See MantheyConcord Antinomianism: Perhaps
Luther wasn't an antilaw teacher as we have been
taught?

"Luther was so zealous to maintain the doctrine of justification by faith, that he was
prepared even to call in question the authority of some portions of Scripture, which
seemed to him not to be reconcilable with it. To the Epistle of James, especially, his
expressions indicate the strongest repugnance."1 Life of Luther by Barnas Sears, D. D.,
lar er ed. pp. 400, 401.

"On the Old Testament: Of the Pentateuch he says: 'We have no wish either to see or hear Moses.... Job is merely the argument of a fable... Ecclesiastes ought to have been more complete. There is too much incoherent matter in it, Solomon did not, therefore, write this book... 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."

Martin Luther had different views of various books of the Bible. Specifically, he had a fairly low
view of the Books of Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation as he wrote, "Up to this point we
have had the true and certain chief books of the New Testament. The four which follow have from
ancient times had a different reputation. In the first place, the fact that Hebrews is not an epistle
of St. Paul, or of any other apostle" (Luther, M. Prefaces to the Epistle of the Hebrews, 1546).
Regarding Hebrews Martin Luther stated, "It need not surprise one to find here bits of wood, hay,
and straw" (O'Hare, p. 203).

\u201cIn a word St. John\u2019s Gospel and his first epistle, St. Paul\u2019s epistles, especially Romans, Galatians, and
Ephesians, and St. Peter\u2019s first epistle are the books that show you Christ and teach you all that is necessary
and salvatory for you to know, even if you were never to see or hear any other book or doctrine. Therefore
St. James\u2019 epistle is really an epistle of straw, compared to these others, for it has nothing of the nature of
the gospel about it. But more of this in the other prefaces.\u201d[40] LW 35:362. What did Luther mean, \u201cepistle
of straw\u201d? The answer is found in his Preface to Hebrews. Luther says the author of Hebrews wrote his
book on the foundation of faith laid by the apostles. The author used \u201cgold, silver, precious stones, as St.
Paul says in I Corinthians 3[:12]\u201d[LW 35:395]. Luther then says, \u201cTherefore we should not be deterred if
wood, straw, or hay are perhaps mixed with them...\u201d[LW 35:395]. Luther says that James \u201chas nothing of
the nature of the gospel about it.\u201d The gospel would then be gold, silver, and precious stones.

But Luther was not the man to be bound by his own rule; few of his followers have ever interpreted,
commented on, and criticized the Bible with the freedom habitual to him. The books he judged according
as they appealed to his own subjective nature, or according to his spiritual needs. He often exercised his
reason in determining the respective worth of the several books of the Bible, and in a way which has been
confirmed to a surprising degree by subsequent researches. He denied the Mosaic authorship of part of

the Pentateuch; he declared Job to be an allegory; Jonah was so childish that he was almost inclined
to laugh at it; the books of Kings were "a thousand paces ahead of Chronicles and more to be
believed." \u201cEcclesiastes has neither boots nor spurs, but rides in socks, as I did when I was in the
cloister."

I will say nothing of the fact that many assert with much probability that this epistle is not by James the apostle, and that it is not worthy of an apostolic spirit; although, whoever was its author, it has come to be regarded as authoritative.

We should throw the Epistle of James out of this school [Wittenberg], for it doesn\u2019t amount to much. It
contains not a syllable about Christ. Not once does it mention Christ, except at the beginning [Jas. 1:1;
2:1]. I maintain that some Jew wrote it who probably heard about Christian people but never encountered
any. Since he heard that Christians place great weight on faith in Christ, he thought, \u2018Wait a moment! I\u2019ll
oppose them and urge works alone.\u2019 This he did. He wrote not a word about the suffering and resurrection
of Christ, although this is what all the apostles preached about. Besides, there\u2019s no order or method in the
epistle. Now he discusses clothing and then he writes about wrath and is constantly shifting from one to the
other. He presents a comparison: \u2018As the body apart from the spirit is dead, so faith apart from works is
dead\u2019 [Jas. 2:26]. O Mary, mother of God! What a terrible comparison that is! James compares faith with
the body when he should rather have compared faith with the soul! The ancients recognized this, too, and
therefore they didn\u2019t acknowledge this letter as one of the catholic epistles.

That epistle of James gives us much trouble, for the papists embrace it alone and leave out all the rest.
Up to this point I have been accustomed just to deal with and interpret it according to the sense of the rest
of Scriptures. For you will judge that none of it must be set forth contrary to manifest Holy Scripture.
Accordingly, if they will not admit my interpretations, then I shall make rubble also of it. I almost feel like
throwing Jimmy into the stove, as the priest in Kalenberg did.

Though this epistle of St. James was rejected by the ancients, I praise it and consider it a good book, because it sets up no doctrines of men but vigorously promulgates the law of God. However, to state my own opinion about it, though without prejudice to anyone, I do not regard it as the writing of an apostle, and my reasons follow.

In the first place it is flatly against St. Paul and all the rest of Scripture in ascribing justification to
works (2:24). It says that Abraham was justified by his works when he offered his son Isaac (2:20); Though
in Romans 4:22-22 St. Paul teaches to the contrary that Abraham was justified apart from works, by his
faith alone, before he had offered his son, and proves it by Moses in Genesis 15:6. Although it would be
possible to "save" the epistle by a gloss giving a correct explanation of justification here ascribed to works,
it is impossible to deny that it does refer to Moses' words in Genesis 15 (which speaks not of Abraham's
works but of his faith, just as Paul makes plain in Romans 4) to Abraham's works. This fault proves that
this epistle is not the work of any apostle.

In the second place its purpose is to teach Christians, but in all this long teaching it does not once
mention the Passion, the resurrection, or the Spirit of Christ. He names Christ several times; however he
teaches nothing about him, but only speaks of general faith in God. Now it is the office of a true apostle to
preach of the Passion and resurrection and office of Christ, and to lay the foundation for faith in him, as
Christ himself says in John 15[:27], "You shall bear witness to me.? All the genuine sacred books agree in
this, that all of them preach and inculcate [treiben] Christ. And that is the true test by which to judge all
books, when we see whether or not they inculcate Christ. For all the Scriptures show us Christ, Romans
3[:21]; and St. Paul will know nothing but Christ, I Corinthians 2[:2]. Whatever does not teach Christ is
not yet apostolic, even though St. Peter or St. Paul does the teaching. Again, whatever preaches Christ
would be apostolic, even if Judas, Annas, Pilate, and Herod were doing it." (ibid).

But this James does nothing more than drive to the law and its works. Besides, he throws things together
so chaotically that it seems to me he must have been some good, pious man, who took a few sayings from
the disciples of the apostles and thus tossed them off on paper. Or it may perhaps have been written by
someone on the basis of his preaching. He calls the law a "law of liberty" [1:25], though Paul calls it a law
of slavery, of wrath, of death, and of sin.

Moreover he cites the sayings of St. Peter [in 5:20]; Love covers a multitude of sins" [1 Pet. 4:8], and
again [in 4:10], "Humble yourselves under he had of God" [1 Pet. 5:6] also the saying of St. Paul in
Galatians 5[:17], "The Spirit lusteth against envy." And yet, in point of time, St. James was put to death by
Herod [Acts 12:2] in Jerusalem, before St. Peter. So it seems that [this author] came long after St. Peter
and St. Paul.

1522 version: In a word, he wanted to guard against those who relied on faith without works, but was unequal to the task in spirit, thought, and words. He mangles the Scriptures and thereby opposes Paul and all Scripture.

He tries to accomplish by harping on the law what the apostles accomplish by stimulating people to love. Therefore I will not have him in my Bible to be numbered among the true chief books, though I would not thereby prevent anyone from including or extolling him as he pleases, for there are otherwise many good sayings in him. One man is no man in worldly things; how then, should this single man alone avail against Paul and all Scripture.

In a word, he wanted to guard against those who relied on faith without works, but was unequal to the task.
He tries to accomplish by harping on the law [PE version: "insisting on the Law"] what the apostles
accomplish by stimulating people to love. Therefore I cannot include him among the chief books, though I
would not thereby prevent anyone from including or extolling him as he pleases, for there are otherwise
many good sayings in him.