be compelled to imitate a cuckoo and give up her glorious melody,
even though she hates a song in monotone.

Implicit in this comment is Luther's high regard for the literary excellence of the biblical
text. Even the best translation fell far short of the original Scripture in this respect.

As far as the overall RL style is concerned, Luther aimed to produce what is known
nowadays as a “common-language version”—one that is “characterized by a combination
of popular speech and poetic dignity.”59 This may be defined as a sort of middle-of-the-
road form of a given sociolect that overlaps on its upper and lower ends with literary
and colloquial variants respectively.60 Luther might well have called his translation a
“market-language version”:61

We do not have to inquire of the literal Latin, how we are to speak German, as these asses
[the literalists] do. Rather we must inquire about this of the mother in the home, the
children on the street, the common man in the marketplace. We must be guided by their
language, the way they speak, and do our translating accordingly. That way they will
understand it and recognize that we are speaking German to them.

58
Cited in Michael Reu, Luther's German Bible (Columbus, OH: Lutheran Book Concern, 1934) 205.
In particular, Luther wanted his Psalms to sing: “In his afterword in the revised Psalter edition, Luther
stresses his wish to be closer to the German…They should sound like songs in the mother tongue and in
the language of the context” – Dorothea Erbele-Küster, “Luther’s Poetic Reading of Psalms,” 261-270, in
K. Mtata, K-W. Niebuhr, and M. Rose, eds., Singing the Songs of the Lord in Foreign Lands: Psalms in
Contemporary Lutheran Interpretation (Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2014), 269.
59
Weissbort and Eysteinsson, A Historical Reader, 57.
60
For further information about a “common language” translation, see de Waard and Nida,
Functional Equivalence, 41; also William L. Wonderly, Bible Translations for Popular Use (London: United
Bible Societies, 1968), ch. 5.
61
Luther, LW 35, 189.

25
The style that Luther used in his translation was “common” with respect to dialect as
well. In his words, the linguistic variety he chose was widespread; it was:62

not merely provincial (certam linguam)… [but] people from the upper and lower Germany
can understand me. My language is that of the Saxon chancellery, which all the princes
and kings of Germany imitate.

Thus, according to Zecher, Luther and his colleagues “used the court tongue as their base
language but flavored it with the best of all the dialects they could find in the empire.”63

62
Cited in Plass, What Luther Says, 727. “Luther's translation used the variant of German spoken
at the Saxon chancellery, intelligible to both northern and southern Germans”
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther#Translation_of_the_Bible, accessed on August 10, 2016).
The map of “Germany” in 1500 accessed on 22/02/2017 at: washttp://germanhistorydocs.ghi-
dc.org/map.cfm?map_id=3752
63
Zecher, “Bible Translation,” 13.

26
It is important to note that Luther did not have a popular vernacular available into which
he could readily shape the biblical message. Rather, he had to create his own formally
appropriate, acceptable style, and subsequently his translation had a significant influence
on the future development of the German language as a whole (see below).

b) Express selected implicit information.

It is frequently the case that elements of meaning which are implicit in the original text
must be stated explicitly in a translation. The reverse is less often true; however, a
translator may sometimes render a “specific” SL term with a “generic” RL term.
Explicating implicit information troubles many people, who may feel that this is “adding”
something to the sacred text. The problem has to do with one's definition of meaning and
how it is expressed in language.

As suggested earlier, the “meaning” of a Bible passage encompasses everything

that the author intended to communicate to his original audience via the text itself.64
That includes not only information, but also message-related feelings, attitudes, values,
and intentions of how he wanted them to act on the basis of his words. Meaning also
includes important formal features,65 as well as certain crucial elements that are implied,
that is, not overtly expressed. An author assumes that some aspects of meaning are

64
I realize that in many cases, especially for the OT books, e.g., Judges, Psalms, we cannot posit
with certainty who the original author might have been. In such instances, however, we are able to suggest
an “implied” author and setting, including a plausible “intended” audience. Thus, every verbal composition
must begin somewhere with someone having a definite communicate intention (which may be multiple),
the specific aspects of which may not be entirely clear to us today. This is, in my opinion, a defensible
(though nowadays debatable) hermeneutical principle that can facilitate and guide the process of textual
interpretation as well as translation. The degree of scribal updating or editing that was involved during
the Scriptures’ transmission cannot be considered here (but see E.R. Wendland, Orality and Scripture:
Composition, Translation, and Transmission [Dallas: SIL International, 2013], chapter 3).
65
The principle that the forms of a language convey meaning is highlighted in a Cognitive
Linguistic approach to translation; see, for example, Elzbieta Tabakowska, “(Cognitive) grammar in
translation: Form as meaning,” in Ana Rojo and Iraide Ibarrestxe-Antunano, eds., Cognitive Linguistics and
Translation (Berlin: deGruyter, 2013), 229-250.

27
already well known to the audience because of a shared religion, culture, ecological
setting, history, and interpersonal situation. Such shared information does not need to
be explicitly stated in the text. Furthermore, some things are better conveyed indirectly
or left unsaid; this can make a greater impression or avoid offense (as in euphemism).

However, when a translator attempts to transmit the same content in a completely

different set of communicative circumstances, a considerable number of the original
author's basic assumptions and presuppositions concerning his audience's understanding
are no longer valid. For example, many elements relating to historical and geographical
knowledge are not shared between the biblical author and a modern-day audience. Nor
are specific customs, social institutions, values, figures of speech, idioms, and so forth.
The crucial question then is: How should such implicit material be conveyed to today's
audience where it constitutes an essential part of the intended message?

To do this, three major means are available, all of which were advocated by Martin
Luther: (1) a meaningful, functionally-equivalent text; (2) readers’ helps, such as
illustrations, prefaces, and paratextual notes; and (3) the supplementary instruction of
the church. (We are concerned here only with Luther's use of the first of these.)

The principle of making information that is implicit in the original explicit in the
translation was applied by Luther on several different levels of communication. In its
simplest, hence least debatable, form this would involve the use of a "classifier" to specify
some point of reference in the original text. For example, Luther explicitly classified
Bethlehem as a city and Judea as a country (“a land”) in Matthew 2:1; in 2:2 he specified
that magi were “wise men” (die Weise, not the misleading magi) and that the king they
sought was “newly” (neu) born. Bluhm comments in this regard:66

Luther was bold and adventurous enough to insert a word when the spirit of a passage
called for it…as long as it did not transgress against essential meaning. Far from
transgressing. Luther at times by his very boldness brought out meaning, released implicit
meaning. It was as if he … read the mind and intention of the original writer.

66
Bluhm, Creative Translator, 58.

28
Such usage is closely related to a translator's sense of what is natural in actual speech (a
quality which Germans themselves refer to as Schprachgefuehl). In his comments on the
use of “alone” (allein) in Romans 3:28, as noted earlier, Luther makes this very point:67

But it is the nature of our German language that in speaking of two things, one of which
is affirmed and the other denied, we use the word solum (allein) along with the (negative)
nicht [not] or kein [no]. For example, we say … “Did you allein write it, and nicht read it
over?” There are innumerable cases of this kind in daily use.

Many times it is necessary to make the intended meaning explicit in order to avoid
uttering nonsense or the completely wrong sense. For example, Psalm 65:8b, which in
the KJV is rendered very literally as “thou makest the outgoings of the morning and
evening to rejoice” (ESV has “you make the going out of the morning and the evening
shout for joy”), Luther clarified to read, “Thou makest joyful all that go about their
business, both morning(s) and evening(s).”68 He thus made what he felt was the sense of
the psalm as a whole explicit by personalizing and specifying, rather than leaving it
figurative and vague as in the KJV. Luther, in commenting on this passage, further reveals
his ultimate concern for contextually-based meaningfulness in translation:69

No one should be surprised if here and in similar passages we occasionally differ from the
rabbis and grammarians. For we followed the rule that wherever the words could have
gained or tolerated an improved meaning, there … we ran (the) risk, relinquishing the
words and rendering the sense.

We conclude this section with just one example of the opposite procedure-that of
making implicit what is stated explicitly in the original text for the sake of
meaningfulness and/or naturalness in the RL. Of Psalm 68:15b (v. 16 in his version),
Luther says:70

67
Luther, LW 35, 189.
68
Luther, LW 35, 212.
69
Luther, LW 35, 212-213.
70
Luther, LW 35, 215.

29
 “a many-peaked mountain” … we have rendered in German as “a great (grosz) mountain.”
For the meaning is that … a mountain is properly called great in which many peaks are
joined together, one above another right up to the highest peak.

In this instance a more generic term (“great”) is used in place of one that might be
semantically misleading or poetically awkward to express in the RL.71

c) Retain certain unnatural forms in critical places.

Sometimes the form of the original needs to be retained in a translation even though this
results in a rendering that is not the most natural or idiomatic.72 This is the case with
certain key theological, symbolical, or cultural terms, such as “vineyard,” “shepherd,”
“sheep,” “scapegoat,” “passover,” “sabbath,” “bread,” “wine,” and “cross.”

Luther realized on the basis of his considerable biblical background, exegetical

skill, and translation experience that at times it is virtually impossible to convey the full
sense or the precise nuance of a particular Hebrew or Greek expression in German.
Correspondingly, a concern for vernacular naturalness must never be allowed to diminish
or distort the intended meaning of a given Greek or Hebrew term. As Luther explains it:73

I have not gone ahead anyway and disregarded altogether the exact wording of the
original. Rather with my helpers I have been careful to see that where everything turns
on a single passage, I have kept to the original quite literally and have not lightly departed
from it. For example, in John 6[:27] Christ says, “Him has God the Father sealed
[versiegelt].” It would have been better German to say, “Him has God the Father signified

71
“Correct TRANSLATION was never for L. a matter of grammar and philology alone. The delicate
art of translation could never be safely left by the church to grammarians, who understood the form but
not necessarily the substance of the text; nor was it a fit task for a clerical drudge or for translators with a
tin ear for the idioms and rhythms of their native tongue” – D. C. Steinmetz, “LUTHER, MARTIN,” in
Dictionary of Biblical Interpretation, vol. 2, John H. Hayes, ed., 96-98 (Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 1999), 97.
72
Nord comments: “Many Bible translators have felt that the process of translating should involve
both procedures: a faithful reproduction of formal source-text qualities in one situation and an adjustment
to the target audience in another. … Martin Luther (1483-1546) held the view that there are passages in
the Bible where the translator must…keep ‘to the letter’ (Luther, Circular Letter on Translation, 1530); in
other passages [he] believed it was more important to ‘render the sense’…” (Nord, Translating, 4).
73
Luther, LW 35, 194.

30
 [gezeichnet],” or “He it is whom God the Father means [meinet].” But I have preferred to
do violence to the German language rather than to depart from the word.

At other times Luther wished to preserve something of the vibrancy of the original
thought as a way of enriching, as it were, the German language and manner of
conceptualizing things:74

We at times also translated quite literally—even though we could have rendered the
meaning more clearly another way—because everything (that is, the precise sense of the
original) turns on these very words. For example, here in [Psalm 68] verse 18, “Thou hast
ascended on high; thou hast led captivity captive,” it would have been good German to
say, “Thou has set the captives free.” But this is too weak, and does not convey the fine,
rich meaning of the Hebrew … On every hand St. Paul propagates such rich, glorious, and
comforting doctrine (cf. Rom. 8:3; 1 Cor. 15:54; Gal. 2:19; 2 Tim. 1:10). Therefore out of
respect for such doctrine, and for the comforting of our conscience, we should keep such
words, accustom ourselves to them, and so give place to the Hebrew language where it
does a better job than our German.

The preceding also illustrates the importance of maintaining intertextual “resonance,”

that is, the accumulated semantic significance of certain important expressions that recur
in a number of places in the Scriptures, especially when dealing with New Testament
quotations of key Old Testament texts.

Then there are those relatively few times where the original text is so difficult or
its sense so obscure that to attempt one meaningful rendering would result in the
elimination of another equally likely interpretation. (The use of footnotes to convey such
alternatives was not an option in those days.) Luther cites the example of Psalm 91:5-6,
which he rendered literally, hence ambiguously:75

Therefore we tried to leave room for each person to understand (the words) according to
the gifts and measure of his spirit. Otherwise we would have rendered them in such a way
as to give fuller expression to our own understanding of the meaning.

74
Luther, LW 35, 216. With regard to Luther’s methodology in these challenging cases, Ellingworth
notes that “Luther takes a pragmatic approach to translation, sometimes rendering the text literally, but
more often ‘rendering only the meaning’…” (“Translation Techniques,” 317).
75
Luther, LW 35, 216-217.

31
d) Listen for the “sonority” of the text.

“Luther had an ear for the ringing, sonorous phrase,” asserts Bluhm,76 as for example, in
his rendition of Matthew 5:16: Also lasset euer Licht leuchten vor den Menschen.” From
alliteration in the preceding passage, we turn to “a”-vowel assonance in Matthew 26:26:
“Da sie aber assen, nahm Jesus das Brot, dankte und brachs und gab es seinen Jüngern und
sprach...” And listen to the significant phonesthetics of Psalm 23:1: “Der Herr ist mein
Hirte; mir wird nichts mangeln.” Although we might not think of German as being a
particularly “musical” language, Luther’s translation did pay special attention to the
beauty of the sound of the biblical text. According to Burger:77

While he was translating the Bible, Luther spoke his sentences out loud to himself, and his
sure sense of rhythm and melody never allowed any sentence to pass whose accents, pauses
and cadences, whose sequence of vowels and consonants, did not satisfy him entirely. …
Although Luther knew and often used earlier Bible translations, his was the first to give the
words of Scripture rhythm and melody in German.

Gritsch adds:78

Luther expanded the use of consonants, and created new ways of pronunciation and
composite words like Sündenbock (scapegoat), Lockvogel (decoy-bird), Lückenbüsser (stand-
in) and similar words. In addition, he created new sentence structures with a tendency to
put the verb at the end of the sentence. Luther always had a conversation with the Bible
to let it speak to him with verve and rhythm.

76
Bluhm, Creative Translator, 65.
77
H. O. Burger, “Luther as an Event in Literary History,” in Martin Luther: 450th Anniversary of the
Reformation [no editor listed], 119-34 (Bad Godesberg: Internationes, 1967) 124. Koelpin makes a similar
observation: “While Luther was translating the Bible, he constantly read his sentences aloud, testing the
accents and cadences, the vowels and consonants for their melodic flow. He did this because German was
really a language (Sprache). It was meant to be spoken aloud by the tongue (lingua), not written; heard,
not read; for a word has sound and tone. By Luther's own description, ‘The soul of the word lies in the
voice.’ Thus Luther constructed his translation with a view to the public reading of the book. By means of
sentence structure and meaningful punctuation, he makes the Bible a book to be heard” (“A New Bible
Translation,” 10-11).
78
“Luther as Bible Translator,” 70.

32
This was not “euphony” or fluency purely for its own sake, but Luther wanted the sound
of his text, particularly in familiar passages, to “ring through all the senses into the heart”
so that those hearing it might “rightly conceive of the word(s) and the feeling behind
(them).79 Ewald Plass provides some detail:80

The Reformer translated for the ear no less than for the eye. He realized that “his” Bible
would be read aloud in church and in family devotion, wherefore he would make the very
sound of it pleasing to the ear. He therefore avoided all harsh constructions, all unbalanced
sentences and disturbing subordinate clauses. The result was a rhythmic flow of language.
For instance, Ps. 33:18 Luther translated: “Des Herrn Auge siehet auf die, so [not 'die' again]
ihn fuerchten, die auf seine Guete hoffen.” In Matt. 5:44 he avoided a similar cacophony by
translating: “Bittet fuer die, so euch beleidigen und verfolgen.”

A sonically well-tuned text is also easier to memorize and remember—no small factor in
the case of a population that were generally not very well educated. If one is looking for
a longer example, “the Pauline description of love in 1 Corinthians 13 sounds like a poem
in German.”81

Luther's desire for an idiomatic sound in German appears to be a major factor in

many of his subtle stylistic flourishes. We see this, for example, in his rhymed version of
Proverbs 8:14: “Mein ist beides, Rat und Tat” (“I have counsel and sound wisdom,” ESV);
or in the alliteration of Mark 14:33, where Christ is described as being “zittern und zagen”
(“greatly distressed and troubled,” ESV).82 We see Luther’s sound sensitivity to a greater
extent as he breaks up the long utterance of Matthew 26:54 into two parts—an emphatic
rhetorical question followed by a brief self-responding assertion: “Wie wuerde aber die
Schrift erfuellet? Es musz also gehen” (ESV rather awkwardly renders: “But how then
should the Scriptures be fulfilled, that it must be so?”)

79
Burger, “Luther as an Event,” 125-126.
80
Plass, This Is Luther, 336-337. Burger eulogizes: “Who among the German humanists—indeed
who in the whole course of German history and literature—wrote better German than Luther? For him
German is really a language—something spoken, not written, something heard, not read, resounding and
reverberant” (“Luther as an Event,” 123).
81
Gritsch, “Luther as Bible Translator,” 70.
82
These examples are taken from Denlinger, “Bible Scholar”, 200.

33
 Koelpin presents a good summary of Luther's basic aim and the effect of his
practical oral/aural-oriented policy:83

Luther aimed to produce more than a faithful translation. He wanted a text that was crisp
and pleasant to hear. By his own admission he read Holy Writ “as though it had been
written yesterday.” And he wished his translation to be read in the same way. He adapts
his language to any mood, to the tenderness of the Christmas story as well as to the terrors
of the Apocalypse. He employs all the skills of the poet’s craft: an added syllable for the
sake of rhythm, the use of alliteration, assonance, and rhyme. All is so naturally conceived
that it does not seem artificially contrived.

Luther also took sound seriously in connection with biblical genre. The Psalms, for
example, are ideally sung musically, as in their original worship setting:84

The stringed instruments of [98:5 and] the following psalms are to help in the singing of
this new song.…All pious Christian musicians should let their singing and playing to the
praise of the Father of all grace sound forth with joy from their organs and whatever other
beloved instruments there are…of which neither David nor Solomon, neither Persia,
Greece, nor Rome, knew anything.

83
Koelpin, “A New Bible Translation,” 12-13. With regard to any text of Scripture, Luther
recommends that “you should meditate, that is, not only in your heart, but also externally, by actually
repeating and comparing oral speech and literal words of the [text], reading and rereading them with
diligent attention and reflection, so that you may see what the Holy Spirit means by them” (“Preface to
the Wittenberg Edition of Luther’s German Writings, 1539,” in H. T. Lehmann, ed., Luther’s Works, vol.
34 [Philadelphia: Muhlenburg Press, 1960], 286).
84
Plass, What Luther Says, 982. In this quote we also note Luther’s progressive, open-minded
perspective on the use of musical instruments during worship—in keeping with the principle of adiaphora,
freely utilize whatever is appropriate in the culture and liturgical setting concerned. And even more
broadly, in his opinion, “I would gladly see all the arts, especially music, in the service of Him who has
given and created them” (cited in Plass, What Luther Says, 980). Corinna Körting suggests four reasons that
Luther gave for promoting a singing of the Psalms: (a) following the biblical example, (b) functioning as
the community of saints, (c) for the comforting and strengthening of one’s faith, and (d) for appreciating
and apprehending God’s Word “affectively”—in the heart (“Singing, Praying and Meditating the Psalms,”
59-71 in Mtata et al, Singing the Songs, 60-62).

34
Indeed, Luther considered the Word of God, especially the Gospel, to be a living, audible
word—hence best communicated in living speech—a voice resounding into the whole
world and publicly shouted—or enthusiastically sung—aloud so that all can hear it.85

4. Comprehensive

From “bottom to top,” and from “top to bottom”—Luther’s translation evinces a scholar’s
concern for all aspects of text analysis, which involves its individual sounds, as noted
earlier, to the different genres of entire books. Luther's high regard for the form of the
original message of Scripture had a number of important implications as far as his
translation procedure was concerned. In his eyes, a thorough knowledge of the biblical
languages was essential so that a translation could be based firmly upon the original text
rather than on some other translation, such as the Latin Vulgate, which had been the
practice before Luther.86

The effort Luther had put into learning and teaching Hebrew and Greek
undoubtedly influenced his estimation of their supreme importance in exegesis.
Accordingly, he gathered together men of scholarly ability to serve as his “revision team”
(see further below). In addition, according to Bachmann, editor of Luther's Works,87
“Luther … availed himself of the best (scholarly) aids of his time, inadequate though
these were, in order to ascertain the most accurate text of Scripture.”88

85
Burger, “Luther as an Event,” 125; cf. also Luther, LW 35, 259 and his version of Psalm 23 below.
“Because [Luther’s Bible] sounded natural when spoken as well as read, its cadence and readability have
made it a popular Bible in Germany to this day” (Zecher, “Bible Translation,” 14).
86
Luther was also up to date with regard to his use of scholarly versions. He “worked from the
second, revised edition of Erasmus’ Greek New Testament, published in Basel in 1519, when he translated
the New Testament into German. For translation of the Old Testament, he and his colleagues relied on a
copy of the Masoretic text of the Hebrew Scriptures produced in 1494 by the Italian Jewish printer Gerson
ben Moses Soncino” (Denlinger, “Bible Scholar”, 197). “Martin Luther capitalized on Erasmus’s
publication, twenty months later fanning the flames of the Reformation in Wittenberg”
(http://friendsofcsntm.com/the-book-that-changed-the-world-500-years-ago/ -- accessed 21/02/2017).
87
LW 35, 230.
88
Luther’s scholarly resources included “the first text-critical Greek edition of the New Testament”
(Erasmus, 1516) and “the Hebrew grammar and dictionary of the German humanist John Reuchlin (1455-

35
 A concern for form also meant that much careful and diligent research was needed
in order to come as close to the original concept as the lexical resources of German would
allow. Luther was an active, extensive researcher. When dealing with some of the more
technical terms of biblical vocabulary, he would go out in search of the most precise
German words that he could find. He investigated the court jewels of the Elector of
Saxony to find names for the gems and precious stones listed in Revelation 21.89 He
examined rare coin collections in Wittenberg to discover suitable equivalents for the

1522)” (Gritsch, “Luther as Bible Translator,” 62-63). (Portrait of Erasmus above by Holbein accessed at
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/30/Holbein-erasmus.jpg on 22/02/2017)
89
But Luther did not aim to please purely a scholarly readership, for as he wrote to Spalatin when
enlisting his assistance: “But remember to give us simple terms, not those used at the castle or court, for
this book should be famous for its simplicity. To begin with, please give us the names and colors of the
gems that are mentioned in Revelation 21; or even better, get the gems for us from the court or wherever
else you can, so that we can see them” (Luther, LW 49, 4, cited in Schuetze, Martin Luther, 82.

36
various monetary terms of the Bible. One contemporary reports that Luther once “had
several rams slaughtered in his presence so that a German butcher could tell him the
proper name for each part of the sheep,”90 thus enabling him to more accurately render
the elaborate details of the Levitical sacrificial system.

In a letter to his friend Spalatin, Luther describes his research into the birds and
beasts of the OT:91

I am all right on the birds of the night-owl, raven, horned owl, tawny owl, screech owl-
and on the birds of prey-vulture, kite, hawk, and sparrow hawk. I can handle the stag,
roebuck, and chamois, but what in the devil am I to do with the taragelaphus, pygargus,
oryx, and camelopard [names for animals in the Vulgate]?

Those of us who work on translations in various African languages can certainly

sympathize with Luther on this point.92 How far can one go in search of indigenous
equivalents before seriously distorting the sense of the original or adversely coloring
biblical terminology with conflicting or even contradictory local connotations? In a
sense-oriented version, however, one must be prepared to err more on the side of greater
contextualization so that the message really means something, rather than to use all sorts
of obscure transliterations, loan words, made-up terms, and semantic reconstructions.
Luther's basic policy is described in this apt comment by Roland Bainton:93

If the French call a centurion a gendarme, and the Germans make a procurator into a
burgomeister, Palestine has moved west. And this is what did happen to a degree in
Luther's rendering. Judea was transplanted to Saxony, and the road from Jericho to
Jerusalem ran through the Thuringian forest. By nuances and turns of expression Luther
enhanced the graphic in terms of the local (that is, where no point of doctrine was
concerned).

90
Johann Mathesius, cited in E. G. Schweibert, Luther and His Times: The Reformation from a New
Perspective (St. Louis: Concordia, 1950), 649.
91
Cited in Roland H. Bainton, Here I Stand: A Life of Martin Luther (Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 1950)
256.
92
See, for example, Wendland, Bible Translation, ch. 7.
93
Bainton, Here I Stand, 256-257.

37
But for an accurate, artistically composed rendition, attention to the individual words of
a text is not enough. In order for an accurate exegetical study to be carried out and a
correspondingly natural translation effected, even a careful verse-by-verse approach is
inadequate. What is needed is a broader, holistic approach. A complete discourse and
genre-oriented perspective must be adopted and applied with respect to both the SL text
and the RL text.

Any verbal composition, especially a literary one (which the Bible arguably is),94
whether oral or written, is composed of smaller segments that are combined to form
larger ones and so on up the hierarchical ladder of linguistic organization until the
complete composition is constituted. Such a discourse must therefore be viewed (both
analyzed and evaluated) as a whole—a harmonious unity that communicates more than,
and is essentially different from, the sum of its individual parts—with respect to form,
content, function, and effect. A discourse perspective includes also a concern for the
various language-specific sociocultural text-forms, or “genres,” in which the Scriptures
are composed: narratives, parables, proverbs, songs, oracles, letters, apocalypses,
legislation, and many other subcategories of these.

Discourse analysis is the fruit of some relatively recent insights of literary and
linguistic science; therefore it is not surprising that Luther had little to write on the
subject. But that he intuitively recognized these principles is evident from the fact that
his translation is not chopped up into distinct verses. Rather, it consists of meaningful
paragraphs of varying length-according to his arrangement of the subject matter at
hand.95 Words are not connected to one another in haphazard fashion, but they are
carefully selected to conform to the meaning-environment into which they are to be set.
Luther often wrestled with this task, and when he himself did not have the answer, he
readily consulted others. Thus Luther adopted a text-holistic as well as a contextually

94
Ernst R. Wendland, Translating the Literature of Scripture (Dallas: SIL International, 2004).
95
Plass, This Is Luther, 331.

38
conditioned perspective on whatever passage he happened to be translating. “Sensitive
to literary genre, Luther could recognize what different authors were doing with different
literary forms in different passages.”96 And such scholarly intuition is abundantly
manifested in the different biblical books of his translation

Luther recognized and appreciated good literature and could compose it himself,
as his many beautiful hymns attest.97 He greatly valued the affective, connotative
qualities of the Word of God and strove to emulate the effect in German garb. He felt,
for example, that “the language of (Job) is more vigorous and splendid than that of any
other book in all the Scriptures,”98 but that there was a problem on the German side:99

We have so much trouble translating Job, on account of the grandeur of his sublime style,
that he seems to be more impatient of our efforts to turn him into German than he was of
the consolation of his friends … Either he always wishes to sit upon his dunghill, or else
he is jealous of the translator who would share with him the credit of writing his book.

Similarly with the Psalms, Luther perceived not only their great theological import—“a
little Bible,” in his opinion—but also their poetic beauty and emotive impact;100 and so
he spent much of his translation career trying to perfect his own German version of the
Psalter. The dynamic power of the Hebrew prophets too must have impressed Luther
because he devoted a great amount of his time to attempting to push them into preaching

96
Kolb, “The Bible in Reformation,” 94; for example, “His brief introduction to the Psalms, penned
in 1531, labeled the psalms by genre: “Trostpsalm” [psalm of comfort], “weissagung von Christo”
[prophecy of Christ], “Dankpsalm” (psalm of thanks], among others” (ibid., 94). See also Edward A.
Englebrecht, ed., The Lutheran Study Bible: English Standard Version (St. Louis: Concordia, 2009), 841-842.
97
See Burger, “Luther as an Event,” 127ff.
98
Luther, LW 35, 252.
99
Luther in a letter to Spalatin, cited in Koelpin, “A New Bible Translation,” 1.
100
“Luther’s translation of the Bible demonstrates on all levels that it was molded with an eye
toward the text’s deepest emotional dimensions, which he himself described so fittingly: “so that it
penetrates into the heart and rings and reverberates through all the senses” (Stolt 2012:398; Stolt’s essay
effectively brings out Luther’s emphasis on speaking the “language of the heart” in and through his German
Bible translation).

39
German! Even the foundational, narrative-legal books of Moses did not escape Luther's
attention; for the goal, as far as he was concerned, was quite comprehensive:101

I will get rid of Hebraisms, so that no one can say that Moses was a Hebrew. Good
translating means adapting the statement to the spirit of the (receptor) language.

But how does one duplicate or learn from Luther when working in the thousands
of other languages in the world? Just listen to his advice. It is something that all present
and future translators of God's Word need to keep in mind.102

I am persuaded that without knowledge of literature, pure theology cannot at all endure,
just as heretofore, when letters [that is, literary study] have declined and lain prostrate,
theology too has wretchedly fallen and lain prostrate; nay I see that there has never been
a great revelation of the Word of God unless He has first prepared the way by the rise and
prosperity of languages and letters, as though they were John the Baptists … Certainly it
is my desire that there shall be as many poets and rhetoricians as possible, because I see
that by these studies, as by no other means, people are wonderfully fitted for the grasping
of sacred truth and for handling it skillfully and happily … Therefore I beg of you that at
my request (if that has any weight) you will urge your young people to be diligent in the
study of poetry and rhetoric.

5. Contextual

The internal linguistic context, or “co-text,” is a crucial factor in biblical exegesis. Any
given term must be understood and translated so as to fit the context, near and far. The
external, situational context must also be considered when doing exegesis—the study
known in theological circles as “isagogics.” This external setting includes such distinct
but interrelated aspects as the historical, cultural, social, economic, educational,
philosophical, literary (oral and written), political, environmental, and religious sectors.

There is no doubt that Luther translated with the linguistic context in mind.
“Luther, never a literalist, chose the more appropriate word according to the
circumstances in which the term occurs,” says Bluhm.103 We have already seen instances

101
Cited in Reu, Luther's German Bible, 269.
102
Cited in Preserved Smith and Charles M. Jacobs, eds., Luther's Correspondence, vol. 2
(Philadelphia: United Lutheran Publication House, 1918), 176-178.
103
Bluhm, Creative Translator, 64.

40
of this above. Another example is Luther's various translations of the Hebrew word chen,
as the editor of Luther's Works points out:104

This Hebrew root may mean favor or grace, with respect either to form and appearance
or to speech; it may also mean the favor or acceptance one has in the sight either of God
or of men. Luther found that his favorite equivalent, Gnade, was not always adequate for
every form, context, and usage; he also utilized such terms as Gunst, lieblich, holdselig, and
others to render the word.

Luther never forgot the local sociocultural setting of his Bible translation work. For
example, “the shekel – currency of ancient Israel – became the Sibberling – the currency
in Saxony at the time of Luther.”105 Several other interesting cases of Luther's practice of
“contextual” (rather than rote “verbal”) consistency in translation are provided by
Plass:106

His amazing wealth of vocabulary was an invaluable asset to Luther in translating…. [He]
uses no fewer than ten synonyms for the word Leid (sorrow). At the same time he does not
choose a different word merely for the sake of variety. The Professor carefully notes the
shade of difference in synonyms and makes his selections accordingly … [Thus] the Pferde
(horses) are held in with bit and bridle, but fiery Rosse (chargers) carry Elijah to heaven
in a fiery chariot, and it is the strong Gaeule (work horses) whose neighing is heard (James
3.3; 2 Kings 2.11; Jer. 50.11).

At times event-based situational cues merged with theological and linguistic concerns to
influence Luther’s rendering, as in the case of his insightful interpretation of Yahweh’s
revelation of his covenantal name when speaking to Moses before the burning bush
(Exodus 3:14): “Ich werde sein, der ich werde sein.”

On the other hand, Luther also realized that in certain domains of vocabulary, the
Hebrew or Greek possessed a wealth of lexical resources that simply could not be
matched in German. Koelpin cites an example, in Luther’s words:107

104
Bachmann in Luther, LW 35, 222.
105
(“Martin Luther: Translator of the Bible,” accessed on July 8, 2016 at
http://www.museeprotestant.org/en/notice/martin-luther-translator-of-the-bible/).
106
Plass, This Is Luther, 337.
107
Koelpin, “A New Bible Translation,” 8.

41
 [Hebrew] possesses many words for singing, praising, glorifying, honoring, rejoicing,
sorrowing, etc., for which we have but one. Especially in sacred and divine matters is it
rich in words. It has at least ten names with which to name God, whereas we have only
one word. It may therefore be rightly called a holy tongue.

As to the “external” situational context, we might point out first that this is a
factor seldom given the attention it deserves by Bible translators.108 After all, the
situational setting is not part of the text per se, so some may feel that it can be dispensed
with or largely ignored. It is also difficult for today’s translators to put themselves into
the biblical author's situation and then attempt to express this perspective accurately
(with reference to the SL text/context) and appropriately (with reference to the RL
text/context). But Luther was intuitively able to do precisely this, as has already been
suggested.109 He reveals his keen awareness of issues of a sociolinguistic nature in his
discussion of Luke 1:28:110

When the angel greets Mary, he says, “Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with you!” Up
to now that has simply been translated according to the literal Latin (ave Maria gratia).
Tell me whether that is also good German! When does a German speak like that, “You are
full of grace”? He would have to think of a keg “full of” beer or a purse “full of” money.
Therefore I have translated it, “Thou gracious one” (du holdselig), so that a German can at
least think his way through to what the angel meant by this greeting … though I have still
not hit upon the best German for it. Suppose I had taken the best German and translated
the salutation thus: “Hello there, Mary” (Gott grusse dich, du liebe Maria)—for that is what
the angel wanted to say, and what he would have said, if he had wanted to greet her in
German.

108
“Cross-cultural communication is more than linguistics. But no effective transmission of the
Gospel takes place across cultural boundaries apart from careful attention to the linguistic component. The
same can be said for indigenization and contextualization. And these missiological insights were not born
in the twentieth century. They were strongly operative in the Protestant Reformation, and especially in
Luther's pen” (Hans Kasdorf, “Luther’s Bible: A Dynamic Equivalence Translation and a Germanizing
Force,” Missiology 6:2, 1978:213-234, from the article’s Abstract).
109
“Luther’s Open Letter on Translation (1530) is an important text in the history of translation
theory, not only because it is intimately connected to a groundbreaking translation, but further because it
manifests vividly how the choice of words and expressions in a translation is sometimes intimately linked
to a whole ideological and institutional matrix” (Weissbort and Eysteinsson, A Historical Reader, 57).
110
Luther, LW 35, 191-192.

42
So why then did Luther not render the greeting that way? Perhaps out of evangelical
concern for his former Catholic brethren. They, he says with tongue in cheek, “would
have hanged themselves out of (their) tremendous fanaticism for the Virgin Mary,
because I had thus destroyed the salutation.”111

Another example, this one from the Old Testament, also reveals how closely
language usage is related to co-text, context, culture, and connotation. What sounds
perfectly natural in one setting may seem completely out of place in another:112

Psalm 92[:14] says, “Even when they grow old, they will nevertheless bloom and be
fruitful and flourishing.” We know, of course, that word for word the text says this, “When
their hair is gray they will still bloom and be fat and green.” But what does this mean?
The psalm had been comparing the righteous to palm trees and cedars [verse 14], which
have no “gray hair,” neither are they “fat” (by which a German means an oily or greasy
substance [schmaltz], and thinks of a hefty paunch). But the prophet here intends to say
that the righteous are such trees, which bloom and are fruitful and flourishing even when
they grow old.

All mother-tongue speakers know such information instinctively and produce their
utterances accordingly when they talk in the varied interpersonal situations of life. The
hard part is to transform such knowledge into idiomatic verbal action when translating.
That takes scholars with the boldness to accompany their sociocultural acumen.

The “context” of a translation also includes its “paratext,” that is, supplementary
material that is intended to aid the reader. Luther’s version did not, of course, include
many of the features that today we call “readers’ helps,” because their great value has
been learned and accepted only in more recent years. Explanatory footnotes, selective
cross-references, a glossary of important terms and technical terms, suitable illustrations,
prefaces to the individual books, section headings, tables, summary charts-all of these
facilitate understanding and further study.

111
Luther, LW 35, 192.
112
Luther, LW 35, 218.

43
 But Luther prepared the ground for such extratextual aids. His Bible contained an
index, and later editions also provided an indication of the regular gospel and epistle
readings for each Sunday.113 The most important of these helps was undoubtedly the
series of explanatory prefaces that he prepared for the Old Testament, the New
Testament, and each of the individual books of the Bible. Luther used these introductions
to raise the abysmally low level of biblical knowledge among his constituency, lay and
clergy alike. One might raise some objections nowadays concerning their theological
narrowness—they tend to be rather catechetical and too polemically Lutheran for a wider
Christian readership. But this depends on one's own ecclesiastical persuasion, and of
course the religious times have dramatically changed since Luther's day. Furthermore,
scholars ought to respectfully temper their criticism of the works written in an age far
removed from their own. At any rate, few would deny that Luther’s prefaces contain
many good theological insights and are especially helpful in the area of practical pastoral
application, as we see in the following excerpt from the “Preface to the Book of Job”:114

But this [book] is written for our comfort, that God allows great saints to falter, especially
in adversity. For before Job comes into fear of death, he praises God at the theft of his
goods and the death of his children. But when death is in prospect and God withdraws
himself, Job's words show what kind of thoughts a man-however holy he may be-holds
towards God: he thinks that God is not god, but only a judge and wrathful tyrant, who
storms ahead and cares nothing about the goodness of a person's life. This is the finest part
of the book. It is understood only by those who also experience and feel what it is to suffer
the wrath … of God and to have his grace hidden.

Along with the book introductions, Luther in some editions also “added comments on
the margin for the guidance of the common folk.”115 We might regard such marginal
expository “glosses” as being an important forerunner of the annotated “study Bibles” so
popular nowadays.116

113
Koelpin, “A New Bible Translation,” 14.
114
Luther, LW 35, 252.
115
Koelpin, “A New Bible Translation,” 14.
116
Luther began including such didactic supplements from the very beginning, starting with his
first revision of the New Testament. He “added marginal notes and prefaces to each book of the New
Testament, thereby producing something akin to what today might be called a study Bible. In this we see

44
 We might even view Luther's inclusion of the Apocrypha as a valuable
supplementary help for Bible readers.117 While he considered this corpus to be inferior to
the biblical canon,118 Luther also felt that Christians could derive some real benefit from
it, especially to gain a greater awareness of the religious life and thought of ancient times.
These extra-canonical texts can provide a useful background to the 66 acknowledged
books of Scripture. In those days of deprivation with respect to scholarly helps and
didactic aids, every additional study tool counted, and it is to Luther's credit that he
recognized this serious need and did something about it, using the best materials at hand.

Another area in which the Luther Bible supplied special help to its readers (and
nonreaders as well) was through its magnificent illustrations (see the example below).119

Luther’s concern, from the very first, not just to grant people access to Scripture in language they could
understand, but also to guide them in their reading and understanding of Scripture” (Denlinger, “Bible
Scholar”, 202). For a detailed discussion of the various auxiliary “metatexts” as well as the general format
of Luther’s 1534 Bible, see Kerr, Bible Translation Theories, 75-79.
117
“The bulk of the translation of the apocrypha was mainly done by Luther’s colleagues
Melanchthon and Justus Jonas” (Gritsch, “Luther as Bible Translator,” 65).
118
Plass, What Luther Says, 1512. Luther at times appeared to value certain biblical books more
highly than others; conversely, at times he seemed to describe some books in less than glowing terms, e.g.,
the epistle of James—as being an “epistle of straw.” However, Luther’s characterization of such books
varied during his ministry and he is often quoted, controversially, out of context. For a brief but helpful
discussion of this issue with reference to James, see The Lutheran Study Bible (St. Louis: Concordia
Publishing House, 2009), 2130-2131.
119
Lutherbibel 1534, Illustration zu Ezechiel 37: “Die Auferweckung der Totengebeine Israels,” by
Werkstatt Lucas Cranachs – Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=24080932.

45
In this regard, Zecher observes:120

Das Newe Testament Deutzsch was published in September 1522. [It was] a typographical
masterpiece, containing woodcuts from Lucas Cranach's workshop and selections from
Albrecht Duerer's famous Apocalypse series.

Such beautiful, graphically detailed illustrations, created by recognized masters of the

day, contributed to the impact and appeal of certain editions. This is evident in the very

120
Zecher, “Bible Translation,” 12.

46
first complete Bible that Luther provided for the German people—the 1534 “Wittenberg”
version published by Hans Lufft, which included 124 Cranach woodcuts.121

However, the illustrators sometimes got a bit carried away with the spirit of their own
age.122 Consequently, they regularly transculturized the message visually—and hence

121
Armin J. Panning, 1983. “Luther as Bible Translator,” in Luther Lives: Essays in Commemoration
th
of the 500 Anniversary of Martin Luther's Birth, 69-84, eds. E. C. Fredrich, S. W. Becker, and D. P. Kuske
(Milwauke, WI: Northwestern Publishing House, 1983) 80. The precise number of woodcuts probably
varied according to the edition; Gritsch notes “117 woodcuts” in the 1534 Luther Bible (“Luther as Bible
Translator,” 65). The colored woodcut below of the Gospel of Matthew chapter one from the 1524 edition
of the New Testament is by Georg Lemberger (dated 1523)—
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Luther_Bible#/media/File:Luther_bible_double_page.jpg.
122
“These illustrations, typical of Renaissance art, used sixteenth-century dress and setting to
illustrate biblical characters and events” (Nichols, Martin Luther, 53).

47
also conceptually—as they transferred the setting from ancient biblical times to
contemporary northern Renaissance Germany.123

This was especially true in the Book of Revelation. (But then again, why should the
imagination not be allowed to run a bit more freely in this book?) The whore of Babylon, for
example, in chapter 17, is anachronistically depicted in the September Testament of 1522

123
Apokalypse aus Lutherbibelexemplar in Schweden –
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Apokalypse_lutherbibel.jpg

48
as wearing the official papal tiara.124 Whatever other purpose they served, the
illustrations did help to localize the Bible and make people feel “at home” when reading
it. As Bainton notes: “Moses and David might almost be mistaken for Frederick the Wise
and John Frederick [his son].”125

Luther's contextual concern for the medium of message transmission extended also
to the typography and format of the printed page. After all, how can a text be properly
read aloud if it has not been set out legibly in written form? His fashioning of the text
into meaningful paragraph units rather than a disruptive sequence of individual verses
has already been mentioned. A project undertaken late in life (perhaps so that he himself
might benefit) was a special “large-type” edition of the New Testament, prepared for
readers with failing eyesight in mind.126

More significant in terms of readability is the fact that “all prints of the Luther
Bible down to 1586 divided the text up … into rhythmical units and used punctuation
[especially the comma, or slash line] to indicate the pauses necessary for rhythmical
diction, not as signs of grammatical articulation.”127 In respect of the oral-aural fluency
and readability of his text, Luther was well ahead of his times and established a model
worth emulating even up to the present day. In fact, in many cases things have actually
regressed in the interests of economy and due to a highly conservative tradition of
Scripture publication.128

124
Bainton, Here I Stand, 259.
125
Bainton, Here I Stand, 257.
126
Panning, “Luther as Bible Translator,” 82.
127
Burger, “Luther as an Event,” 125.
128
The illustration below of LZB in Flensburg - Niederdeutsche Lutherbibel von 1574-1580, Bild
16 is by Soenke Rahn - CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=39648863.
There are some exceptions, the best overall format for English Bibles today in my opinion is that of the
New International Version, which pays close attention to the larger (strophic) structure of poetic discourse,
especially in the Psalms.

49
 Certainly more could and should be done to create a more “user-friendly”
Scripture text today. This might be achieved by more discourse-cognizant paragraphing;
an unjustified right margin; a single column of print on the page (each line a distinct
utterance unit); large, clear typefaces; more space between lines and along the margins;
with form/content-shaped indentation employed to reflect special syntactic structures or
larger poetic patterns. These are just a few of the more important formatting variables
available as visual cues, which indirectly assist hearers as well—when a pericope of
Scripture is proclaimed aloud by sensitive readers following a plainly legible text.

50
 6. Collaborative

A diversified and well-organized translation team generally produces results that are
more accurate, effective, and acceptable to the RL audience than a translator working in
isolation can achieve. Although Luther completed his September Testament alone and in
a hurry, that was due to special circumstances and was certainly not his preference.

Panning provides a description of how Luther would often proceed when

beginning to translate a new Old Testament text:129

Luther apparently always began from the original Hebrew. In a first pass, Luther would
translate literally and woodenly, even word for word. Often the first rough draft would be
in Latin. At times when Luther didn't know a Hebrew word, he simply transliterated it or
left a blank for the time being. The second stage was to fit the parts together lexically,
syntactically, grammatically. When he had determined … what the Hebrew said, then he
went at what it meant, trying to put the content into basic German, which was then
reworked and polished and refined in the painstaking search to find just the right German
words. After crossing out three, four, and even more attempts, a final decision would be
reached and the crabbed and cluttered manuscript would be sent to the longsuffering
typesetter.

It is indeed striking to observe how similar these procedures are to the basic three-step
method of text analysis, transfer, and restructuring that is recommended in some of the
more popular Bible translation manuals.130

But Luther openly acknowledged that a one-man translation has its limitations,
especially where the Old Testament is concerned:131

I freely admit that I have undertaken too much, especially in trying to put the Old
Testament into German. The Hebrew language, sad to say, has gone down so far that even
the Jews know little enough about it, and their glosses and interpretations (which I have
tested) are not to be relied upon.

129
Panning, “Luther as Bible Translator,” 76.
130
See for example, Nida and Taber, Theory and Practice, 33; Wonderly, Bible Translations, 52.
131
Luther, LW 35, 249.

51
Therefore, Luther's subsequent revision of his initial New Testament version, as well as
his translation of the Old Testament and Apocrypha, was undertaken with the help of a
scholarly translation committee (collegium biblicum), which he affectionately referred to
as his “Sanhedrin.”132 Luther, realizing his weaknesses, selected committee members who
were recognized scholars and specialists in their field, men like Philip Melanchthon for
Greek and Matthew Aurogallus for Hebrew. As Luther himself explained this important
practical point:133

Translators must never work by themselves. When one is alone, the best and most suitable
words do not always occur to him.

132
“Before dinner every Wednesday and Thursday, from the summer of 1539 to the beginning of
1541, he assembled a group of scholars…to assist him in revising his translation of the Old Testament”
(David B. Calhoun, “Luther in His Later Years” [in Sproul and Nichols, Legacy of Luther, 53-74], 58).
133
Cited in Zecher, “Bible Translation,” 12-13. Portrait of Melanchthon and Luther:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Melanchthon#/media/File:Luther-melanch-kreuzkirche-bretten.jpg

52
In his preface to the Old Testament, Luther acknowledges the help of his translation
“team”:134

If all of us were to work together, we would have plenty to do in bringing the Bible to
light, one working with the meaning, the other with the languages. For I too have not
worked at this alone, but have used the services of anyone whom I could get.

Even with such a highly qualified and close-knit committee, the work was not easy,
mainly due to the nature of the translation that Luther was trying to produce, namely,
one that emphasized the meaning of Scripture, rather than its linguistic form:135

I have constantly striven to produce a pure and clear German in translating; and it often
happened that for two or three or four weeks we sought and asked for a single word and
at times did not find it even then. Such was our labor while translating Job that Master
Philip, Aurogallus, and I could at times scarcely finish three lines in four days.

An important member of the review team was its recording secretary, Georg Roerer, who
diligently made notes of the major decisions. In an extensive, sustained, and detailed
project such as this, it is essential to be able to refer back to past proceedings so that the
same ground is not plowed twice and also to encourage the development of a stable set
of translation terms and procedures. That is exactly what happened as we see from the
following descriptions by Johann Matthesius of the committee in session:136

Then, when D. (Luther) had reviewed the previously published Bible and had also gained
information from Jews and friends with linguistic talents, and had inquired of old Germans
about appropriate words … he came into the assembly (Konsistorium) with his old Latin
and a new German Bible, and always brought the Hebrew text with him. M. Philip brought
the Greek text with him. D. Creuziger a Chaldean Bible in addition to the Hebrew. The
professors had their rabbinical commentaries. D. Pommer also had the Latin text, with

134
Luther, LW 35, 250.
135
Cited in Plass, What Luther Says, 106. A literal translation is actually rather easy to produce, in
any language, though various degrees of “literalness” are possible, e.g., NASB versus NRSV.
136
Matthesius is cited first in Reu, Luther's German Bible, 212-213, and secondly in Plass, What
Luther Says, 649. Gritsch mentions “three other colleagues…all former students and/or strong supporters
of Luther,” Justus Jonas, Veit Dietrich, and Bernhard Ziegler, who occasionally joined the group (“Luther
as Bible Translator,” 68).

53
 which he was very familiar. Each one had studied the text which was to be discussed and
had examined Greek and Latin as well as Hebrew commentators.

Thereupon the president [Luther] submitted a text and permitted each to speak in turn
and listened to what each had to say about the characteristics of the language or about
the expositions of the ancient doctors. Wonderful and instructive discussions are said to
have taken place in connection with this work, some of which M. Georg (Roerer) recorded,
which were afterwards printed as little glosses and annotations on the margin.

7. Continuative

No translation is ever perfect or complete. That means critical and qualitative revision is
essential. It is, in fact, a never-ending process from one generation to the next. During
the course of a translation project, a team learns many things—about the original text,
exegesis, consistency, how to handle key terms or difficult passages in the RL, and even
organizational efficiency. Thus at the end, they realize that, in view of what they have
picked up along the way, they need to begin all over again. They must undertake a careful
revision in order to correct the inevitable errors and to improve the wording wherever
possible, based on their past experience and also the feedback from the publication of
selected portions.

In many cases, unfortunately, such an opportunity does not materialize. For one
reason or another the production team is disbanded and its members return to other
pursuits. In Luther's case, however, it was different. As has been mentioned, the
translation and revision of the Bible occupied Luther for most of his life. As soon as the
“September Testament” of 1522 appeared in print, Luther immediately set to work on a
thorough revision (even as he was simultaneously engaged in a translation of the Old
Testament). Amazingly, a second and significantly revised edition was published just
three months after the first (the “December Testament”). This same cycle was repeated
for the OT books: analyze, translate, publish, and revise. In all, according to Koelpin,

54
Luther produced five major text revisions during his lifetime;137 furthermore, his central
task in life never came to an end:138

He promoted the task of revision and improvement to the very end of his life, all of it done
in the recognition that final authority belongs only to the original text, and that Christ is
the unity of Scripture.

Luther's “Sanhedrin” supported him in this ongoing review work. A supplement

to secretary Roerer's 1552 notes gives us an insight into the cooperative endeavor:139

On January 24, 1534, certain invited men started to revise the Bible anew and in many
places it was rendered into more distinct and clear German than before. They particularly
had trouble with the section of the Prophets from Jeremiah on as it was difficult to render
into good German. Isaiah and Daniel had been printed in German several years earlier.
The words of Jesus gave the commission great concern to render them into clear German.

As the group worked closely with one another meeting after meeting, they became aware
of each other's particular strengths and were progressively knit into an ever more
competent and cohesive team. Schweibert summarizes the change that took place:140

The word-for-word searching in an attempt at a literal translation of the Greek and Hebrew
texts had been replaced by a spirit of freedom, an attempt to render the exact meaning of
the original in the idiom of the 16th-century German.

Luther noted this progressive shift in the direction of greater linguistic naturalness and
expressed his satisfaction at the result:141

137
Koelpin, “A New Bible Translation,” 3. “With the help of his colleagues, [Luther] ultimately
produced no less than five unique editions of the entire German Bible, the last completed in 1545, one
year before his death” (Denlinger, “Bible Scholar”, 199).
138
Bachmann, in Luther, LW 35, 229. The final revised edition of the New Testament appeared in
the year of Luther’s death (Schuetze, Martin Luther, 85).
139
Cited in Schweibert, Luther and His Times, 653-654.
140
Schweibert, Luther and His Times, 655-656.
141
Cited in Reu, Luther's German Bible, 221.

55
 The former German Psalter is closer, in many places, to the Hebrew and further removed
from the German. This one (1531) is closer to the German and further removed from the
Hebrew.

The Professor himself remained the guiding light and principal motivating factor in the
revision process. He provided that essential continuity and set the desired standards so
that a consistency of style and method might be maintained during the long period over
which the translation and revision took place.142

The initiative throughout came from Luther. He called the commission together, he largely
outlined the assignment for each session, he led the discussion and usually spoke the
deciding word [in cases of disagreement] … In other cases Luther made changes in his
entries, either during the meeting or afterward, as is apparent from a comparison of these
with Roerer's protocol and sometimes is evident in Luther's own copy.

Of great assistance in the revision process was a set of notes that Luther personally
recorded in his Handexemplar, a special copy of the Bible reserved specifically for the
purpose. Apparently Luther and his “updated” annotated version were inseparable.
Whenever he worked with the German text, he tested it out either on his audience or
personally on himself. Then he would carefully write down any corrections and potential
improvements in the margins. These jottings would often serve as the basis for discussion
during the meetings with his review team. Luther's detailed notes performed the same
service even after his death. They were incorporated into the revised Bible that he
happened to be working on right up to the end, a version that was published later in
1546.143 So it was that “for Luther there was always a ‘next’ edition. He ate, drank and
slept Bible translation.”144 In fact, “the last printed page on which he ever looked was the
proof of the latest revision of his New Testament.”145

8. Consequential

142
Reu, Luther's German Bible, 235.
143
Schweibert, Luther and His Times, 656.
144
Panning, “Luther as Bible Translator,” 79.
145
Sproul and Nichols, Legacy of Luther, 58.

56
Luther's version can now be seen for what it was: a truly revolutionary achievement for
his age, linguistically, socially, translationally, and theologically.146

It was the first time a mass medium had ever penetrated everyday life. Everyone read
Luther’s new Bible or listened to it being read.147 German readers quickly adopted this
Bible as an indispensable, indeed fascinating, guide for life. That is why it became the
cornerstone for an enduring Lutheran culture in Germany.148

“Luther created a linguistic work of art whose impact on the German language was
incalculable and can be felt to this day.”149 “Through this Bible, Luther became
the creator of the New High German written language.”150 De Waard and Nida, promoters
of the functional-equivalence method, point out its importance from the perspective of
translation theory and practice:151

Luther's approach to translation was certainly a communication breakthrough, thus setting

the stage for important departures for a tradition dominated by ecclesiastical Latin.

And even Luther’s Catholic critics admitted the stylistic superiority of his version:

146
“Eighteen editions of the German Bible had appeared before Luther’s version,” but his “was the
first to be based on the original texts, and was in much more contemporary and idiomatic German” (Paul
Ellingworth, “From Martin Luther to the English Revised Version,” in A History of Bible Translation, Phillip
A. Noss, ed., 105-139 [Rome: Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura, 2007], 110).
147
Zecher, “Bible Translation,” 14.
148
Gritsch, “Luther as Bible Translator,” 65-66.
149
Kerr, “Bible Translation Theories,” 74, citing E. Bernstein, “The Book of Books: The Luther Bible
of 1534—A Cultural-Historical Introduction,” Renaissance Quarterly, June 22, 2004. This opinion is
supported by Dr. Hal Lindsley, “Profiles of Faith: Martin Luther” in Knowing & Doing, Spring 2002, p. 2
(accessed on July 9, 2016, at http://www.cslewisinstitute.org/webfm_send/617).
150
“Luther and the German Bible” accessed at http://www.luther.de/en/sprache.html on July 8,
2016. “If the German Bible had not become the most popular book in German households, a common
German language would not have been born” (Gritsch, “Luther as Bible Translator,” 71)—at least not as
soon as it did.
151
De Waard and Nida, Functional Equivalence, 183.

57
 The translation of the [German] Bible is a noble monument of literature, a vast enterprise.
The poetic soul finds in this translation evidences of genius and expressions as natural, as
beautiful, and melodious as in the original languages.152

Luther's New Testament was so much multiplied and spread by printers that even tailors
and shoemakers, yea, even women and ignorant persons who had accepted this new
Lutheran gospel, and could read a little German, studied it with the greatest avidity as the
fountain of all truth. Some committed it to memory, and carried it about in their bosom.
In a few months such people deemed themselves so learned that they were not ashamed
to dispute about faith and the gospel not only with Catholic laymen, but even with priests
and monks and doctors of divinity.153

“Ironically, the very same…figures who criticized the accuracy of Luther’s translation of
the Bible into German ultimately provided testimony to the merits of Luther’s work” by
frequently copying his translation, “editing the text where appropriate to make certain
passages sound less supportive of Luther’s reforming ideas.”154

Truly, Luther deserves the epithet bestowed by one of his contemporaries—the

“father of the German language,”155 for his “word choices from the range of German
dialects and his choice of syntax profoundly impacted the development of modern
German grammar.156 Thus, as noted by Haile:157

152
The French Catholic scholar Audin, cited in Plass, This Is Luther, 338.
153
Phillip Schaff, citing “Cochlaeus, the champion of Romanism” (History of the Christian Church,
350). See also Denlinger, “Bible Scholar”, 201.
154
Denlinger, “Bible Scholar”, 200. “‘The Papists steal my German,” Luther complained, “and they
do not thank me for it, but rather use it against me” (ibid.:loc. cit; cf. Gritsch, “Luther as Bible Translator,”
66-67).
155
“Erasmus Alberus’s [1500-1553] comparison between Luther and Cicero is very apposite:
“Lutherus linguae Germanicae parens, sicut Cicero Latinae”—Luther is the father of the German language,
just as Cicero was of the Latin” (Burger, “Luther as an Event,” 124). “Luther’s German translation of the
Bible had more influence upon the German language than the King James Version had on English. Though
almost 460 years old, Luther’s translation is still sold and read widely” (Mark Galli, “Martin Luther’s Later
Years: Did You Know?” [Christian History 39, 1993;
https://www.christianhistoryinstitute.org/magazine/article/martin-luthers-later-years-did-you-know/].
156
Nichols, Martin Luther, 54.
157
Haile, Luther, 338.

58
 The flurry of pamphlet reading in the early 1520s, reinforced by the general familiarity
with Luther's Bible, resulted in the normalization of German in accordance with his own
middle German dialect. The standard modern language takes its beginning there.

Luther's unifying influence affected not only the German language,158 but to a greater
extent its literature as well, with respect to verbal style and persuasive rhetoric. In the
words of one professor of German studies, “His Bible…is the starting point and guiding
principle of our modern literature…”159 For example:160

The German classical and romantic authors learnt their language from the revised version
of the Luther Bible… From Luther Goethe learnt that the essence of language is to be found
in speech, not in writing… In “Beyond Good and Evil” Friedrich Nietzsche admits that
Luther’s Bible is the best German book. … His translation of the Bible is a living spring
from which German literature—to be understood as German linguistic art—has for
centuries drawn its purest life-giving water.

The sheer volume of his own literary production is indeed staggering. Hirst
estimates that:161

Roughly one-third of all German writing appearing between 1518 and 1522 [even before
he really got going!] bore Luther's name, while between 1534 [date of the publication of
the full German Bible] and 1584 Lufft's press in Wittenberg alone produced some 100,000
copies of Luther's Bible translation.162

158
See Ellingworth, “Translation Techniques,” 315-316.
159
Hermann Schneider, cited in Burger, “Luther as an Event”, 120, 134. “Among no nation has a
single person so shaped the language of a whole people as Luther has done. In fact, Luther’s language—
above all the language of his translation of the Bible—became the presupposition of understanding and
communication throughout the whole of the German language” (Oswald Bayer, “Luther as an Interpreter
of Holy Scripture,” in Donald K. McKim, ed., The Cambridge Companion to Martin Luther [Cambridge
University Press, 2003, 73-85], 73). A more recent dissertation concludes: “The greatest contribution of
[Luther’s] translation was in its invigorating of German as a language by elevating it to a literary usage”
(Kerr, Bible Translation Theories, 92).
160
Burger, “Luther as an Event”, 127.
161
Hirst, “Sendbrief,” 4.
162
“Scholars have calculated that between 1522, when Luther’s first German Bible was published—
his September Testament, and 1546, the end of his life, over half a million Luther Bibles of one edition or

59
By thus “providing the decisive thrust for the creation of a single German language, the
one essential precondition of a national literature” was satisfied.163 This development had
important socio-educational ramifications:164

As the Bible became popular reading throughout northern Europe, a new age of literacy,
even of poetry, began to disperse the dank fog of barbarism. Thus Luther's Bible became
not just a legacy, but an important stage in the still gradually awakening consciousness of
man.

But what is of prime importance is the spiritual significance of all this literary,
linguistic, and cultural influence. Given its emphasis on Sola Scriptura, it is arguable that
the Reformation might have taken a rather different turn, theologically and otherwise,
had it not been for Luther’s translation.165 Schweibert summarizes the revolutionized
situation as follows:166

The German Bible … became the center of the [worship] service and its message the daily
spiritual food for many a devout German home. It is impossible to evaluate its role in the
furthering of the Reformation, for its assistance in spreading the Gospel to the common
man was immeasurable.

another had been purchased” (David M. Whitford, ed., T&T Companion to Reformation Theology [London:
T&T Clark International, 2012], 39).
163
Hirst, “Sendbrief,” 4.
164
Haile, Luther, 329.
165
“The Reformation probably would not have happened without Luther’s translation into
German” (Karen Jobes, “Relevance Theory and the Translation of Scripture,” JETS 50:4, 2007:773 (773-
797). Indeed, one could argue that Sola Scriptura (the original text primarily, but including all accurate,
confessional translations, such as Luther’s German Bible) is the foundation for the other two Reformation
age “solas”—“by grace alone, through faith alone,” the correct understanding of which must be based upon
a proper interpretation of Scripture.
166
Schweibert, Luther and His Times, 643.

60
This dual evangelistic and edifying effect extended far beyond Germany. Luther's Bible
served as a primary source for the translations produced later in Holland, Sweden,
Denmark, Iceland, and England.167 The impact on English is particularly noteworthy:168

Luther's strong influence on [William Tyndale] the father of the English Bible is
unmistakable. Since Tyndale’s English translation makes up more than 90 percent of the
King James New Testament and more than 75 percent of the Revised Standard Version,
Luther's legacy is still plain to see.

Conclusion

So what more can we say about a Bible translation that was (is) confessional,
communicative, creative, comprehensive, contextual, collaborative, continuative, and
consequential—indeed, consummate? Perhaps nothing needs to be added except a
sample from the master translator himself and those whom he has influenced and
motivated centuries later in another language and a very different cultural and
communicative setting. I will close this essay with Luther’s famous translation of Psalm
23 (already referred to above),169 coupled with its poetic rendition in Chichewa, the
primary lingua franca of southeastern Africa (Malawi, Mozambique, Zambia, Zimbabwe)
and the principal language of the Lutheran Church of Central Africa.

167
Ellingworth, “From Martin Luther,” 112.
168
Zecher, “The Bible Translation that Rocked the World,” 15; cf. Brian H. Edwards, God's Outlaw:
The Story of William Tyndale and the English Bible (Welwyn, UK: Evangelical Press, 99), ch. 5; James E.
McGoldrick, Luther's English Connection (Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 1979), 43ff. See also
Mark Schroeder, “God’s Outlaw,” Forward in Christ (June 2016), p. 8. Furthermore, “The first complete
Bible printed in English was the work of Miles Coverdale (1535). It was based on the Vulgate, Tyndale,
and Luther’s German translation” (David Lyle Jeffrey, “”Pre-KJV English Translations” [Christian History
100, 2011; https://www.christianhistoryinstitute.org/magazine/article/pre-kjv-english-translations/]).
“By the time Luther published his German New Testament, Tyndale was traveling to Wittenberg in order
to learn how to best translate the Scriptures into his own native language” (Steven J. Lawson, “Luther as
a Man of Conflict” [in Sproul and Nichols, Legacy of Luther, 32-52], 39).
169
In order to better appreciate the poetic, sound-sensitive qualities of this translation, as Luther
intended it and probably composed it, one must actually read this text aloud—several times; or, if you do
not speak German, have a mother-tongue speaker read the text to you—again, several times, listening
carefully to a different feature each time: the shifting rhythm of the lines, the alliteration or assonance of
the words in flow, the overall pattern of intonation.

61
Psalm 23170 – Ein Psalm Davids171

Der HERR ist mein Hirte;

mir wird nichts mangeln.
2
Er weidet mich auf grüner Aue
und führet mich zum frischen Wasser.
3
Er erquicket meine Seele;
er führet mich auf rechter Straße
um seines Namens willen.
4
Und ob ich schon wanderte im finstern Tal,
fürchte ich kein Unglück;

170
Die Heilige Schrift, nach der deutschen Übersetzung D. Martin Luthers (London: The British and
Foreign Bible Society, 1950), 479. I have modified the script of this text and poetically rearranged its lines.
Luther held a special place in his heart for the Psalms: “The Psalter ought to be a precious and beloved
book, if for no other reason than this: it promises Christ’s death and resurrection so clearly and pictures
his kingdom and the condition and nature of all Christendom—that it might well be called a little Bible”
(LW 35, 196). “Luther sees the Psalter as a primer in which Christian faith is taught to praise, in so doing
exposing anti-doxologies and the ways they obscure the living presence of God’s tangible and accessible
saving activity” (Brian Brock, “The Psalms and Luther’s Praise Inversion: Cultural Criticism as Doxological
Detection,” 191–212 in Mtata et al., Singing the Songs, 203. For more on “Luther’s appreciation of the
Psalter,” see John Brug, A Commentary on Psalms 1—72 (Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House,
2004), 92-93; also “Luther on the Psalms,” Englebrecht, Lutheran Study Bible, 839-842.
171
Luther has an interesting perspective on Psalm 23: “In this psalm, David, together with every
other Christian heart, praises and thanks God for His greatest blessing: namely, for the preaching of His
dear Holy Word. Through it we are called, received, and numbered into the host which is God’s
communion, or church, where alone—and nowhere else—we can find and have pure doctrine, the true
knowledge of God, and the right worship of God. Blessed David, however, lauds and magnifies this noble
treasure most beautifully in delightful figurative and picturesque language and also in metaphorical
expressions taken from the Old Testament worship of God. … The prophet accordingly applies many kinds
of names to the Word of God. He calls it a fine, pleasant, green pasture; fresh water; the path of
righteousness; a rod; a staff; a table; balm, or the oil of gladness (Ps. 45:7); and a cup that is filled to
overflowing. This he does quite appropriately, for the power of God is also of many kinds” (Luther’s Works,
vol. 12, Selected Psalms I, J. J. Pelikan, H. C. Oswald, and H. T. Lehmann, eds., accessed online at:
https://thefirstpremise.wordpress.com/2011/10/07/martin-luther-expounding-psalm-23-after-grace-at-
the-dinner-table/). “Thus L. set about to make David sing in German like a Christian because the
theological meaning of the text as he understood it required him to do so” (Steinmetz, “Luther,” 97).

62
denn du bist bei mir,
dein Stecken und dein Stab trösten mich.
5
Du bereitest vor mir einen Tisch
im Angesicht meiner Feinde.
Du salbest mein Haupt mit Öl
und schenkest mir voll ein.
6
Gutes und Barmherzigkeit werden mir folgen mein Leben lang,
und ich werde bleiben im Hause des HERRN immerdar.172

The following then is a poetic (ndakatulo style) dynamic equivalence rendering of

Psalm 23 in Chichewa:173

Mbusa wanga ngwokoma mtima. Herdsman of mine, he’s so good-hearted.

Chauta ndi dzina lake lochukadi.
Mwa iye, ine kusowa kanthu ayi.
Gonee! pa zobiriwira andigonetsa.
Malo opumulirako n’kumadzi odikha,
Moyo ine amanditsitsimutsa komweko.
M’njira zolungama amanditsogoleramo,
Chauta is that most famous name of his.
In him, as for me—I lack nothing, not at all.
DOWN! on fresh greens he makes me lie down.
[My] resting place is at quiet waters,
My life he always revives it right there.
Along straight paths he leads me in them,

172
Bluhm comments effusively on Luther’s translation (Creative Translator, 112): “Luther’s
translation of the Twenty-third Psalm is, in the final version of 1531, a consummate work of art. Though
it is and remains a translation of course, it was artistically reborn in the gradual process of its complete
vernacularization. It is still similar to, but no longer identical with, the original Hebrew poem… One could
hold that it has become a German poem of almost independent artistic significance. The least one can
claim for it is that it is integrally ‘new,’ having a structure of its own which is perhaps not inferior to that
of the marvelous original. The final product of Luther’s long struggle to find an adequate German garb for
this great psalm is somehow beyond the limits of even creative translation. It is somewhere in the
borderland between creative translation and ‘original’ composition…clearly a work of art of high order.”
173
Note that this rendering of Psalm 23 reads more “dynamically” in English back-translation than
it actually sounds in the original Chewa. For a discussion of this rendering and its distinctive poetic features
in Chewa, a Bantu language, see Wendland, Translating the Literature of Scripture, 330-335. I composed the
initial draft of this text, which was subsequently revised and polished up by the students of my Psalms
exegetical class (Lusaka Lutheran Seminary). The “final exam” for this course is the presentation of an
exegesis and poetic translation of a selected psalm in the student’s mother tongue; those who are able to
produce a sung version of their translation, one suitable for congregational/choir use, get “extra credit.”
For a sample, you may hear two musical renditions of Psalm 13 by Mr. Chilembwe Banda (a Malawian,
March, 2016) at the following links:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZA-glP2FP5c and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yka0ygfNGnU.

63
Malinga n’dzina lake lomveka—Chauta!
M’chigwa cha mdima bii! n’kayendamo,
Mantha onse balala! poti Chauta alipodi.
Inu Abusa, muli pafupi n’zida zotetezera,
Ine mtima pansi phee! nthawi zonsezo.
Kunena chakudya, ha! ndine mwana-alirenji.
Mwandikonzera phwando, adani angoti tong’oo!
Chiko changa cha madalitso chiri nde-nde-nde!
Kwanu inu mwandilandiradi ndi manja awiri.
Indetu, zokoma za chikondi chanu chosasinthika,
Zimandilondoladi m’moyo wonse wa pansi pano.
M’nyumba yanu yoyera, inu Chauta, sindichokamo,
Nchito yanga n’kukutumikirani mpaka muyayaya!
According to his well-known name—Chauta!
If in a deep dark valley BLACK! I happen to walk,
All [my] fear GONE! since Chauta is right there.
O Herdsman, you are close by with weapons for defense,
As for my heart, it’s completely QUIET! at all times.
Talk about food, ha! I’m a “what-can-a-child-cry-for.”
You’ve prepared me a feast, my enemies can just STARE!
My cup of blessings is full-up BRIM-BRIM-BRIMMING!
At your home you’ve welcomed me with both hands.
Yes indeed, the good things from your unchangeable love,
They really follow me during [my] whole life down here.
From inside your holy house, Chauta, I don’t leave it,
My work is to serve you right up until FOREVER-EVER!

So what did this little translation exercise teach us—my students and me? Three
things in particular:

• Energetic participation in Bible translation-related activities is essential for the development

of a dynamic, healthy church—the pastorate as well as the laity. Such involvement may
include actual translation and review work; the careful comparative study of various
translations plus how and why they differ; the consistent support of Bible translation,
publication, and distribution work, both at home and abroad—on the mission field.174
• It is important that the church promotes an accurate, meaningful, readily communicable
version for use in its diverse activities—preaching, teaching, singing (hymnody),175

174
In a country like the United States, there are more different types of Bibles, including the various
niche versions, than we know what to do with. But that is not true in most parts of the world today, though
the Internet is helping to break that barrier. However, many places still suffer from a lack of Scriptures in
the languages spoken, from the prohibitive cost of Bibles that are available, and/or a low level of literacy
that prevents Scripture access except by the spoken word. There are also the extreme danger zones, like
North Korea, where even the possession of a Bible is a capital offense. For thirty years (1977-2007) the
Lusaka Translation Centre, located on the campus of Lusaka Lutheran Seminary, was instrumental in the
production of 8 full Bibles and another 4 New Testaments in the Bantu languages of south-central Africa.
175
For example, “At Torgau, [Johann] Walter set many texts of Luther's German translation of
Scripture to music and put into practice Luther's goal of encouraging worshipers to participate more
actively in the service by singing the new German chorales. The powerful hymn texts and tunes became
popular” (Carlos Messerli, “Grace Notes,” [Christian History 95, 2007;
https://www.christianhistoryinstitute.org/magazine/article/grace-notes/]). “Perhaps the best witness to
Luther’s accomplishment for those who do not speak German is the eighteenth century composer Johann
Sebastian bach, who set Luther’s German translation of Scripture to music in numerous pieces. So, for
instance, Bach’s St Matthew Passion comprises the exact text of Luther’s translation of chapters 26 and 27

64
 publications, etc. A literalistic version is not really helpful, no matter how familiar its
wording may be, or how much it may be used, if the average person, young or old, cannot
understand it clearly or correctly without pastoral assistance.

• The key concern here is Scripture usage: How is the Bible being regularly utilized not only
in church-related activities, but also at home—privately (e.g., personal and family
devotions) and publicly as an evangelism tool to share the Gospel in a meaningful way
with others, or on occasion to serve fellow Christians at their point of need, whether for
encouragement, consolation, instruction, or, if need be, for reproof.

It is highly unlikely that another “Luther” will arise, before the Lord returns, to
make the contribution that he did to Bible translation theory and practice. Nevertheless,
there are many today who by faithfully following Luther's principles (aided by computer-
based tools and internet technology) are together, in corporate cooperation, able to
accomplish results that he never dreamed possible. Commissioned and supported by
worldwide mission agencies and umbrella organizations, trained personnel are currently
seeking to translate the Word of God accurately and idiomatically in hundreds of non-
Indo-European languages.176
We pray that the cumulative effect of the Scriptures in these many languages will
turn out to be similar to what happened in Luther’s day, when a spiritually needy
population finally received the saving Word of life in a form that faithfully and
intelligibly reflects the divine intention of the sacred original—and at the same time
“pulls the heart-strings” (chichewa chokoka mtima) via their diverse mother tongues.
Energetic communal participation in Bible translation-related activities—as producers
and/or recipients—anticipates that wonderful beatific vision in the heavenly throne
room, where there will be “a great multitude that no one [can] count, from every nation,

of Matthew’s Gospel. … The congruity between Luther’s text and Bach’s music stems from the inherent
beauty of each” (Denlinger, “Bible Scholar”, 201).
176
The current global Scripture statistics are as follows (31/12/2015):
The figures for the number of language speakers are based on the best available data which currently totals 6.5
billion, less than the actual world population: 563 languages (spoken by nearly 5.1 billion people) now have
a full Bible and a further 1,334 languages (spoken by 658 million people) have a New Testament. This
leaves 281 million people with only some portions of the Bible and a further 497 million people with no
Scripture translated in their language at all (accessed at http://ubscommunity.org/blog/2016/03/31/50-
new-scripture-translations-completed-last-year/).

65
tribe, people, and language, standing before the throne and in front of the Lamb, [crying]
out in a loud voice, “Heil sei dem, der auf dem Stuhl, sitzt, unserm Gott, und dem Lamm!”
(Revelation 7:10, NIV and Martin Luther).177

177
The portrait below of Martin Luther (1486-1546) was accessed on 22/02/2017 at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germany#/media/File:Lucas_Cranach_d.%C3%84._-
_Martin_Luther,_1528_(Veste_Coburg).jpg

66
 178

178
The photo here [Frontispice Bible de Luther 1668 (12518269664).jpg] was accessed on 22/02/2017
at https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=52234924.

67
APPENDIX A—from Philip Schaff's History of the Christian Church
(New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1910).

(http://www.bible-researcher.com/luther02.html )

(https://www.awesomestories.com/asset/view/Martin-Luther-Bible-Translation-in-German )

68
 Luther's Translation of the Bible
The richest fruit of Luther's leisure in the Wartburg, and the most
important and useful work of his whole life, is the translation of the
New Testament, by which he brought the teaching and example of
Christ and the Apostles to the mind and heart of the Germans in life-
like reproduction. It was a republication of the gospel. He made the
Bible the people's book in church, school, and house. If he had done
nothing else, he would be one of the greatest benefactors of the
German-speaking race. (1)
His version was followed by Protestant versions in other languages,
especially the French, Dutch, and English. The Bible ceased to be a
foreign book in a foreign tongue, and became naturalized, and hence
far more clear and dear to the common people. Hereafter the
Reformation depended no longer on the works of the Reformers, but
on the book of God, which everybody could read for himself as his
daily guide in spiritual life. This inestimable blessing of an open Bible
for all, without the permission or intervention of pope and priest,
marks an immense advance in church history, and can never be lost.
Earlier Versions
Luther was not the first, but by far the greatest translator of the
German Bible, and is as inseparably connected with it as Jerome is
with the Latin Vulgate. He threw the older translation into the shade
and out of use, and has not been surpassed or even equaled by a
successor. There are more accurate versions for scholars (as those of
De Wette and Weizsäcker), but none that can rival Luther's for
popular authority and use.
The civilization of the barbarians in the dark ages began with the
introduction of Christianity, and the translation of such portions of
the Scriptures as were needed in public worship.
The Gothic Bishop Wulfila or Wölflein (i.e., Little Wolf) in the fourth
century translated nearly the whole Bible from the Greek into the
Gothic dialect. It is the earliest monument of Teutonic literature, and
the basis of comparative Teutonic philology. (2)
During the fourteenth century some unknown scholars prepared a
new translation of the whole Bible into the Middle High German
dialect. It slavishly follows the Latin Vulgate. It may be compared to
Wiclif's English Version (1380), which was likewise made from the
Vulgate, the original languages being then almost unknown in Europe.

69
A copy of the New Testament of this version has been recently
published, from a manuscript in the Premonstratensian convent of
Tepl in Bohemia. (3) Another copy is preserved in the college library at
Freiberg in Saxony. (4) Both are from the fourteenth century, and
agree almost word for word with the first printed German Bible, but
contain, besides the New Testament, the apocryphal letter of St. Paul
to the Laodiceans, which is a worthless compilation of a few
sentences from the genuine writings of the apostle. (5)
After the invention of the printing-press, and before the
Reformation, this mediaeval German Bible was more frequently
printed than any other except the Latin Vulgate. (6)No less than
seventeen or eighteen editions appeared between 1462 and 1522, at
Strassburg, Augsburg, Nürnberg, Cöln, Lübeck, and Halberstadt
(fourteen in the High, three or four in the Low German dialect). Most
of them are in large folio, in two volumes, and illustrated by wood-
cuts. The editions present one and the same version (or rather two
versions,--one High German, the other Low German) with dialectical
alterations and accommodations to the textual variations of the MSS.
of the Vulgate, which was in a very unsettled condition before the
Clementine recension (1592). The revisers are as unknown as the
translators.
The spread of this version, imperfect as it was, proves the hunger
and thirst of the German people for the pure word of God, and
prepared the way for the Reformation. It alarmed the hierarchy.
Archbishop Berthold of Mainz, otherwise a learned and enlightened
prelate, issued, Jan. 4, 1486, a prohibition of all unauthorized
printing of sacred and learned books, especially the German Bible,
within his diocese, giving as a reason that the German language was
incapable of correctly rendering the profound sense of Greek and
Latin works, and that laymen and women could not understand the
Bible. Even Geiler of Kaisersberg, who sharply criticised the follies of
the world and abuses of the Church, thought it "an evil thing to print
the Bible in German."
Besides the whole Bible, there were numerous German editions of
the Gospels and Epistles (Plenaria), and the Psalter, all made from
the Vulgate. (7)
Luther could not be ignorant of this mediaeval version. He made
judicious use of it, as he did also of old German and Latin hymns.
Without such aid he could hardly have finished his New Testament in
the short space of three months. (8) But this fact does not diminish his
70
merit in the least; for his version was made from the original Hebrew
and Greek, and was so far superior in every respect that the older
version entirely disappeared. It is to all intents a new work.
Luther's Qualifications
Luther had a rare combination of gifts for a Bible translator:
familiarity with the original languages, perfect mastery over the
vernacular, faith in the revealed word of God, enthusiasm for the
gospel, unction of the Holy Spirit. A good translation must be both
true and free, faithful and idiomatic, so as to read like an original
work. This is the case with Luther's version. Besides, he had already
acquired such fame and authority that his version at once commanded
universal attention.
His knowledge of Greek and Hebrew was only moderate, but
sufficient to enable him to form an independent judgment. (9) What he
lacked in scholarship was supplied by his intuitive genius and the help
of Melanchthon. In the German tongue he had no rival. He created, as
it were, or gave shape and form to the modern High German. He
combined the official language of the government with that of the
common people. He listened, as he says, to the speech of the mother
at home, the children in the street, the men and women in the
market, the butcher and various tradesmen in their shops, and,
"looked them on the mouth," in pursuit of the most intelligible terms.
His genius for poetry and music enabled him to reproduce the rhythm
and melody, the parallelism and symmetry, of Hebrew poetry and
prose. His crowning qualification was his intuitive insight and spiritual
sympathy with the contents of the Bible.
A good translation, he says, requires "a truly devout, faithful,
diligent, Christian, learned, experienced, and practiced heart."
Progress of his Version
Luther was gradually prepared for this work. He found for the first
time a complete copy of the Latin Bible in the University Library at
Erfurt, to his great delight, and made it his chief study. He derived
from it his theology and spiritual nourishment; he lectured and
preached on it as professor at Wittenberg day after day. He acquired
the knowledge of the original languages for the purpose of its better
understanding. He liked to call himself a "Doctor of the Sacred
Scriptures."
He made his first attempt as translator with the seven Penitential
Psalms, which he published in March, 1517, six months before the
71
outbreak of the Reformation. Then followed several other sections of
the Old and New Testaments,--the Ten Commandments, the Lord's
Prayer, the Prayer of King Manasseh, the Magnificat of the Virgin
Mary, etc., with popular comments. He was urged by his friends,
especially by Melanchthon, as well as by his own sense of duty, to
translate the whole Bible.
He began with the New Testament in November or December, 1521,
and completed it in the following March, before he left the Wartburg.
He thoroughly revised it on his return to Wittenberg, with the
effectual help of Melanchthon, who was a much better Greek scholar.
Sturz at Erfurt was consulted about coins and measures; Spalatin
furnished from the Electoral treasury names for the precious stones of
the New Jerusalem (Rev. 21). The translation was then hurried
through three presses, and appeared already Sept. 21, 1522, but
without his name. (10)
In December a second edition was required, which contained many
corrections and improvements. (11)
He at once proceeded to the more difficult task of translating the
Old Testament, and published it in parts as they were ready. The
Pentateuch appeared in 1523; the Psalter, 1524.
In the progress of the work he founded a Collegium Biblieum, or
Bible club, consisting of his colleagues Melanchthon, Bugenhagen
(Pommer), Cruciger, Justus Jonas, and Aurogallus. They met once a
week in his house, several hours before supper. Deacon Georg Rörer
(Rorarius), the first clergyman ordained by Luther, and his proof-
reader, was also present; occasionally foreign scholars were
admitted; and Jewish rabbis were freely consulted. Each member of
the company contributed to the work from his special knowledge and
preparation. Melanchthon brought with him the Greek Bible, Cruciger
the Hebrew and Chaldee, Bugenhagen the Vulgate, others the old
commentators; Luther had always with him the Latin and the German
versions besides the Hebrew. Sometimes they scarcely mastered three
lines of the Book of Job in four days, and hunted two, three, and four
weeks for a single word. No record exists of the discussions of this
remarkable company, but Mathesius says that "wonderfully beautiful
and instructive speeches were made."
At last the whole Bible, including the Apocrypha as "books not equal
to the Holy Scriptures, yet useful and good to read," was completed in
1534, and printed with numerous woodcuts.

72
 In the mean time the New Testament had appeared in sixteen or
seventeen editions, and in over fifty reprints. (12)
Luther complained of the many errors in these irresponsible
editions.
He never ceased to amend his translation. Besides correcting errors,
he improved the uncouth and confused orthography, fixed the
inflections, purged the vocabulary of obscure and ignoble words, and
made the whole more symmetrical and melodious.
He prepared five original editions, or recensions, of his whole Bible,
the last in 1545, a year before his death. (13) This is the proper basis of
all critical editions. (14)
The edition of 1546 was prepared by his friend Rörer, and contains a
large number of alterations, which he traced to Luther himself. Some
of them are real improvements, e.g., "Die Liebe höret nimmer auf,"
for, "Die Liebe wird nicht müde" (1 Cor. 13:8). The charge that he
made the changes in the interest of Philippism (Melanchthonianism),
seems to be unfounded.
Editions and Revisions
The printed Bible text of Luther had the same fate as the written
text of the old Itala and Jerome's Vulgate. It passed through
innumerable improvements and mis-improvements. The orthography
and inflections were modernized, obsolete words removed, the
versicular division introduced (first in a Heidelberg reprint, 1568), the
spurious clause of the three witnesses inserted in 1 John 5:7 (first by
a Frankfurt publisher, 1574), the third and fourth books of Ezra and
the third book of the Maccabees added to the Apocrypha, and various
other changes effected, necessary and unnecessary, good and bad.
Elector August of Saxony tried to control the text in the interest of
strict Lutheran orthodoxy, and ordered the preparation of a standard
edition (1581). But it was disregarded outside of Saxony.
Gradually no less than eleven or twelve recensions came into use,
some based on the edition of 1545, others on that of 1546. The most
careful recension was that of the Canstein Bible Institute, founded by
a pious nobleman, Carl Hildebrand von Canstein (1667-1719) in
connection with Francke's Orphan House at Halle. It acquired the
largest circulation and became the textus receptus of the German
Bible.

73
 With the immense progress of biblical learning in the present
century, the desire for a timely revision of Luther's version was more
and more felt. Revised versions with many improvements were
prepared by Joh.- Friedrich von Meyer, a Frankfurt patrician (1772-
1849), and Dr. Rudolf Stier (18001862), but did not obtain public
authority.
At last a conservative official revision of the Luther Bible was
inaugurated by the combined German church governments in 1863,
with a view and fair prospect of superseding all former editions in
public use. (15)
The Success
The German Bible of Luther was saluted with the greatest
enthusiasm, and became the most powerful help to the Reformation.
Duke George of Saxony, Duke William of Bavaria, and Archduke
Ferdinand of Austria strictly prohibited the sale in their dominions,
but could not stay the current. Hans Lufft at Wittenberg printed and
sold in forty years (between 1534 and 1574) about a hundred
thousand copies,--an enormous number for that age,--and these were
read by millions. The number of copies from reprints is beyond
estimate.
Cochlaeus, the champion of Romanism, paid the translation the
greatest compliment when he complained that "Luther's New
Testament was so much multiplied and spread by printers that even
tailors and shoemakers, yea, even women and ignorant persons who
had accepted this new Lutheran gospel, and could read a little
German, studied it with the greatest avidity as the fountain of all
truth. Some committed it to memory, and carried it about in their
bosom. In a few months such people deemed themselves so learned
that they were not ashamed to dispute about faith and the gospel not
only with Catholic laymen, but even with priests and monks and
doctors of divinity." (16)
The Romanists were forced in self-defense to issue rival
translations. Such were made by Emser (1527), Dietenberger (1534),
and Eck (1537), and accompanied with annotations. They are more
correct in a number of passages, but slavishly conformed to the
Vulgate, stiff and heavy, and they frequently copy the very language
of Luther, so that he could say with truth, "The Papists steal my
German of which they knew little before, and they do not thank me

74
 for it, but rather use it against me." These versions have long since
gone out of use even in the Roman Church, while Luther's still lives. (17)

NOTE

The Pre-Lutheran German Bible

According to the latest investigations, fourteen printed editions of
the whole Bible in the Middle High German dialect, and three in the
Low German, have been identified. Panzer already knew fourteen;
see his Gesch. der nürnbergischen Ausgaben der Bibel, Nürnberg,
1778, p. 74.
The first four, in large folio, appeared without date and place of
publication, but were probably printed: 1, at Strassburg, by Heinrich
Eggestein, about or before 1466 (the falsely so-called Mainzer
Bibel of 1462); 2, at Strassburg, by Johann Mentelin, 1466 (?); 3, at
Augsburg, by Jodocus Pflanzmann, or Tyner, 1470 (?); 4, at Nürnberg,
by Sensenschmidt and Frissner, in 2 vols., 408 and 104 leaves, 1470-
73 (?). The others are located, and from the seventh on also dated,
viz.: 5, Augsburg, by Günther Zainer, 2 vols., probably between 1473-
1475. 6, Augsburg, by the same, dated 1477 (Stevens says, 1475?). 7,
The third Augsburg edition, by Günther Zainer, or Anton Sorg, 1477, 2
vols., 321 and 332 leaves, fol., printed in double columns; the first
German Bible with a date. 8, The fourth Augsburg edition, by A. Sorg,
1480, folio. 9, Nürnberg, by Anton Koburger (also spelled Koberger),
1483. 10, Strassburg, by Johann Gruninger, 1485. 11 and 12, The fifth
and sixth Augsburg editions, in small fol., by Hans Schönsperger, 1487
and 1490. 13, The seventh Augsburg edition, by Hans Otmar, 1507,
small folio. 14, The eighth Augsburg edition, by Silvan Otmar, 1518,
small folio.
The Low Dutch Bibles were printed: 1, at Cologne, in large folio,
double columns, probably 1480. The unknown editor speaks of
previous editions and his own improvements. Stevens (Nos. 653 and
654) mentions two copies of the O. T. in Dutch, printed at Delf, 1477,
2 vols. fol. 2, At Lübeck, 1491 (not 1494), 2 vols. fol. with large
woodcuts. 3, At Halberstadt, 1522.
Comp. Kehrein (I.c.), Krafft (l.c., pp. 4, 5), and Henry Stevens, The
Bibles in the Caxton Exhibition, London, 1878. Stevens gives the full
titles with descriptions, pp. 45 sqq., nos. 620 sqq.

75
 Several of these Bibles, including the Koburger and those of Cologne
and Halberstadt, are in the possession of the Union Theol. Seminary,
New York. I examined them. They are ornamented by woodcuts,
beginning with a picture of God creating the world, and forming Eve
from the rib of Adam in Paradise. Several of them have Jerome's
preface (De omnibus divinae historiae libris, Ep. ad Paulinum), the
oldest with the remark: "Da hebet an die epistel des heiligen
priesters sant Jeronimi zu Paulinum von allen gottlichen büchern der
hystory. Das erst capitel."
Dr. Krafft illustrates the dependence of Luther on the earlier
version by several examples (pp. 13-18). The following is from the
Sermon on the Mount, Matt. 5:21-27:--

76

The Ninth Bible, 1483
Habt ir gehört, das gesaget
ist den alten. Du solt nit
tödten, wellicher aber
tödtet. der wird schuldig
des gerichts. Aber ich sag
euch, daz ein yeglicher der
do zürnet seinem bruder.
der wirt schuldig des
gerichts. Der aber spricht
zu seinem bruder. racha.
der wirt schuldig des rats.
Und der do spricht. tor. der
wirt schuldig des hellischen
fewrs. Darum ob du
opfferst dein gab zu dem
attar. und do wirst
gedenckend. daz dein
bruder ettwas hat wider
dich, lasz do dein gab vor
dem altar und gee zum
ersten und versüne dich mit
deim bruder und denn kum
und opffer dein gab. Bis
gehellig deim
widerwertigen schyer. die
weyl du mit im bist him
weg. das dich villeycht der
widersacher nit antwurt
den Richter. und der
Richter dich antwurt dem
diener und werdest gelegt
in den kercker. Fürwar ich
sag dir. du geest nit aus von
dannen. und das du
vergeltest den letzten
quadranten.
Luther's New Testament, 1522
Ihr habt gehortt, das zu
den alten gesagt ist, du
sollt nit todten, wer aber
todtet, der soll des
gerichts schuldig seyn. Ich
aber sage euch, wer mit
seynem bruder zurnit, der
ist des gerichts schuldig,
wer aber zu seynem bruder
sagt, Racha, der ist des
rads schuldig, wer aber
sagt, du narr, der ist des
hellischen fewers schuldig.
Darumbwenð du deyn gabe
auff den altar opfferst, un
wirst alda eyngedenken,
das deyn bruder ettwas
widder dich hab, so las
alda fur dem altar deyn
gabe, unnd gehe zuvor
hyn, unnd versune dich
mitt deynem bruder, unnd
als denn kom unnd opffer
deyn gabe. Sey willfertig
deynem widersacher, bald,
dieweyl du noch mit yhm
auff dem wege bist, auff
das dich der widdersacher
nit der mal eyns
ubirantwortte dem richter,
unð d. richter ubirantworte
dich dem diener, unð
werdist ynð den kerccker
geworffen, warlich ich sage
dyr, du wirst nit von
dannen erauze komen, bis
du auch den letzten heller
bezealest.
77
To this I add two specimens in which the superiority of Luther's version is
more apparent.
Gen. 1:1-3
The Koburger Bible of Nürnberg,
1483
In dem anfang hat got
beschaffen hymel und erden.
aber dye erde was eytel und
leere. und die vinsternus
warn auff dem antlitz des
abgrunds. vnd der geist gots
swebet oder ward getragen
auff den wassern. Unð got der
sprach. Es werde dz liecht.
Un das liecht ist worden.
1 Cor. 13:1, 2
The Strassburg Bible Of 1485
Ob ich rede inn der zungen
der engel vnd der
menschen; aber habe ich
der lieb nit, ich bin
gemacht alls ein
glockenspeyss lautend oder
alls ein schell klingend. Vnd
ob ich hab die weissagung
und erkenn all heimlichkeit
vnd alle kunst, und ob ich
hab alten glauben, also das
ich übertrag die berg, habe
ich aber der lieb nit, ich
bin nichts.
The precise origin of the mediaeval German Bible is still unknown. Dr.
Luther's Bible, ed. 1535
Im anfang schuff Gott
himel und erden. Und die
erde war wüst und leer,
und es war finster auff
der tieffe, und der Geist
Gottes schwebet auff
dem wasser. Un Gott
sprach. Es werde liecht.
Und es ward liecht.
Luther's New Testament, 1522
Wenn ich mit menschen
und mit engelzungen redet
und hette die (18) liebe
nit, (19) so wäre ich ein
tönend ertz oder ein
klingende schell. (20) Und
wenn ich weissagen kündt,
vnnd wüste alle
geheymnuss vnd alle
erkantnüss, vnd hette alten
glauben, also das ich berg
versetzete, und hett der
liebe nicht, so were ich
nichts.
78
Ludwig Keller of Münster first suggested in his Die Reformation und die
älteren Reformparteien, Leipzig, 1885, pp. 257-260, the hypothesis that it
was made by Waldenses (who had also a Romanic version); and he tried to
prove it in his Die Waldenser und die deutschen Bibelübersetzungen,
Leipzig, 1886 (189 pages). Dr. Hermann Haupt, of Würzburg, took the same
ground in his Die deutsche Bibelübersetzung der mittelalterlichen
Waldenser in dem Codex Teplensis und der ersten gedruckten Bibel
nachgewiesen, Würzburg, 1885 (64 pages); and again, in self-defense against
Jostes, in Der waldensische Ursprung des Codex Teplensis und der vor-
lutherischen deutschen Bibeldrucke, Würzburg, 1886. On the other hand,
Dr. Franz Jostes, a Roman Catholic scholar, denied the Waldensian and
defended the Catholic origin of that translation, in two pamphlets: Die
Waldenser und die vorlutherische Bibelübersetzung, Münster, 1885 (44
pages), and Die Tepler Bibelübersetzung. Eine zweite Kritik, Münster, 1886
(43 pages). The same author promises a complete history of German
Catholic Bible versions. The question has been discussed in periodicals and
reviews, e.g., by Kawerau in Luthardt's "Theol. Literaturblatt," Leipzig, 1885
and 1886 (Nos. 32-34), by Schaff in the New York "Independent" for Oct. 8,
1885, and in the "Presbyterian Review" for April, 1887, pp. 355 sqq.; by
Kolde, in the "Göttinger Gelehrte Anzeigen," 1887, No. I.; by Müller in the
"Studien und Kritiken," 1887, No. III.; and Bornemann, in the "Jahrb. f. Prot.
Theol.," 1888, 67-101.

The arguments for the Waldensian origin are derived from certain
additions to the Codex Teplensis, and alleged departures from the
text of the Vulgate. But the additions are not anti-Catholic, and are
not found in the cognate Freiberger MS.; and the textual variations
can not be traced to sectarian bias. The text of the Vulgate was in
greater confusion in the middle ages than the text of the Itala at the
time of Jerome, nor was there any authorized text of it before the
Clementine recension of 1592. The only plausible argument which Dr.
Keller brings out in his second publication (pp. 80 sqq.) is the fact
that Emser, in his Annotations to the New Test. (1523), charges
Luther with having translated the N. T. from a "Wickleffisch oder
hussisch exemplar." But this refers to copies of the Latin Vulgate; and
in the examples quoted by Keller, Luther does not agree with the
Codex Teplensis.

79
 The hostility of several Popes and Councils to the circulation of
vernacular translations of the Bible implies the existence of such
translations, and could not prevent their publication, as the numerous
German editions prove. Dutch, French, and Italian versions also
appeared among the earliest prints. See Stevens, Nos. 687 and 688 (p.
59 sq.). The Italian edition exhibited in 1877 at London is entitled: La
Biblia en lingua Volgare (per Nicolo di Mallermi). Venetia: per Joan.
Rosso Vercellese, 1487, fol. A Spanish Bible by Bonif. Ferrer was
printed at Valencia, 1478 (see Reuss, Gesch. der heil. Schr. N. T., II.
207, 5th Ed.).
The Bible is the common property and most sacred treasure of all
Christian churches. The art of printing was invented in Catholic times,
and its history goes hand in hand with the history of the Bible. Henry
Stevens says (The Bibles in the Caxton Exhibition, p. 25): "The secular
history of the Holy Scriptures is the sacred history of Printing. The
Bible was the first book printed, and the Bible is the last book
printed. Between 1450 and 1877, an interval of four centuries and a
quarter, the Bible shows the progress and comparative development
of the art of printing in a manner that no other single book can; and
Biblical bibliography proves that during the first forty years, at least,
the Bible exceeded in amount of printing all other books put
together; nor were its quality, style, and variety a whit behind its
quantity."

A Critical Estimate of Luther's Version

Luther's version of the Bible is a wonderful monument of genius,
learning, and piety, and may be regarded in a secondary sense as
inspired. It was, from beginning to end, a labor of love and
enthusiasm. While publishers and printers made fortunes, Luther
never received or asked a copper for this greatest work of his life. (21)
We must judge it from the times. A German translation from the
original languages was a work of colossal magnitude if we consider
the absence of good grammars, dictionaries, and concordances, the
crude state of Greek and Hebrew scholarship, and of the German
language, in the sixteenth century. Luther wrote to Amsdorf, Jan. 13,
1522, that he had undertaken a task beyond his power, that he now
understood why no one had attempted it before in his own name, and

80
that he would not venture on the Old Testament without the aid of
his friends. (22) He felt especially how difficult it was to make Job and
the Hebrew prophets speak in barbarous German. (23) He jocosely
remarked that Job would have become more impatient at the
blunders of his translators than at the long speeches of his "miserable
comforters."
As regards the text, it was in an unsettled condition. The science of
textual criticism was not yet born, and the materials for it were not
yet collected from the manuscripts, ancient versions, and patristic
quotations. Luther had to use the first printed editions. He had no
access to manuscripts, the most important of which were not even
discovered or made available before the middle of the nineteenth
century. Biblical geography and archaeology were in their infancy,
and many names and phrases could not be understood at the time.
In view of these difficulties we need not be surprised at the large
number of mistakes, inaccuracies, and inconsistencies in Luther's
version. They are most numerous in Job and the Prophets, who
present, even to the advanced Hebrew scholars of our day, many
unsolved problems of text and rendering. The English Version of 1611
had the great advantage of the labors of three generations of
translators and revisers, and is therefore more accurate, and yet
equally idiomatic.
The Original Text
The basis for Luther's version of the Old Testament was the
Massoretic text as published by Gerson Ben Mosheh at Brescia in
1494. (24) He used also the Septuagint, the Vulgate of
Jerome (25) (although he disliked him exceedingly on account of his
monkery), the Latin translations of the Dominican Sanctes Pagnini of
Lucca (1527), and of the Franciscan Sebastian Münster (1534), the
"Glossa ordinaria" (a favorite exegetical vade-mecum of Walafried
Strabo from the ninth century), and Nicolaus Lyra (d. 1340), the chief
of mediaeval commentators, who, besides the Fathers, consulted also
the Jewish rabbis. (26)

81
 The basis for the New Testament was the second edition of Erasmus,
published at Basel in Switzerland in 1519. (27) His first edition of the
Greek Testament had appeared in 1516, just one year before the
Reformation. He derived the text from a few mediaeval MSS. (28) The
second edition, though much more correct than the first ("multo
diligentius recognitum, emendatum," etc.), is disfigured by a large -
number of typographical errors. (29) He laid the foundation of
the Textus Receptus, which was brought into its mature shape by R.
Stephen, in his "royal edition" of 1550 (the basis of the English Textus
Receptus), and by the Elzevirs in their editions of 1624 and 1633 (the
basis of the Continental Textus Receptus), and which maintained the
supremacy till Lachmann inaugurated the adoption of an older textual
basis (1831).
Luther did not slavishly follow the Greek of Erasmus, and in many
places conformed to the Latin Vulgate, which is based on an older
text. He also omitted, even in his last edition, the famous
interpolation of the heavenly witnesses in 1 John 5:7, which Erasmus
inserted in his third edition (1522) against his better judgment. (30)

The German Rendering

The German language was divided into as many dialects as tribes
and states, and none served as a bond of literary union. Saxons and
Bavarians, Hanoverians and Swabians, could scarcely understand each
other. Each author wrote in the dialect of his district, Zwingli in his
Schwyzerdütsch. "I have so far read no book or letter," says Luther in

82
the preface to his version of the Pentateuch (1523), in which the
German language is properly handled. Nobody seems to care
sufficiently for it; and every preacher thinks he has a right to change
it at pleasure, and to invent new terms." Scholars preferred to write
in Latin, and when they attempted to use the mother tongue, as
Reuchlin and Melanchthon did occasionally, they fell far below in ease
and beauty of expression.
Luther brought harmony out of this confusion, and made the modern
High German the common book language. He chose as the basis the
Saxon dialect, which was used at the Saxon court and in diplomatic
intercourse between the emperor and the estates, but was
bureaucratic, stiff, heavy, involved, dragging, and unwieldy. (31) He
popularized and adapted it to theology and religion. He enriched it
with the vocabulary of the German mystics, chroniclers, and poets.
He gave it wings, and made it intelligible to the common people of all
parts of Germany.
He adapted the words to the capacity of the Germans, often at the
expense of accuracy. He cared more for the substance than the form.
He turned the Hebrew shekel into a Silberling, (32) the Greek drachma
and Roman denarius into a German Groschen, the quadrans into
a Heller, the Hebrew measures into Scheffel, Malter, Tonne,
Centner, and the Roman centurion into a Hauptmann. He substituted
even undeutsch (!) for barbarian in 1 Cor. 14:11. Still greater liberties
he allowed himself in the Apocrypha, to make them more easy and
pleasant reading. (33) He used popular alliterative phrases as Geld und
Gut, Land und Leute, Rath und That, Stecken und Stab, Dornen und
Disteln, matt und müde, gäng und gäbe. He avoided foreign terms
which rushed in like a flood with the revival of learning, especially in
proper names (as Melanchthon for Schwarzerd, Aurifaber for
Goldschmid, Oecolampadius for Hausschein, Camerarius for
Kammermeister). He enriched the vocabulary with such beautiful
words as holdselig, Gottseligkeit.
Erasmus Alber, a contemporary of Luther, called him the German
Cicero, who not only reformed religion, but also the German
language.
Luther's version is an idiomatic reproduction of the Bible in the very
spirit of the Bible. It brings out the whole wealth, force, and beauty
of the German language. It is the first German classic, as King James's
version is the first English classic. It anticipated the golden age of
German literature as represented by Klopstock, Lessing, Herder,
83
Goethe, Schiller,--all of them Protestants, and more or less indebted
to the Luther-Bible for their style. The best authority in Teutonic
philology pronounces his language to be the foundation of the new
High German dialect on account of its purity and influence, and the
Protestant dialect on account of its freedom which conquered even
Roman Catholic authors. (34)
The Protestant Spirit of Luther's Version
Dr. Emser, one of the most learned opponents of the Reformation,
singled out in Luther's New Testament several hundred linguistic
blunders and heretical falsifications. (35)Many of them were silently
corrected in later editions. He published, by order of Duke George of
Saxony, a new translation (1527) for the purpose of correcting the
errors of "Luther and other heretics." (36)
The charge that Luther adapted the translation to his theological
opinions has become traditional in the Roman Church, and is repeated
again and again by her controversialists and historians. (37)
The same objection has been raised against the Authorized English
Version. (38)
In both cases, the charge has some foundation, but no more than
the counter-charge which may be brought against Roman Catholic
Versions.
The most important example of dogmatic influence in Luther's
version is the famous interpolation of the word alone in Rom. 3:28
(allein durch den Glauben), by which he intended to emphasize his
solifidian doctrine of justification, on the plea that the German idiom
required the insertion for the sake of clearness. (39) But he thereby
brought Paul into direct verbal conflict with James, who says (James
2:24), "by works a man is justified, and not only by faith" ("nicht
durch den Glauben allein"). It is well known that Luther deemed it
impossible to harmonize the two apostles in this article, and
characterized the Epistle of James as an "epistle of straw," because it
had no evangelical character ("keine evangelische Art").
He therefore insisted on this insertion in spite of all outcry against
it. His defense is very characteristic. "If your papist," he
says, (40) "makes much useless fuss about the word sola, allein, tell him
at once: Doctor Martin Luther will have it so, and says: Papist and
donkey are one thing; sic volo, sic jubeo, sit pro ratione voluntas. For
we do not want to be pupils and followers of the Papists, but their
masters and judges." Then he goes on in the style of foolish boasting
84
against the Papists, imitating the language of St. Paul in dealing with
his Judaizing opponents (2 Cor. 11:22 sqq.): "Are they doctors? so am
I. Are they learned? so am I. Are they preachers? so am I. Are they
theologians? so am I. Are they disputators? so am I. Are they
philosophers? so am I. Are they the writers of books? so am I. And I
shall further boast: I can expound Psalms and Prophets; which they
can not. I can translate; which they can not .... Therefore the
word allein shall remain in my New Testament, and though all pope-
donkeys (Papstesel) should get furious and foolish, they shall not turn
it out." (41)
The Protestant and anti-Romish character of Luther's New
Testament is undeniable in his prefaces, his discrimination between
chief books and less important books, his change of the traditional
order, and his unfavorable judgments on James, Hebrews, and
Revelation. (42) It is still more apparent in his marginal notes,
especially on the Pauline Epistles, where he emphasizes throughout
the difference between the law and the gospel, and the doctrine of
justification by faith alone; and on the Apocalypse, where he finds
the papacy in the beast from the abyss (Rev. 13), and in the
Babylonian harlot (Rev. 17). (43) The anti-papal explanation of the
Apocalypse became for a long time almost traditional in Protestant
commentaries.
On the other hand, the Roman Catholic translators used the same
liberty of marginal annotations and pictorial illustrations in favor of
the doctrines and usages of their own church. Emser's New Testament
is full of anti-Lutheran glosses. In Rom. 3:28, he protests on the
margin against Luther's allein, and says, "Paul by the words 'without
works of the law' does not mean that man is saved by faith alone,
without good works, but only without works of the law, that is,
external circumcision and other Jewish ceremonies." He therefore
confines the "law" here to the ritual law, and "works" to Jewish works;
while, according to the best modern commentators, Paul means
the whole law, moral as well as ceremonial, and all works
commanded by the law. And yet even in the same chapter and
throughout the whole Epistle to the Romans, Emser copies verbatim
Luther's version for whole verses and sections; and where he departs
from his language, it is generally for the worse.
The same may be said of the other two German Catholic Bibles of
the age of the Reformation. They follow Luther's language very
closely within the limits of the Vulgate, and yet abuse him in the

85
notes. Dr. Dietenberger adds his comments in smaller type after the
chapters, and agrees with Emser's interpretation of Rom. 3:28. (44) Dr.
Eck's German Bible has few notes, but a strongly anti-Protestant
preface. (45)
To be just, we must recognize the sectarian imperfections of Bible
versions, arising partly from defective knowledge, partly from
ingrained prejudices. A translation is an interpretation. Absolute
reproduction is impossible in any work. (46) … So also the New
Testament is rendered differently by scholars of the Greek, Latin, and
Protestant churches. And even where they agree in words, there is a
difference in the pervading spirit. They move, as it were, in a
different atmosphere. A Roman Catholic version must be closely
conformed to the Latin Vulgate, which the Council of Trent puts on an
equal footing with the original text. (47) A Protestant version is bound
only by the original text, and breathes an air of freedom from
traditional restraint. The Roman Church will never use Luther's
Version or King James's Version, and could not do so without
endangering her creed; nor will German Protestants use Emser's and
Eck's Versions, or English Protestants the Douay Version. The Romanist
must become evangelical before he can fully apprehend the free
spirit of the gospel as revealed in the New Testament.
There is, however, a gradual progress in translation, which goes
hand in hand with the progress of the understanding of the Bible.
Jerome's Vulgate is an advance upon the Itala, both in accuracy and
Latinity; the Protestant Versions of the sixteenth century are an
advance upon the Vulgate, in spirit and in idiomatic reproduction; the
revisions of the nineteenth century are an advance upon the versions
of the sixteenth, in philological and historical accuracy and
consistency. A future generation will make a still nearer approach to
the original text in its purity and integrity. If the Holy Spirit of God
shall raise the Church to a higher plane of faith and love, and melt
the antagonisms of human creeds into the one creed of Christ, then,
and not before then, may we expect perfect versions of the oracles of
God.

86
 NOTES
1
The testimony of the great philosopher Hegel is worth quoting. He says in
his Philosophie der Geschichte, p. 503: "Luther hat die Autorität der Kirche
verworfen und an ihre Stelle die Bibel und das Zeugniss des menschlichen Geistes
gesetzt. Dass nun die Bibel selbst die Grundlage der christlichen Kirche geworden ist,
ist von der grössten Wichtigkeit; jeder soll sich nun selbst daraus belehren, jeder
sein Gewissen daraus bestimmen können. Diess ist die ungeheure Veränderung im
Principe: die ganze Tradition und das Gebäude der Kirche wird problematisch und das
Princip der Autorität der Kirche umgestossen. Die Uebersetzung, welche Luther von
der Bibel gemacht hat, ist von unschätzbarem Werthe für das deutsche Volk
gewesen. Dieses hat dadurch ein Volksbuch erhalten, wie keine Nation der
katholischen Welt ein solches hat; sie haben wohl eine Unzahl von Gebetbüchlein,
aber kein Grundbuch zur Belehrung des Volks. Trotz dem hat man in neueren Zeiten
Streit deshalb erhoben, ob es zweckmässig sei, dem Volke die Bibel indie Hand zu
geben; die wenigen Nachtheile, die dieses hat, werden doch bei weitem von den
ungeheuren Vortheilen überwogen; die äusserlichen Geschichten, die dem Herzen
und Verstande anstössig sein können, weiss der religiöse Sinn sehr wohl zu
unterscheiden, und sich an das Substantielle haltend überwindet er sie." Froude
(Luther, p. 42) calls Luther's translation of the Bible "the greatest of all the gifts he
was able to offer to Germany."
2
Hence repeatedly published from the remaining fragmentary MSS. in Upsala (Codex
Argenteus, so called from its silver binding), Wolfenbüttel and Milan, by H. C. von
Gabelenz and J. Loebe (1836), Massmann (1857), Bernhardt (1875), Stamm (1878),
Uppström (1854-1868, the most accurate edition), R. Müller and H. Hoeppe (1881), W.
W. Skeat (1882). Comp. also Jos. Bosworth, The Gothic and Anglo-Saxon Gospels in
Parallel Columns with the Versions of Wycliffe and Tyndale, London, 2d ed., 1874
(with a fac-simile of the Codex Argenteus).
3
By P. Philipp Klimesch (librarian of the convent), Der Codex Teplensis, enthaltend
"Die Schrift des newen Gezeuges." Aelteste deutsche Handschrift, welche den im 15
Jahrh. gedruckten deutschen Bibeln zu Grunde gelegen. Augsburg and München,
1881-1884, in 3 parts. The Codex contains also homilies of St. Augustin and St.
Chrysostom, and seven articles of faith. The last especially have induced Keller and
Haupt to assign the translation to Waldensian origin. But these Addenda are not
uncatholic, and at most would only prove Waldensian or Bohemian proprietorship of
this particular copy, but not authorship of the translation. See Notes below, p. 353.
4
See Dr. M. Rachel's Gymnasial program: Ueber die Freiberger Bibelhandschrift,
nebst Beiträgen zur Gesch. der vorlutherischen Bibelübersetzung, Freiberg, 1886 (31
pages).
5
This apocryphal Epistle was also included in the Albigensian (Romance) version of
the 13th century, in a Bohemian version, and in the early English Bibles, in two
independent translations of the 14th or 15th century, but not in Wiclif's Bible. See
Forshall and Maddan, Wycliffite Versions of the Bible (1850), IV. 438 sq.;
Anger, Ueber den Laodicenerbrief (Leipzig, 1843); and Lightfoot, Com. on Ep. to the
Colossians (London, 1875), p. 363 sq. On the other hand, the same pseudo-Pauline
Epistle appears in many MSS. and early editions of the Vulgate, and in the German
versions of Eck and Dietenberger. It can therefore not be used as an argument for or
against the Waldensian hypothesis of Keller.

87
6
Ninety-seven editions of the Vulgate were printed between 1450 and 1500,--28 in
Italy (nearly all in Venice), 16 in Germany, 10 in Basel, 9 in France. See Fritzsche in
Herzog ii, vol. VIII. 450.
7
In the royal library of Munich there are 21 MSS. of German versions of the Gospels
and Epistles. The Gospels for the year were printed about 25 times before 1518; the
Psalter about 13 times before 1513. See besides the works of Panzer, Kehrein, Keller,
Haupt, above quoted, Alzog, Die deutschen Plenarien im 15. und zu Anfang des 16.
Jahrh., Freiburg-i-B., 1874.
8
Luther's use of the older German version was formerly ignored or denied, but has
been proved by Professor Krafft of Bonn (1883). He adds, however, very justly (l.c. p.
19): "Es gereicht Luther zum grössten Verdienst, dass er auf den griechischen
Grundtext zurückgegangen, den deutschen Wortschatz zunächst im N. T. wesentlich
berichtigt, dann aber auch mit seiner Genialität bedeutend vermehrt hat." See Notes
below, p. 352.
9
"Ich kann," he says in his Tischreden, "weder griechisch noch ebraeisch, ich will aber
dennoch einem Ebraeer und Griechen ziemlich begegnen. Aber die Sprachen machen
für sich selbst keinen Theologen, sondern sind nur eine Hülfe. Denn soll einer von
einem Dinge reden, so muss er die Sache [Sprache?] zuvor wissen und verstehen."
Erl.-Frkf. ed., vol. LXII. 313.
10
Under the title: Das Newe Testament Deutzsch. Wittemberg. With wood-cuts by
Lucas Cranach, one at the beginning of each book and twenty-one in the Apocalypse.
The chapter division of the Latin Bible, dating from Hugo a St. Caro, was retained
with some paragraph divisions; the versicular division was as yet unknown (Robert
Stephanus first introduced it in his Latin edition, 1548, and in his Greek Testament of
1551). The order of the Epistles is changed, and the change remained in all
subsequent editions. Some parallel passages and glosses are added on the margin. It
contained many typographical errors, a very curious one in Gal. 5:6: "Die Liebe, die
durch den Glauben thaetig ist," instead of "Der Glaube, der durch die Liebe thätig
ist." A copy of this rare edition, without the full-page Apocalyptic pictures, but with
the error just noticed, is in the Union Seminary Library, New York. It has the famous
preface with the fling at the "rechte stroern Epistel" of St. James, which was
afterwards omitted or modified.
11
The woodcuts were also changed. The triple papal crown of the Babylonian woman
in Rev. 17 gave place to a simple crown.
Fritzsche (l.c., p. 549): "Vom N. T. sind von 1522-1533 ziemlich sicher 16 original
12

Ausgaben nachgewiesen ... Die Nachdrucke belaufen sich auf ungefähr 54, wobei
Augsburg mit 14, Strassburg mit 13, und Basel mit 12 vertreten ist."
13
Under the title: Biblia, das ist die gantze Heilige Schrift, Deutsch. Auffs neu
zugericht. D. Mart. Luther. Wittemberg. Durch Hans Lufft, M.D.XLV. fol. with
numerous woodcuts. A copy in the Canstein Bibelanstalt at Halle. The Union Theol.
Seminary in New York has a copy of the edition of 1535 which bears this title: Biblia
das ist die /gantze Heilige /Schrifft Deutsch./ Mart. Luth./ Wittemberg./ Begnadet
mit Kür-/ furstlicher zu Sachsen /freiheit. /Gedruckt durch Hans Lufft./ M. D. XXXV.
The margin is ornamented. Then follows the imprimatur of the Elector John Frederick
of Saxony, a preface of Luther to the O. T., and a rude picture of God, the globe and
paradise with Adam and Eve among trees and animals.
14
Republished with the greatest care by Bindseil & Niemeyer. See Lit., p. 340.

88
15
See Note at the end of the next section.
16
De Actis et Scriptis M. Lutheri ad Ann. 1522. Gieseler (IV. 65 sq.) quotes the whole
passage in Latin.
17
The last edition of Dr. Eck's Bible appeared in 1558, at Ingolstadt, Bavaria.
18
Ed. of 1535: der.
19
Ed. of 1535: nicht.
20
Later eds.: eine ... schelle.
21
He could say with perfect truth: "Ich habe meine Ehre nicht gemeint, auch keinen
Heller dafür genomen, sondern habe es zu Ehren gethan den lieben Christen und zu
Ehren einem, der droben sitzt."
22
"Interim Biblia transferam, quanquam onus susceperim supra vires. Video nunc,
quid sit interpretari, et cur hactenus a nullo sit attentatum, qui proficeretur nomen
suum. [This implies his knowledge of older German translations which are
anonymous.] Vetus Testamentum non potero attingere, nisi vobis praesentibus et
cooperantibus."
23
"Ach Gott! wie ein gross und verdriesslich Werk ist es, die hebräischen Schreiber zu
zwingen deutsch zu reden; wie sträuben sie sich und wollen ihre hebräische Art gar
nicht verlassen und dem groben Deutschen nachfolgen, gleich als wenn eine
Nachtigall ... sollte ihre liebliche Melodei verlassen und dem Kukuk nachsingen."
Walch, XVI. 508. Comp. his letter to Spalatin about the difficulties in Job, Feb. 23,
1524, in De Wette, II. 486.
24
Luther's copy of the Hebrew Bible is preserved in the Royal Library at Berlin.
The editio princeps of the whole Hebrew Bible appeared 1488 (Soncino: Abraham ben
Chayin de' Tintori). A copy in possession of Dr. Ginsburg in England. See
Stevens, l.c. p. 60. Portions had been printed before.
25
A copy of the Lyons ed. of 1519, and one of the Basel ed. of 1509, now in possession
of the Brandenburg Provincial Museum at Berlin. Grimm, Gesch. d. luther.
Bibelübers., p. 8, note.
26
Lyra acquired by his Postillae perpetuae in V. et N. Test. (first published in Rome,
1472, in 5 vols. fol., again at Venice, 1540) the title Doctor planus et utilis. His
influence on Luther is expressed in the well-known lines:--

"Si Lyra non lyrasset,

Lutherus non saltasset."
27
Greek and Latin, 2 vols. folio. The first part contains Preface, Dedication to Pope
Leo X., and the Ratio seu Compendium verae Theologiae per Erasmum
Roterodamum (120 pages); the second part, the Greek Text, with a Latin version in
parallel columns, with brief introductions to the several books (565 pages). At the end
is a Latin letter of Frobenius, the publisher, dated "Nonis Fehr. Anno M.D.XIX." A copy
in the Union Theol. Seminary, New York. - Some say that Luther made use of Gerbel's
reprint of Erasmus, 1521. But Dr. Reuss of Strassburg, who has the largest collection
and best knowledge of Greek Testaments, denies this. Gesch. der h. Schriften des N.
T., 5th ed., II. 211, note.

89
28
See Schaff, Companion to the Greek Testament, etc., New York, 3d ed., 1888, pp.
229 sqq., and the facsimile of the Erasmian ed. on p. 532 sq. Tyndale's English version
was likewise made from Erasmus.
29
O. von Gebhardt, in his Novum Test. Graece et Germanice, Preface, p. xvi., says of
the second ed. of Erasmus: "Die Zahl der Druckfehler ist so gross, dass ein
vollständiges Verzeichniss derselben Seiten füllen würde." Comp. Scrivener, Introd.
to the Criticism of the N. T., 3d ed. (1883), p. 432 sq.
30
It first appeared in the Frankfort edition of Luther's Bible, 1574. The revised Luther-
Bible of 1883 strangely retains the passage, but in small type and in brackets, with
the note that it was wanting in Luther's editions. The Probebibel departs only in a few
places from the Erasmian text as followed by Luther: viz., Acts 12:25; Heb. 10:34; 1
John 2:23; Rev. 11:2. In this respect the German revision is far behind the Anglo-
American revision of 1881, which corrects the Textus Receptus In about five thousand
places.
31
He says in his Tischreden (Erl. ed., vol. lxii. 313): "Ich habe keine gewisse,
sonderliche eigene Sprache im Deutschen [i.e., no special dialect], sondern brauche
der gemeinen deutschen Sprache, dass mich Oberländer und Niederländer verstehen
mögen. Ich rede nach der sächsischen Canzelei, welcher nachfolgen alle Fürsten und
Könige in Deutschland. Alle Beichstädte, Fürstenhöfe schreiben nach der sächsischen
und unseres Fürsten Canzelei, darumb ists auch die gemeinste deutsche Sprache.
Kaiser Maximilian und Kurfürst Friedrich, Herzog zu Sachsen, etc., haben im
römischen Reich die deutschen Sprachen [dialects] also in eine gewisse Sprache
gezogen." Formerly the Latin was the diplomatic language in Germany. Louis the
Bavarian introduced the German in 1330. The founder of the diplomatic German of
Saxony was Elector Ernst, the father of Elector Friedrich. See Wilibald Grimm, Gesch.
der luth. Bibelübersetzung (Jena, 1884), p. 24 sqq.
32
The same word silverling occurs once in the English version, Isa. 7:23, and is
retained in the R. V. of 1885. The German Probebibel retains it in this and other
passages, as Gen. 20:16; Judg. 9:4, etc.
33
See Grimm, Luther's Uebersetzung der Apocryphen, in the "Studien und Kritiken" for
1883, pp. 376-400. He judges that Luther's version of Ecclesiasticus (Jesus Sirach) is
by no means a faithful translation, but a model of a free and happy reproduction from
a combination of the Greek and Latin texts.
34
"Luther's Sprache," says Jakob Grimm, In the Preface to his German Grammar, "muss
ihrer edeln, fast wunderbaren Reinheit, auch ihres gewaltigen Einflusses halber für
Kern und Grundlage der neuhochdeutschen Sprachniedersetzung gehalten werden,
wovon bis auf den heutigen Tag nur sehr unbedeutend, meistens zum Schaden der
Kraft und des Ausdrucks, abgewichen wordenist. Man darf das Neuhochdeutsche in
der That als den protestantischen Dialekt bezeichnen, dessen freiheitathmende
Natur längst schon, ihnen unbewusst, Dichter und Schriftsteller des katholischen
Glaubens überwältigte. Unsere Sprache ist nach dem unaufhaltsamen Laufe der
Dinge in Lautverhältnissen und Formen gesunken; was aber ihren Geist und Leib
genährt, verjüngt, was endlich Blüten neuer Poesie getrieben hat, verdanken wir
keinem mehr als Luthern." Comp. Wetzel, Die Sprache Luthers in seiner Bibel,
Stuttgart, 1850. Heinrich Rückert, Geschichte der neu-hochdeutschen Schriftsprache,
II. 15-175. Opitz, Ueber die Sprache Luthers, Halle, 1869. Dietz, Wörterbuch zu
Luther's deutschen Schriften, Leipzig, 1870 sqq. Lehmann, Luthers Sprache in seiner
Uebersetzung des N. T., Halle, 1873.

90
35
Annotationes des hochgel. und christl. doctors Hieronymi Emsers über Luthers
neuw Testament, 1523. I have before me an edition of Freiburg-i.-B., 1535 (140
pages). Emser charges Luther with a thousand grammatical and fourteen hundred
heretical errors. He suspects (p. 14) that he had before him "ein sonderlich
Wickleffisch oder Hussisch Exemplar." He does not say whether he means a copy of
the Latin Vulgate or the older German version. He finds (p. 17) four errors in Luther's
version of the Lord's Prayer: 1, that he turned Vater unser into Unser Vater, against
the German custom for a thousand years (but in his Shorter Catechism he retained the
old form, and the Lutherans adhere to it to this day); 2, that he omitted der du bist;
3, that he changed the panis supersubstantialis (überselbständig Brot!) into panis
quotidianus (täglich Brot); 4, that he added the doxology, which is not in the Vulgate.
In our days, one of the chief objections against the English Revision is the omission of
the doxology.
36
Das gantz New Testament: So durch den Hochgelerten L. Hieronymum Emser
seligen verteutscht, unter des Durchlauchten Hochgebornen Fürsten und Herren
Georgen Hertzogen zu Sachsen, etc., ausgegangen ist. Leipzig, 1528. The first edition
appeared before Emser's death, which occurred Nov. 8, 1527. I find in the Union
Seminary four octavo copies of his N. T., dated Coln, 1528 (355 pp.), Leipzig, 1529
(416 pp.), Freiburg-i.-B. 1535 (406 pp.), Cöln, 1568 (879 pp.), and a copy of a fol.
ed., Cologne, 1529 (227 pp.), all with illustrations and marginal notes against Luther.
On the concluding page, it is stated that 607 errors of Luther's are noted and
corrected. The Cologne ed. of 1529 indicates, on the titlepage, that Luther arbitrarily
changed the text according to the Hussite copy ("wie Martinus Luther dem rechten
Text, dem huschischen Exemplar nach, seins gefallens ab und zugethan und
verendert hab"). Most editions contain a Preface of Duke George of Saxony, in which
he charges Luther with rebellion against all ecclesiastical and secular authority, and
identifies him with the beast of the Apocalypse, Rev. 13 ("dass sein Mund wol genannt
werden mag der Mund der Bestie von welcher Johannes schreibet in seiner
Offenbarung am dreizehnten").
37
Dr. Döllinger, in his Reformation, vol. III. 139 sqq., 156 sqq., goes into an elaborate
proof. In his Luther, eine Skizze (Freiburg-i. -B., 1851), p. 26, he calls Luther's version
"ein Meisterstück in sprachlicher Hinsicht, aber seinem Lehrbegriffe gemäss
eingerichtet, und daher in vielen Stellen absichtlich unrichtig und sinnentstellend."
So also Cardinal Hergenröther (Lehrbuch der allg. Kirchengesch., vol. III. 40, third ed.
of 1886): "Die ganze Uebersetzung war ganz nach Luthers System zugerichtet, auf
Verbreitung seiner Rechtfertigungslehre berechnet, oft durch willkührliche
Entstellungen und Einschaltungen seinen Lehren angepasst."
38
By older and more recent Romanists, as Ward, Errata of the Protestant Bible,
Dublin, 1810. Trench considers the main objections in his book on the Authorized
Version and Revision, pp. 165 sqq. (in the Harper ed. of 1873). The chief passages
objected to by Romanists are Heb. 13:4 (where the E. V. translates "Marriage is
honorable in all" for "Let marriage be honorable among all"); 1 Cor. 11:27 ("and" for
"or"); Gal. 5:6 ("faith which worketh by love;" which is correct according to the
prevailing sense of ejnergei'sqai, and corresponds to the Vulgate operatur, against
the Roman view of the passive sense, "wrought by love," in conformity with the
doctrine of fides formata), and the rendering of eijdwlon by image, instead of idol.
The E. V. has also been charged with a Calvinistic bias from its connection with Beza's
Greek text and Latin notes.

91
39
But he omitted allein in Gal. 2:16, where it might be just as well justified, and
where the pre-Lutheran Bible reads "nur durch den Glauben." However correct in
substance and as an inference, the insertion has no business in the text as a
translation. See Meyer on Rom. 3:28, 5th ed., and Weiss, 6th ed. (1881), also my
annotations to Lange on Romans (p. 136).
40
In his Sendbrief vom Dolmetschen, in the Erl.-Frkf. ed., vol. LXV., p. 107 sqq. It was
published in September, 1530, with special reference to Emser, whom he does not
name, but calls "the scribbler from Dresden" ("der dresdener Sudler").
41
The Revisers of the Probebibel retained the interpolated allein in Rom. 8:28,
the nur in 4:15, and the incorrect rendering in 3:25,26,--a striking proof of Luther's
overpowering influence even over conscientious critical scholars in Germany. Dr.
Grimm, the lexicographer (l.c., p. 48), unjustly censures Meyer and Stier for omitting
the word allein. I have an old copy of Luther's Testament, without titlepage, before
me, where the word allein is printed in larger type with a marginal finger pointing to
it.
42
The Prefaces are collected in the 7th volume of Bindseil's edition of the Luther
Bible, and in the 63d volume of the Erlangen ed. of Luther's works. The most
important is his preface to the Epistle to the Romans, and his most objectionable that
to the Epistle of James.
43
He adds in the marginal note on Rev. 17: "Hie zeiget er die römische Kirche in ihrer
Gestalt und Wesen, die verdammt soll werden." His friend Cranach, in the
accompanying picture in the first ed., and also in the ed. of 1535, represents the
harlot as riding on a dragon with a triple crown on her head.
44
Biblia beider Allt unnd Newen Testamenten, fleissig, treulich vn Christlich nach
alter inn Christlicher Kirchen gehabter Translation, mit Ausslegung etlicher
dunckeler ort und besserung vieler verrückter wort und sprüch ... Durch D. Johan
Dietenberger, new verdeutscht. Gott zu ewiger ehre unnd wolfarth seiner heil.
Christlichen Kirchen ... Meynz, 1534, fol. From a copy in the Union Seminary (Van Ess
library). Well printed and illustrated.
45
I have before me three copies of as many folio editions of Eck's Bible, 1537, 1550,
and 1558, bearing the title: Bibel Alt und New Testament, nach dem Text in der
heiligen Kirchen gebraucht, durch Doctor Johan Ecken, mit fleiss, auf hochteutsch
verdolmetscht, etc. They were printed at Ingolstadt, and agree in the number of
pages (1035), and vary only in the date of publication. They contain in an appendix
the Prayer of Manasseh, the Third Book of Maccabees, and the spurious Epistle of Paul
to the Laodiceans.
46
There is an Italian proverb that translators are traitors (Traduttori traditori).
Jerome speaks of versiones which are eversiones. As Trench says, there are in every
translation "unavoidable losses inherent in the nature of the task, in the relations of
one language to the other, in the lack of accurate correlations between them, in the
different schemes of their construction."
47
Hence the stiffness of literalism and the abundance of Latinisms in the Rhemish
Version of the N. T. (first published in 1582, second ed. 1600, third ed. at Douay,
1621), such as "supersubstantial bread" for daily or needful bread (Jerome
introduced supersubstantialis for the difficult ejpiouvsio" in the Lord's Prayer, Matt.
6:11, but retained quotidianus in Luke), transmigration of Babylon, impudicity,
coinquinations, postulations, agnition, cogitation, prepuce, pasche, exinanite,

92
 contristate, domesticals, exemplars of the coelestials, etc. Some of them have been
silently removed in modern editions. The notes of the older editions abound in
fulminations against heretics.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Dr. Martin Luther's Bibelübersetzung nach der letzten Original-Ausgabe,
kritisch bearbeitet von H. E. Bindseil und H. A. Niemeyer. Halle, 1845-55, in 7
vols. 8°. The N. T. in vols. 6 and 7. A critical reprint of the last edition of
Luther (1545). Niemeyer died after the publication of the first volume. Comp.
the Probebibel (the revised Luther-Version), Halle, 1883. Luther's Sendbrief
vom Dolmetschen und Fürbitte der Heiligen (with a letter to Wenceslaus Link,
Sept. 12, 1530), in Walch, XXI. 310 sqq., and the Erl. Frkf. ed., vol. LXV. 102-
123. (Not in De Wette's collection, because of its polemical character.) A
defense of his version against the attacks of the Romanists. Mathesius, in his
thirteenth sermon on the Life of Luther.
On the merits and history of Luther's version. The best works are by Palm
(1772). Panzer (Vollständ. Gesch. der deutschen Bibelübers. Luthers, Nürnb.
1783, 2d ed. 1791), Weidemann (1834), H. Schott (1835), Bindseil (1847), Hopf
(1847), Mönckeberg (1855 and 1861), Karl Frommann (1862), Dorner (1868), W.
Grimm (1874 and l884), Düsterdieck (1882), Kleinert (1883), TH. Schott (1883),
and the introduction to the Probebibel (1883). See Lit. in § 17, p. 103.
On the pre-Lutheran German Bible, and Luther's relation to it. Ed. Reuss: Die
deutsche Historienbibel vor der Erfindung des Bücherdrucks. Jena, 1855. Jos.
Kehrein (Rom. Cath.): Zur Geschichte der deutschen Bibelübersetzung vor
Luther. Stuttgart, 1851. O. F. Fritzsche in Herzog, 2d ed., Bd. III. (1876), pp.
543 sqq. Dr. W. Krafft: Die deutsche Bibel vor Luther, sein Verhältniss zu
derselben und seine Verdienste um die deutsche Bibelübersetzung. Bonn, 1883
(25 pages. 4°.) Also the recent discussions (1885-1887) of Keller, Haupt,
Jostes, Rachel, Kawerau, Kolde, K. Müller, on the alleged Waldensian origin of
the pre-Lutheran German version.
See also: http://www.biblestudytools.com/lut/genesis/1.html
http://www.bibledbdata.org/onlinebibles/german_l/01_001.htm
http://www.dw.com/en/whats-changed-in-the-new-luther-bible-and-how-the-scorpions-contributed/a-36088313
https://www.museeprotestant.org/en/notice/martin-luther-translator-of-the-bible/
https://quod.lib.umich.edu/l/luther/
https://www.luther2017.de/en/reformation/and-culture/images-and-the-bible/a-hit-for-centuries-the-luther-bible-still-shapes-
germany-today/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEAuifqzebA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5c2p5YqwNF4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5VyX6-vj_0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OS5SdGhNR-U
https://www.luther2017.de/en/reformation/and-society/the-german-language/pioneering-work-the-bible-according-to-martin-
luthers-translation/

93
Psalm 46:1 (Ein Lied der Kinder Korah, von der Jugend,
vorzusingen.) Gott ist unsre Zuversicht und Stärke. Eine Hilfe
in den großen Nöten, die uns getroffen haben.

46:2 Darum fürchten wir uns nicht, wenngleich die Welt

unterginge und die Berge mitten ins Meer sänken,

46:3 wenngleich das Meer wütete und wallte und von seinem
Ungestüm die Berge einfielen. (Sela.)

46:4 Dennoch soll die Stadt Gottes fein lustig bleiben mit
ihren Brünnlein, da die heiligen Wohnungen des Höchsten
sind.

46:5 Gott ist bei ihr drinnen, darum wird sie fest bleiben;
Gott hilft ihr früh am Morgen.

46:6 Die Heiden müssen verzagen und die Königreiche fallen;

das Erdreich muß vergehen, wenn er sich hören läßt.

46:7 Der HERR Zebaoth ist mit uns; der Gott Jakobs ist unser
Schutz. (Sela.)

46:8 Kommet her und schauet die Werke des HERRN, der auf
Erden solch zerstören anrichtet,

46:9 der den Kriegen steuert in aller Welt, den Bogen

zerbricht, Spieße zerschlägt und Wagen mit Feuer verbrennt.

46:10 Seid stille und erkennet, daß ich GOTT bin. Ich will
Ehre einlegen unter den Heiden; ich will Ehre einlegen auf
Erden.

46:11 Der HERR Zebaoth ist mit uns; der Gott Jakobs ist
unser Schutz. (Sela.)

94
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Mighty_Fortress_Is_Our_God#/media/File:Luther%27s_Ein_Feste_
Burg.jpg )

95
APPENDIX B – Articles on Luther’s Gift for Communicating
God’s Word

The Bible Translation That Rocked the World

Luther's Bible introduced mass media, unified a nation, and set the standard for future
translations.

HENRY ZECHER

Martin Luther was many things: preacher, teacher, orator, translator, theologian, composer, and
family man. He came to symbolize everything the Protestant Reformation stood for.
Current Issue

But perhaps Luther's greatest achievement was the German Bible. No other work has had as
strong an impact on a nation's development and heritage as has this Book.

In Luther's time, the German language consisted of several regional dialects (all similar to the
tongue spoken in the courts of the Hapsburg and Luxemburg emperors). How were these
scattered dialects united into one modern language? The rise of the middle class, the growth of
trade, and the invention of the printing press all played a part. But the key factor was Luther's
Bible.

The Wartburg Wonder

Following the Diet of Worms in 1521, Luther's territorial ruler, Frederick the Wise, had Luther
hidden away for safekeeping in the castle at Wartburg. Luther settled down and translated
Erasmus's Greek New Testament in only eleven weeks. This is a phenomenal feat under any
circumstances, but Luther contended with darkened days, poor lighting, and his own generally
poor health.

Das Newe Testament Deutzsch was published in September 1522. A typographical masterpiece,
containing woodcuts from Lucas Cranach's workshop and selections from Albrecht Durer's
famous Apocalypse series, the September Bibel sold an estimated five thousand copies in the first
two months alone.

96
Luther then turned his attention to the Old Testament. Though well taught in both Greek and
Hebrew, he would not attempt it alone. "Translators must never work by themselves," he wrote.
"When one is alone, the best and most suitable words do not always occur to him." Luther thus
formed a translation committee, which he dubbed his "Sanhedrin." If the notion of a translation
committee seems obvious today, it is because such scholars as Philipp Melanchthon, Justus Jonas,
John Bugenhagen, and Caspar Cruciger joined Luther in setting the precedent. Never before, and
not for many years after, was the scholarship of this body equaled.

Forcing Prophets to Speak German

Luther remained the principal translator, however. His spirit motivated and guided the Sanhedrin
in producing a translation that was not literal in the truest sense of the word. He wanted this
Bible to be in spoken rather than bookish or written German. Before any word or phrase could be
put on paper, it had to pass the test of Luther's ear, not his eye. It had to sound right. This was
the German Bible's greatest asset, but it meant Luther had to straddle the fence between the free
and the literal.
"It is not possible to reproduce a foreign idiom in one's native tongue," he wrote. "The proper
method of translation is to select the most fitting terms according to the usage of the language
adopted. To translate properly is to render the spirit of a foreign language into our own idiom. I
try to speak as men do in the market place. In rendering Moses, I make him so German that no
one would suspect he was a Jew."

The translators used the court tongue as their base language but flavored it with the best of all
the dialects they could find in the empire. Luther, a relentless perfectionist who might spend a
month searching out a single word, talked at length with old Germans in the different regions.
To better understand the sacrificial rituals in the Mosaic law, he had the town butcher cut up
sheep so he could study their entrails. When he ran into the precious stones in the "new
Jerusalem" that were unfamiliar to him, he had similar gems from the elector's collection brought
for him to study.

Luther longed to express the original Hebrew in the best possible German, but the task was not
without its difficulties. "We are now sweating over a German translation of the Prophets," he
wrote. "O God, what a hard and difficult task it is to force these writers, quite against their wills,
to speak German. They have no desire to give up their native Hebrew in order to imitate our
barbaric German. It is as though one were to force a nightingale to imitate a cuckoo, to give up
his own glorious melody for a monotonous song he must certainly hate. The translation of Job

97
gives us immense trouble on account of its exalted language, which seems to suffer even more,
under our attempts to translate it, than Job did under the consolation of his friends, and seems
to prefer to lie among the ashes."

In spite of this, the Sanhedrin worked rapidly but accurately, translating in a tone more
apologetic than scientific. The result was a German Bible of such literary quality that those
competent to say so consider it superior even to the King James Version that followed it. And
because it sounded natural when spoken as well as read, its cadence and readability have made
it a popular Bible in Germany to this day.

The Book Must Be in German Homes

Germans everywhere bought Luther's Bible, not only for the salvation of their souls (if such was
their concern), but also for the new middleclass prestige it conferred. It was the must book to
have in their homes, and many Germans had no choice but to read it: it was likely to be one of
the few books they could afford to buy.
It was the first time a mass medium had ever penetrated everyday life. Everyone read Luther's
new Bible or listened to it being read. Its phrasing became the people's phrasing, its speech
patterns their speech patterns. So universal was its appeal, and so thoroughly did it embrace the
entire range of the German tongue, that it formed a linguistic rallying point for the formation of
the modern German language. It helped formally restructure German literature and the German
performing arts. Its impact, and Luther's in general, were so awesome that Frederick the Great
later called Luther the personification of the German national spirit. Many scholars still consider
him the most influential German who ever lived.

Uncle of the English Bible

As might be expected, the German Bible's impact reached well beyond the borders of the empire.
It was the direct source for Bibles in Holland, Sweden, Iceland, and Denmark, and its influence
was felt in many other countries as well.

Most important, the Bible left a permanent impression on a great translator of the English Bible.
William Tyndale, one of the Reformation's champions, had fled from England to the Continent
about the time Luther was publishing his German New Testament. He, too, was translating from
the original manuscripts, and possibly he and Luther met in Wittenberg.

98
One strong point of Luther's work that impressed Tyndale was the order given to the books of
the New Testament. In previous Bibles, there had been no uniform arrangement; translators
placed them in whatever order suited them.

Luther, however, ranked them by the yardstick of was treibt Christus—how Christ was taught: the
four Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John); the Acts of the Apostles; the Epistles, in
descending order of the Savior's prominence in each; and, finally, the Revelation of John. Tyndale
followed Luther's lead, as have virtually all Bible translators since.

Many phrases we know today came from Luther, through Tyndale. From the
German's natürlich, Tyndale wrote natural, and the phrase natural manappeared in 1 Corinthians
2:14. Luther's auf dem gebirge became was a voice heard in Matthew 2:18. Tyndale translated from
Luther the place of dead men's skulls in John 19:17, Ye vex yourselves off a true meaning in 2
Corinthians 6:12, Doctors in the Scripture in 1 Timothy 1:7, and hosianna in Matthew 21:15.
Like Luther, Tyndale eschewed the Latinized ecclesiastical terms in favor of those applicable to
his readers: repent instead of do penance; congregationrather than church; Savior or elder in the
place of priest; and love over charityfor the Greek agape.

Both translations flowed freely in a rhythm and happy fluency of narration; and, wherever he
could, Tyndale upheld Luther's doctrine of justification by faith. While in many instances the two
translators must have reached the same conclusions independently, Luther's strong influence on
the father of the English Bible is unmistakable. Since Tyndale's English translation makes up
more than 90 percent of the King James New Testament and more than 75 percent of the Revised
Standard Version, Luther's legacy is still plain to see.

Luther was exceptionally gifted in many areas. But the aspect of his genius perhaps most
responsible for his impact is the one least heralded: his skill and power as a translator and writer.
Had it not been for that, the Protestant Reformation and the growth of a united German nation
might have taken an entirely different course.

Henry Zecher is a personnel specialist at the U. S. Department of Health & Human Resources. Formerly,
he wrote for the Delaware State News.

(http://www.christianitytoday.com/history/issues/issue-34/bible-translation-that-rocked-world.html)

99
The Most Dangerous Thing Luther Did
And other facts about Bible translation that transformed the world.

BEN WITHERINGTON III

At the very beginning of the Reformation, the principal Bible available was the Latin Vulgate,
the Bible Jerome had originally produced in Latin in A.D. 380—though by the time of the
Reformation it has undergone significant textual corruptions. It included both a translation of
the Hebrew Old Testament and the Greek New Testament, plus Tobit, Judith, Wisdom of
Solomon, Sirach, Baruch, some additions to the Book of Daniel, and 1 and 2 Maccabees.
The Bible was not a book the general public was familiar with. It was not a book most individuals
or families could own. There were pulpit Bibles usually chained to the pulpit; there were
manuscripts of Bibles in monasteries; there were Bibles owned by kings and the socially elite.
But the Bible was not a book possessed by many.

Furthermore, it was rare to find a Bible in the language of the people. There were a number of
German translations in existence by the time of Luther, and one French version published already
in 1473. But it was still the case that the Latin Bible was by far and away the principal Bible
available. The well-educated social elite could read Latin, but your average resident of England

100
or France or Germany or Italy or Spain knew only snippets of Latin from the Mass. And indeed,
often enough they garbled the snippets they knew. If you want to get a good feel for the poverty
of biblical literacy in the general public in this era, read Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales, written
between 1387 and 1400 in Middle English. Confusion and misunderstandings of the Bible abound
in Chaucer’s stories.

The Latin Vulgate was the Bible that Luther first studied, but he soon became aware of its
deficiencies as he delved into the Greek text to discover his revolutionary insights. That led
Luther to another realization: if things were really going to change, it would not come just by
debating theology with other learned souls. The Bible needed to be made available in the
vernacular (in this case German) and needed to be widely available. In my view, the most
dangerous thing Luther ever did was not nail the 95 Theses to a door. It was translating the Bible
into ordinary German and encouraging its widespread dissemination.

Luther’s ‘Heresy’

By 1522, Luther had translated the New Testament, and he had completed the full Bible by 1534,
which included what came to be called the Apocrypha (those extra books from intertestamental
Judaism). Luther kept revising this into his waning years, for he realized what a major change
agent this translated Bible was.

Luther did not translate directly from the Latin Vulgate, and for some, this amounted to heresy.
Luther had learned Greek the usual way, at Latin school at Magdeburg, so he could translate
Greek works into Latin. There are tales, probably true, that Luther made forays into nearby towns
and villages just to listen to people speak so that his translation, particularly of the New
Testament, would be as close to ordinary contemporary usage as possible. This was not to be a
Bible of and for the elite.

Philip Schaff, the great church historian, opined: “The richest fruit of Luther’s leisure in the
Wartburg [castle], and the most important and useful work of his whole life, is the translation of
the New Testament, by which he brought the teaching and example of Christ and the Apostles to
the mind and hearts of the Germans in life-like reproduction. … He made the Bible the people’s
book in church, school, and house.”

101
This act by Luther opened Pandora’s box when it came to translations of the Bible, and there was
no getting the box closed thereafter. Needless to say, this worried church officials of all stripes
because they no longer had strict control of God’s Word.

Forerunners and Followers

Too few people, however, have said enough about the precursors to Luther’s act of translating
the Bible into the vernacular. For example, John Wycliffe’s team preceded Luther by a good 140
years with the translation of the Bible into Middle English between 1382 and 1395. Wycliffe
himself was not solely responsible for the translation; others, such as Nicholas of Hereford, are
known to have done some of the translating. The difference between the work of the Wycliffe
team and Luther is that no textual criticism was involved; the Wycliffe team worked directly
from the Latin Vulgate.

In addition, Wycliffe included not only what came to be called the Apocrypha, he threw in 2
Esdras and the second-century work Paul’s Letter to the Laodiceans as a bonus.
Like Luther’s efforts, Wycliffe’s work was not authorized by any ecclesiastical or royal authority,
but it became enormously popular. And the fallout was severe. Henry IV and his archbishop
Thomas Arundel worked hard to suppress the work, and the Oxford Convocation of 1408 voted
that no new translation of the Bible should be made by anyone without official approval.
Wycliffe, however, had struck a match, and there was no putting out the fire.

Perhaps the most poignant tale of this era is that of William Tyndale. Tyndale lived from 1494–
1536 and was martyred for translating the Bible into English. Tyndale, like Luther, translated
directly from the Hebrew and the Greek, except presumably for cross-referencing and checking.
He actually only finished the New Testament, completing about half of his Old Testament
translation before his death. His was the first mass-produced Bible in English.

Tyndale originally sought permission from Bishop Tunstall of London to produce this work but
was told that it was forbidden, indeed heretical, and so Tyndale went to the Continent to get the
job done. A partial edition was printed in 1525 (just three years after Luther) in Cologne, but
spies betrayed Tyndale to the authorities and, ironically, he fled to Worms, the very city where
Luther was brought before a diet and tried. From there, Tyndale’s complete edition of the New
Testament was published in 1526.

102
As Alister McGrath was later to note, the King James Version (KJV), or Authorized Version, of
the early 1600s (in several editions including the 1611 one) was not an original translation of
the Bible into English but instead a rather wholescale taking over of Tyndale’s translation with
some help from the Geneva Bible and other translations. Many of the memorable turns of phrase
in the King James—“by the skin of his teeth,” “am I my brother’s keeper?” “the spirit is willing
but the flesh is weak,” “a law unto themselves,” and so forth—are phrases Tyndale coined. He
had a remarkable gift for turning biblical phrases into memorable English.

But even the Authorized Version was not the first authorized English translation of the Bible.
That distinction goes to the “Great Bible” of 1539, authorized by Henry VIII. Henry wanted this
Bible read in all the Anglican churches, and Miles Coverdale produced the translation. Coverdale
simply cribbed from Tyndale’s version with a few objectionable features removed, and he
completed Tyndale’s translation of the Old Testament plus the Apocrypha. Note, however, that
Coverdale used the Vulgate and Luther’s translation in making this translation, not the original
Hebrew or Greek.

For this and various reasons, many of the budding Protestant movements on the Continent and
in Great Britain were not happy with the Great Bible. The Geneva Bible had more vivid and
vigorous language and became quickly more popular than the Great Bible. It was the Bible of
choice for William Shakespeare, Oliver Cromwell, John Bunyan, John Donne, and the pilgrims
when they came to New England. It, not the KJV, was the Bible that accompanied them on the
Mayflower.

The Geneva Bible was popular not only because it was mass produced for the general public but
also because it had annotations, study guides, cross-references with relevant verses elsewhere in
the Bible, and introductions to each book summarizing content, maps, tables, illustrations, and
even indices. In short, it was the first study Bible in English, and again note, it preceded the KJV
by a half-century. Not surprisingly for a Bible produced under the aegis of John Calvin’s Geneva,
the notes were Calvinistic in substance and Dissenting (disagreeing with the Church of England)
in character. That was one reason the kings of England produced “the Authorized Version.” They
needed a Bible that didn’t question Dieu et mon droit (meaning “God and my right,” the monarch’s
motto that suggested his sovereignty).

103
What About the Apocrypha?

Notably, the Geneva Bible was the first to produce an English Old Testament translation entirely
from the Hebrew text. Like its predecessors, it included the Apocrypha. In fact, the King James
Bible of 1611 also incorporated the Apocrypha, including the Story of Susanna, the History of
the Destruction of Bel and the Dragon (both additions to Daniel), and the Prayer of Manasseh.
In short, none of the major Bible translations that emerged during the German, Swiss, or English
reformations produced a Bible of simply 66 books. It is true that beyond the 66 books the other
7 (or more) were viewed as deuterocanonical, hence the term apocrypha, but nonetheless, they
were still seen as having some authority.

So when and where does the Protestant Bible of 66 books show up? This practice was not
standardized until 1825 when the British and Foreign Bible Society, in essence, threw down the
gauntlet and said, “These 66 books and no others.” But this was not the Bible of Luther, Calvin,
Knox, or even the Wesleys, who used the Authorized Version. Protestants had long treated the
extra books as, at best, deuterocanonical. Some had even called them non-canonical, and there
were some precedents for printing a Bible without these books. For example, there was a minority
edition of the Great Bible from after 1549 that did not include the Apocrypha, and a 1575 edition
of the Bishop’s Bible also excluded those books. The 1599 and 1640 printings of the Geneva Bible
left them out as well. But in any event, these books had not been treated as canonical by many
Protestants.

Luther’s Most Influential Act

Luther could not have imagined in 1517 that his most influential act during the German
Reformation, the act which would touch most lives and effect the budding Protestant movement
the most would not be his Galatians or Romans commentaries, his theological tracts like “The
Bondage of the Will,” or even his insistence on justification by grace through faith alone. No, the
biggest rock he threw into the ecclesiastical pond, which produced not only the most ripples but
real waves, was his production of the Luther Bible. But he was not a lone pioneer. He and William
Tyndale deserve equal billing as the real pioneers of producing translations of the Bible from the
original languages into the language of ordinary people, so they might read it, study it, learn it,
and be moved and shaped by it. The Bible of the people, by the people, and especially for the
people did not really exist before Luther and Tyndale.

104
Today, to speak just of English, there are more than 900 translations or paraphrases of the New
Testament in whole or in part into our language. Nine hundred! None of the original Reformers
could have envisioned this nor for that matter could they have imagined many people having
Bibles not just in the pulpits and pews but having their own Bibles in their own homes. The genie
let out of the bottle at the beginning of the German Reformation turned out to be the Holy Spirit,
who makes all things new. This includes ever-new translations of the Bible as we draw closer
and closer to the original inspired text of the Old and New Testaments by finding more
manuscripts, doing the hard work of text criticism, and producing translations based on our
earliest and best witnesses to the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts of the Bible.

When the Luther Bible was produced based on Erasmus’ work on the Greek New Testament, there
were only a handful of Greek manuscripts Erasmus could consult, and they were not all that old.
When the KJV was produced in 1611, there was the same problem both in regard to the Old
Testament and the New Testament.

Today, we have over 5,000 manuscripts of the Greek New Testament, most of which have been
unearthed in the last 150 years and some of which go back to the second and third centuries A.D.
We have the discoveries at the Dead Sea and elsewhere providing us with manuscripts more than
1,000 years closer to the original Old Testament source texts than the Masoretic text (the
traditional basis for the Old Testament text), and closer than we were in 1900. God in his
providence is drawing us closer to himself by drawing us closer to the original inspired text in
the modern era.

The cry sola Scriptura can echo today with a less hollow ring than in the past because we know
today the decisions taken by church leaders in the fourth century to recognize the 27 books of
the New Testament and the 39 books of the Old (plus a few), were the right decisions. The canon
was closed when it was recognized that what we needed in our Bibles were the books written by
the original eyewitnesses, or their co-workers and colleagues in the case of the New Testament,
and those written within the context of the passing on of the sacred Jewish traditions of Law,
Prophets, and Writings that went back to Moses, the Chroniclers, and the great Prophets of old.
While we owe our source texts to the ancient worthies who wrote things down between the time
of Moses and John of Patmos, we owe our Bibles Bibles are illegal or where no translation in the
local language is available. But thanks be to God, the work can continue because the cry semper
reformanda still rings true today.

105
Ben Witherington III is professor of New Testament interpretation at Asbury Theological Seminary. He
is author of many books, most recently, A Week in the Fall of Jerusalem (IVP Academic).

(http://www.christianitytoday.com/history/2017/october/most-dangerous-thing-luther-did.html)

Changing the Tempo of Worship

For a thousand years of Christian worship, lay people had rarely sung. Then came Luther.

PAUL J. GRIME

“Next to the Word of God, music deserves the highest praise,” Luther declared. He thus stood in
sharp contrast to other reformers of his era.

Ulrich Zwingli, leader of the new church in Zurich, was a trained musician. Yet under his
influence, Zurich’s magistrates banned all playing of organs, and some of Zwingli’s followers
went about smashing organs in their churches. Though Zwingli later permitted some vocal music,
he rejected instrumental music.

John Calvin, though he considered music a gift of God, saw it as a gift only in the worldly domain.
Thus, its role in the church was severely limited. He considered instrumental music “senseless
and absurd” and disallowed harmonies. Only unison singing of the Psalms was permitted.

Not so for Martin Luther. “I am not of the opinion,” he wrote, “that all arts are to be cast down
and destroyed on account of the gospel, as some fanatics protest; on the other hand, I would
gladly see all arts, especially music, in the service of him who has given and created them.”

Music in congregational worship remains one of Luther’s most enduring legacies. “Who doubts,”
he said, “that originally all the people sang these which now only the choir sings or responds to
while the bishop is consecrating?”

In fact, Luther’s hymns—especially “A Mighty Fortress Is Our God”—are the only direct contact
many people have with Luther. Modern Lutheran hymnals may contain twenty or more of his
hymns, and many non-Lutheran hymnals include several.

What were Luther’s beliefs about music? What role did it play in worship? And what did Luther
himself contribute musically to the church?

106
In Praise of Music

By the sixteenth century, musical composition had developed into a high art, and Luther himself
was a well-trained musician. He possessed a fine voice, played the lute, and even tried his hand
at advanced composition. He was acquainted with the works of the day’s leading composers, like
Josquin des Pres: “God has preached the gospel through music, as may be seen in Josquin des
Prez, all of whose compositions flow freely, gently, and cheerfully, are not forced or cramped by
rules, and are like the song of the finch.”

Luther observed that only humans have been given the gift of language and the gift of song. This
shows we are to “praise God with both word and music.” Furthermore, music is a vehicle for
proclaiming the Word of God. Luther loved to cite examples like Moses, who praised God in song
following the crossing of the Red Sea, and David, who composed many of the psalms.

He said, “I always loved music; whoso has skill in this art, is of a good temperament, fitted for
all things. We must teach music in schools; a schoolmaster ought to have skill in music, or I
would not regard him; neither should we ordain young men as preachers, unless they have been
well exercised in music.”

Conservative Reformer

Luther’s high regard for music was matched by a cautious attitude when it came to reforming
worship practices. “It is not now, nor has it ever been, in our mind to abolish entirely the whole
formal cultus [worship] of God,” he once wrote, “but to cleanse that which is in use, which has
been vitiated by most abominable additions, and to point out a pious use.”

He had no desire simply to throw out the liturgy of the church. The cry for mercy in the Kyrie,
the praise of Christ in the Gloria in Excelsis, the witness to the apostolic faith in the Credo, the
proclamation of Christ’s all-sufficient sacrifice for the sins of the world in the Agnus Dei—these
were vital ingredients for the faithful proclamation of justification by grace alone.

Still, Luther sought reform. One of his concerns was the predominant use of Latin in the service.
The common people needed to hear and sing the Word of God in their own tongue—German—
so they might be edified. In one of his earliest liturgical writings, Luther said, “Let everything be
done so that the Word [of God] may have free course”

107
Luther also sought to rid the service of every trace of false teaching, which for him centered in
the Canon of the Mass, a collection of prayers and responses surrounding Christ’s words of
institution. Luther rejected the implicit teaching that the Mass was a sacrifice the priest offered
to God. For the Canon, he reserved some of his choicest criticism, calling it, “that abominable
concoction drawn from everyone’s sewer and cesspool.”

Luther nonetheless understood that hasty reform would only make matters worse. In his first
revised liturgy of 1523 (An Order of Mass and Communion for the Church at Wittenberg), Luther
said, “I have been hesitant and fearful, partly because of the weak in faith, who cannot suddenly
exchange an old and accustomed order of worship for a new and unusual one.” Indeed, the six-
year gap between the start of the Reformation and his first liturgical reforms demonstrates
Luther’s caution.

Luther’s Order of Mass was itself a conservative reform effort. Certainly, the Canon of the Mass
was out, replaced with instructions that Christ’s words of institution be chanted loudly. And all
communicants would receive not only the body but also the blood of Christ in the sacrament.
Still, though the singing of German hymns was encouraged, Latin remained the principal
language.

The shift from Latin to German was also delayed because not many hymns or portions of the
liturgy had been translated into German. Luther sounded the call for qualified poets and
musicians to produce German hymns and liturgies that faithfully proclaimed God’s Word. Near
the end of 1523, Luther wrote to Georg Spalatin, pastor to the prince of Saxony, urging him to
write German hymns based on the Psalms. His straightforward advice: use the simplest and most
common words, preserve the pure teaching of God’s Word, and keep the meaning as close to the
psalm as possible.

By 1526, enough materials had been produced to enable Luther to prepare a service entirely in
German. This German Mass followed the historic structure of the liturgy. Though Luther inserted
German hymns to replace Latin, he insisted that Latin services continue to be offered on occasion.
In fact, his ideal would have been to conduct services not only in German and Latin, but also in
the biblical languages of Greek and Hebrew!

108
Hymn Writer

Between the publication of his 1523 and 1526 services, Luther began writing hymns. Though he
had expressed doubts about his ability, he was not one to wait around indefinitely. Besides,
Thomas Munzer, the radical German reformer, was already producing German services and
hymns. In order to protect his people from Munzer’s teachings, Luther decided to provide hymns
of his own.

During the final months of 1523 and the beginning of 1524, Luther produced more than twenty
hymns—more than half his total output. Four of these appeared in January 1524 in the first
Lutheran hymnal (known as the “Hymnal of Eight,” since it contained eight hymns).

By the summer of 1524, two other hymnals appeared in the neighboring town of Erfurt; each
contained about two dozen hymns, eighteen of them by Luther. In 1524, the first hymnal
prepared under Luther’s auspices also went to press. Unlike modern hymnals, it was actually a
choir book with multivoice settings. Of its thirty-eight hymns, twenty-four were by Luther.

Hymnals proliferated so rapidly that many of them published hymns by Luther without
permission. Though Luther did not have the modern-day concern of copyright infringement, he
didn’t want others making “improvements” to his hymns, lest the pure teaching of God’s Word
be adulterated.

Luther wrote a variety of hymns. His first, more of a ballad, came following the deaths of the
first two Lutheran martyrs (in Brussels on July 1,1523). Luther used this hymn to counter rumors
that the two men had recanted before they died. Luther sings that though enemies can spread
their lies, “We thank our God therefore, his Word has reappeared.”

Luther’s other hymns were intended for church services and for devotions at home. In 1524,
Luther wrote six of his seven hymns based on psalms. His final psalm hymn, “A Mighty Fortress,”
was written about three years later, when Luther was undergoing severe trials. This hymn
exhibits a much freer style and is only loosely connected to the text of Psalm 46. Yet “A Mighty
Fortress” reflects both Luther’s struggles and his utter confidence in God: “Though devils all the
world should fill, / All eager to devour us, / We tremble not, we fear no ill, / They shall not
overpower us.”

109
Luther also wrote hymns for portions of the liturgy and for all the seasons of the church year. To
teach the catechism, he wrote two hymns on the Ten Commandments, a hymn for the Apostles’
Creed, one for the Lord’s Prayer, and others for baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Through these
hymns, Luther demonstrated his ongoing desire to teach the faith, especially to children.

Martin Luther forged a new hymnody and church music that continues to express the message
he proclaimed.

Paul J. Grime is pastor of St. Paul's Lutheran Church in West Allis, Wisconsin, and a doctoral candidate
at Marquette University.

(http://www.christianitytoday.com/history/issues/issue-39/changing-tempo-of-worship.html)

The Weak Man Behind a Mighty Fortress

In intense turmoil, Luther wrote his greatest hymn.

MARK GALLI

It was the worst of times—1527—one of the most trying years of Luther’s life. It’s hard to imagine
he had the energy or spirit to compose one of Christendom’s most memorable hymns.
Current Issue

On April 22, a dizzy spell forced Luther to stop preaching in the middle of his sermon. For ten
years, since publishing his 95 Theses against the abuse of indulgences, Luther had been buffeted
by political and theological storms; at times his life had been in danger. Now he was battling
other reformers over the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. To Luther, their errors were as great as
those of Rome—the very gospel was at stake—and Luther was deeply disturbed and angry. He
suffered severe depression.
Then, on July 6, as friends arrived for dinner, Luther felt an intense buzzing in his left ear. He
went to lie down, when suddenly he called, “Water … or I’ll die!” He became cold, and he was
convinced he had seen his last night. In a loud prayer, he surrendered himself to God’s will.

With a doctor’s help, Luther partially regained his strength. But this depression and illness
overcame him again in August, September and late December. Looking back on one of his bouts,
he wrote his friend Melanchthon, “I spent more than a week in death and hell. My entire body
was in pain, and I still tremble. Completely abandoned by Christ, I labored under the vacillations

110
and storms of desperation and blasphemy against God. But through the prayers of the saints [his
friends], God began to have mercy on me and pulled my soul from the inferno below.”

Meanwhile, in August, the plague had erupted in Wittenberg. As fear spread, so did many of the
townspeople. But Luther considered it his duty to remain and care for the sick. Even though his
wife was pregnant, Luther’s house was transformed into a hospital, and he watched many friends
die. Then his son became ill. Not until late November did the epidemic abate and the ill begin to
recover.

During that horrific year, Luther took time to remember the tenth anniversary of his publication
against indulgences, noting the deeper meaning of his trials: “The only comfort against raging
Satan is that we have God’s Word to save the souls of believers.” Sometime that year, Luther
expanded that thought into the hymn he is most famous for: “A Mighty Fortress Is Our God.”
This verse, translated by Frederick Hedge in 1853, comes from one of more than sixty English
versions:

And though this world with devils filled

should threaten to undo us,
We will not fear, for God has willed
his truth to triumph through us.
The prince of darkness grim? We tremble not for him.
His rage we can endure, for lo! his doom is sure.
One little Word shall fell him.

Mark Galli is associate editor of Christian History.

(http://www.christianitytoday.com/history/issues/issue-39/weak-man-behind-mighty-fortress.html)

Powerful Preaching
A sample of how Luther could bring Bible characters to life

Martin Luther preached an estimated 4,000 sermons (some 2,300 have survived). He also lectured and
wrote commentaries on numerous books of the Bible. As historian Roland Bainton put it, “He was
always teaching, whether in the classroom or the pulpit; and he was always preaching, whether in the

111
pulpit or the classrooms.” Here, in Bainton’s translation, is Luther’s exposition of Genesis 22—the
ultimate test of Abraham’s faith.

“I Am Afraid Every Time I have to preach,” Luther confessed. Though he preached often—once he gave
195 sermons in just 145 days—for him, preaching never ceased to be an awesome endeavor before a
holy God. One scholar has called Luther’s preaching “the best and principal work of his variously busy
life.”

Abraham was told by God that he must sacrifice the son of his old age by a miracle, the seed
through whom he was to become the father of kings and of a great nation. Abraham turned pale.
Not only would he lose his son, but God appeared to be a liar. He had said, “In Isaac shall be thy
seed,” but now he said, “Kill Isaac.” Who would not hate a God so cruel and contradictory?
How Abraham longed to talk it over with someone! Could he not tell Sarah? But he well knew
that if he mentioned it to anyone, he would be dissuaded and prevented from carrying out the
behest.

The spot designated for the sacrifice, Mount Moriah, was some distance away; “and Abraham
rose up early in the morning, and saddled his ass, and took two of his young men with him, and
Isaac his son, and clave the wood for the burnt-offering.” Abraham did not leave the saddling of
the ass to others. He himself laid on the beast the wood for the burnt offering. He was thinking
all the time that these logs would consume his son, his hope of seed. With these very sticks that
he was picking up the boy would be burned.

In such a terrible case should he not take time to think it over? Could he not tell Sarah? With
what inner tears he suffered! He girt the ass and was so absorbed he scarcely knew what he was
doing.

He took two servants and Isaac his son. In that moment everything died in him; Sarah, his family,
his home, Isaac. This is what it is to sit in sackcloth and ashes. If he had known that this was
only a trial, he would not have been tried. Such is the nature of our trials that while they last we
cannot see to the end.

“Then on the third day Abraham lifted his eyes, and saw the place afar off.” What a battle he had
endured in those three days! There Abraham left the servants and the ass, and he laid the wood
upon Isaac and himself took the torch and sacrificial knife. All the time he was thinking, “Isaac,
if you knew, if your mother knew, that you are to be sacrificed.”

112
“And they went both of them together.” The whole world does not know what here took place.
They two walked together. Who? The father and the dearest son—the one not knowing what was
in store but ready to obey, the other certain that he must leave his son in ashes

Then said Isaac, “My father.” And he said, “Yes, my son.” And Isaac said, “Father, here is the fire
and here the wood, but where is the lamb?” He called him father and was solicitous lest he had
overlooked something, and Abraham said, “God will himself provide a lamb, my son.”
When they were come to the mount, Abraham built the altar and laid on the wood, and then he
was forced to tell Isaac. The boy was stupefied. He must have protested, “Have you forgotten: I
am the son of Sarah by a miracle in her old age, that I was promised and that through me you
are to be the father of a great nation?” And Abraham must have answered that God would fulfill
his promise even out of ashes.

Then Abraham bound him and laid him upon the wood. The father raised the knife. The boy
bared his throat. If God had slept an instant, the lad would have been dead. I could not have
watched. I am not able in my thoughts to follow. The lad was as a sheep for the slaughter. Never
in history was there such obedience, save only in Christ. But God was watching, and all the
angels. The father raised his knife; the boy did not wince. The angel cried, “Abraham, Abraham!”
See how divine majesty is at hand in the hour of death. We say, “In the midst of life we die.” God
answers, “Nay, in the midst of death we live.”

Historian Bainton adds: “Luther once read this story for family devotions. When he had finished,
Katie said, ‘I do not believe it. God would not have treated his son like that.’ ”

“ ‘But, Katie,’ answered Luther, ‘he did.’ ”

(http://www.christianitytoday.com/history/issues/issue-39/powerful-preaching.html)

How Martin Luther became the first Christian pop star

Martin Luther not only reformed the Church 500 years ago, but also discovered
the power of music as a songwriter and composer. His chorales gave churchgoers
a voice and helped spread the ideas of the Reformation.

113
Schweinfurt, Germany in 1532: A Catholic congregation would like to join the Reformation,
but the priest opposes the move. So, one Sunday, the churchgoers start singing a song
written by church reformer Martin Luther, namely "A Mighty Fortress Is Our God."
The congregation wins and the priest flees. In the following days, young people roam the
town's streets belting out the song, recounts theologian and journalist Burkhard Weitz: "A
short while later, the Reformation was introduced in Schweinfurth." For the past 500
years, Martin Luther (1483-1546) has been known as an eloquent author of theological
writings. But he is far less known as a songwriter and musician, although he
not only played a key role as a reformer of the Christian faith, but also
initiated a new chapter of spiritual music.

Music from a young age

Dieter Falk, a successful musician and music producer, said, "In my view, Luther was the
first pop musician of the church. And pop means nothing but popular." At the young age of
14, Luther was trained in music theory while attending the Latin school in Eisenach. He
sang in a church choir and a student choir. Later on, he studied theology, music, voice and
composition at the Erfurt University. He played the lute and the German flute, wrote four-
part compositions and joined a musical circle — a kind of band.

114
As Burkhard Weitz told DW, "He even thought about becoming a musician, but then opted
for theology." Had he decided differently, the course of history could have been changed.
After all, it was his expertise in theology that enabled Luther to take on the Catholic Church
in 1517 and transform social and political thought at the threshold of the modern era.

Luther's breakthrough as a songwriter

Things soon got busy — and stressful for Luther. Besides developing his reformatory
thoughts and putting them in writing, he had to deal with tough disputes with the pope and
the clergy, as well as the emperor of the Holy Roman Empire and a Church ban against him.
Luther didn't have much time for music.

That changed in 1523, when he composed his first song. It was full of defiance, says
Burkhard Weitz: "When the first martyrs who followed his teachings were burned in
Brussels, the reformer was shocked and horrified. He commented on the events in a song."

Still haunted by the terrible fate of the martyrs, Luther composed the song "Dear Christians,
One And All, Rejoice." In 10 verses, Luther described how God has saved humanity. The
song appealed to many people and contributed to the spreading of reformist principles. It
was sung all over the text was even printed on flyers. Its composer came to understand just
how powerful a song can be.

Martin Luther was far more significant as a musician than commonly assumed

115
•
THE REFORMATION: THE LUTHER EFFECT GOES GLOBAL

All roads led to Rome

In this painting (1625-1650) dating from around 100 years after the Reformation, Martin Luther
(center) is among a circle of reformers. Portraying the renewal of the church and the battle of wills
among religious scholars as secular rulers watch on in the foreground, the painting signifies the
interwoven nature of religion and politics at the time.

Poetic serial production

Highly motivated, Luther started to translate Latin hymns into German. He also wrote
songs to the psalms of the Old Testament, and incorporated basic reformist principles in
new songs. Over the next 12 months, he composed 24 new such songs. Among them is one
song that has encouraged many Christians over the past centuries. "My favorite choral is
'Out of the depths I cry to Thee.' Here, Luther seems to be crying out from the depths of his
soul, and these are the songs that give me goosebumps," musician Dieter Falk told DW. "On
my instrumental CD, which I devoted Luther, I felt most comfortable at the piano with that

116
particular song because it enabled me to put myself in his psychological state." The chorale
clearly proved that Luther wasn't just a poet, but also a composer.
Recipe for a church hit

But that wasn't always the case. When a melody fit a particular text, Luther was also willing
to borrow popular songs that were sung in pubs or on the streets. The original version of the
Christmas song "From Heaven Above to Earth I Come" was based on a ballad. "The guy was
totally uninhibited," commented Falk, adding, "Considering 'From Heaven Above to Earth I
Come' and the similarly constructed 'A Mighty Fortress Is Our God,' I come to the
conclusion that, like many modern musicians, Martin Luther also used to steal from his own
repertoire. These songs are hits."

Dieter Falk knows how to identify a hit. The records he produced for Patricia Kaas, Pur,
Roger Chapmann, Paul Young and Gildo Horn have sold more than 20 million copies
worldwide. "Earworms — that's the keyword," said Falk. "An earworm, a catchy tune, stays
in our memory for a very long time. The structure of Luther's verses was quite simple,
differing from the structure of modern pop songs with a verse, a refrain, and a bridge.
Luther's verses were pure verses. Once in a while, there was also a refrain, like in folk
songs."

Catchy melodies and verses that were easy to memorize were an ideal combination in a time
when most people were able to read neither texts nor music. "The big advantage of these
songs was that they provided two different ways of memorizing them — by the rhythm and
rhyme of the verses, or by the melody," explained Burkhard Weitz.

From memory to the printing press

But memorizing alone wasn't enough. The first collection of reformist songs was published
in late 1523, namely the "Achtlieder Buch," a collection of eight songs of which four were
composed by Luther. One year later, all 24 of his songs were published in a choir songbook
for schools.

117
Martin Luther's "Achtliederbuch" was a collection of eight songs

But Luther did not intend to limit himself to working as a poet and a composer. In 1523, he
wrote to his companion and friend Georg Spalatin: "I have the intention to create psalms for
the people, in other words spiritual songs so that the word of God will remain among the
people also by means of music. That's why we are looking for poets everywhere." More and
more Christians were daring to express their faith in German rhymes.

German songs during worship

Luther's next objective was to establish singing in religious services that had been held in
Latin up until that point. As Burkhard Weitz explained, "In his writing 'Formula missae'
from 1523, Luther lamented that 'only a choir of clergymen and pupils sing and respond
when the bishop blesses the bread and performs his service.' That's why he called for
'German songs to be sung by the people during holy mass.'" To Luther, it was important for
people to understand what was going on during the service. "That's why he wanted to
preach in German, to introduce German liturgy and to sing German songs." The reformer
managed to do that in Wittenberg, where he was most active.

118
Since he knew that most of his compatriots could only be reached in their native language,
Luther wrote a mass in German in 1526 that included German songs. The church
congregation suddenly took on a whole new role. Instead of sitting quietly and listening,
they were now playing an active role in the mass.

Organ at the Freiberg Cathedral (Saxony): Music has been a central part of church life in Germany since
Luther
For Luther, a feeling for language and music were both important when writing new songs,
though he also felt the music was meant to serve the text. And songs in general, he thought,
were there to spread the word of God.

Fierce weapons of a singing movement

The propaganda effect of Luther's songs, as well as songs by other reformist composers, has
been documented over and over again. It's not surprising that the diocesan town of
Hildesheim prohibited the singing of reformist songs in the public twice, namely in 1524
and 1531. They were considered fierce weapons of the reform movement, explained
Burkhard Weitz: "From early on, singing was a trademark of the Lutherans, and it turned
the Reformation into a singing movement."

119
Dieter Falk goes even further: "There is a famous quote by US civil rights activist Martin
Luther King (1929-1968), who once said, 'What I learned from Martin Luther is that a
movement can only succeed when it sings.' Without a doubt, music has played a prominent
role in the spread of the Reformation."

US civil rights activist Martin Luther King says he learned something from his German namesake
(http://www.dw.com/en/how-martin-luther-influenced-martin-luther-king-jr/a-41082670)

According to Falk, Luther was one of the first to achieve decisive cultural and religious
change with music. The song mentioned above, "A Mighty Fortress Is Our God," composed
in 1529, became the most triumphal song of the Reformation.

Luther's songs today

All of Luther's known 37 songs are still part of Protestant songbooks. He continues to be the
most heavily represented composer and poet of the official German Protestant songbook,
even though only few of these songs are still sung on a regular basis.

120
Dieter Falk touring across Germany with his Luther Pop-Oratorium

Numerous musical productions are planned this year, on the 500th anniversary of Luther's
95 theses, to make sure his role as a songwriter and composer will not be forgotten. Dieter
Falk has made a large contribution by touring across Germany with the Luther oratorio that
he composed.

"Of course, I have also worked on Luther's chorales. I have arranged them and transformed
them into the contemporary language of pop music." The reformer would probably be very
pleased about that. After all, he said "music is one of the most significant and delightful
presents God has given us."

(http://www.dw.com/en/how-martin-luther-became-the-first-christian-pop-star/a-38399365 )

The art that built Martin Luther’s brand

By Andrew Pettegree

(https://www.apollo-magazine.com/the-art-that-built-martin-luthers-brand/ )

121
Law and Grace 1529, Lucas Cranach the Elder. Foundation Schloss Friedenstein Gotha

Lucas Cranach (1472–1553) is today acknowledged as one of the great painters of the
Northern Renaissance, the creator of a large number of remarkable paintings in a
distinctive, highly recognisable style. He was also responsible for the iconic series of
images of the Protestant reformer Martin Luther (1483–1546), his friend and
contemporary who had also settled in the small north German city of Wittenberg. His
images of Luther and friends provide the definitive pictorial chronicle of the reformer’s
life, from the time he first burst on to the public stage, and into old age. All of the

122
many books that celebrate Luther in this run-up to the 500th anniversary in 2017 of
the publishing of his 95 Theses will draw on Cranach for their image of the reformer.
These were some of the most copied pictures of the 16th century; not least because
Cranach deliberately developed a workshop practice which facilitated the production of
multiple versions. Even so, these paintings would only have had a relatively restricted
contemporary reach. We can, however, go further and say that despite the enduring
magnificence of these images, in terms of his service to the Reformation Cranach’s
greatest achievement lay elsewhere, in other parts of his enormous output.

Here we need to be aware of two great, but comparatively understudied innovations

emerging from Cranach’s workshop. The first was the transformation of the woodcut
from a relatively undervalued medium of artistic expression, to a powerful tool of
evangelism. The second was the development of a model of cultural industrialisation
that enabled images to be produced on a sufficiently large scale to serve a movement of
ideas growing at a quite remarkable rate between 1517 and 1525. It was during these
years that Cranach created the images that defined the new movement, and organised
their production in industrial quantities. It was an extraordinary act of cultural
innovation: all the more so given it was accomplished in a place, Wittenberg, that up to
this point had hardly registered on the cultural atlas of the Holy Roman Empire.

Lucas Cranach was born in 1472 in Kronach, Franconia. He spent his formative years as
a master painter in and around Vienna. In 1504 he accepted an invitation to join a
team of distinguished painters working on the decoration of Frederick the Wise’s newly
remodelled castle and its church in Wittenberg. It was here that he met Albrecht Dürer,
another artist commissioned by the ambitious Elector to work on his prestige project;
the two painters became and remained friends. However when Dürer and the other
contracted painters finished their assignments, Cranach stayed on to work as
Frederick’s court painter. This proved to be the ideal role for a man of Cranach’s
talents. It required above all versatility; a court painter was expected to turn his hand
to anything the employer required, whether this was painting walls, designing court
entertainments, portraits, or, in Frederick’s case, hunting scenes. Cranach rose to the
challenge. He had the reputation of someone who worked very quickly – ideal for

123
answering the whims and fancies of a prince. He also proved adept at managing a
team. He soon became very close to his princely employer, a trusted counsellor as well
as an admired artisan. In 1508, the year Cranach was sent to the Low Countries to
negotiate a family marriage on the Elector’s behalf, Frederick granted the painter his
own coat of arms. Cranach, indeed, was on much more intimate terms with Frederick
the Wise than Luther would ever be.

In the years before the Reformation we can identify two seminal moments in the
development of Cranach’s business and career path. The first came early, with the
commission in 1508 to create a catalogue of Frederick’s growing collection of relics: it
is often noted, usually for its delicious irony, that Elector Frederick had one of Europe’s
largest relic collections. The task of compiling such a catalogue, which would be
adorned with over 100 woodcuts of the major pieces, was a considerable undertaking,
particularly in Wittenberg whose printers had, up until now, produced only brief
literary pamphlets and dissertation texts for the professors and students of the
university. No doubt Frederick underwrote the cost, but Cranach was required to
supply the illustrations. The printing was contracted to Simprecht Reinhart, an
employee of Cranach’s who may also have incised the woodblocks. Cranach had
experimented with woodcuts, and also engravings before, but this was his first
sustained engagement with a medium that would come to define his contribution to the
Reformation. The Reliquary Book opened his eyes to the potential of woodblocks as a
means of mass communication, and as a commercial opportunity: witness his
subsequent series of prints on the passion, in competition to those of Albrecht Dürer.

124
The Wittenberg Reliquary Book (1509), text by Georg Spalatin and illustrations by Lucas Cranach the
Elder. Luther Memorials Foundation of Saxony-Anhalt

By the time he had completed the Reliquary Book Cranach was doing extremely well.
The role of court painter was well paid, and, crucially, not exclusive; Cranach was at
liberty to accept other commissions. As the most distinguished painter in north-east
Germany, work was not hard to find. It was in these years that Cranach began to
assemble the remarkable portfolio of Wittenberg properties that were the most tangible
symbol of his dominance of the local economy. Between 1511 and 1517 he purchased
and renovated the two most substantial of these properties, at Schlossstrasse 1 and Am
Markt 4, both in the centre of town. Here he would create an elegant town house and,
at Schlossstrasse 1, a gigantic building that would be both a residence and a
factory/workshop for his growing workforce. By 1517, when he took full possession of
the rebuilt Schlossstrasse property, Cranach had the means to create not only great art,
but great art in bulk.

125
By now Cranach had most certainly met Martin Luther, the second seminal event for
the artist during these years. Luther settled in Wittenberg in 1511 and by 1514 he was
combining his responsibilities in the university with preaching in the town’s only
parish church. As a member of the congregation, Cranach would first have come into
contact with Luther here: the two became firm friends. In 1517 Luther would stand as
godfather to Cranach’s last child, and Cranach would return the favour when Luther
began a family. In fact Cranach and his wife were two of the very small number of
witnesses at Luther’s controversial marriage in 1525. From the beginning Cranach was
a firm and important supporter of the Reformation. This was a relationship of mutual
respect, mutual affection and mutual benefit. Cranach provided the Reformation with
some of its most memorable images; in return, Luther took a strong line against the
radical rejection of pictorial art promoted by some of his Wittenberg colleagues.

Cranach was a crucial ally, and not merely because of his artistic talents. By this point
he was one of Wittenberg’s leading citizens, firmly established among the city’s ruling
elite. He would play a crucial role in this regard when Luther was absent from
Wittenberg in 1521, and over-enthusiastic supporters, led by Andreas Karlstadt, pressed
for radical changes to the order of worship that Luther would not have approved.
Cranach, civic leader and artistic entrepreneur, was one of the rocks on which the
Wittenberg Reformation was built. He also had the managerial skills and resources to
conceive a solution to the problem that might otherwise have stopped the Reformation
in its tracks: how to build a mass movement from a small place with extremely limited
infrastructure. Until 1517 Wittenberg had only one commercial printing shop, run by
the patient Johann Rhau-Grunenberg who had undertaken the routine printing of a
small provincial university, but who was utterly unprepared for the gear change
required by the firestorm set off by Luther’s 95 Theses criticising indulgences.

By 1518, when Luther’s works began to be reprinted in large numbers in other parts of
Germany, it was already clear that Rhau-Grunenberg’s work was far inferior to that of
printers undertaking their own editions of Luther elsewhere. He was also dreadfully
slow. Aware that the situation could not be allowed to continue, Luther intervened. An
experienced printer from Leipzig, Melchior Lotter, was persuaded to open a branch

126
office in Wittenberg, to be managed by his son, Melchior Junior. And Cranach was
closely involved in this whole scheme; he gave the new workshop space in his great
factory at the Schlossstrasse. The look of Wittenberg’s Luther imprints improved
immeasurably, but this was still essentially the look of Leipzig: there was nothing
particular to Wittenberg in the appearance of Lotter’s books. This required a more
decisive intervention on Cranach’s part.

Cranach was in these years intimately involved in the printing industry. As ever, he
had prepared the ground carefully. To secure access to the necessary raw materials he
purchased a paper mill; to facilitate marketing he entered into a partnership with
Christian Döring, who ran a trucking business. Having achieved this precocious feat,
Cranach and Döring even published a few books on their own initiative, but this was
soon allowed to lapse. Cranach did not need to publish his own books to dominate the
market: because of his monopoly of woodcut illustrations, Cranach soon made himself
indispensable to anyone active in the growing Wittenberg publishing industry, both to
Rhau-Grunenberg and Lotter, and the new generation of printers who arrived in the
mid 1520s. And by doing so he transformed the look of the Reformation book and the
fortunes of the Wittenberg printing industry.

127
Title-page from That Jesus was Born a Jew 1523, text by Martin Luther and illustrations by Lucas Cranach the
Elder. Luther Memorials Foundation of Saxony-Anhalt

128
Up until this point Wittenberg imprints had mostly been associated with the
spare utilitarian texts of Rhau-Grunenberg. Printers outside Wittenberg had
improved the look somewhat, using decorative borders to frame the title.
Cranach offered a radically new solution: a title-page frame, made up not of
separate panels but a single woodcut. Here the illustrative features were blocked
around a blank central panel into which the title could then be inserted. It was a
masterpiece of design innovation, solving a complex problem of integrating text
and decorative material while allowing space for imaginative artistic expression
on the front of the book. It was a major and decisive breakthrough in the history
of the book, and for the Reformation. Cranach’s exquisite work now adorned
pamphlets that might sell for no more than a few pence. Stylistically this was the
part of Cranach’s artistic oeuvre that most self-consciously adhered to the
principles of Renaissance art. A statement was being made: the message of the
Reformation – Luther’s message – deserved to be magnificently arranged. In the
process, and thanks to Cranach’s decisive intervention, the Wittenberg book led
the way in terms of aesthetic appeal.

The distinctive look provided by Cranach’s title-page designs was the final
component of a puzzle that had been taxing Germany’s printers since the early
days of the Reformation: how to capitalise on their most marketable property,
the new phenomenon that was Martin Luther. In the design of the Reformation
title-page we also see printers gradually waking up to the potency of Luther’s
personal reputation as a writer and teacher. Early works often bury Luther’s
name in the midst of a dense block of text; not infrequently his name is split
over two lines (Lu- / theri), if that is what is dictated by the blocking. This
obscured the book’s most obvious selling point, which printers soon recognised.
They learned to move Luther’s name on to a line of its own, separated from the
main body of the title. The name is often in a bold type of larger size, intended
to spring off the page to catch the eye of purchasers surveying a mass of titles
piled up on the bookseller’s stall.

129
Passion of Christ and Antichrist 1521, texts by Philip Melanchton and Johannes Schwertfeger; illustrations by
Lucas Cranach the Elder. Luther Memorials Foundation of Saxony-Anhalt

The last element of brand identity was Wittenberg itself. In most parts of Europe it was
now common practice for the printer’s address to be printed in neat small type at the
bottom of the title page. Not so in Wittenberg. Here the printer’s name was mostly
relegated to the end (the colophon) or omitted altogether. Instead the city was given
pride of place, often on a single line at the bottom, separated from other text by several
centimetres of white space.

Of course there were other images: the Passion of Christ and Antichrist (1521), a
pictorial encapsulation of the Protestant reason for rejecting the Pope, created in
partnership with Melanchthon, and the Law and Grace, a powerful representation of
the old and the new law, and developed by Cranach both as a painted panel (1529) and

130
as a book title-page (1528). Cranach’s other signal service to the Reformation was the
fashioning of the portraits of Luther that first made his physical features known beyond
the relatively narrow group of those who had encountered him in person. The initiative
for the first portrait – an engraving – seems to have come from Albrecht Dürer. A
passionate admirer of Luther from his first reading of the preacher’s works, Dürer
regretted the lack of a true likeness of the reformer. He wrote suggesting such a
likeness be created, enclosing copies of his magnificent portrait of Albrecht of
Brandenburg as a model. Cranach studied the portrait of Albrecht carefully before
embarking on his own rendition of Luther. The result was a triumph, simultaneously a
magnificent propaganda piece and a lifelike rendering of the reformer at a seminal
moment of his career (1520). Cranach depicts Luther as a simple monk, lean but not
gaunt, staring impassively outward, resolute and monumental in the face of adversity:
the simple man of God strong against the marshalled forces of the institutional church.

131
Martin Luther as an Augustinian Monk (1520), Lucas Cranach the Elder. Thrivent Financial Collection of
Religious Art, Minneapolis

132
This image was not destined for immediate circulation. In the months before Luther’s
appearance at the Diet of Worms in 1521, many at the Elector’s court feared that this
portrait of heroic resolution might strike the wrong note. Asked to respond, Cranach
produced a second image that, while capturing Luther’s inner essence in the same way,
gives the appropriate hint of humility. Luther, now shown within a wall niche, places a
hand across his heart in a traditional sign of friendship and sincerity; in his other hand
is an open book. Once again he wears the monk’s habit. The impact of these images,
and of unauthorised images with less iconographic fidelity, is clearly attested by
contemporary witnesses. But Luther also played his part in establishing his own
celebrity. We know this from a fascinating little vignette in an otherwise routine letter
to Georg Spalatin in early March 1521, while Luther was awaiting his summons to the
Diet of Worms. With this letter he enclosed some copies of Cranach’s early engraved
portrait of himself, which at Cranach’s request he had also autographed.

Luther understood his own importance to the Reformation’s extraordinary success.

Although he mused in his letters and sermons on his role as the humble instrument of
God’s purpose, he was fully aware that his own personality and the drama of his
struggle with the church authorities was what had piqued public interest, and had
furnished the movement with its most powerful shield against those who would destroy
it. This undisguised self-knowledge was a key aspect of Luther’s movement which, in
partnership with Cranach’s artistry and exceptional business competence, played a
major part in its success.

Quotes by Martin Luther

"The Holy Scriptures surpass in efficaciousness all the arts and all the sciences of the
philosophers and jurists; these, though good and necessary to life here below, are vain and of no
effect as to what concerns the life eternal."

Topic: Philosophy | Source: Table Talk

"He who wholly renounces himself, and relies not on mere human reason, will make good
progress in the Scriptures; but the world comprehends them not, from ignorance of that
mortification which is the gift of God’s Word."

Topic: Self-denial | Source: Table Talk

133
"I have grounded my preaching upon the literal word; he that pleases may follow me; he that
will not may stay. I call upon St Peter, St Paul, Moses, and all the Saints, to say whether they
ever fundamentally comprehended one single word of God, without studying it over and over
and over again."

Topic: Preaching | Source: Table Talk

"If I thoroughly appreciated these first words of the Lord’s Prayer, Our Father, which art in
Heaven, and really believed that God, who made heaven and earth, and all creatures, and has all
things in his hand, was my Father, then should I certainly conclude with myself, that I also am a
lord of heaven and earth, that Christ is my brother, Gabriel my servant, Raphael my coachman,
and all the angels my attendants at need, given unto me by my heavenly Father, to keep me in
the path, that unawares I knock not my foot against a stone."

Topic: Lord's Prayer | Source: Table Talk

“I would advise no one to send his child where the Holy Scriptures are not supreme. Every
institution that does not unceasingly pursue the study of Gods word becomes corrupt. Because
of this we can see what kind of people they become in the universities and what they are like
now. Nobody is to blame for this except the pope, the bishops, and the prelates, who are all
charged with training young people. The universities only ought to turn out men who are experts
in the Holy Scriptures, men who can become bishops and priests, and stand in the front line
against heretics, the devil, and all the world. But where do you find that? I greatly fear that the
universities, unless they teach the Holy Scriptures diligently and impress them on the young
students, are wide gates to hell.”

“If I am not allowed to laugh in heaven, I don't want to go there.”

“Anyone who can be proved to be a seditious person is an outlaw before God and the emperor;
and whoever is the first to put him to death does right and well. Therefore let everyone who can,
smite, slay and stab, secretly or openly, remembering that nothing can be more poisonous,
hurtful, or devilish than a rebel.”

“Cannons and fire-arms are cruel and damnable machines; I believe them to have been the
direct suggestion of the Devil. If Adam had seen in a vision the horrible instruments his children
were to invent, he would have died of grief.”

“Forgiveness is God's command.”

“Every man must do two things alone; he must do his own believing and his own dying.”

“The human heart is like a ship on a stormy sea driven about by winds blowing from all four
corners of heaven.”

“Christians are rare people on earth.”

“Our Lord has written the promise of resurrection, not in books alone, but in every leaf in
springtime.”

134
“I cannot and will not recant anything, for to go against conscience is neither right nor safe.
Here I stand, I can do no other, so help me God. Amen.”

“All who call on God in true faith, earnestly from the heart, will certainly be heard, and will
receive what they have asked and desired.”

“Who loves not women, wine and song remains a fool his whole life long.”

“The devil is God's ape!”

“Some plague the people with too long sermons; for the faculty of listening is a tender thing, and
soon becomes weary and satiated.”

“The God of this world is riches, pleasure and pride.”

“The fewer the words, the better the prayer.”

“Faith must trample under foot all reason, sense, and understanding.”

“Mankind has a free will; but it is free to milk cows and to build houses, nothing more.”

“I shall never be a heretic; I may err in dispute, but I do not wish to decide anything finally; on
the other hand, I am not bound by the opinions of men.”

“You should point to the whole man Jesus and say, That is God.”

“Next to theology I give music the highest place of honor.”

“Let the wife make the husband glad to come home, and let him make her sorry to see him
leave.”

“To gather with God's people in united adoration of the Father is as necessary to the Christian
life as prayer.”

“The hair is the richest ornament of women.”

“Superstition, idolatry and hypocrisy have ample wages, but the truth goes begging.”

“I am more afraid of my own heart than the Pope and all his cardinals. I have within me the
great Pope, Self.”

“People must have righteous principles in the first, and then they will not fail to perform
virtuous actions.”

“Be a sinner and sin strongly, but more strongly have faith and rejoice in Christ.”

“If he have faith, the believer cannot be restrained. He betrays himself. He breaks out. He
confesses and teaches this gospel to the people at the risk of life itself.”

“To be a Christian without prayer is no more possible than to be alive without breathing.”

135
“Christians are to be taught that the pope would and should wish to give of his own money, even
though he had to sell the basilica of St. Peter, to many of those from whom certain hawkers of
indulgences cajole money.”

“Everything done in the world is done by hope.”

“I have no pleasure in any man who despises music. It is no invention of ours: it is a gift of God.
I place it next to theology. Satan hates music: he knows how it drives the evil spirit out of us.”

“An angel is a spiritual creature created by God without a body for the service of Christendom
and the church.”

“A good servant is a real godsend, but truly this is a rare bird in the land.”

“Reason is the enemy of faith.”

“My heart, which is so full to overflowing, has often been solaced and refreshed by music when
sick and weary.”

“Even if I knew that tomorrow the world would go to pieces, I would still plant my apple tree.”

“There is no more lovely, friendly, and charming relationship, communion, or company than a
good marriage.”

“Who has skill in the art of music is of good temperament and fitted for all things.”

“Where God builds a church the devil builds a chapel.”

“Here I stand; I can do no other. God help me. Amen!”

“Teaching is of more importance than urging.”

“Christian life consists of faith and charity.”

“The multitude of books is a great evil. There is no limit to this fever for writing.”

“An earthly kingdom cannot exist without inequality of persons. Some must be free, some serfs,
some rulers, some subjects.”

“Peace if possible, but truth at any rate.”

“You should not believe your conscience and your feelings more than the word which the Lord
who receives sinners preaches to you.”

“How soon not now, becomes never.”

“I am afraid that the schools will prove the very gates of hell, unless they diligently labor in
explaining the Holy Scriptures and engraving them in the heart of the youth.”

“In our sad condition our only consolation is the expectancy of another life. Here below all is
incomprehensible.”

136
“When I am angry I can pray well and preach well.”

“The Lord commonly gives riches to foolish people, to whom he gives nothing else.”

“Faith is a living, daring confidence in God's grace, so sure and certain that a man could stake
his life on it a thousand times.”

“Reason is a whore, the greatest enemy that faith has.”

“So our Lord God commonly gave riches to those gross asses to whom he vouchsafed nothing
else.”

“There is no wisdom save in truth. Truth is everlasting, but our ideas about truth are
changeable. Only a little of the first fruits of wisdom, only a few fragments of the boundless
heights, breadths and depths of truth, have I been able to gather.”

“No one need think that the world can be ruled without blood. The civil sword shall and must be
red and bloody.”

“The Devil beget darkness; darkness beget ignorance; ignorance beget error and his brethren;
error beget free-will and presumption; free-will beget works; works beget forgetfulness of God;
forgetfulness beget transgression; transgression beget superstition; superstition beget
satisfaction; satisfaction beget the mass-offering; the mass-offering beget the priest; the priest
beget unbelief; unbelief beget hypocrisy; hypocrisy beget traffic in offerings for gain; traffic in
offerings for gain beget Purgatory; Purgatory beget the annual solemn vigils; the annual vigils
beget church-livings; church-livings beget avarice; avarice beget swelling superfluity; swelling
superfluity beget fulness; fulness beget rage; rage beget license; license beget empire and
domination; domination beget pomp; pomp beget ambition; ambition beget simony; simony
beget the pope and his brethren, about the time of the Babylonish captivity.”

“Justice is a temporary thing that must at last come to an end; but the conscience is eternal and
will never die.”

(https://www.ccel.org/ccel/luther)

Appendix C: An Open Letter on Translating, by Martin Luther, 1530

Translated from "Ein sendbrief D. M. Luthers. Von Dolmetzschen und Fürbit der heiligenn" in Dr. Martin
Luthers Werke, (Weimar: Hermann Boehlaus Nachfolger, 1909), Band 30, Teil II, pp. 632-646.
Revised and annotated by Michael D. Marlowe, June 2003.

137
 The English version of Luther's Sendbrief vom Dolmetschen presented here is a
revision of the translation done by Dr. Gary Mann for project Wittenberg. In
revising Mann's translation I have used the German text of the Weimar edition
of Luther's Works, and also the translation of Charles M. Jacobs (as revised by
Theodore Bachmann) in the American edition of Luther's Works. Beside this I
set the German text in original spelling, as reprinted in the edition of Erwin
Arndt, Martin Luther. Sendbrief vom Dolmetschen und Summarien über die
Psalmen und Ursachen des Dolmetschens. Mit einem Anhang ausgewählter
Selbstzeugnisse und übersetzungsproben (Halle/Saale: Max Niemeyer Verlag,
1968) --M.D.M.

Wenzeslaus Link allen Christgläubigen Wenceslas Link to all believers in Christ:

Gottes gnade und barmherzigkeit /
Der weise Salomon spricht Wer korn
inne helt / dem fluchen die leute /
Aber sege kömpt ober den /so es
verkeufft. Welcher Spruch eigentlich
zuverstehen ist / von allem das zu
gemeinem nutz oder troste der
Christenheit dienen kann / Drumb
schilt auch der Herr im Evangelio
den untreuen knecht einen faulen
schalck /das er sein gelt inn die
erden vergraben und verborgen
hatte. Solchen fluch des Herrn und
der gantzen gemeinen zu vermeiden
/ hab ich diesen Sendbrieff / der mir
duch einen guten freund zu handen
komen / nicht wissen zuverhalten /
Sondern öffentlich inn druck geben /
Denn dieweil der verdolmetschunge
halben / Alts und Newes testaments
/ viel rede sich zutragen / Nemlich
die feinde der wahrheit furgeben /
als were der Text an viel orten
geendert odder auch verfelschet /
dadurch viel einfeltiger Christen /
auch untern gelerten / so der
Ebreisschen und Griechischen
sprache nicht kundig / entsetzunge
oder schew gewinnen / Ist gütlich
zuuerhoffen / das auffs minste zum
teil hiermit den gottlosen ihr lestern
verhindert / und den frommen ihr
scrupel genomen soll werden /
Villeicht auch verursachet / das
etwas mehrers auff solche fragstück
oder materi geschrieben werde /
Bitte derhalben / ein jeder liebhaber
der wahrheit / wölle im solch werck
im besten lassen befohlen sein / und
Gott treulich bitten umb rechten
God's grace and mercy. The wise Solomon
says in Proverbs 11: "The people curse him
who withholds grain, but there is a blessing
on the head of him who sells it." This verse
speaks truly concerning everything that can
serve the common good and well-being of
Christendom. This is why the master in the
gospel reprimands the unfaithful servant
like a lazy rascal for having hidden and
buried his money in the ground. So that
this curse of the Lord and the entire
Church might be avoided, I had to publish
this letter which came into my hands
through a good friend. I could not withhold
it, as there has been much discussion about
the translating of the Old and New
Testaments. It has been charged by the
enemies of truth that the text has been
modified and even falsified in many places,
which has startled and shocked many
simple Christians, even among the
educated who do not know the Hebrew and
Greek languages. It is devoutly to be hoped
that with this publication the slander of
the godless will be stopped and the
scruples of the devout removed, at least in
part. Perhaps it may even give rise to more
writing on such questions and matters such
as these. Therefore I ask all lovers of the
truth to take this work to heart seriously,
and faithfully to pray to God for a right
understanding of the divine Scriptures, to
the improvement and increase of our
common Christendom. Amen.
Nuremberg. September 15, 1530

138
verstand der Göttlichen schrifft / zu
besserung und mehrung gemeiner
Christenheit / Amen.
Nürnberg / am xv. Septemb. Anno M.
D. XXX.
***
Dem Ebarn und fürsichtigen N. meinem
günstigen herrn und freunde.
Gnad und friede inn Christo /
Erbar / Fürsichtiger lieber herr und
freund / Ich hab ewer schrifft
empfangen mit den zwo Questen
odder fragen / darin ihr meines
berichts begert. Erstlich / Warümb
ich zun Römern am dritten Capitel
die wort S. Pauli / Arbitramur
hominem iustificari ex fide absque
operibus legis / also verdeudscht
habe. Wir halte / das der mensch
gerecht werde on des gesetzs werck
/ allein durch den glauben Und zeigt
darneben an / wie die Papisten sich
über die massen unnütz machen /
weil im Text Pauli nicht stehet das
wort / Sola (allein) Und sey solcher
zusatz von mir nicht zu leiden / inn
Gottes worten etc. Zum andern / Ob
auch die verstorbenen Heiligen fur
uns bitten / weil wir lesen / das ia
die Engel fur uns bitten etc. Auff die
erste frage / wo es euch gelüstet /
mügt ihr ewern Papisten von meinet
wegen antworten / also.
Zum ersten / Wenn ich D. Luther /
mich hette mügen des versehen /
das die Papisten / alle auff einen
hauffen / so geschickt weren / das
sie ein Capitel inn der schrifft
kündten recht und wol verdeudschen
/ So wolt ich furwar mich der demut
haben finden lassen / und sie umb
hülff und beystand gebeten / das
Newe Testament zuverdeudschen /
Aber dieweil ich gewust / und noch
fur augen sehe / das ihr keiner recht
weis / wie man dolmetschen odder
deudsch reden sol / hab ich sie und
mich solcher mühe uberhaben. Das
***
To the Honorable and Worthy N., my favorite lord
and friend.
Grace and peace in Christ, honorable,
worthy and dear Lord and friend! I received
your letter with the two questions, or
inquiries, requesting my response. In the
first place, you ask why in translating the
words of Paul in the 3rd chapter of the
Epistle to the Romans, Arbitramur
hominem iustificari ex fide absque
operibus, I rendered them, "We hold that a
man is justified without the works of the
law, by faith alone," and you also tell me
that the papists are causing a great fuss
because Paul's text does not contain the
word sola (alone), and that my addition to
the words of God is not to be tolerated.
Secondly, you ask whether the departed
saints intercede also for us, because we
read that angels intercede for us.
Regarding the first question, you can give
the papists this answer from me, if you
like.
First of all if I, Dr. Luther, had expected
that all the papists together were capable
of translating even one chapter of Scripture
correctly and well into German, I would
have gathered up enough humility to ask
for their aid and assistance in translating
the New Testament into German. However,
because I knew (and still see with my own
eyes) that not one of them knows how to
translate or speak German, I spared them
and myself the trouble. It is evident,
however, that they are learning to speak
and write German from my German
translation, and so they are stealing my
139
merckt man aber wol / das sie aus
meinem dolmetschen un deudsch /
lernen deudsch reden und schreiben
/ und stelen mir also meine sprache
/ davon sie zuvor wenig gewust /
dancken mir aber nicht dafur /
Sondern brauchen sie viel lieber
wider mich / Aber ich günne es ihn
wol / denn es thut mir doch sanfft /
das ich auch meine undanckbare
jünger / dazu meine feinde / reden
gelert habe.
Zum andern / Mügt ihr sagen / das
ich das Newe Testament verdeudscht
habe / auff mein bestes vermögen
und auff mein gewissen / habe damit
niemand gezwungen / das er es lese
/ sondern frey gelassen / Und allein
zu dienst gethan / denen / die es
nicht besser machen können / Ist
niemand verboten ein bessers zu
machen / Wers nicht lesen will / der
lasse es ligen / Ich bitte und feyer
niemand drümb / Es ist mein
Testament un mein dolmetschung /
und sol mein bleiben und sein / Hab
ich drinnen etwa gefelhet (das mir
doch nicht bewußt und freilich
ungern einen buchstaben
mutwilliglich wolt unrecht
verdolmetschen) darüber wil ich die
Papisten nicht zu richter leiden /
Denn sie haben noch zur zeit / zu
lange oren dazu / und ihr ika ika ist
zu schwach mein verdolmetschen zu
urteilen / Ich weis wol / und sie
wissens weniger denn des müllers
thier / was fur kunst / vleis /
vernunfft / verstand zum guten
Dolmetscher gehöret / denn sie
habens nicht versucht.
Es heisst / Wer am wege bawet /
der hat viel meister /also gehet mirs
auch / Die jenigen die noch nie
haben recht reden können /
schweige denn dolmetschen / die
sind allzumal meine meister / und
ich mus ihr aller jünger sein / Und
wenn ich sie hette sollen fragen /
language from me, a language they had
little knowledge of before this. Yet they do
not thank me for this, but instead they use
it against me. However, I readily grant
them this, for it tickles me to know that I
have taught my ungrateful pupils, even my
enemies, how to speak.
Secondly, you might say that I have
conscientiously translated the New
Testament into German to the best of my
ability, and that I have not compelled
anyone to read it. Rather I have left that
open, only doing the work as a service to
those who could not do it better. No one is
forbidden to do it better! If someone does
not wish to read it, he can let it lie, for I
do not ask anyone to read it or praise
anyone who does so. It is my Testament
and my translation, and it shall remain
mine. If I have made some mistakes in it
(although I am not aware of any, and would
most certainly be unwilling to deliberately
mistranslate a single letter) I will not allow
the papists to be my judges. For their ears
are still too long and their hee-haws too
weak for them to criticize my translating. I
know quite well how much skill, hard work,
sense and brains are needed for a good
translation. They know it even less than
the miller's donkey, for they have never
tried it.
It is said, "He who builds along the road
has many masters." That is how it is with
me also. Those who have never been able
to speak properly (to say nothing of
translating) have all at once become my
masters and I must be their pupil. If I were
to have asked them how to turn into
German the first two words of
140
wie man die ersten zwey wort
Matthei. j. Liber generationis /
sollte verdeudschen / so hette ihr
keiner gewust gack dazu zu sagen /
und urteilen mir nu das ganze werck
/ die feinen gesellen. Also gieng es
S. Hieronymo auch / da er die Biblia
dolmetschet / da war alle welt sein
meister / Er allein war es / der
nichts kundte / und urteileten dem
guten man sein werck die jenigen /
so ihm nicht gnug gewest weren /
das sie ihm die schuch hetten solle
wisschen / Darümb gehört grosse
gedult dazu / so jemand etwas
öffentlich guts thun will / denn die
welt wil meister Klüglin bleiben /
und mus imer das Ros unter dem
schwantz zeumen / alles meistern un
selbs nichts können / das ist ihr art /
davon sie nicht lassen kan.
Ich wolt noch gern den Papisten
ansehen / der sich erfur thet / und
etwa eine Epistel S. Pauli odeer
einen Propheten verdeudschet / So
fern / das er des Luthers deudsch
und dolmetschen nicht dazu
gebraucht / da solt man sehen / ein
fein / schön / löblich deudsch odder
dolmetschen / Denn wir haben ia
gesehen den Sudler zu Dresen / der
mein New testament gemeistert hat
/ (Ich wil seinen namen inn meinen
büchern nicht mehr nennen / So hat
er auch nu seinen Richter / und ist
sonst wol bekand) der bekennet /
das mein deudsch susse und gut sey
/ und sahe wohl / das ers nicht
besser machen kund / un wolt es
doch zu schanden machen / fur zu /
und nam fur sich mein New
testament / fast von wort zu wort
wie ichs gemacht habe / und thet
meine vorrede / glose un namen
davon / schreib seinen namen /
vorrede und glose dazu / verkauffte
also mein New testament unter
seinem namen / Wanne lieben
kinder / wie geschach mir da so
wehe / da sein Landsfurst mit einer
grewlichen vorrede verdampt und
verbot des Luthers New testament
zu lesen / doch daneben gebot / des
Matthew, Liber Generationis, not one of
them would have been able to say Quack!
And now they judge my whole work! Fine
fellows! It was also like this for St. Jerome
when he translated the Bible. Everybody
was his master. He alone was totally
incompetent, and people who were not
worthy to clean his boots judged the good
man's work. It takes a great deal of
patience to do good things in public. The
world believes itself to be the expert in
everything, while putting the bit under the
horse's tail. Criticizing everything and
accomplishing nothing, that is the world's
nature. It can do nothing else.
I would like to see a papist come
forward and translate even one epistle
of St. Paul's or one of the prophets
without making use of Luther's German
or translation. Then we might see a
fine, beautiful and noteworthy
translation into German. We have seen
that scribbler from Dresden (1) play the
master to my New Testament. I will not
mention his name again in my books, as
he has his Judge now, and is already
well-known. He admits that my German
is sweet and good. He saw that he
could not improve upon it. Yet, eager
to dishonor it, he took my New
Testament nearly word for word as it
was written, and removed my prefaces
and notes, replaced them with his own,
and thus published my New Testament
under his name! Oh Dear Children, how
it pained me when his prince in a
detestable preface condemned Luther's
New Testament and forbade the
reading of it, while commanding the
Scribbler's New Testament to be read,
141
Sudlers New testament zu lesen /
welchs doch eben dasselbige ist /
das der Luther gemacht hat.
Und das nicht jemand hie dencke /
ich liege / So nim beide testament
fur dich / des Luthers und des
Sudlers / halt sie gegen ander / so
wirstu sehen / wer inn allen beiden
der dolmetscher sey / Den was er
inn wenig orten geflickt und
geendert hat (wie wol mirs nicht
alles gefellet) so kan ichs doch wol
leide / un schadet mir sonderlich
nichts / so viel es den Text betrifft /
darümb ich auch nie darwidder habe
wölle schreibe / Sondern habe der
grossen weisheit müssen lachen /
das man mein New testament so
grewlich gelestert / verdampt /
verboten hat / weil es unter meinem
namen ist ausgegangen / Aber doch
müssen lesen / weil es unter eines
andern namen ist ausgegangen.
Wiewol / was das fur eine tugent sey
/ einem andern sein buch lestern
und schenden / darnach dasselbige
stelen und unter eigenem name
dennoch aus lassen gehen / und also
durch frembde verlesterte erbeit /
eigen lob und namen suchen / das
las ich seinen richter finden. Mit ist
inn des gnug / und bin fro / das
meine arbeit (wie S. Paulus auch
rhümet) mus auch durch meine
feinde geföddert / und des Luthers
buch / on Luthers namen / unter
seiner feinde namen / gelesen
werden / Wie künd ich mich bas
rechen?
Und das ich widder zur sachen
kome / Wenn ewer Papist sich viel
unnütze machen wil mit dem wort
(Sola / Allein) so sagt ihm flugs also
/ Doctor Martinus Luther wils also
haben / und spricht / Papist und Esel
sey ein ding / Sic volo / sic iubeo /
sit pro ratione voluntas. Denn wir
wöllen nicht der Papisten schuler
noch iünger / sondern ihre meister
und richter sein / Wöllen auch ein
mal stoltzieren un pochen mit den
even though it was the very same one
Luther had done!
So that no one may think I am lying, put
Luther's and the Scribbler's New Testament
side by side and compare them. You will
see who is the translator in both. He has
patched it and altered it in a few places.
Not all of it pleases me, but I can let it
pass; it does no particular harm as far as
the text is concerned. For this reason I had
decided not to write against it. But I did
have to laugh at the great wisdom that so
terribly slandered, condemned and forbade
my New Testament when it was published
under my name, but required it to be read
when published under the name of
another! What kind of virtue is this, that
slanders and heaps shame on someone
else's work, and then steals it, and
publishes it under one's own name, thereby
seeking praise and a good reputation
through the slandered work of someone
else! I leave that for his judge to say. As
for me, I am well satisfied that my work (as
Paul also boasts) will be furthered by my
enemies, and that Luther's work, without
Luther's name but under that of his enemy,
is to be read. What better revenge could I
have than this?
But I will return to the subject at hand. If
your papist wishes to make a great fuss
about the word sola (alone), say this to
him: "Dr. Martin Luther will have it so, and
he says that a papist and a donkey are the
same thing." Sic volo, sic iubeo, sit pro
ratione voluntas. (2) For we are not going to
be students and disciples of the papists.
Rather, we will become their teachers and
judges. For once, we also are going to be
proud and brag, with these blockheads;
142
Esels köpffen / Und wie Paulus
widder seine tollen heiligen sich
rhümet / so wil ich mich auch wider
diese meine Esel rhümen / Sie sind
Doctores? Ich auch. Sie sind gelert?
Ich auch. Sie sind Prediger? Ich auch.
Sie sind Theologi? Ich auch. Sie sind
Disputatores? Ich auch. Sie sind
Philosophi? Ich auch. Sie sind
Dialectici? Ich auch. Sie sind
Legenten? Ich auch. Sie schreiben
bücher? Ich auch.
Und ich wil weiter rhümen / Ich
kan Psalmen und Propheten auslegen
/ Das können sie nicht. Ich kan
dolmetschen / Das können sie nicht.
Ich kan die heiligen schrifft lesen /
Das können sie nicht. Ich kan biten /
Das können sie nicht. Und das ich
herunter kome / Ich kan ihr eigen
Dialectica und Philosophia bas /
denn sie selbs allesampt. Und weis
dazu fur war / das ihr keiner ihren
Aristotelen verstehet. Und ist einer
unter ihn der ein proemium odder
Capitel im Aristotele recht verstehet
/ so wil ich mich lassen prellen. Ich
rede itzt nicht zuviel / denn ich bin
durch ihre kunst alle erzogen und
erfaren von iugent auff / weis fast
wol wie tieff und weit sie ist. So
wissen sie auch wol / das ichs alles
weis und kann / was sie können /
Noch handeln die heilosen leute
gegen mir / als were ich ein gast inn
ihrer kunst / der allererst heut
morgen komen were / und noch nie
weder gesehen noch gehört hette /
was sie leren odder können / So gar
herrlich prangen sie herein mit ihrer
kunst / und leren mich / was ich vor
zwentzig iaren an den schuhen
zurissen habe / das ich auch mit
jhener Metzen auff all ihr plerren
und schreien singen mus / Ich habs
fur sieben iaren gewist / das
huffnegel eisen sind.
Das sey auff ewer erste frage
geantwortet / und bit euch / wöllet
and just as Paul brags against his mad
raving saints, I will brag against these
donkeys of mine! Are they doctors? So am I.
Are they scholars? So am I. Are they
preachers? So am I. Are they theologians?
So am I. Are they debaters? So am I. Are
they philosophers? So am I. Are they
logicians? So am I. Do they lecture? So do I.
Do they write books? So do I.
I will go even further with my boasting: I
can expound the psalms and the prophets,
and they cannot. I can translate, and they
cannot. I can read the Holy Scriptures, and
they cannot. I can pray, they cannot.
Coming down to their level, I can use their
rhetoric and philosophy better than all of
them put together. Plus I know that not
one of them understands his Aristotle. If
any one of them can correctly understand
one preface or chapter of Aristotle, I will
eat my hat! No, I am not overdoing it, for I
have been schooled in and have practiced
their science from my youth. I recognize
how deep and broad it is. They, too, are
well aware that I can do everything they
can do. Yet they treat me as a stranger in
their discipline, these incurable fellows, as
if I had just arrived this morning and had
never seen or heard what they teach and
know. How they do brilliantly parade
around with their science, teaching me
what I outgrew twenty years ago! To all
their noise and shouting I sing, with the
harlot, "I have known for seven years that
horseshoe nails are iron." (3)
Let this be the answer to your first
question. Please do not give these donkeys
143
solchen Eseln ja nicht anders noch
mehr antworten / auff ihr unnütze
geplerre / vom wort Sola / denn
alsso viel / Luther wils so haben /
und spricht / Er sey ein Doctor uber
alle Doctor jm gantzen Bapstum / da
sols bey bleiben / Ich wil sie hinfürt
schlecht verachten / und veracht
haben / so lange sie solche leute (ich
wolt sagen) Esel sind / Denn es sind
solche unverschempte tropffen unter
ihn / die auch ihr eigen / der
Sophisten kunst nie gelernt haben /
wie Doctor Schmid / und Doctor
Rotzlöffel / und seine gleichen / und
legen sich gleichwoi widder mich /
inn dieser sachen / die nicht allein
uber die Sophisterey / sondern auch
(wie S. Paulus sagt) uber aller welt
weisheit und vernunfft ist. Zwar es
dürfft ein Esel nicht viel singen /
man kennet ihn sonst wol bey den
ohren.
Euch aber und den unsern wil ich
anzeigen / warümb ich das wort
(Sola) hab wöllen brauchen /
Wiewohl Roma. 3. nicht Sola /
sondern solum odder tantum von mir
gebraucht ist / Also fein sehen die
Esel meinen Text an. Aber doch hab
ichs sonst anderswo / sola fide
gebraucht / und wil auch beide
Solum und Sola haben. Ich hab mich
des gevlissen im dolmetschen / das
ich rein und klar deudsch geben
möchte. Und ist uns wol offt
begegenet / das wir viertzehen Tage
/ drey / vier wochen / habe ein
einiges wort gesucht und gefragt /
habens dennoch zu weilen nicht
funden. Im Hiob erbeiten wir also /
M, Philips / Aurogallus und ich / das
wir inn vier tagen zu weilen kaum
drey zeilen kundten fertigen. Lieber
/ nu es verdeudscht und bereit ist /
kans ein jeder lesen und meistern /
Leufft einer itzt mit den Augen
durch drey odder vier bletter / und
stösst nicht ein mal an / wird aber
nicht gewar / welche wacken und
klötze da gelegen sind / da er itzt
uber hin gehet / wie uber ein
gehoffelt bret / da wir haben müst
any other answer to their useless braying
about that word sola than simply this:
"Luther will have it so, and he says that he
is a doctor above all the doctors of the
pope." Let it rest there. I will from now on
hold them in contempt, and have already
held them in contempt, as long as they are
the kind of people (or rather donkeys) that
they are. And there are brazen idiots
among them who have never even learned
their own art of sophistry, like Dr. Schmidt
and Dr. Snot-Nose, (4) and such like them,
who set themselves against me in this
matter, which not only transcends
sophistry, but as Paul writes, all the
wisdom and understanding in the world as
well. Truly a donkey does not have to sing
much, because he is already known by his
ears.
For you and our people, however, I shall
show why I used the [German equivalent of
the] word sola — even though in Romans 3
it was not [the equivalent of] sola I used
but solum or tantum. (5) That is how closely
those donkeys have looked at my text!
Nevertheless I have used sola
fides elsewhere; I want to use
both solum and sola. I have always tried to
translate in a pure and clear German. It
has often happened that for three or four
weeks we have searched and inquired
about a single word, and sometimes we
have not found it even then. In translating
the book of Job, Master Philip,
Aurogallus (6) and I have taken such pains
that we have sometimes scarcely
translated three lines in four days. Now
that it has been translated into German
and completed, all can read and criticize
it. The reader can now run his eyes over
three or four pages without stumbling
once, never knowing what rocks and clods
had once lain where he now travels as over
a smoothly-planed board. We had to sweat
and toil there before we got those boulders
and clods out of the way, so that one could
144
schwitzen und uns engsten / ehe
denn wir solche wacken und klötze
aus dem wege reumeten / auf das
man kündte so fein daher gehen. Es
ist gut pflügen / wenn der acker
gereinigt ist. Aber den wald und die
stöcke ausrotten / und den acker
zurichten / da wil niemand an. Es ist
bey der welt kein danck zu
verdienen / Kan doch Gott selbs mit
der sonnen / ja mit himel und erden
/ noch mit seines eigen sons tod /
keinen danck verdienen / sie sey und
bleibe welt des Teuffels namen /
weil sie ja nicht anders wil.
Also habe ich hie Roma. 3. fast
wol gewust / das im Lateinischen
und Griechischen Text / das wort
(Solum) nicht stehet / und hetten
mich solchs die Papisten nicht
dürffen leren. War ists / Diese vier
buchstaben Sola stehen nicht
drinnen / welche buchstaben die
Eselsköpff ansehen / wie die kue ein
new thor / Sehen aber nicht / das
gleichwol die meinung des Texts inn
sich hat / und wo mans wil klar und
gewaltiglich verdeudschen / so
gehöret es hinein / den ich habe
Deudsch / nicht Lateinisch noch
Griechisch reden wöllen / da ich
deudsch zu reden im dolmetschen
furgenomen hatte. Das ist aber die
art unser Deudschen sprache / wen
sich ein rede begibt / von zweien
dingen / der man eins bekennet /
und das ander verneinet / so braucht
man des worts solum (allein) neben
dem wort (nicht odder kein) Als wen
man sagt / Der Bawr bringt allein
korn und kein gelt / Item / ich hab
warlich itzt nicht gelt / sondern
allein korn / Ich hab allein gessen
und noch nicht getruncken / Hastu
allein geschrieben und nicht
uberlesen? Und der gleichen
unzeliche weise inn teglichem
brauch.
Inn diesen reden allen / obs gleich
die Lateinische oder Griechische
sprache nicht thut / so thuts doch
go along so nicely. The plowing goes well in
a field that has been cleared. But nobody
wants the task of digging out the rocks and
stumps. There is no such thing as earning
the world's thanks. Even God himself
cannot earn thanks, not with the sun, nor
with heaven and earth, nor even the death
of his Son. The world simply is and remains
as it is, in the devil's name, because it will
not be anything else.
I know very well that in Romans 3 the
word solum is not in the Greek or Latin
text — the papists did not have to teach me
that. It is fact that the letters s-o-l-a are
not there. And these blockheads stare at
them like cows at a new gate, while at the
same time they do not recognize that it
conveys the sense of the text -- if the
translation is to be clear and vigorous [klar
und gewaltiglich], it belongs there. I
wanted to speak German, not Latin or
Greek, since it was German I had set about
to speak in the translation. But it is the
nature of our language that in speaking
about two things, one which is affirmed,
the other denied, we use the
word allein[only] along with the
word nicht [not] or kein [no]. For example,
we say "the farmer brings allein grain
and kein money"; or "No, I really
have nicht money, but allein grain"; I
have allein eaten and nicht yet drunk"; "Did
you write it allein and nicht read it over?"
There are countless cases like this in daily
usage.
In all these phrases, this is a German
usage, even though it is not the Latin or
Greek usage. It is the nature of the German
145
die Deudsche / und ist ihr art / das
sie das wort (Allein) hinzu setzt /
auff das / das wort (nicht odder
kein) deste völliger und deutlicher
sey / Den wiewol ich auch sage / Der
Bawer bringt korn und kein gelt / So
laut doch das wort (kein gelt) nicht
so völlig und deutlich / als wenn ich
sage / Der Bawer bringt allein korn
und kein gelt / und hilfft hie das
wort (Allein) dem wort (kein) so viel
/ das es eine völlige Deudsche klare
rede wird / denn man mus nicht die
buchstaben inn der Lateinischen
sprachen fragen / wie man sol
Deudsch reden / wie diese Esel thun
/ Sondern man mus die mutter ihm
hause / die kinder auff der gassen /
den gemeinen man auff dem marckt
drümb fragen / und den selbigen
auff das maul sehen / wie sie reden
/ und darnach dolmetschen / so
verstehen sie es denn / und mercken
/ das man Deudsch mit ihn redet.
Als wenn Christus spricht / Ex
abundantia cordis os loquitur. Wenn
ich den Eseln sol folgen / die werden
mir die buchstaben furlegen / und
also dolmetschen / Aus dem uberflus
des hertzen redet der mund. Sage
mir / Ist das deudsch gered? Welcher
deudscher verstehet solchs? Was ist
uberflus des hertzen fur ein ding?
Das kan kein Deudscher sagen / Er
wolt denn sagen / es sey das einer
allzu ein gros hertz habe / oder zu
viel hertzens habe / wiewol das auch
noch nicht recht ist / Denn uberflus
des hertzen ist kein deudsch / so
wenig / als das deudsch ist /
Uberflus des hauses / uberflus des
kacheloffens / uberflus der banck /
Sondern also redet die mutter im
hause und der gemein man / Wes das
hertz vol ist / des gehet der mund
uber / das heist gut deudsch gered /
des ich mich gevlissen / und leider
nicht allwege erreicht noch
getroffen habe / Denn die
Lateinischen buchstaben hindern aus
der massen seer / gut deudsch zu
reden.
language to add allein in order
that nicht or kein may be clearer and more
complete. To be sure, I can also say, "The
farmer brings grain and kein money," but
the words "kein money" do not sound as full
and clear as if I were to say, "the farmer
brings allein grain and kein money." Here
the word allein helps the word kein so
much that it becomes a completely clear
German expression. We do not have to ask
the literal Latin how we are to speak
German, as these donkeys do. Rather we
must ask the mother in the home, the
children on the street, the common man in
the marketplace. We must be guided by
their language, by the way they speak, and
do our translating accordingly. Then they
will understand it and recognize that we
are speaking German to them.
For instance, Christ says: Ex abundatia
cordis os loquitur. If I am to follow these
donkeys, they will lay the original before
me literally and translate it thus: "Aus dem
uberfluss des hertzen redet der mund" [out
of the excessiveness of the heart the
mouth speaks]. Tell me, is that speaking
German? What German could understand
something like that? What is "the
excessiveness of the heart"? No German can
say that; unless, perhaps, he was trying to
say that someone was altogether too
generous, or too courageous, though even
that would not yet be correct.
"Excessiveness of the heart" is no more
German than "excessiveness of the house,
"excessiveness of the stove" or
"excessiveness of the bench." But the
mother in the home and the common man
say this: "Wes das hertz vol ist, des gehet
der mund über" [What fills the heart
overflows the mouth]. That is speaking
good German of the kind I have tried for,
although unfortunately not always
successfully. The literal Latin is a great
obstacle to speaking good German.
146
 Also / wenn der verrheter Judas
sagt / Matthei. 26. Ut quid perditio
hec?" und Matthei. 14. Ut quid
perditio ista ungenti facta est?" Folge
ich den Eseln und buchstabilisten /
so muß ichs also verdeudsche /
Warümb ist diese verlierung der
salben geschehen? Was ist aber das
fur deudsch? Welcher deudscher
redet also / Verlierung der salben ist
geschehen? Und wenn ers wol
verstehet / so denckt er / die salbe
sey verloren / und müsse sie etwa
widder suchen / Wiewol das auch
noch tunckel und ungewis lautet.
Wenn nu das gut deudsch ist /
warümb tretten sie nicht erfur / und
machen uns ein solch fein / hübsch /
New deudsch Testament / und lassen
des Luthers Testament ligen? Ich
meine ja sie solten ihre kunst an den
tag bringen / Aber der deudsche
man redet also / Ut quid etc. Was
sol doch solcher unrat? odder was sol
solcher schade? Item / Es ist schade
umb die salbe / Das ist gut deudsch
/ daraus man verstehet / das
Magdalene mit der verschütten
salben sey unrethlich umbgangen /
und habe schaden gethan / das war
Judas meinung / denn er gedacht
bessern rat damit zu schaffen.
Item / da der Engel Mariam
grüsset un spricht / Gegrüsset seistu
Maria vol gnaden / der Herr mit dir.
Wolan / so ists bisher schlecht den
Lateinischen buchstaben nach
verdeudschet / Sage mir aber / ob
solchs auch gut deudsch sey? Wo
redet der deudsch man alsso / du
bist vol gnaden? Und welcher
Deudscher verstehet / was gesagt
sey / vol gnaden? Er mus dencken an
ein fas vol bier / odder beutel vol
geldes / Darümb hab ichs
verdeudscht / du holdselige / damit
doch ein Deudscher / deste mehr hin
zu kan dencke / was der Engel
meinet mit seinem grus. Aber hie
wöllen die Papisten toll werden uber
mich / das ich den Engelischen grus
verderbet habe / Wie wol ich
For another example, the traitor Judas
says in Matthew 26: Ut quid perditio
haec?and in Mark 14, Ut quid perditio iste
unguenti facta est? According to these
literalist donkeys I would have to translate
it, "Warumb ist dise verlierung der salben
geschehen?" [Why has this loss of ointment
occurred?] But what kind of German is this?
What German says "loss of the ointment
occurred"? And if he understands it at all,
he would think that the ointment is lost
and must be looked for and found again,
though even that is obscure and uncertain
enough. Now if that is good German why do
they not come out and make us a fine, new
German Testament and let Luther's
Testament alone? I think that would really
bring out their talents. But a German
would say Ut quid, etc., this way: "Was sol
doch solcher unrat?" [What is the reason for
this waste?] or "Why this extravagance?"
Perhaps even, "it is a shame about the
ointment." That is good German, in which
one can understand that Magdalene had
wasted the ointment she poured out and
had been wasteful. That was what Judas
meant, because he thought he could have
used it better.
Again, when the angel greets Mary, he
says: "Gegruesset seistu, Maria vol gnaden,
der Herr mit dir" [Hail Mary, full of grace,
the Lord is with you]. Up till now this has
simply been translated according to the
literal Latin. (7) But tell me, is that good
German? Since when does a German speak
like that, "du bist vol gnaden" [you are full
of grace]? One would have to think about a
keg "full of" beer or a purse "full of" money.
Therefore I translated it: "du holdselige"
[thou pleasing one]. This way a German can
at least think his way through to what the
angel meant by his greeting. Now the
papists are throwing a fit about me
corrupting the Angelic Salutation, yet I still
have not used the most satisfactory
German translation. Suppose I had used the
147
dennoch damit nicht das beste
deudsch habe troffen. Und hette ich
das beste deudsch hie sollen nemen
/ und den grus also verdeudschen /
Gott grüsse dich du liebe Maria
(denn so viel wil der Engel sagen /
und so würde er gered haben / wenn
er hette wöllen sie deudsch grüssen)
Ich halt sie solten sich wol selbs
erhenckt haben fur grosser andacht /
zu der lieben Maria / das ich den
grus so zu nichte gemacht hette.
Aber was frage ich darnach? sie
toben odder rasen / Ich wil nicht
wehren / das sie verdeudschen was
sie wöllen / Ich wil aber auch
verdeudschen / nicht wie sie wöllen
/ sondern wie ich will / Wer es nicht
haben wil / der las mirs stehen / und
halt seine meisterschafft bey sich /
denn ich will ihr widder sehen noch
hören / sie dürffen fur mein
dolmetschen nicht antwort geben /
noch rechenschafft thun / Das
hörestu wol / Ich wil sagen / Du
holdselige Maria / du liebe Maria /
und lasse sie sagen / Du volgnaden
Maria / Wer Deudsch kann / der weis
wol / welch ein hertzlich fein wort
das ist / Die liebe Maria / der liebe
Gott / der liebe Keyser / der liebe
Fürst / der liebe man / das liebe
kind. Und ich weis nicht / ob man
das wort liebe / auch so hertzlich
und gnugsam inn Lateinischer odder
andern sprachen reden müge / das
also dringe und klinge ins hertz /
durch alle sinne wie es thut inn
unser sprache.
Denn ich halte S. Lukas / als ein
meister inn Ebreischer und
Griechischer sprache / hab das
Ebreisch wort / so der Engel
gebraucht / wöllen mit dem
Griechischen / kecharitomeni /
treffen und deutlich geben. Und
denck mir / der Engel Gabriel habe
mit Maria gered / wie er mit Daniel
redet / und nennet ihn Hamudoth
und Isch Hamudoth / vir desideriorü
/ das ist / du lieber Daniel / Denn
best German and translated the salutation:
"Gott grusse dich, du liebe Maria" [God
greet you, dear Mary], for that is all the
angel meant to say, and what he would
have said if he had greeted her in German.
Suppose I had done that! I believe that
they would have hanged themselves out of
their fanatical devotion to the Virgin Mary,
because I had so destroyed the Salutation.
Yet why should I be concerned about
their ranting and raving? I will not stop
them from translating as they want. But I
too shall translate, not as they please but
as I please. And whoever does not like it
can just ignore it and keep his criticism to
himself, for I will neither look at nor listen
to it. They do not have to answer for my
translation or bear any responsibility for it.
Mark this well: I shall say "holdselige
[pleasing] Mary" and "liebe [dear] Mary",
and let them say "Mary volgnaden [full of
grace]". Anyone who knows German also
knows what a hearty word "liebe" is: dear
Mary, dear God, the dear emperor, the
dear prince, the dear man, the dear child. I
do not know if one can say this word "liebe"
in Latin or in other languages with so much
depth of feeling, so that it goes to the
heart and resonates there, through all the
senses, as it does in our language.
I think that St. Luke, as a master of the
Hebrew and Greek tongues, wanted to
clarify and interpret the Hebrew word that
the angel spoke when he used the Greek
word kecharitomene. And I think that the
angel Gabriel spoke with Mary just as he
spoke with Daniel, when he called
him Chamudoth and Ish chamudoth, vir
desiriorum, that is "Dear Daniel." That is
the way Gabriel speaks, as we can see in
Daniel. Now if I were to literally translate
148
das ist Gabrielis weise zu reden /
wie wir im Daniel sehen. Wen ich nu
den buchstaben nach / aus der esel
kunst / solt des Engels wort
verdeudschen / müste ich also sagen
/ Daniel du man der begirungen /
odder Daniel du man der lüste / O
das were schön deudsch / Ein
Deudscher höret wol / das Man /
Lüste / oder begirunge / deudsche
wort sind / wiewol es nicht eitel
reine deudsche wort sind / Sondern
lust und begir / weren wol besser.
Aber wenn sie so zusamen gefasset
werden / du man der begirungen /
so weis kein deudscher was gesagt
ist / denckt / das Daniel villeicht vol
böser lust stecke / Das hiesse denn
fein gedolmetschet. Darümb mus ich
hie die buchstaben faren lassen / un
forschen / wie der Deudsche man
solchs redet / welchs der Ebreische
man Isch Hamudoth redet / So finde
ich / das der Deudsche man also
spricht / du lieber Daniel / du liebe
Maria / odder du holdselige magd /
niedliche jungfraw / du zartes weib
/ und dergleichen / Den wer
dolmetschen will / mus grossen
vorrat von worten haben / das er die
wal könne haben / wo eins an allen
orten nicht lauten wil.
Und was sol ich viel und lang sagen
von dolmetschen? Solt ich aller
meiner wort ursachen und
gedancken anzeigen / ich müste wol
ein jar dran zu schreiben haben /
Was dolmetschen fur kunst / mühe
und erbeit sey / das hab ich wol
erfaren / Darümb wil ich keinen
Bapstesel / noch maulesel / die
nichts versucht haben / hierin zum
richter oder thadeler leiden / Wer
mein dolmetschen nicht will / der
las es anstehen / der Teuffel danck
ihm / wers ungerne hat odder on
mein willen und wissen meistert /
Sols gemeistert werden / so wil ichs
selber thun / Wo ichs selber nicht
thue / da lasse man mir mein
dolmetschen mit frieden / un mache
the words of the angel, and use the skills of
these donkeys, I would have to translate it
as "Daniel, thou man of desires" or "Daniel,
you man of lust"! Oh, that would be fine
German! A German would, of course,
recognize "Man", "Lueste" and "begirunge"
as being German words, although not
altogether pure, because "lust" and "begir"
would be better. But when those words are
put together as "thou man of desires" no
German is going to understand it. He would
perhaps even think that Daniel is full of
evil desires. Now wouldn't that be a fine
translation? So I must let the literal words
go and try to discover how the German says
what the Hebrew says with ish chamudoth.
I find that the German says this, "You dear
Daniel", "you dear Mary", or "you gracious
maiden", "you lovely maiden", "you gentle
girl" and so forth. A translator must have a
large store of words so that he can have
them all ready when one word does not fit
in every context.
Why should I even bother to talk about
translating so much? If I were I to explain
all the reasons and considerations behind
my words, I would need an entire year. I
have learned by experience what an art
and what a task translating is, so I will not
tolerate some papal donkey or mule acting
as my judge or critic. They have not tried
it. If anyone does not like my translations,
he can ignore it; and may the devil repay
him for it if he dislikes or criticizes my
translations without my knowledge or
permission. If it needs to be criticized, I
will do it myself. If I do not do it, then let
them leave my translations in peace. Each
of them can do a translation for himself
that suits him — what do I care?
149
ein iglicher was er will / fur sich
selbs / un habe ihm ein gut jar.
Das kan ich mit gutem gewissen
zeugen / das ich meine höchste
trewe und vleis drinnen erzeigt /
und nie kein falsche gedancken
gehabt habe / Denn ich habe keinen
heller dafur genomen noch gesucht /
noch damit gewonne / So hab ich
meine ehre drinnen nicht gemeinet /
das weis Gott und mein Herr /
Sondern habs zu dienst gethan den
lieben Christen / und zur ehren
einem der droben sitzt / der mir alle
stunde so viel guts thut / das / wenn
ich tausent mal so viel und vleissig
dolmetscht / dennoch nicht eine
stunde verdienet hette zu leben /
odder ein gesund auge zu haben. Es
ist alles seiner gnaden und
barmhertzigkeit / was ich bin und
habe / Ja es ist seines theuren bluts
und sauren schweisses / darümb sols
auch (ob Gott wil) alles ihm zu ehren
dienen / mit freuden und von
hertzen. Lestern mich die Suddeler
un Bapstesel / wolan / so loben mich
die fromen Christen sampt ihrem
Herrn Christo / Un bin allzu reichlich
belohnet / wo mich nür ein einiger
Christ fur einen trewen erbeiter
erkennet / Ich frage nach Bapsteseln
nichts / Sie sind nicht wird / das sie
meine erbeit sollen erkennen / Und
solt mir im grund meins hertzen leid
sein / das sie mich lobeten / Ihr
lestern ist mein höchster rhum und
ehre / Ich wil doch ein Doctor / ja
auch ein ausbündiger Doctor sein /
un sie sollen mir den namen nicht
neme / bis an den Jüngsten tag / das
weis ich fur war.
Doch hab ich widderümb / nicht
allzu frey die buchstaben lassen
faren / Sondern mit grossen sorgen /
sampt meinen gehülffen drauff
gesehen / das / wo etwa an einem
wort gelegen ist / hab ichs nach den
buchstaben behalten / und bin nicht
so frey davon gangen / Als Johan. 6.
da Christus spricht / Diesen hat Gott
This I can testify with good conscience: I
gave my utmost effort and care and I had
no ulterior motives. I have not taken or
wanted even a small coin in return. Neither
have I made any by it. God knows that I
have not even sought honor by it, but I
have done it as a service to the dear
Christians and to the honor of the One who
sits above, who blesses me every hour of
my life. If I had translated a thousand
times more diligently, I should not have
deserved to live or have a sound eye for
even a single hour. All I am and have to
offer is of his mercy and grace, indeed, of
his precious blood and bitter sweat.
Therefore, God willing, all of it will also
serve to his honor, joyfully and sincerely. I
may be insulted by the scribblers and
papists, but true Christians, along with
Christ, their Lord, bless me. And I am more
than amply rewarded if just one Christian
acknowledges me as a workman with
integrity. I care nothing about the papal
donkeys, as they are not good enough to
acknowledge my work and, if they were to
bless me, it would break my heart. Their
insults are my highest praise and honor. I
shall still be a doctor, even a distinguished
one. I am certain that they shall never take
that away from me until the Last Day.
On the other hand I have not just gone
ahead and disregarded altogether the exact
wording in the original. Rather, with my
helpers I have been very careful to see that
where everything depends upon a single
passage, I have kept to the original quite
literally and have not departed lightly from
it. For instance, in John 6 Christ says: "Him
150
der Vater versiegelt / da were wol
besser deudsch gewest / diesen hat
Gott der Vater gezeichent / odder /
diesen meinet Gott der Vater / Aber
ich habe ehe wöllen der deudschen
sprache abbrechen / den von dem
wort weichen / Ach es ist
dolmetschen ja nicht eines iglichen
kunst / wie die tollen heiligen
meinen / Es gehöret dazu ein recht /
frum / trew / vleissig / furchtsam /
Christlich / geleret / erfaren /
geübet herz / Darümb halt ich / das
kein falscher Christ / noch rotten
geist / trewlich dolmetschen könne /
wie das wol scheinet / inn den
Propheten zu Wormbs verdeudschet
/ darin doch warlich grosser vleis
geschehen / und meinem deudschen
fast nach gangen ist / Aber es sind
Jüden dabey gewest / die Christo
nicht grosse hulde erzeigt habe /
sonst were kunst und vleis gnug da.
Das sey vom dolmetschen und art
der sprachen gesagt / Aber nu hab
ich nicht allein der sprachen art
vertrawet und gefolget / das ich zun
Römer am dritten / Solum (allein)
habe hinzu gesetzt / Sondern der
Text und die meinung S. Pauli
foddern und erzwingens mit gewalt /
Denn er handelt ja daselbs das
heubtstück Christlicherl lere /
Nemlich / das wir durch den glauben
an Christum / on alle werck des
gesetzs gerecht werden / und
schneidt alle werck so rein abe / das
er auch spricht / des gesetzes (das
doch Gottes gesetz und wort ist)
werck nicht helffen zur gerechtigkeit
/ Und setzt zum Exempel Abraham /
das der selbige sey so gar on werck
gerecht worden / das auch das
höhest werck / das dazumal new
gepoten ward von Gott / fur und
uber allen andern gesetzen und
wercken / Nemlich / die
beschneittung / ihm nicht geholffen
habe zur gerechtigkeit / Sondern sey
on die beschneittung / und on alle
werck gerecht worden / durch den
glauben / wie er spricht / Cap. 4. Ist
has God the Father versiegelt [sealed]." It
would have been better German to say
"Him has God the
Father gezeichent [signified]" or even "He it
is whom God the Father meinet [means]."
But I preferred to do violence to the
German language rather than to depart
from the word. (8) Ah, translating is not
everyone's skill as some mad saints
imagine. It requires a right, devout,
honest, sincere, God-fearing, Christian,
trained, educated, and experienced heart.
So I hold that no false Christian or
sectarian spirit can be a good translator.
That is obvious in the version of the
Prophets done at Worms. Although it is
carefully done and resembles my own
German quite closely, Jews had a hand in
it, and they do not show much reverence
for Christ. Aside from that it shows plenty
of skill and craftsmanship. (9)
So much for translating and the nature of
language. However, I was not depending
upon or following the nature of the
languages alone when I inserted the
word solumin Romans 3. The text itself,
and Saint Paul's meaning, urgently require
and demand it. For in that passage he is
dealing with the main point of Christian
doctrine, namely, that we are justified by
faith in Christ without any works of the
Law. Paul excludes all works so completely
as to say that the works of the Law, though
it is God's law and word, do not aid us in
justification. Using Abraham as an
example, he argues that Abraham was so
justified without works that even the
highest work, which had been commanded
by God, over and above all others, namely
circumcision, did not aid him in
justification. Rather, Abraham was
justified without circumcision and without
any works, but by faith, as he says in
Chapter 4: "If Abraham were justified by
works, he may boast, but not before God."
So, when all works are so completely
rejected — which must mean faith alone
justifies — whoever would speak plainly
151
Abraham durch die werck gerecht
worden / So mag er sich rhümen /
Aber nicht fur Gott / Wo man aber
alle werck so rein abschneit / da
mus ja die meinung sein / das allein
der glaube gerecht mache / Und wer
deutlich und dürre von solchem
abschneiten der werck reden wil /
der mus sagen / Allein der glaube /
und nicht die werck machen uns
gerecht / das zwinget die sache
selbs / neben der sprachen art.
Ja sprechen sie / es laut ergerlich
/ und die leute lernen daraus
verstehen / das sie keine gute werck
thun dürffen. Lieber / was soll man
sage? Ists nicht viel ergerlicher / das
S. Paulus selbs nicht sagt / Allein der
glaube / Sondern schüttets wol
gröber eraus und stösset dem fas den
boden aus / Un spricht / On des
gesetzs werck? Und zun Galathern
am andern. Nicht durch die werck
des gesetzes / Und das viel mehr an
anderen orten. Denn das wort (allein
der glaube) möcht noch eine glose
finden / Aber das Wort (on werck
des gesetzs) ist so grob / ergerlich /
schendlich / das man mit keiner
glose helffen kann / Wie viel mehr
möchten hieraus die leute lernen
kein gut werck thun / da sie hören
mit so dürren starcken worten von
den wercken selbs predige (Kein
werck / on werck / nicht durch
werck) Ist nu das nicht ergerlich /
das man (on werck / kein werck /
nicht durch werck) predigt / Was
solts denn ergerlich sein / so man dis
(allein der glaube) predigt?
Und das noch ergerlicher ist / S.
Paulus verwirfft nicht schlechte
gemeine werck / Sondern des
gesetzes selbs / Daraus möchte wol
jemand sich noch mehr ergern und
sagen / das gesetz sey verdampt und
verflucht fur Gott / und man solle
eitel böses thun / wie die theten zun
Römern am dritten / Last uns böses
thun / auff das es gut werde / Wie
auch ein rotten geist zu unser zeit
and clearly about this rejection of works
will have to say "Faith alone justifies and
not works." The matter itself and the
nature of language requires it.
"But," they say, "it has an objectionable
tone, and people infer from it that they
need not do any good works." Dear me,
what are we to say? Is it not much more
offensive when Paul himself, while not
using the term "faith alone," spells it out
even more bluntly, putting the finishing
touches on it by saying "Without the works
of the Law?" And in Galatians 1 (as well as
in many other places) he says "not by works
of the law." The expression "faith alone"
may perhaps be glossed over somehow, but
the phrase "without the works of the law" is
so blunt, offensive, and scandalous that no
amount of interpretation can help it. How
much more might people learn from this
that "they need not do any good works,"
when they hear this teaching about the
works themselves stated in such a clear
strong way: "No works", "without works",
"not by works"! If it is not offensive to
preach "without works," "not by works," "no
works," why is it offensive to preach "by
faith alone"?
Still more offensive is that Paul does
not reject just ordinary works, but
works of the law! One could easily take
offense at that all the more and say
that the law is condemned and cursed
before God, and so we should be doing
nothing but what is against the law, as
it is said in Romans 3: "Why not do evil
so that there might be more good?" This
152
anfieng / Solt man umb solcher
ergernis willen S. Paulus worte
verleugnen / odder nicht frisch und
frey vom glauben reden? Lieber /
eben S. Paulus und wir wöllen solch
ergernis haben / und leren umb
keiner ander ursach willen / so
starck widder die werck / und
treiben allein auff den glauben /
denn das die leute sich sollen ergern
/ stossen und fallen / damit sie
mügen lernen und wissen / das sie
durch ihre gute werck nicht frum
werden / Sondern allein durch
Christus tod und aufferstehen.
Können sie nu durch gute werck des
gesetzes nicht frum werden / Wie
viel weniger werde sie frum werden
durch böse werck / und on gesetz?
Darümb folget es nicht / Gute werck
helffen nicht / drümb helffen böse
werck / Gleich als nicht fein folget /
die Sonne kan dem blinden nicht
helffen das er sehe / drümb mus ihm
die nacht und finsternis helffen / das
er sehe.
Mich wundert aber / das man sich
inn dieser öffentlichen sachen so
mag sperren. Sage mir doch / ob
Christus tod und aufferstehen /
unser werck sey / das wir thun /
odder nicht? Es ist ja nicht unser
werck / noch einiges gesetzes werck
/ Nu macht uns ja allein Christus tod
und aufferstehen frey von sünden
und frum / wie Paulus sagt Ro. 4. Er
ist gestorben umb unserer sunde
willen / und aufferstande umb unser
gerechtigkeit willen. Weiter sage mir
/ Welchs ist das werck / damit wir
Christus tod und aufferstehen fassen
und halten? Es mus ja kein eusserlich
werck / sondern allein der einige
glaube im hertzen sein / der selbige
allein / ja gar allein / und on alle
werck / fasset solchen tod und
aufferstehen / wo es gepredigt wird
durchs Evangeliom. Was ists denn nu
/ das man so tobet und wütet /
ketzert und brennet / so die sache
im grunde selbs klerlich da ligt und
beweiset / das allein der glaube /
is what one Rottengeist of our time
began to do. (10) Should we reject Paul's
word because of such "offense" or
refrain from speaking freely about
faith? Dear me, Saint Paul and I want to
offend like this, for we preach so
strongly against works and insist upon
faith alone just so that people will be
offended, stumble and fall, that they
may learn that they are not saved by
good works but only by Christ's death
and resurrection. Knowing that they
cannot be saved by their good works of
the law, how much more will they
realize that they shall not be saved by
bad works, or without the law!
Therefore, it does not follow that
because good works do not help, bad
works will; just as it does not follow
that because the sun cannot help a
blind man to see, the night and
darkness must help him to see.
I am amazed that anyone can object
to something as evident as this. Just
tell me: Is Christ's death and
resurrection our work, that we do, or
not? Of course it is not our work, nor is
it the work of any law. Now it is Christ's
death and resurrection alone which
saves and frees us from sin, as Paul
writes in Romans 4: "He died for our
sins and rose for our justification." Tell
me, further: What is the work by which
we take hold of Christ's death and
resurrection? It cannot be any external
work, but only the eternal faith that is
in the heart. Faith alone, indeed all
alone, wihtout any works, takes hold of
this death and resurrection when it is
preached through the gospel. Then why
all this ranting and raving, this making
of heretics and burning them at the
stake, when it is clear at its very core
that faith alone takes hold of Christ's
153
Christus tod un aufferstehen fasse on
alle werck / Und der selbige tod und
aufferstehen / sey unser leben und
gerechtigkeit / So es denn an ihm
selbs öffentlich also ist / das allein
der glaube / uns solch leben und
gerechtigkeit bringet / fasset und
gibt / Warümb sol man dann nicht
auch also reden? Es ist nicht
ketzerey / das der glaube allein
Christum fasset und das leben gibt /
Aber ketzerey mus es sein / wer
solchs sagt odder redet / Sind sie
nicht toll / töricht und unsinnig? Die
sachen bekennen sie fur recht / und
straffen doch die rede von der
selbigen sache fur unrecht / Einerley
zu gleich / mus beide recht und
unrecht sein.
Auch bin ichs nicht allein / noch
der erste / der da sagt / Allein der
glaube macht gerecht / Es hat fur
mir Ambrosius / Augustinus / und
viel andere gesagt / Und wer S.
Paulum lesen und verstehen sol / der
mus wol so sagen / und kan nicht
anders / Seine wort sind zu starck /
un leiden kein / ja gar kein werck /
Ists kein werck / so mus der glaube
alleine sein. O, wie solt es so gar
eine feine / besserliche /
unergerliche lere sein / wenn die
leute lernten / das sie nebe dem
glauben / auch durch werck from
möchten werden / das wer so viel
gesagt / das nicht allein Christus tod
unser sunde weg neme / sondern
unser werck thete auch etwas dazu /
Das hiesse Christus tod fein geehret
/ das unser werck ihm hülffen / und
kündten das auch thun das er thut /
auff das ihm gleich gut und starck
weren / Es ist der Teuffel / der das
blut Christi nicht kan ungeschendet
lassen.
Weil nu die sache im grund selbs
foddert / das man sage / Allein der
glaub macht gerecht / Und unser
deudschen sprachen art / die solchs
auch lernt also aus zusprechen /
death and resurrection, without any
works, and that his death and
resurrection are our life and
righteousness? As this fact is so obvious,
that faith alone conveys, grasps, and
imparts this life and righteousness —
why should we not say so? It is not
heretical to believe that faith alone
lays hold on Christ and gives life; and
yet it seems to be heresy if someone
mentions it. Are they not insane,
foolish and absurd? They will admit that
it is right but they brand the telling of
it as wrong, though nothing can be
simultaneously right and wrong.
Furthermore, I am not the only one, nor
the first, to say that faith alone makes one
righteous. There was Ambrose, Augustine
and many others who said it before me.
And if a man is going to read and
understand St. Paul, he will have to say the
same thing, and he can say nothing else.
Paul's words are too strong — they allow no
works, none at all! Now if it is not works, it
must be faith alone. Oh what a fine,
constructive and inoffensive teaching that
would be, if men were taught that they can
be saved by works as well as by faith. That
would be like saying that it is not Christ's
death alone that takes away our sin but
that our works have something to do with
it. Now that would be a fine way of
honoring Christ's death, saying that it is
helped by our works, and that whatever it
does our works can also do — which
amounts to saying that we are his equal in
strength and goodness. This is the very
devil's teaching, for he cannot stop abusing
the blood of Christ.
Therefore the matter itself, at its very
core, requires us to say: "Faith alone
justifies." The nature of the German
language also teaches us to say it that way.
In addition, I have the precedent of the
154
Habe dazu der Heiligen Veter
Exempel / und zwinget auch die fahr
der leute / das sie nicht an den
wercken hangen bleiben / den des
glaubens feilen / und Christum
verlieren / sonderlich zu dieser zeit
/ da sie so lang her der werck
gewonet / un mit macht davon zu
reissen sind. Sso ists nicht allein
recht / sondern auch hoch von nöten
/ das man auffs aller deutlichst und
völligst eraus sage / Allein der
glaube on werck macht frum / Und
rewet mich / das ich nicht auch dazu
gesetzt habe / alle und aller / also
on alle werck aller gesetz das es vol
und rund eraus gesprochen were /
darümb sols inn meinem Newen
Testament bleiben / und solten alle
Papstesel toll und töricht werden /
so sollen sie mirs nicht eraus
bringen. Das sey itzt davon gnug /
Weiter wil ich (so Gott gnade gibt)
davon reden im büchlin / De
iustificatione.
Auff die Ander frag / ob die
verstorbenen Heiligen fur uns bitten.
Drauff wil ich itzt kürtzlich
antworten / Denn ich gedencke
einen Sermon von den lieben Engeln
auszulassen / darin ich dis stücke
weiter (wils Gott) handeln werde.
Erstlich wisset ihr / das im
Bapstum nicht allein geleret ist / das
die Heiligen im himel fur uns bitten
/ welchs wir doch nicht wissen
können / weil die schrifft uns solchs
nicht sagt / Sondern auch / das man
die Heiligen zu Götter gemacht hat /
das sie unser Patron haben müssen
sein / die wir anruffen sollen / Etlich
auch / die nie gewest sind / Und
einem jglichen Heiligen /
sonderliche krafft und macht
zugeeigent / Einem uber feur /
diesem uber wasser / diesem uber
Pestilentz / Fieber / und allerley
plage / das Gott selbs gar müssig
sein müssen / und die Heiligen
lassen an seiner stat wircken und
holy fathers. The dangers confronting the
people also compel it, for they cannot
continue to hang onto works and wander
away from faith, losing Christ, especially at
this time when they have been so
accustomed to works they have to be
pulled away from them by force. It is for
these reasons that it is not only right but
also necessary to say it as plainly and
forcefully as possible: "Faith alone saves
without works!" I am only sorry I did not
also add the words alle and aller, and say,
"without any works of any laws." That
would have stated it with the most perfect
clarity. Therefore, it will remain in the
New Testament, and though all the papal
donkeys go stark raving mad they shall not
take it away. Let this be enough for now.
God willing, I shall have more to say about
it in the treatise On Justification.
On the other question, as to whether the
departed saints intercede for us. For the
present I am only going to give a brief
answer, because I am thinking of publishing
a sermon on the angels in which, God
willing, I will respond more fully on the
matter.
First, you know that under the papacy it
is not only taught that the saints in heaven
intercede for us — even though we cannot
know this as the Scripture does not tell us
such — but the saints have even been made
into gods, so that they are to be our
patrons, to whom we must call. Some of
these have never even existed. To each of
these saints a particular power and might
has been ascribed — one over fire, another
over water, another over pestilence, fever
and all sorts of plagues. Indeed, God must
have been altogether idle to have let the
saints work in his place. Of this
abomination the papists themselves are
aware, as they quietly take up their pipes
155
schaffen. Diesen grewel fülen odder
empfinden die Papisten itzt wol /
und ziehen heimlich die pfeiffen ein
/ putzen und schmücken sich nu /
mit dem furbit der Heiligen. Dis wil
ich itzt auff schieben / Aber was
gilts / ob ichs vergessen / und solch
putzen und schmücken also
ungebüsset hingehen lassen werde?
Zum andern wisset ihr / das Gott
mit keine wort geboten hat / weder
Engel noch Heiligen umb furbit
anzuruffen. Habt auch inn der
schrifft des kein Exempel / Denn
man findet das die lieben Engel mit
den Vetern und Propheten geredt
haben / Aber nie keiner ist von ihnen
umb furbit gebetten worden / Auch
der Ertzvater Jacob / seinen
kampffengel nicht umb furbit hat /
sondern nam allein den segen von
ihm / Man findet aber wol das
widderspiel inn der Apocalyp. da der
Engel sich nicht wolt lassen anbete
von Johanne / Und findet sich also /
das Heiligen dienst sey ein lauter
menschen thand / und ein eigen
fündlin / ausser Gottes wort und der
schrifft.
Weil uns aber inn Gottes dienst
nichts gebürt furzunemen / on
Gottes befehl / Und wer es furnimpt
/ das ist ein Gottes versuchunge /
Darümb ists nicht zu raten noch zu
leiden / das man die verstorbenn
Heiligen umb furbit anruffe / odder
anruffen lere / Sondern sols viel
mehr verdammen un meiden leren /
Derhalben ich auch nicht dazu raten
/ un mein gewissen mit frembder
missethat / nicht beschweren will /
Es ist mir selber aus der massen saur
worde / das ich mich von den
Heiligen gerissen habe / Denn ich
uber alle masse tieff darinnen
gesteckt und ersoffen gewest bin /
Aber das liecht des Evangelij / ist nu
so helle am tage / das hinfurt
niemand entschüldigt ist / wo er im
and preen and primp themselves over this
doctrine of the intercession of the saints. I
will leave this subject for now, but you can
be sure that I will not forget it, nor allow
this preening and primping to go on
without a price.
Second, you know that there is not a
single word from God demanding us to call
upon either saints or angels to intercede
for us, and that there is no example of such
in the Scriptures. We find that the angels
spoke with the fathers and the prophets,
but that none of them had ever been asked
to intercede for them. Why even Jacob the
patriarch did not ask the angel with whom
he wrestled for any intercession. Instead,
he only took from him a blessing. In fact,
we find in the Apocalypse the very
opposite, as the angel will not allow
himself to be worshipped by John. [Rev.
22] So the worship of saints shows itself as
nothing but human nonsense, man's own
invention apart from the word of God in
the Scriptures.
Since it is not proper in the matter of
divine worship for us to do anything that is
not commanded by God (whoever does so is
tempting God), it is therefore neither
advisable nor tolerable that one should call
upon the saints to incercede for him, or to
teach others to call upon them. Rather this
is to be condemned and people should be
taught to avoid it. Therefore, I also will not
advise it and burden my conscience with
the iniquities of others. It was very hard for
me to tear myself away from this calling
upon the saints, for I was so steeped in it
to have nearly drowned. But the light of
the gospel is now shining so brightly that
from henceforth no one has an excuse for
remaining in the darkness. We all know
very well what we need to do.
156
finsternis bleibt / Wir wissen fast
alle wol / was wir thun sollen.
Uber das / so ists an ihm selbs ein
ferlicher ergerlicher dienst / das die
leute gewonen gar leicht / sich von
Christo zu wenden / und lernen bald
/ mehrz zuuersicht auff die Heiligen
/ den auff Christo selbs zu setzen /
Denn es ist die natur / on das allzu
sehr geneigt von Gott und Christo zu
fliehen / un auff menschen zu trawe
/ Ja es wird aus der massen schweer
/ das man lerne auff Gott und
Christum trawen / wie wir doch
gelobt haben und schuldig sind /
Darümb ist solch ergernis nicht zu
dulden / damit die schwachen und
fleischlichen leute ein Abgöterey
anrichten / widder das Erste gepot /
und widder unser tauffe. Man treibe
nür getrost die zuuersicht und
vertrawen von den Heiligen zu
Christo / beide mit leren und uben /
es hat dennoch mühe und hindernis
gnug / das man zu ihm kompt und
recht ergreifft / Man darff den
Teuffel nicht uber die thür malen /
er find sich wol selbs.
Zu letzt / sind wir ja gewis / das
Gott nicht drümb zürnet / und sind
wol sicher / ob wir die Heiligen nicht
umb furbit anruffen / weil ers
nirgent gepoten hat / denn er
spricht / das er sey ein eiuerer / der
die missethat heimsucht an denen /
die sein gebot nicht halten / Hie
aber ist kein gebot / darümb auch
kein zorn zu furchten. Weil denn hie
auff dieser seiten sicherheit ist / und
dort grosse fahr und ergernis widder
Gottes wort / Warümb wolten wir
uns den aus der sicherheit begeben
inn die fahr / da wir kein Gottes
wort haben / das uns inn der not /
halten / trösten odder erretten kan?
Denn es stehet geschrieben / Wer
sich gern inn die fahr gibt / der wird
drinnen umbkomen. Auch spricht
Gottes gepot / Du solt Gott deinen
Herrn nicht versuchen.
This is itself a very risky and offensive
way to worship, because people are easily
accustomed to turning away from Christ.
They learn quickly to trust more in the
saints than in Christ himself. Our nature is
already too prone to run from God and
Christ, and trust in men. It is indeed
difficult to learn to trust in God and Christ,
even though we have vowed to do so and
are therefore obligated to do so.
Therefore, this offense is not to be
tolerated, whereby those who are weak
and of the flesh participate in idolatry,
against the first commandment and against
our baptism. Even if you try to accomplish
nothing more than getting men to switch
their trust from the saints to Christ,
through teaching and practice, that will be
difficult enough to accomplish, that men
should come to him and rightly take hold of
him. It does not help to paint the devil on
the door — he will already be present.
Finally, we are sure that God is not angry
with us, and that even if we do not call on
the saints for intercession, we are quite
secure, for God has never commanded it.
He says that he is a jealous God, visiting
their iniquities on those who do not keep
his commandments [Ex.20]; but there is no
commandment here and, therefore, no
anger to be feared. Since, then, there is on
this side security and on the other side
great risk and offense against the Word of
God, why should we go from security into
danger where we do not have the Word of
God to sustain, comfort and save us in the
times of trial? For it is written, "Whoever
loves danger will perish by it" [Ecclus. 3],
and God's commandment says, "You shall
not tempt the Lord your God" [Matt. 4].
157
 Ja sprechen sie / damit
verdampstu die gantzen Christenheit
/ die allenthalben solchs bisher
gehalten hat? Antwort / Ich weis fast
wol / das die Pfaffen und Münch /
solchen deckel ihrer grewel suchen /
und wöllen auff die Christenheit
schieben / was sie verwarloset
haben / Auff das / wenn wir sagen /
die Christenheit irre nicht / so sollen
wir auch sage / das sie auch nicht
irren / und also kein lügen auch
irthum an ihn müge gestrafft werden
/ weil es die Christenheit so helt.
Also ist denn keine walfart (wie
offenbarlich der Teuffel da sey),
kein ablas (wie grob die lügen sey)
unrecht. Kurtzümb eitel heiligkeit ist
da. Darümb solt ihr hierzu so sage /
Wir handeln itzt nicht wer verdampt
odder nicht verdampt sey. Diese
frembde sache mengen sie daher /
das sie uns von unser sache füren /
Wir handeln itzt vom Gottes wort /
Was die Christenheit sey odder thue
/ das gehört auff ein ander ort. Hie
fragt man / was Gottes wort sey
odder nicht? Was Gottes wort nicht
ist / das macht auch keine
Christenheit.
Wir lesen zur zeit Elie des
Propheten / das öffentlich kein
Gottes wort noch Gottes dienst war
im gantzen volck Israel / wie er
spricht / Herr / Sie haben deine
Propheten getödt / Un deine Altar
umb gegraben / Und bin ich gar
allein. Hie wird der könig Ahab und
andere gesagt haben / Elia Mit
solcher rede / verdampstu das
gantze volck Gottes / Aber Gott
hette gleichwol sieben tausent
behalten / Wie? meinstu nicht das
Gott unter dem Bapstum itzt auch
habe können die seinen erhalten /
ob gleich die Pfaffen un Münche inn
der Christenheit eitel Teuffels lerer
gewest / und inn die helle gefaren
sind? Es sind gar viel kinder und
iunges volck gestorben inn Christo /
Denn Christus hat mit gewalt unter
seinem Widder Christ / die Tauffe /
"But," they say, "this way you condemn
all of Christendom, which till now
everywhere practiced this custom." I
answer: I know very well that the priests
and monks seek this cloak for their
abominations. They want to impute to
"Christendom" the damage caused by their
own negligence. So if they get us to say
"Christendom does not err" we shall also be
saying that they do not err, since
Christendom holds it to be so. Thus no
pilgrimage can be wrong, no matter how
obviously the Devil is a participant in it. No
indulgence can be wrong, regardless of how
gross the lies involved. In short, there is
nothing there but holiness! Therefore to
this you should reply, "It is not a question
of who is to blame for this offense." They
inject this irrelevant subject in order to
divert us from the subject at hand. We are
now discussing the Word of God. What
Christendom is or what it does belongs
somewhere else. The question here is:
What is or is not God's word? What is not
the Word of God does not make
Christendom.
We read that in the days of Elijah the
prophet there was apparently no word from
God and no worship of God in all Israel. For
Elijah says, "Lord, they have killed your
prophets and destroyed your altars, and I
am left completely alone" [I Kings 19]. Here
King Ahab and others could have said,
"Elijah, with talk like that you are
condemning all the people of God."
However, God had at the same time
reserved seven thousand [I Kings 19]. How?
Do you not think that God could now also,
under the papacy, have preserved his own,
even though the priests and monks of
Christendom have been mere teachers of
the devil, and gone to hell? Many children
and young people have died in Christ. For
even under Anti-Christ, Christ has
steadfastly preserved baptism, the simple
text of the gospel in the pulpit, the Lord's
158
dazu den blossen Text des Euangelij
auf der Cantzel / un das Vater unser
/ und den Glauben erhalten / damit
er gar viel seiner Christen / und also
sein Christenheit erhalten / und den
Teufels lerern nichts dauon gesagt.
Und ob die Christen gleich haben
etlich stücke der Bepstlichen grewel
gethan / So habe die Bapst Esel
damit noch nicht beweiset das die
liebe Christe solchs gern gethan
haben / viel weniger ist damit
beweiset / das die Christen recht
gethan haben / Christen können wol
jrren / und sundigen allesampt /
Gott aber hat sie allesampt leren
beten / umb vergebung der sunden /
jm Vater unser / Und hat jhre solch
sunde / die sie haben müssen /
ungern / unwissend / und von dem
Widderchrist gezwungen / thun /
wol wissen zu vergeben / und
dennoch Pfaffen und München nichts
dauon sagen. Aber das kan man wol
beweisen / das inn aller welt jmer
ein gros heimlich mummeln und
klagen gewest ist / widder die
geistlichen / als giengen sie mit der
Christenheit nicht recht umb / Und
die Bapstesel haben auch solchem
mummeln mit feuer und schwerd /
trefflich widderstanden / bis auff
diese zeit daher. Solch mummeln
beweiset wol / wie gern die Christen
solche grewel gesehen / und wie
recht man daran gethan habe / Ja
lieben Bapstesel / komet nu her /
und saget / Es sey der Christenheit
lere / was ihr / erstuncken / erlogen
/ Und als die Böswichter und
Verrether / der lieben Christenheit
mit gewalt auffgedrungen / und als
die ertzmörder / viel Christe drüber
ermördet / habt / Zeugen doch alle
buchstaben inn allen Bepsts gesetzen
/ das nichts aus willen und rat der
Christenheit jemals sey gelert /
Sondern eitel / districte precipiendo
mandamus / ist da / das ist ihr
heiliger geist gewest / Solch
tyranney hat die Christenheit müssen
leiden / damit ihr das Sacrament
geraubt / Und on ihr schuld / so jm
Prayer, and the Creed, and by these things
he has preserved many of his Christians,
and therefore also his Christendom, and he
has said nothing about it to these devil's
teachers.
Even though Christians have participated
in some little parts of the papal
abomination, the papal donkeys have not
yet proved that they did it gladly. Still less
does it prove that they did the right thing.
All Christians can err and sin, but God has
taught them all to pray in the Lord's Prayer
for the forgiveness of sins. God can very
well forgive the sins they had to committ
unwillingly, unknowingly, and under the
coercion of the Antichrist, without saying
anything about it to the priests and monks!
It can, however, be easily proven that in
the whole world there has always been a
great deal of secret murmuring and
complaining against the clergy, that they
are not treating Christendom properly. And
the papal donkeys have courageously
withstood such complaining with fire and
sword, even to the present day. This
murmuring proves how happy Christians
have been over these abominations, and
how right they have been in doing them! So
out with it, you papal donkeys! Say that
this is the teaching of Christendom: these
stinking lies which you villains and traitors
have forced upon Christendom and for the
sake of which you murderers have killed
many Christians. Why each letter of every
papal law gives testimony to the fact that
nothing has ever been taught by the
counsel and the consent of Christendom.
There is nothing there but districte
precipiendo mandamus ["we teach and
strictly command"]. That has been their
Holy Spirit. Christendom has had to endure
this tyranny, which has robbed it of the
sacrament and, not by its own fault, it has
been held in captivity. And still the
donkeys would palm off on us this
intolerable tyranny of their own
wickedness as a willing act and example of
159
gefengnis gehalten ist / Und die Esel Christendom — and thereby acquit
wolten solch unleidlich tyranney themselves!
jhres freuels / uns itzt fur ein willige
that und Exempel der Christenheit
verkeuffen / und sich so fein putzen.

Aber es wil itzt zu lang werden. Es
sey das mal gnug auff die frage / Ein
ander mal mehr / Und haltet mir
meine lange schrifft zu gut. Christus
unser Herr / sey mit uns allen /
Amen.
But this is getting too long. Let this be
enough of an answer to your questions for
now. More another time. Excuse this long
letter. Christ our Lord be with us all.
Amen.

Martinus Luther,
ewr guter freund. Martin Luther,
Ex Eremo Octaua Septembris. 1530. Your good friend.
The Wilderness, (11) September 8, 1530

Notes

1. Here Luther refers to the late theologian and lawyer Jerome Emser (1478-1527),
one of his harshest critics. Emser had served as secretary to Duke George of Saxony,
who had forbidden the sale of Luther's New Testament in his territory, and who had
commissioned Emser to produce an authorized German version from the Roman
Catholic side. Emser's version (published in 1527) was substantially Luther's,
"corrected" here and there from the Vulgate, and provided with anti-Lutheran notes.
This is the context necessary to understand the seemingly strong language that Luther
uses in his rebuttal; in addition, we must note that this bellicose style was the norm
for theological discourse of that age.
2. "I will it, I command it, my will is reason enough." A quotation from Juvenal's sixth
satire, which Luther often used to characterize the arbitrary power of the pope.
3. The meaning of this saying and its bearing on the issue at hand is no longer known,
though it seems that Luther must be quoting a proverbial expression from a folk song.
4. With these abusive terms Luther refers to two prominent Catholic enemies. By
"Smith" he means Johann Faber of Leutkirch (whose father was a blacksmith) and by
"Snot-Nose" (Rotzlöffel) he means Johann Cochlaeus ("löffel" is the German equivalent
of the Latin cochlear).
5. Luther's quibble here is that he had used allein adverbially, and not as an
adjective, so his opponents who write in Latin should use the adverbial Latin
equivalents.
6. Philip Melanchthon and Matthew Aurogallus at the University of Wittenberg
collaborated with Luther in the translation of the Old Testament.
7. By "up till now" Luther means in the German versions which preceded his own.
The gratia plena [full of grace] of the Vulgate was cherished by Roman Catholics as
some sort of proof that Mary was extraordinarily endowed with "grace" from
conception, so that she was sinless. By rendering it as a merely polite form of
greeting, Luther had removed this handle of Mariolatry.

160
8. It is evident from the marginal note on John 6:27 in Luther's German Testament
that Luther wants to give an especially literal translation of the Greek
word esphragisen in this one place because versiegelt [sealed] will suggest the
meaning "sealed with the Holy Spirit." His note on John 6:27 reads thus: "Sealed
means endowed with the Holy Spirit, so that whoever eats of this food (as in the
following verses) also receives the Spirit and shall live." But it is unclear just what
doctrine Luther wants to support with this interpretation. At the time he was involved
in complicated debates regarding the nature and efficacy of the Lord's Supper.
9. Here Luther is referring to the translation of the Prophets done from the Hebrew
by the Anabaptists Ludwig Haetzer and Hans Denk, published in 1527. By "the Jews
had a hand in it," he apparently means that Denk and Haetzer received help from
Jewish rabbis who were familiar with the Hebrew. The resemblance of this translation
to Luther's version of the prophets (which began with Isaiah, published in 1528) is in
many places so close that it cannot be accidental. Much of it was obviously copied,
without credit, by Luther in his version.
10. By Rottengeist [rabble-spirit] Luther probably means the revolutionary Thomas
Münzer.
11. "The Wilderness" is Luther's way of referring to the Coburg Castle, where he was
lodged for reasons of safety during much of the year 1530.

(http://www.bible-researcher.com/luther01.html )

161
(http://www.lexikus.de/pics/manager/mode_19-
1/reformationszeit/luther_lutherzimmer_auf_der_wartburg.jpg )

162
APPENDIX D—Links to Selected Works of Martin Luther
(http://www.projectwittenberg.org/pub/resources/text/wittenberg/wittenberg-luther.html)

Table of Contents:

• About Luther
• Bible Commentaries
• Famous Passages of Martin Luther
• Selected Hymns of Martin Luther
• Selected Prayers of Martin Luther
• Selected Sermons from Martin Luther
• Concerning Christian Liberty
• Disputation On the Divinity and Humanity of Christ
• The German Mass and Order of Divine Service
• The Last Written Words of Luther...
• Let Your Sins Be Strong
• An Open Letter to The Christian Nobility
• To Several Nuns
• A Treatise on Good Works
• On Translating
• Prefaces from Luther's German Bible Version
• Ninety-Five Theses
• Luther's Larger Catechism
• Luther's Smaller Catechism
• The Smalcald Articles
• Preface to Luther's Latin Writing
• Miscellaneous References

About Luther:

• A Christian Sermon Over the Body and At the Funeral of the Venerable Dr. Martin
Luther, preached by Mr. Johann Bugenhagen Pomeranus, (1546)
o From the Pitts Theological Library, Emory University
o (Graphics of a German facsimilie at Pitts).

163
 • A History of the Life and Actions of the Very Reverend Dr. Martin Luther, Faithfully
Written by Philip Melancthon. Wittemburg. 1549.[sic.] From Hymns of the
Reformation by Martin Luther, reprint 1845, by J. Unwin (London):
o Unwin 1845 edition: Part 1
o Unwin 1845 edition: Part 2
• Historia de vita et actis Lutheri, [Heidelberg] 1548. Melancthon, Philip. Prepared by Dr.
Steve Sohmer, 1996. In Latin.
o Sohmer Latin edition: Part 1
o Sohmer Latin edition: Part 2
• The History of the Life and Acts of Luther. 1548. Melanthon, Philip. Prepared by Dr.
Steve Sohmer 1996. Translated by T.Frazel 1995.
o Frazel/Sohmer English edition: Part 1
o Frazel/Sohmer English edition: Part 2

Bible Commentaries by Luther

• Galatians - Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians (1535), by Martin Luther.

Translated by Theodore Graebner (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing
House, 1949).

Revised indexed version at Wheaton College, seeded by Project Wittenberg..

Famous Passages From the Writings of Martin Luther:

• Martin Luther's Definition of Faith

• Martin Luther on Quoting Martin Luther
• What is Your God? Devotional Thoughts of Martin Luther
• Martin Luther Discovers the Gospel: The Tower Experience

Selected Hymns of Martin Luther:

(More hymns can be found at the Lutheran Hymnals page.)

• All Praise to Thee, Eternal God

• Christ Jesus Lay in Death's Strong Bands
• Dear Christians, One and All, Rejoice
• Dear Christians, One and All, Rejoice (German)

164
 • Flung to the Heedless Winds
• From Depths of Woe I Cry to Thee
• From Depths of Woe I Cry to Thee (German)
• From Heaven Above (German)
• From Heaven Above (English)
• If God Had Not Been on Our Side
• If God Had Not Been on Our Side (German)
• In Peace and Joy I Now Depart
• In the Midst of Earthly Life (German)
• Isaiah, Mighty Seer, in Days of Old
• Lord, Keep Us Steadfast in Your Word
• Lord, Keep Us Steadfast in Your Word (German)
• May God Bestow on Us His Grace
• May God Bestow on Us His Grace (German)
• A Mighty Fortress (In German)
• A Mighty Fortress (In English): American Lutheran Version
• A Mighty Fortress (In English): Frederick H. Hedge version
• O Lord, Look Down from Heaven, Behold
• O Lord, Look Down from Heaven, Behold (German)
• O Lord, We Praise Thee
• O Lord, We Praise Thee (German)
• Our Father, Thou in Heaven Above
• Our Father, Thou in Heaven Above (German)
• Savior of the Nations, Come
• Savior of the Nations, Come (German)
• That Man a Godly Life Might Live (German)
• Thou Who Art Three in Unity
• We All Believe in One True God
• We All Believe in One True God (German)
• We Now Implore God the Holy Ghost
• We Now Implore God the Holy Ghost (German)

Selected Sermons from Martin Luther:

• Sermon on Threefold Righteousness by Martin Luther; from Philippians 2 (1518). From

the texts in: D. Martin Luther's Werke: Kritische Gesammtausgabe, Band 2, (Weimar:

165
 Hermann Boehlau, 1884), pp. 41-47. Dr. Martin Luther's Catechetische Schriften and J.G.
Walch and G. Stoeckhardt eds., Band 10. Dr. Martin Luther's Saemmtliche Schriften. (St.
Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1885), cols. 1254-1263. Translated by The
Reverend Dr. Glen Zweck.
• [Refer to Luther sermons recommended and archived at the Reformation INK web site
from our References Section, below.]

Selected Prayers of Martin Luther:

• Luther's Morning Prayer

• Luther's Evening Prayer
• A Sacristy Prayer, from Dr. Martin Luthers Werke, Weimar: Hermann Boehlaus
Nachfolger, 1909, bd. 43, pp.513, trans. by James Kellerman.

Concerning Christian Liberty (1520):

• Part 1: Letter from Martin Luther to Pope Leo X

• Part 2: Beginning of the Treatise
• Part 3: Conclusion of the Treatise

Disputation On the Divinity and Humanity of Christ (1540):

Disputation On the Divinity and Humanity of Christ, February 27, 1540, conducted by
Dr. Martin Luther, 1483-1546, translated from the Latin text, WA 39/2,.92-121, by
Christopher B. Brown.

The German Mass and Order of Divine Service (1526):

The German Mass and Order of Divine Service, Jan. 1526, by Martin Luther, 1483-
1546. Documents Illustrative of the Continental Reformation, from B.J. Kidd, ed.
(Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1911), pp.193-202. This document was originally made
available in digital form as part of the Hanover College Historic Text Archive.

A Treatise on Good Works... (1520):

A Treatise on Good Works, Together with the Letter of Dedication by Dr. Martin Luther.

166
Let Your Sins Be Strong (1521):
Let Your Sins Be Strong: A Letter from Luther to Melancthon. Letter no. 99, 1 August
1521. From Wortburg (Segment). Translated by Erika bullman Flores. From Dr. Martin
Luther's Saemmtliche Schriften . Dr. Johannes Georg Walch, Ed. (St. Louis: Concordia
Publishing House, N.D.), Vol.15, cols. 2585-2590.

An Open Letter to the Christian Nobillity (1520):

An Open Letter to the Christian Nobility of the German Nation Concerning the Reform of the
Christian Estate, 1520, by Martin Luther. Introduction and Translation by C. M. Jacobs. Works
of Martin Luther With Introductionand Notes, Vol. II. Philadelphia: A.J. Holman Co., 1915)

• Translator's Introduction
• Luther's Cover Letters
• I. The Three Walls of the Romanists
• II. Abuses to Be Discussed in Councils
• Proposals for Reform I
• Proposals for Reform II
• Proposals for Reform III

To Several Nuns (1524):

To Several Nuns, by Martin Luther. From Wittenberg, 6 August 1524. Translated
from Briefe aus dem Jahre 1524 , No. 732-756. (Letters of the Year 1524, Nos. 733 -
756). Weimarer Ausgabe. Translated by Erika Bullman Flores.

On Translating (1530):
Martin Luther's Classic tract On Translating is the foundation of the modern science of
linguistics, of Bible translation and a classic of the German language.

The Prefaces From Martin Luther's German Bible Version:

• Preface to Hosea in German

• Preface to the Book of Romans in English (1522)
• Preface to the Book of Romans in German (1522)

167
 Martin Luther's 95 Theses:
"Disputation of Doctor Martin Luther on the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences" (1517)

Latin version:

• Disputatio pro Declaratione Virtutis Indulgentiarum, by Dr. Martin Luther, 1483-1546.

From D. Martin Luther's Werke: Kritische Gesammtausgabe . I Band (Weimar: Hermann
Boehlau, 1883).
• An html version seeded by Project Wittenberg, from The Classics Page at George Mason
University, Latin Library, Neu-Latin.

English translation:

• Disputation of Doctor Martin Luther on the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences

• Study Guide for the Disposition of Doctor Martin Luther on the Power and Efficacy of
Indulgences more commonly known as The Ninety-five Theses, prepared by Lyman Baker,
Department of English, at Kansas State University

Dutch translation:
95 stellingen van Martin Luther: Debat tot opheldering over de geldigheid der aflaten
van de Eerw. Pater Martinus Luther, Doctor in de Letteren en de H. Godgeleerdheid.
Translated by F. van der Heijden. [Connection from The Netherlands]

Turkish translation:
Martin Luther: "Disputaio pro Declaratione Virtutis Indulgentiarum", translated by Asst.
Prof. Dr. Kaan H. Ökten, Maltepe University, Istanbul, available in Adobe Acrobat,
and Microsoft Wordformats.

Related Correspondence:

• Letter to the Archbishop Albrecht of Mainz. (1517)

• Letter to Pope Leo X, Accompanying the "Resolutions" to the XCV Theses. (1518)
• Letter to John Staupitz, Accompanying the "Resolutions" to the XCX Theses. (1518)
• Dr. Martin Luther to the Christian Reader, ... the older opinion of the Ninety-Five Theses. (1545
ed.)

168
Martin Luther's Large Catechism (1530):
The Large Catechism, by Martin Luther. Translated by F. Bente and W.H.T. Dan. Published
in: Triglot Concordia: The Symbolical Books of the Ev. Lutheran Church. (St. Louis: Concordia
Publishing House, 1921).

Introductory:

o Luther's Introduction to the Large Catechism

o Short Preface of Dr. Martin Luther

Part First:

o The First Commandment

o The Second Commandment
o The Third Commandment
o The Fourth Commandment
o The Fifth through Seventh Commandments
o The Eighth through Tenth Commandments
o Conclusion of the Ten Commandments

Part Second:

o Of the Creed

Part Third:

o Of Prayer
o Commentary on the Petition the Lord's Prayer

Part Fourth:

o Of Baptism
o Of Infant Baptism

Part Fifth:

o Of the Sacrament of the Altar

169
 o Exhortation to Receive the Sacraments Frequently

Martin Luther's Small Catechism (1529):

In English:

o Part 1: The Ten Commandments

o Part 2: The Creed
o Part 3: The Lord's Prayer
o Part 4: Baptism
o Part 5: Confession
o Part 6: Holy Communion
o Appendix 1: Daily Devotions

In French:

o Le Petit Catéchisme de Martin Luther from Église Luthérienne du Canada.

In Japanese

o The Japanese version is translated by courtesy of Hiroshi Yuki.

In Swedish:

o Den Lilla Katekesen from Project Runeberg.

The Smalcald Articles of Martin Luther (1537):

As subtitled by Martin Luther, The Smalcald Articles were "Articles of Christian Doctrine
which were to have been presented on our part to the Council, if any had been
assembled at Mantua or elsewhere, indicating what we could accept or yield, and what
we could not."

The Last Written Words of Luther (1646):

The Last Written Words of Luther: Holy Ponderings of the Reverend Father Doctor
Martin Luther, 16 February 1546, Dr. Martin Luthers Werke, (Weimar: Hermann
Boehlaus Nachfolger, 1909), Band 85 (TR 5), pp. 317-318. Translated by James A.
Kellerman.

170
Preface to Luther's Latin Writings:

• The Preface to Luther's Latin Writings in English

• The Preface to Luther's Latin Writings in Latin

External References:
Luther's Deutsche Messe (1526), and Passional Christi und Antichristi (1521) are
represented in the Digital Image Archive at Pitts Theological Library. They are a portion
of the Richard C. Kessler Reformation Collection at Emory University's Candler School
of Theology. The files may be viewed in postscript and image file formats.

LuiSA: Luther in Sachen-Anhalt GmbH Martin Luther Web Pages in Saxony-Anhalt,

"produced by an official Institution in the country Luther comes from".

Index Verborum-- Martin Luther's German Writings is an one-of-a-kind reference

work provided at Boston College. This on line concordance to works of Luther between
the years 1516-1525, provides the location of a word in the Weimar Ausgabe printing of
the original texts.

Selected Sermons of Martin Luther from Reformation INK, include the following:

• Enemies of the Cross of Christ, by Martin Luther.

• The Twofold Uses of The Law & Gospel, by Martin Luther.
• Christ Our Great High Priest, by Martin Luther.
• On Faith & Coming to Christ, by Martin Luther.
• Christ's Holy Sufferings, by Martin Luther.
• Of The Office of Preaching, by Martin Luther.
• The Wheat & The Tares, by Martin Luther.
• The Parable of the Sower, by Martin Luther.
• The Law & The Gospel, by Martin Luther, et al.

Martin Luther's Sermons. A collection from The Sermons of Martin Luther (Baker Book
House) made available on line by Our Redeemer Lutheran Church, Lexington, Kentucky.
Religious Texts of the Center of Center on Religion and Democracy, University of
Virginia.

171
Additional Luther Translations
In addition to appearing in editions of the New Testament, the Old Testament, and the entire
Bible, Luther’s translations were also included in shorter works with his commentaries or sermons
on specific biblical texts. Examples include texts from the Old and New Testaments, the entire
book of Genesis with illustrations copied from Luther’s 1523 Old Testament, the Magnificat, and
the Canon of the Mass. These editions further disseminated his religious translations and
expanded the potential audience for his exegesis of these texts. Perhaps less well known, Luther
also had begun a translation of Aesop’s fables. The first illustrated edition of these translations
includes Luther’s preface, his rendering of thirteen fables, and an appendix with Luther’s own
fable and accompanying introduction.

Psalm CX (Vulgate Psalm CIX)

Psalm LXVIII (Vulgate Psalm LXVII)

172
The Magnificat (Luke 1:46–55)

Second Epistle of Peter and Epistle of Jude

Book of Jonah

Genesis

(Aesop)

(https://www.smu.edu/Bridwell/SpecialCollectionsandArchives/Exhibitions/Luther/Translations)

173
An interesting Jewish perspective

(http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/luther-rsquo-s-translation-of-the-bible-judaic-treasures )

God in human form is common in Christian Bible illustrations, belief in a God who is both All
God and All Man making such depiction quite natural. No such depiction would be expected in
Hebrew books published under Jewish auspices or for a Jewish readership. Yet on the engraved
title pages of Minhat Shai (Mantua, 1744), an illustration depicting Ezekiel prophesying to the
dry bones shows the face and outstretched arm of God breathing life into those bones. The editor
of this volume is Yedidiah Shlomo Norzi; the publisher is Raphael Hayim Italia. Similarly, in a
superbly illustrated Haggadah published in 1864 in Trieste, edited by Abraham Hayyim
Morpurgo and printed by Johan Cohen, God is shown in the burning bush before which Moses
is kneeling. Such depictions in Jewish sacred books are unexpected, even shocking, considering
how seriously the Second Commandment inhibited Jewish artistic expression, especially of
aspects of the deity. It indicates how widely Jewish publishers employed Christian artists and
how great was the influence of Christian art on Jewish book illustration.

More acceptable from a Jewish perspective though no less appealing to the Christian reader are
the illustrations in the first printings of Martin Luther's translation of the Bible into German, Das
Alte Testament deutsch (Wittenberg, 1524). These portray such biblical scenes as the Fall of
Jericho and Solomon's Temple. The biblical experiences are made all the more immediate by
illustrations which employ contemporary landscape peopled by recognizable figures clad in
familiar garb of the time. Jericho, for example, is drawn as a medieval German town around
which warriors in sixteenth- century military garb are marching, and each of the traditional
shofars is a German horn.

To translate the Old Testament, Luther needed help. He consulted Jewish scholars, and the great
Christian savant Melancthon was particularly helpful. Luther made wide use of the commentaries
of Nicholas de Lyra, a French scholar who drew heavily on the commentary of Rashi, "whom he
transcribes almost word for word." So frequently did Luther draw from de Lyra that a well-known
couplet asserts, "Si Lyra non Lyrasset, Luther non saltasset" (Had Lyra not played, Luther could
not have danced). The Luther translation of the Bible was to Hochdeutsch what Shakespeare was

174
to the English language. Its immediate and lasting popularity was overwhelming; within a decade
of its publication, it was reprinted some eighty times.

175
 Of singular importance to the history of Christianity is Martin Luther's translation of the
Bible into German. This majestic first edition followed by countless others, and inspiring
further translations into virtually all the major languages of humankind, may be viewed as
a monument to the influence of the Bible on the course of civilization. It is opened to the
Book of Joshua, where the artistically accomplished woodcut depicts the march around
Jericho by Joshua's army led by Kohanim (priests) sounding Shofrot (horns) till "the walls
came tumbling down" (Rare Book and Special Collections Division, Library of Congress
Photo).

Sources:Abraham J. Karp, From the Ends of the Earth: Judaic Treasures of the Library of Congress,
(DC: Library of Congress, 1991).

Revisions of Luther’s Bible after 1534

Gutenberg Bible, part one, Old Testament:

Introduction of Hieronymus. (Photo: Wikipedia_Center of the University of Texas at Austin)

The history of the Luther Bible begins with the so-called

"September Testament", named after the time of its
publication, which was issued as the result of Luther's
translation work on the Wartburg in September 1522. In
1534, the whole Bible was published for the first time in
Luther's translation.

176
The history of the Luther Bible and its
revisions
Until the end of his life, Luther continued to improve his
translation. In 1545, one year before his death, the final
authorised edition was published, which remained
authoritative for centuries to come.
Over the course of time, printing errors crept into the text,
different versions evolved, and the language continued to
develop since the 16th century. Therefore, the Luther Bible
was revised for the first time in the 19th century. In 1892,
the first "official" Luther Bible was published. Because it still
stayed very close to Luther's German, a second revision was
soon carried through. It also took into account the general
orthography according to Duden's spelling dictionary, which
had been introduced in the meantime. The result was the
text version of 1912.

The familiar sound of the Bible shall continue

to resonate
But for many, even this version seemed to be in need of
modernisation. As early as in 1921, the decision was taken
to make a new revision, which, due to the Second World
War, required a long time to be completed. The revised New
Testament was not published until 1956. In 1964, the Old
Testament followed, and in 1970, the Apocrypha were
finished. Due to the large time gap, the New Testament was
edited once again afterwards. However, the version that was
published in 1975 was rejected because it was deemed to be
too modern. Therefore, the revision process continued. In
1984, it came to its temporary conclusion with a version
that aimed to stay closer to Luther's original. In the context
of the introduction of the new spelling, some text changes
were made in 1999. Especially the language of the Old

177
Testament was aligned with that of the New Testament,
because it had been revised 20 years earlier.
In 2010, the Council of the Evangelical Church in Germany
decided to once again to "check" the Luther Bible, taking
into account new results of biblical text research and
exegesis. Changes of Luther's text will however only be
made if they are absolutely necessary. The sound of the
Luther Bible, which is familiar to the parishioners, shall not
be altered. It is planned to present the new edition to the
public, if possible, before the Reformation anniversary in
2017.

Luther's language enabled many people to

find access to God in the first place
The power of the Luther Bible remains unbroken until today
and is due to the congenial connection of linguistic and
theological competence that is contained within it.
By translating the Bible into a language which can be
understood by "the mother in the house, the children on the
street" and the "man on the market square" (Open Letter on
Translating), Luther enabled the people to find their own
access to God, without needing the authorities of the church
as intermediaries – merely by studying the Holy Scriptures.
On the one hand, he consciously maintained the unwieldy
nature of the original, which is why people often mention
the "earthiness" of the Luther language. (Accordingly, the
Luther Bible belongs to the genre of philological Bible
translations). On the other hand, Luther's translation
already contains clearly communicative elements: Luther
shaped his translation strongly according to his justification
theology, by using the central keywords of the Reformation,
for example grace, faith, consolation, preaching (as in
"preaching the Gospel") much more often than it would be
178
demanded by the lexical meaning of the original words. It is
exactly this consistent translation strategy that has made
the Luther Bible into an indispensable crystallisation point of
Protestant identity.

The Luther Bible shapes German

Protestantism and literature
Luther's bible translation has been praised as being his
"greatest gift to the Germans", and rightly so. For it has not
only fundamentally influenced German Protestantism and its
piety for centuries, but also the history of German language
and literature. There exists no other German Bible
translation which imprints itself so deeply and easily into the
mind. Many are able to recite from memory entire passages
from Luther's translation, like the 23rd Psalm or the
Christmas story. This is how biblical words, in the shape of
Luther's translations, accompany people and give them
support and hope – during life and even during death.
In Germany, the Luther Bible has shaped the notion of what
a Bible translation is. Thus, one might call it the "original"
amongst German Bible translations. It is recommended by
the Evangelical Church in Germany for church services and
religious studies.
(https://www.luther2017.de/en/reformation/and-society/the-german-
language/pioneering-work-the-bible-according-to-martin-luthers-translation/)

179
(New Testament title page from a Luther Bible printed in 1769: Biblia Heilige Schrifft Alten und Neuen Testaments,
1769 from the private collection of S. Whitehead, Public Domain,
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=3447000)

180