Shoebat: Luther Attacked the book of Jonah in the Hebrew Bible

This is a follow-up to my earlier critique of  Shoebat's Martin Luther- The Bare Truth Unfolded. Their recent hit piece includes some Luther quotes I've never gone into detail on or have never covered, or deserve a fresh look. For instance, they state:


His contempt for Holy Scripture does not end at just the book of James, but also extends to attacking even the book of Esther and Jonah in the Hebrew Bible, which he supposedly based his version of the Bible on for the Old Testament. Here are his words on the matter: “The book of Esther I toss into the Elbe. I am such an enemy to the book of Esther that I wish it did not exist, for it Judaizes too much and has in it a great deal of heathenish foolishness.” (‘The Facts About Luther’, O’Hare, TAN Books, 1987, p202) And also: “The history of Jonah is so monstrous that it is absolutely incredible.” (Ibid.) Are we not surprised therefore that Lutheranism was the first to succumb to the blasphemous and ridiculous theories of Higher and Lower Criticism, and also to find her priests wanting to eliminate both James and Revelation? Let us not forget the earlier example of the Lutheran pastor/priest who stated on a radio program that both the Epistle of James and the Apocalypse/Revelation should be eliminated from our Bible. They are only following their wicked founder! Luther has in fact incurred God’s anathema on himself already. Many of these modern day Lutherans have become twice the sons of hell than Luther. Let us be warned.

This blog entry is going to cover Shoebat's Jonah quote. For responses to Shoebat.com on Luther's view of James and Revelation, see these links: Luther: We should throw the Epistle of James out of this school [Wittenberg] and Luther on Revelation: "I feel an aversion to it, and to me this is sufficient reason for rejecting it."

Documentation
Shoebat.com cites this Luther quote from: "The Facts About Luther’, O’Hare, TAN Books, 1987, p202." I've mentioned this book often throughout the years (it has been a perpetual source of propaganda for Rome's defenders). In an earlier paper, I documented Father O’Hare's analysis of Luther: Luther was crazy, depraved, and corrupt. He was in contact with Satan. He lived indecently and sanctioned adultery. He dishonored marriage and authorized prostitution and polygamy. He was a drunkard blasphemer, and a revolutionary. To learn more about Father O'Hare, see this link. For this present quote, O'Hare states:

But even for the books he chose to retain, he showed little or no respect. Here are some examples of his judgments on them. Of the Pentateuch he says: "We have no wish either to see or hear Moses." "Judith is a good, serious, brave tragedy." "Tobias is an elegant, pleasing, godly comedy." "Ecclesiasticus is a profitable book for an ordinary man." "Of very little worth is the book of Baruch, whoever the worthy Baruch may be." "Esdras I would not translate, because there is nothing in it which you might not find better in Aesop." "Job spoke not as it stands written in his book; but only had such thoughts. It is merely the argument of a fable. It is probable that Solomon wrote and made this book." "The book entitled 'Ecclesiastes' ought to have been more complete. There is too much incoherent matter in it. It has neither boots nor spurs; but rides only in socks as I myself did when an inmate of the cloister. Solomon did not, therefore, write this book, which was made in the days of the Maccabees of Sirach. It is like a Talmud, compiled from many books, perhaps in Egypt at the desire of King Evergetes." "The book of Esther I toss into the Elbe. I am such an enemy to the book of Esther that I wish it did not exist, for it Judaizes too much and has in it a great deal of heathenish naughtiness." "The history of Jonah is so monstrous that it is absolutely incredible." "The first book of the Maccabees might have been taken into the Scriptures, but the second is rightly cast out, though there is some good in it."

O'Hare provides no exact documentation for these quotes. He does say on page 201-202, "In his prefaces to these books [the apocrypha] he gives at length his opinion as to their character and authority," and then a little later, "But even for the books he chose to retain, he showed little or no respect. Here are some examples of his judgments on them." The assumption therefore, is that these comments come from Luther's Prefaces to the books of the Bible. When one looks at the Prefaces though, the quote is not there.  The statement appears to find its genesis in the Table Talk. The Table Talk is a collection of second hand comments written down by Luther's friends and students, published after his death. O'Hare probably didn't mine these quotes out of Luther's writings.  The Jonah quote, for instance, had been circulating in polemical writings since at least 1834.

There are actually two Prefaces to Jonah, one from 1526, and one from 1532. Neither of these documents contains the quote cited by Father O'Hare, so the Table Talk is probably the culprit.  For this Jonah quote, the source used originally may have been the text that now exists in WA TR 3:550- 551 (it was probably an earlier edition of Luther's works used). If so, it would have been from a comment made in January 1538 recorded by Anthony Lauterbach:

English versions are found in various 19th century editions of  the Table Talk. This translation dates from 1818, so the quote was most certainly around in English previous to O'Hare's use. The most popular English translation was probably that put forth by William Hazlitt. More recently, James Limburg did truncated version of it in his Jonah Commentary. Below, I'm going to provide these translations.


Context

1. Joseph Kerby (1818)
Of the Prophet Jonah. The majesty of the Prophet Jonah is worthy to be advanced. He hath but four chapters, and yet he moved therewith the whole kingdom, therefore under weakness he was justly a figure and a sign of the Lord Christ. Indeed it is surprising, that Christ should remember this but only in four words. Moses likewise, with few words describeth the creation, the histories of Abraham, and such great mysteries; but he spendeth much time about describing the tent, the external sacrifices, the kidneys and excrements, for he saw that the world greatly esteemed outward things which they beheld with their carnal eyes; but that which was spiritual they soon forgot. This history of the prophet Jonah is so great, that it is almost incredible; yea, it soundeth more strange than any of the poets' fables; and if it stood not in the Bible, I should take it for a lie; for consider, how for the space of three days he was in the great belly of the whale, whereas in three hours he might have been digested and changed into the nature, flesh and blood of that monster; may not this be said, to live in the midst of death? In comparison of this miracle, that wonderful passage through the Red Sea was nothing. But what appeareth more strange is, that after he was delivered, he then began to be angry, and to expostulate with a gracious God, touching a small matter, not worth a straw. It is a great mystery; I am ashamed of my exposition upon this Prophet, in that I so weakly touch the main point of this wonderful miracle.(source)

2. William Hazlitt (1848)
The majesty of the prophet Jonah is surpassing. He has but four chapters, and yet he moved therewith the whole kingdom, so that in his weakness, he was justly a figure and a sign of the Lord Christ. Indeed, it is surprising, that Christ should recur to this but in four words. Moses likewise, in few words describes the creation, the history of Abraham, and other great mysteries; but he spends much time in describing the tent, the external sacrifices, the kidneys and so on; the reason is, he saw that the world greatly esteemed outward things, which they beheld with their carnal eyes, but. that which was spiritual, they soon forgot. The history of the prophet Jonah is almost incredible, sounding more strange than any poet's fable; if it were not in the Bible, I should take it for a lie; for consider, how for the space of three days he was in the great belly of the whale, whereas in three hours he might have been digested and changed into the nature, flesh and blood of that monster; may not this be said, to live in the midst of death? In comparison of this miracle, the wonderful passage through the Red Sea was nothing.  But what appears more strange is, that after he was delivered, he began to be angry, and to expostulate with the gracious God, touching a small matter not worth a straw. It is a great mystery. I am ashamed of my exposition upon this prophet, in that I so weakly touch the main point of this wonderful miracle. [source]

3. James Limburg (1993)
But this story of the prophet Jonah is so great that it is almost unbelievable, yes it even sounds like a lie, and more full of nonsense than any poet's fable. If it were not in the Bible, I'd consider it a silly lie. Because if one thinks about it, Jonah was three days in the huge belly of the whale, where he could have been digested in three hours and changed into the flesh and blood of the whale. He could have died three hundred times, under the earth, in the sea, inside the whale. Isn't that living in the midst of death? In comparison with this miracle [source]

Conclusion

Back in the 1800's, a defense of this quote was provided by Julius Charles Hare in response to an  article by The Edinburgh Review. The author says of this quote:

On the book of Jonah the Reviewer makes Luther say, "The history of Jonah is so monstrous, that it is absolutely incredible." Verily the misrepresentation in these words is so monstrous as to be almost incredible. True, Luther is represented in the Tabletalk as saying those words; and he goes on thus (p. 2096): "yea, it sounds like a lie, and more extravagant than any fable of the poets; and if it did not stand in the Bible, I should laugh at it as a lie. For if one thinks about him, how he was three days in the great belly of the fish, where in three hours he might have been digested and turned into the substance of the fish: here he might have died a hundred times, under the earth, in the sea, in the fish, etc. Is not this to live in the midst of death? so that beside this miracle that in the Red Sea is nothing. And how oddly it turns out. After he is delivered and saved, he begins to rage and to grumble and to vex himself for the sake of a little thing, namely, a herb. It is a great mystery: I am ashamed of my interpretation of this prophet, that I have treated the main action and purpose of the miracle so weakly." So that the greatness of the miracle, instead of making Luther doubt its truth, as the Reviewer by his shamefully garbled quotation accuses him of doing, is merely magnified by Luther to shew the fullness of his faith in it." [source]

Shoebat.com says that this quote is an example of Luther "attacking" the book of Jonah. Rather though, if one reads the quote in context, Luther concludes with a deep reverence for the book: "I am ashamed of my exposition upon this prophet, in that I so weakly touch the main point of this wonderful miracle." That isn't an attack. The entire snippet is a demonstration of the power of God's word- that the heart of faith will believe what it says, even if it seems against nature and reason.

Luther: He that says the Gospel requires works for salvation is a liar

The following is from the web page Luther, Exposing the Myth, under the heading "Faith and Good Works":

“He that says the Gospel requires works for salvation, I say, flat and plain, is a liar” [Tischreden, P. 137].

Luther Exposing the Myth says their stated purpose is to show that "from Luther’s own words we shall see him for what he really was, that is a rebellious apostate, who abandoned the faith and led many into apostasy from God under the guise of “reformation” in order to follow his perverse inclinations." With this quote, they attempt to show Christ valued works as part of salvation, while Luther, directly opposing Christ, says the gospel opposes works for salvation.

Documentation
Luther Exposing the Myth cites "Tischreden, P. 137." There's a strong possibility this quote was mined out this source. Note the similarities:

"Tischreden" refers to the German edition of Luther's Table Talk. There are multiple versions of this source. I'm going to demonstrate that the quote ultimately came from an English edition. The quote can also be found in Patrick O'Hare's The Facts About Luther. Note how Father O'Hare documents the quote:

"The Gospel," Luther falsely declares, "teaches nothing of the merits of works; he that says the Gospel requires works for salvation, I say, flat and plain, is a liar." (Table Talk, p. 137, Hazlitt.) If men believe in Christ, they are told, and accept Him as their personal Saviour, His justice will be imputed to them and they will go straight to Heaven. It does not matter what evil they have done during their lives; it does not matter whether or not they repent of their sins; it does not matter whether or not, at the moment of death, they have compunction, contrition or attrition, or, are in a state of grace, if they have faith they will be saved [Link].

O'Hare cited the same quote and page number, but refers to "Hazlitt." This refers to William Hazlitt's English translation of The Tischrenden (1848). Page 137 can be found here. The Table Talk is a collection of comments from Luther written down by Luther’s students and friends. Thus, it is not in actuality an official writing of Luther. Probably half of my Roman Catholic Luther studies involve tracking down obscure Luther quotes, and more often than not, these quotes find their way back to the Table Talk. It often appears to fall on deaf ears when I point out to the defenders of Rome that Luther didn't write the Table Talk. Since the statements contained therein are purported to have been made by Luther, they should serve more as corroborating second-hand testimony to something Luther is certain to have written.

Without an exact German source provided, the quote appears to be the following:

This can be found in Dr. Martin Luther's Sämmtliche werke page 300 and in Dr. Martin Luthers Sämmtliche schriften 22:428.  In English, the quote can be found in another form different from Hazlitt's, that put together by Joseph Kerby, The Familiar discourses of Martin Luther (1818), p. 171. Kerby rook multiple Table talk statements from the German text combining them into numerical sections.

Context
Here is the quote from page 137 from Hazlitt:

CCLXXXIII.
The gospel preaches nothing of the merit of works; he that says the gospel requires works for salvation, I say, flat and plain, is a liar.

Nothing that is properly good proceeds out of the works of the law, unless grace be present; for what we are forced to do, goes not from the heart, nor is acceptable. The people under Moses were always in a murmuring state, would fain have stoned him, and were rather his enemies than his friends.

Here is Kerby's translation:

The Gospel is a comfortable messenger, it bringeth good news; namely that the Son of God is made man; that he died for us, arose again from the dead, &c. the gospel preacheth nothing of the merit of works. Therefore he that saith, that the Gospel requireth works necessary to salvation, I say flat and plain, he is a liar.

Nothing that is properly good proceedeth out of the works of the Law (except grace be present); for what we are forced to do, the same goeth not from the heart, neither is it acceptable. The people under Moses were always in a murmuring state and condition, They would need stone him, they were rather his enemies then his friends.

The German text cited above is found in the first paragraph presented by Kerby. Hazlitt's version has an edited first paragraph. The second paragraph in both Hazlitt and Kerby is from the next Table talk statement (see #40 on this page).

Conclusion
As with many of the Table Talk sayings, this one exists independently of a greater context or background. It is though consistent with Luther's basic understanding of faith and works. There is nothing radical about this sola fide statement.

 The second paragraph from the following Table Talk statement do a fair job with explaining Luther's theology (which is probably why Hazlitt and Kerby included it).  It explains that only a grace filled heart can produce what is "properly good." Works are the result of saving faith, done out of thankfulness for God's grace. These works aren't forced, for as Luther states elsewhere,

"We receive Christ not only as a gift by faith, but also as an example of love toward our neighbor, whom we are to serve as Christ serves us. Faith brings and gives Christ to you with all his possessions. Love gives you to your neighbor with all your possessions" (The Complete Sermons of Martin Luther 1:34).

The paragraph also explains what type of people forced works produces: murmurers under a heavy burden, despising God. This is why the Gospel doesn't require works. If works are required, people become enemies of God. This sheds light on the previous Table Talk utterance: why the Gospel does not require works.

Addendum (2016)
This blog entry is a revision of an entry I posted back in 2010. The original can be found here. Because so many sources are now available online, I'm revising older entries by adding additional materials and commentary, and also fixing or deleting dead hyperlinks. Nothing of any significant substance has changed in this entry from that presented in the former.