Was On the Jews and their lies (1543) hyperbole?

BonfireNerd04 said:

---

Was On the Jews and their lies (1543) hyperbole?

---

I was wrong about hyperbole. I understood most of it until the last section and application part of Luther's diatribe.
He was definitely wrong about his solution to the problem.

"First, that their synagogues be burned down, and that all who are able toss in sulphur and pitch; it would be good if someone could also throw in some hellfire. That would demonstrate to God our serious resolve and be evidence to all the world that it was in ignorance that we tolerated such houses, in which the Jews have reviled God, our dear Creator and Father, and his Son most shamefully up till now, but that we have now given them their due reward.

Second, that all their books their prayer books, their Talmudic writings, also the entire Bible, be taken from them, not leaving them one leaf, and that these be preserved for those who may be converted. For they use all of these books to blaspheme the Son of God, that is, God the Father himself, Creator of heaven and earth, as was said above; and they will never use them differently.

Third, that they be forbidden on pain of death to praise God, to give thanks, to pray, and to teach publicly among us and in our country. They may do this in their own country or wherever they can without our being obliged to hear it or know it. The reason for this prohibition is that their praise, thanks, prayer, and doctrine are sheer blasphemy, cursing, and idolatry, because their heart and mouth call God the Father Hebel Vorik as they call his Son, our Lord Jesus, this. For as they name and honor the Son, thus they also name and honor the Father. It does not help them to use many fine words and to make much ado about the name of God. For we read, "You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain" [Exod. 20:7][/Exod.]. Just as little did it avail their ancestors at the time of the kings of Israel that they bore God's name, yet called him Baal.

Fourth, that they be forbidden to utter the name of God within our hearing. For we cannot with a good conscience listen to this or tolerate it, because their blasphemous and accursed mouth and heart call God's Son Hebel Vorik, and thus also call his Father that. He cannot and will not interpret this otherwise, just as we Christians too cannot interpret it otherwise, we who believe that however the Son is named and honored thus also the Father is named and honored. Therefore we must not consider the mouth of the Jews as worthy of uttering the name of God within our hearing. He who hears this name-from a Jew must inform the authorities, or else throw sow dung at him when he sees him and chase him away. And may no one be merciful and kind in this regard, for God's honor and the salvation of us all, including that of the Jews, are at stake!

And if they, or someone else in their behalf, were to suggest that they do not intend any such great evil, or that they are not aware that with such blaspheming and cursing they are blaspheming and cursing God the Father alleging that though they blaspheme Jesus and us Christians, they nonetheless praise and honor God most highly and beautifully we answer as we have done before: that if the Jews do not want to admit this or try to put a better face on it, we Christians at least are bound to admit it. The Jews' ignorance is not to be excused, since God has had this proclaimed for almost fifteen hundred years. They are obliged to know it, and God demands this knowledge of them. For if anyone who hears God's words for fifteen hundred years still constantly remarks, "I do not want to acknowledge this," his ignorance will provide a very poor excuse. He thereby really incurs a sevenfold guilt."

We are not to be the ones who chastise the Jews. God help us be a better light for them to see. Open the blind hearts and deaf ears to your saving grace through our Triune God. Amen.








Also…

"Although John Calvin rejected the angry invective of Martin Luther against the Jews, he nevertheless agreed with him that Christian biblical interpretation was a more reliable guide to the mind of the patriarchs in Genesis than the exegesis of Rabbinic Judaism. The Hebrew Bible was therefore properly understood as Christian Scripture and had always been addressed to the Church as well as to ancient Israel."

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1558/poth.v10i3.391

That is horrible stuff.

And you wonder where Hitler got his ideas.

dermdoc said:

---

That is horrible stuff.

And you wonder where Hitler got his ideas.

---

Yep.

Nothing can replace the bloodline of Israel, we as the church are grafted in. If Israel is discarded by God then we as the church are grafted to nothing. The whole point of the events of the Book of Revelation is to bring Israel back to their first love which is God the Father and Messiah they rejected but finally accept as their conquering king. Im not saying anyone here is espousing replacement theology (i haven't been following the whole thread) as I see it as antithetical to the whole of scripture and God's plan, but even if we are persecuted by the Jews, Muslims, anyone if we can't escape it we must be like the apostles and forgive them. It's a hard gospel to follow.

I not only vehemently disagree with Luther's application of what should be done to the Jews. I also disagree with Luther's assessment that we shouldn't even try by God's grace to witness to Jews.

Please note that Lutheran bodies reject this work of Luther's.