Sola Scriptura: Luther on Biblical

Authority

DAVI D W . LOT
Z
Washburn Professor of Church
History
The Union Theological Seminary in New York

By urging Scripture alone Luther was in fact

urging
Christ alone.

E ARL Y O N T H E MOR NI N G of August 16, 1513, Marti n Luthe r

bega n his lifelong vocation as Doctor of Sacred Scriptur e with a lecture
on th e
Psalms. Thirty-two years later , on Novembe r 17, 1545, old an d feeble an
d prayin g for a blessed end, he gave his last lecture on Genesis. Thre e
month s late r h e died in Eisleben, th e town of his birth .
Such was th e outwar d an d in itself uneventful course of Luther' s
academi c caree r in th e university of Wittenber g over thre e decades. Thre e
or four times weekly, except when prevente d by illness or absent on
travels, Luthe r ap• peare d at the appointe d hou r to deliver exegetical
lectures, devoting primar y attentio n to th e Old Testament . An d in th e
process of faithfully fulfilling his ecclesiastical calling—by n o mean s
intendin g to pu t himself forward as a reformer of churc h an d society, bu t
concerne d solely with th e precariou s state of his soul before God —this
solitary mon k an d professor not only won his way throug h to a resolution of
his spiritual quest for a gracious God bu t also artic• ulate d a religious
message which was revolutionary enoug h to brin g abou t the dividing of
Wester n Christendom .
T h e Luthera n Reformatio n was thus th e work of a professor of biblical
the• ology, affording graphi c evidence tha t th e history of th e Christia n churc
h ma y justly be interprete d as th e history of the church' s ongoin g
 Sola Scriptura : Luther on Biblical Authority
Int erp re ta ti o n

1
Holy Scripture. Certainl y Luther' s own so-called Reformatio n
consciousness, or evangelical breakthroug h , was itself th e produc t of a n
exegetical discovery as h e wrestled with th e meanin g of th e biblical
"righteousness of Go d " (cf. Ps.
2
31:1 ; R om . 1:17). At th e Diet of Worm s in April 1521 Luthe r is reporte d
to
have said, "m y conscience is captive to th e Wor d of Go d , " an d wha t was
3
so dramaticall y tru e at Worm s was consistently tru e throughou t his life. I n
late r years, reflecting upo n th e course of th e Reformatio n h e ever ascribed
4
its suc cess to th e agency of th e Wor d alone.
I n brief, then , th e life, thought , an d work of Marti n Luthe r was inseparabl
y boun d u p with th e Wor d of Go d as found in Holy Scripture . His theology
is preeminentl y a theology of th e Wor d and , as such, implicitly maintain s
th e sufficient authorit y of tha t Wor d for th e church' s faith a n d life.
Luther , however, never offered a comprehensive, systematic formulatio n of
th e concep t of biblical authority , such as ca n b e foun d in th e first book
of Calvin's Institutesan d i n th e length y prolegomen a "Concerni n g t h e Sacre
d Scriptures " {De scriptura sacra) in th e doctrina l textbooks of late r
5
Luther a n an d Reforme d Orthodoxy. Luther' s position ha s to b e
reconstructe d from relevant statement s in his academi c lectures an d
disputation s , his polemica l , catechetical , an d devotional works, an d
particular l y his sermons an d biblical prefaces, in short, from his entir e
literary corpu s (includin g his correspon dence , tabl e talk, an d Bible
translations) .
T h e sheer volum e an d variety of pertinen t materia l rende r synthesis a n d
summati o n imperative ; they ma y also lur e th e unwar y int o hasty
generaliza tio n an d unwarrant e d simplification. Scholarship in this are a
ha s bee n

1 See G e r h a r d Ebelmg , " C h u r c h History is th e History of th e Expositio n of Scripture , " i n

The Word of God and Tradition (Philadelphi a , Fortress Press, 1968), p p 11-
31
2 Cf Bernar d Lohse, ed , Der Durchbruch der reformatorischen Erkenntnis bei Luther
(Darmstad t , Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1968), a n d L W 34, 336-38/W A 54, 185f
("Prefac e to th e Lati n Writings, " 1545) [References ar e given to th e volum e a n d pag e nu mbe r
s in bot h th e W ei ma r editio n ( = WA D Martin Luthers Werke Kritisch e Gesamtausgabe ,
Weima r Bohlau , 1883 ff WA D B = Deutsche Bibel W A T R = Tischreden ) a n d th e Ame
r lea n editio n of Luther' s works ( = L W Luthers Works, St Louis, Concord i a
Publishin g House , a n d Philadelphia , Fortress Press, 1955 ff ) Wh er e a n English tran s is
availabl e in LW , I hav e normall y used it, o n occasion I hav e translat e d directly from W A ]
3 L W 3 2 11 2/ W A 7 838 ("Luth e r a t th e Diet of Wo rm s , " 1521)
4 Cf L W 51 , 77/W A 10 I I I , 18-19 ("Sermo n o n Monda y after Invocavit, " 1522) " I sim
ply taugh t , preached , an d wrot e God' s Word , otherwise I di d nothi n g An d while I slept,
o r dr a n k Wittenber g bee r with m y friends Phili p [Melanchton ] a n d [Nichola s von] Amsdorf,
th e Wo r d so greatl y weakene d th e papac y th a t n o princ e o r empero r ever inflicted such losses
u p o n it I di d nothing , th e W o r d di d everythin g "
5 See J o h n Τ McNeill , e d , Calvin Institutes of the Christian Religion, Vol I (Philad e l
phi a T h e Westminste r Press, 1960), Book On e , Chapte r s VI IX , p p 69 96, Heinri c h Schmid
, The Doctrinal Theology of the Evangelical Lutheran Church (Philade lphi a , Unite d
L ut h e r a n Publicati o n House , 1899, reprint e d Minneapolis , Augsbu r g Publishin g House , 1961),
C h a pt e r IV, p p 38 91 , a n d Heinri c h Hepp e , Reformed Dogmatics, rev a n d ed by Erns t
Bizer (Lo n don , Georg e Allen & Un w m Lt d , 1950), Chapter s I I I I I , p p 12 46
plague d by anachronisti c attempt s to link Luther' s position with latter-
da y biblicistic fundamentalis m or with moder n biblical criticism. Perhap
s n o othe r topic in Luther' s theology has bee n so liable to
misinterpretatio n throug h incautiou s assertion an d tendentiou s argument .
Bearin g such caveats an d cautionar y tales in mind , I propose to
examin e an d explain th e theological rational e underlyin g Luther' s doctrin e
of biblical authority . For present purposes, therefore, I will tak e for grante
d th e indis• putabl e fact that Luthe r insisted upo n Scripture's sole normativ
e authorit y for Christian faith an d life. My intent , rather , is to show why
Luthe r ascribed such authorit y to th e Bible.
1. Clarification of terms: Word , Scripture , and
gospel.
Inquir y into th e theological basis of Luther' s doctrin e of biblical authorit y
is best launche d by makin g some terminological distinctions. Luthe r can
rou• tinely use th e term s Word (of God) , Scripture(s) an d gospel in th e
6
same con• text without clearly distinguishing amon g them. Yet such
usage tends to obscure significant distinctions which, in othe r contexts, Luthe
r himself insists upon . Henc e on e is constraine d to ask: Wh a t does Luthe r
me a n by Word? How is Word relate d to Scripture (Bible), an d how ar e bot
h term s relate d to gospel?
Thes e distinctions meri t close attentio n because they at once inform an
d embod y Luther' s understandin g of biblical authority . The y also accoun t
for his tension-laden, even paradoxical , approac h to Scripture : his total
submis• sion to th e Bible as the "oracles of God " before which hu m a n
reason must "doff its cap, " combine d with a bold critical freedom in
7
assessing individual books an d passages within th e Bible.
I have said tha t Luther' s theology is above all a theology of th e Word .
Actu• ally tha t is to say tha t Christ stands at the center of his theology
because th e Word is first an d foremost Jesus Christ.
Th e Wor d they still shall let remain
, No r any thank s have for it;
He's by ou r side upo n th e plai n
Wit h His good gifts an d Spirit.
Thes e familiar lines from Ein' feste Burg sound th e leitmotif of Luther' s
life

6. Cf. L W 26 , 4 7 / W A 40-1 , 105 ("Galatian s Lectures, " 1535): "W h e n th e light of th e

Gos• pel first bega n to appea r after th e grea t darknes s of h u m a n traditions , man y listened
eagerly to sermons . But now tha t th e teachin g of religion ha s bee n successfully reforme d
by th e grea t growt h of th e Wo r d of God , man y ar e joinin g th e sects, to thei r destruction .
Man y despise no t only Sacre d Scriptur e bu t almost all learning . "
7. See Pau l Althaus , "Autorit ä t u n d Freiheit in Luther s Stellun g zur Heilige n
Schrift," Luther 33 (1962) 41 -4 5 ; an d Gerha r d Gloege, "Freihei t u n d Bindun g im U mg an g
mi t de r hei• ligen Schrift nac h Luth er , " Kerygma und Dogma 22 (1976) 237-49 .

260
 Sola Scriptura : Luther on Biblical Authority
Interpretati o n

an d thought . T h e Word , in this christological or "personal " sense, is bot h

th e eterna l Word , th e second person of th e Trinity , th e cosmic Christ
throug h who m th e heavens an d eart h were mad e , an d th e Wor d m a d e
flesh, th e incar• nat e Christ in who m Go d is savingly disclosed. Christ as the
Wo r d is thu s God's agen t of creatio n as well as God's decisive act of
8
revelation an d redemption.
An d it is this very Wor d to who m all th e Scriptures point . H e is their
9
essential conten t an d heart. Indee d this Wo r d still speaks a n d acts throug h
th e biblical word, employing it as his instrumen t for calling his own.
T o be sure, th e explicit identification of Wo r d of Go d with Jesus Christ
is comparatively rar e in Luther' s works. Luthe r usually equate s "Wo r d of
God " with gospel, with th e spoken Word , th e ora l proclamati o n of
Christ. In his Preface to Romans (1522), for example , h e states tha t faith
10
"comes only throug h God's Wor d or gospel, which preache s Christ . . . ."
An d th e gos• pel, accordin g to Luther' s definition, "is nothin g else tha n th
e preachin g an d proclamatio n of th e grac e an d merc y of Go d which
11
Jesus Christ ha s earne d an d gaine d for us throug h his death."
Luthe r maintain s tha t th e Wor d of Go d as gospel —as proclamati o n
of God's gracious acceptanc e of sinners for Christ's sake —is th e
indispensable foundation , th e conditio sine qua non, of th e church' s
existence an d of Chris• tia n faith an d life. "On e thing , an d only on e thing ,
is necessary for Christia n life, righteousness, an d freedom, " h e asserts in
th e Freedom of a Christian
(1520). "Th a t on e thin g is th e most holy Wor d of God, th e gospel ol
12
Christ."
I n 1521, in reply to a polemica l trac t of Ambrosius Catharinus , Luthe r
u
ad• vance d his fundamenta l ecclesiological axiom : Tota vita et substantia
eccle-
siae est in verbo Dei (th e church' s entir e life an d substance reside in th e
Wor d of God). " H e specifically identifies this Wor d with th e gospel, addin g
in expla• nation :

For the gospel —even more than the bread and baptism —is the unique, most cer
tain, and noblest sign of the church, since it is through the gospel alone that the

8 O n Christ th e W o r d as agen t of creation , cf L W 1, 17 / W A 42 , 14 ("Lecture s

o n Genesis," 1535-45) , o n Christ th e W o r d as revealer, cf L W 12, 3 1 2 / W A 40 II , 329
("Comme n tar y o n Psal m 5 1 , " 1538) I a m indebte d for these references to Jarosla v Pelikan ,
Luther the Ex positor (St Louis, Concord i a Publishin g House , 1959), p p 5 0 - 5 1 , notes 11 12
9 A mo n g countless references, cf L W 35 , 1 32 / W A 10 II , 73 ("For this mu c h is
beyon d question , tha t all Scripture s poin t to Christ alone") , L W 52 , 1 73 / W A 10 I 1, 578
("So we mus t cling to th e pur e Scripture s alon e whic h teac h nothin g bu t Christ") , L W 25 ,
4 0 5 / W A 56 414 ("Th e entir e Scriptur e deals only with Christ everywhere if it is looke d at
inwardly") , L W 23
1 6 / W A 33 , 19 ("All of Holy Wri t point s solely to Hi m , attestin g tha t H e alon e possesses seal
a n d letter") , L W 11 , 1 1 0/ W A 3, 620 ("Whe n Christ is no t known , it is impossible to
hav e any under standi n g m Scripture , since H e is th e Su n a n d T r u t h in Scripture") , W A 12
41 8 ("Chris tus ist in de r Schrift eingewickelt durc h u n d durch , gleichwie de r Lei b in de m
Tuch le m " )
10 L W 35 , 3 68 / W A D B 7, 6
11 W A 12, 2 5 9 / L W 3 0 , 3 ("Epistel S Petr i gepredig t u n d ausgelegt ' 1523)
 church is conceived, formed, nourished, born, trained, fed, clothed, adorned,
13
strengthened, armed, and preserved.

Althoug h th e churc h is th e mothe r of all Christians, she remain s th e

daughte r of th e gospel. Th e churc h is ever th e creatura evangelii.
Luther' s gospel-centered understandin g of th e Wor d of God is at th e
sam e tim e a completely Christ-centered understandin g since "th e preachin g
of th e gospel is nothin g else tha n Christ comin g to us, or we bein g brough t
14
to him."
Henc e th e relative infrequency of Luther' s explicit identification of Wor d
of God with Christ is of little theological import , since th e primar y equatio
n of Wor d of God with gospel entails a n implicit equatio n of gospel with
Christ. By identifying th e gospel as th e basic an d indispensable form of
God's Word , Luthe r is really identifying Jesus Christ as God's preeminen t
Word , since th e gospel is not only a message about Christ bu t is above all
th e living Wor d in an d throug h which th e Lor d Christ himself is still
acting as savior an d
redeeme r in th e present, as h e once acted in th e past in th e flesh. Thu s
th e gospel does not simply bea r witness to th e past event of salvation, bu t is
itself take n u p into tha t event. Indee d such gospel proclamatio n
becomes th e present occurrenc e of tha t saving event whenever this self-
communication of the exalted Lor d throug h th e power of his Spirit
("Christ comin g to us") is hear d in faith. T h e gospel as spoken Wor d of
God, in short, is nothin g else tha n th e real presence of th e exalted Christ, th
15
e living Lor d of th e church.
Accordin g to Luther' s usage, then , th e ter m Word of God refers to
Jesus Christ as th e personal Word, eterna l an d incarnate . It refers to th e
gospel of Christ as th e spoken Word which creates an d preserves th e churc h
because it is

13. W A 7 , 721 .
14. L W 35 , 12 1/ W A 10-1-1, 13-1 4 ("Brief Instruction , " 1522). O n th e inseparabilit y
an d implicit identit y of Wor d , Christ, an d gospel, cf. L W 26, 6 4 / W A 40-1 , 130: ". . .
Nothin g is mo r e dangerou s tha n to beco m e tire d of th e Wo rd . Therefor e anyon e who is
so cold tha t h e think s h e knows enoug h an d graduall y begins to loath e th e W o r d ha s
lost Christ a n d th e Gospel. "
15. T h e gospel as th e rea l presenc e of th e exalte d Christ is so centra l to Luther' s
theology tha t on e encounter s it throughou t his works. T h e 1535 Galatian s lectures contai n
man y chara c • teristic formulation s of Luther' s position . For example , see L W 26 , 1 6/ W A
40-1 , 57 : "Fo r they [Paul' s hearers ] ar e no t listening to Paul ; bu t in Pau l they ar e listening
to Christ Himself a n d to Go d th e Father , who sends hi m forth. " L W 26, 9 4 / W A 40-1 , 173 :
Go d "does no t wan t us to ad• mir e an d ador e th e apostolat e in th e persons of Pete r a n d
Paul , bu t th e Christ who speaks in the m an d th e W or d of Go d itself tha t proceed s from
thei r m o u th . " L W 26 , 2 4 0/ W A 40-1 , 379: "Toda y Christ is still presen t to some, bu t to other
s H e is still to come . T o believers H e is presen t an d has come ; to unbelievers H e ha s no t yet
com e a n d does no t hel p the m . Bu t if they hea r His Wo r d an d believe, Christ become s
presen t to them , justifies an d saves t he m . " Thi s last quota • tion clearly shows tha t th e
faithful preachin g an d hearin g of th e gospel constitut e th e presen t event of salvation, tha i
justificatio n ever an d agai n occurs whe n W o r d a n d faith meet , becaus e Christ himself is
truly presen t in th e gospel an d trul y presen t in th e faith whic h comes by hear • ing.
 Sola Scriptura : Luther on Biblical Authority
Interpretatio n

th e mediu m of Christ's real presence. It also refers no less to Holy Scriptur e

as th e written Word.
Luthe r never hesitates to speak of Scriptur e as God's Word . No r ma y
one give th e impression tha t h e make s this identification only rarely, or
reluc• tantly, or in some sense improperly . Scriptur e for Luthe r is God's Wor
d since it has God th e Holy Spirit as its ultimat e author . Thu s h e can use
such tradi • tional phrases as "th e words of God" {verba Dei) or "divine
1 6
words" {verba divina) to designate Scripture. On e ma y not invoke
Luther' s authorit y in defense of such familiar formulas as "Scriptur e
witnesses to th e Wor d of God, " or "Scriptur e becomes God's Wor d when
hear d in faith, " or "Scriptur e is th e recor d of God's revelation" — if such
formulas are take n to me a n tha t for Luthe r himself Scriptur e is only a
fallible, h u m a n word which first becomes
a n infallible, divine Wor d when "animated " by th e Spirit of Christ, or
tha t Scriptur e is not as such God's tru e Wor d an d authenti c revelation.
Thes e for• mula s have their provenanc e in moder n theology, chiefly in
Protestan t neo- Orthodoxy . The y can be attribute d to Luthe r only by
readin g the m bac k into his theology in an anachronistic , hence erroneous ,
fashion.
At th e same time , on e ma y not obscure, minimize , or otherwise
explain away Luther' s unconditiona l emphasis on Jesus Christ as Scripture's
hear t an d center an d on th e gospel of Christ as th e one thin g needful for
Christian exis• tence . For Luther , of course, ther e ca n be n o access to th e
gospel an d to Christ apar t from Scripture . On e ma y not , in Luther' s name ,
drive a wedge between th e written Wor d on th e one han d an d th e personal
an d th e spoken Wor d on th e other . Christ an d his gospel are in Scripture ,
an d Scriptur e is truly God's Word . Yet within this unitar y category of th e
"Wor d of God, " real distinctions an d relative ranking s obtai n in keeping
with Luther' s consistent christocen- trism. T h e written Wor d exists for the
sake of th e personal Wor d an d th e spoken Word . Thu s one ca n justly
maintai n tha t for Luthe r Scriptur e is God's Wo r d in a secondary or
derivative sense.
Whil e Scripture , therefore, is properl y designated Wor d of God, it
holds this dignity because it witnesses to Christ th e Wo r d who is in Scriptur
e as its matchless content an d because it contains th e gospel throug h which
th e risen an d exalted Christ still speaks an d acts redemptively on behalf of
his church . Thi s same Christ also remain s Scripture's lord an d king, tha t is,
Scriptur e can• not rightly be interprete d in opposition to Christ's person an d
17
work. Hence ,

16. W A 7, 97-9 8 ("Assertio o mni u m ar ticulorum , " 1521). Cf. W A 40-III , 254 ("In X
V Psalmos g r a du u m , " 1540): "No t only th e words , bu t also th e expression [phrasis] is divine
whic h th e Holy Spirit an d Scriptur e employ. "
17. L W 34, 1 12 / W A 39-1, 47 ("Theses Concernin g Fait h an d Law, " 1535): "Briefly,
Christ is th e Lord , no t th e servant, th e Lor d of th e Sabbath , of law, a n d of all things . T h e
Scripture s mus t b e understoo d in favor of Christ, no t agains t him . For tha t reaso n they mus t
eithe r refer to
without contradictio n or inconsistency, Luthe r ca n say at on e an d th e
sam e tim e tha t Scriptur e alone is to rul e in th e churc h as quee n and tha t
Scriptur e is ever th e servant of Christ its king . I n his 1535 Lectures on
Galatians, for ex• ample , Luthe r says of Scriptur e (apropo s of Gal . 1:9):

This queen must rule, and everyone must obey, and be subject to, her The pope,
Luther, Augustine, Paul, an angel from heaven —these should not be masters,
18
judges, or arbiters but only witnesses, disciples, and confessors of Scripture.

Yet in these sam e lectures, replying to opponent s who adduc e biblical

passages stressing works an d merits , Luthe r objects:

You are stressing the servant, that is, Scripture —and not all of it at that or
even its most powerful part, but only a few passages concerning works. I leave
19
this ser• vant to you. I for my part stress the Lord, who is the King of Scripture.

Thi s insistence on Scripture's servant status shows tha t Luthe r di d in fact ran
20
k th e several forms of God's Wor d on a relative scale of intrinsic value.
I n sum, within th e overarchin g category of "Wo r d of God, " thre e forms
of this Wor d —the personal Wor d (Christ), th e spoken Wo r d (gospel), an d
th e written Wor d (Scripture) —may be distinguished an d ranked , althoug h
they mus t no t be separated .
Luthe r himself draws a n especially shar p distinction between Scriptur e an
d gospel. Whil e Christ, th e gospel, an d Holy Scriptur e ar e all th e Wor d of
God, Scriptur e an d gospel ar e two very different forms of this Wor d an d
mus t no t be lumpe d together . For, properl y speaking, Scripture , die Schrift,
designates th e Old Testamen t alone . T h e Old Testament , says Luther ,
is necessarily somethin g written, th e "letter. " I n contrast, h e adds ,

the gospel should really not be something written, but a spoken word which
brought forth the Scriptures, as Christ and the apostles have done This is why

hi m o r mus t no t b e hel d to b e tru e Scripture s " It is strikin g tha t Luth e r does no t

re pudiat e a no n chnstologica l understandi n g of Scriptur e as a false interpretation, bu t
hold s tha t a Scrip• tu r e whic h canno t b e referre d to Christ is m fact a false Scripture
Luther' s Christ princip l e thu
s determine s wha t is authenticall y scriptura l Scriptur e is itself judged o n theologica l ground
s by reference to th e Christ who is th e Lor d of Scriptur e
18 LW2 6 58/WA40- I ,
120
19 L W 26, 2 95 / W A 40 I,
459
20 In his theses prep are d for th e licentiat e examinatio n of Jero m e Weile r an d
Nichola s Medler , publishe d in th e sam e year as his larg e Galatian s lectures , Luth e r agai n
underscore d Scripture' s servant statu s relative to Christ See L W 34 , 1 1 2/ W A 39 I, 47
"Therefore , if th e adversaries press th e Scripture s agains t Christ , we urg e Christ agains t th e
Scripture s W e hav e th e Lord , they th e servants, we hav e th e He ad , they th e feet o r
memb er s , over whic h th e H ea d necessarily dominat e s a n d takes precedenc e " Fo r a n
analysis of this moti f of th e Chris t wh o is supra et contra scripturam, see R ub e n Josefson,
"Christu s u n d die Heilig e Schrift, " m Vilmo s Vajta , ed , Lutherforschung heute (Berlin ,
Lutherische s Verlagshaus , 1958), p p 5 7 -6 3

264
 Sola Scriptura : Luther on Biblical Authority
Interpretati o n

Christ himself did not write anything but only spoke. He called his teaching not
Scripture but gospel, meaning good news or a proclamation that is spread not by
2 1
pen, but by word of mouth.

T h e New Testamen t message, therefore, is no t Schrift bu t Botschaft,

somethin g proclaimed , th e liberatin g news of God's free forgiveness of
sinners for Christ's sake throug h faith alone . T h e gospel by its very natu r e as
goo d tid ings of deliverance require s th e viva vox, th e living voice of th e
preacher . Even so th e churc h is above all a Mundhaus, th e plac e of th
22
e m ou t h an d salutary speech, no t a Federhaus, th e domai n of th e scribe. Th
e origina l gospel proc lamatio n was itself writte n down eventually only to
comba t heresy an d to no r m th e futur e teachin g an d preachi n g of th e
23
ch urch .
Thi s fundamenta l distinction between Scriptur e an d gospel agai n
shows tha t Scriptur e exists for th e sake of Christ. Scripture , tha t is, exists
toda y in orde r tha t th e same gospel which originally brough t forth th e
Scriptures, a n d is now containe d an d conceale d in them , ma y ever an d agai
n b e brough t ou t of Scriptur e an d given contemporar y expression throug h
24
ora l procl amation .
Scripture , therefore, is properl y understoo d as th e recor d of past proclama
tio n which exists to becom e present proclamation . Scripture , in turn ,
also norm s or regulate s this present proclamation . T h e preachin g of th e
apostles, thei r witness to Christ, which after a tim e was writte n dow n an d so
becam e th e apostolic Scripture , is th e sole authorit y by which all subsequent
teachin g an d preachi n g mus t be judged . Scriptur e functions as such a no r
m an d judge , however, for th e sake of tha t original gospel, in orde r to
assure tha t present proclamatio n is truly gospel. It is plain , therefore, tha t
Scripture' s authorit y is roote d in th e underlyin g authorit y of th e Gospel of
Christ.
In brief, while Scriptur e an d gospel belong inseparabl y together , Scriptur
e itself—in its dua l role as source an d nor m of present proclamatio n —
always exists for th e sake of th e gospel. T h e whole of Luther' s theology is
oriente d to

21 L W 3 5 , 1 23 /W A1 0 I 1, 17 ("Brief Instr uct ion , "

1522)
22 WA 10 I 2, 48 ("Adventspostille, " 1522)
23 For all of th e centra l theme s a d u m b r a t e d in this a n d th e following p a r ag r a p h , see
espe c i a l l y L W 5 2 , 205 07/W A 10 I 1, 625-2 8 ("Churc h Postil, " 1522)
24 For Luth e r th e gospel is contain e d an d hidd e n in th e "letter " of Scripture , ι e , in th
e Ol d T es ta me n t Christia n preaching , o r th e living voice, mus t extrac t th e "spiri t ' or
gospel from th e lette r Cf L W 52, 205/W A 10 I 1, 625-2 6 "Chris t ha s two witnesses to his
birt h a n d his real m T h e on e is Scriptur e th e wor d co mp reh en d e d in th e letters of th e
alphab e t T h e othe r is th e voice o r th e words proclaime d by m ou t h I n th e
New Testamen t , preachi n g mus t be don e orally a n d publicly, with th e living voice, to produ c e
in speech a n d heari n g wha t prio r to this lay hidd e n m th e lette r an d m secret vision " Preachi n
g thu s bear s th e responsibility for agai n bringi n g to ora l expression th a t origina l gospel whic h
now also exists in writte n for m as apostolic Scriptur e (New Testamen t ) See H Ostergaar d
Nielsen, Scriptura sacra et viva vox (Munich , Ch r Kaiser Verlag , 1957), an d Pete r Meinhold ,
Luthers Sprachphilosophie (Berlin , Lutherische s Verlagshaus ,
this doctrina evangelii, this present teachin g an d preachin g of th e
apostolic gospel on th e basis of, an d in accord with, Holy Scripture . Even so
th e distinc• tiveness of Luther' s position on biblical authorit y resides in this
complet e con• centratio n on th e gospel as th e on e thin g needful within
Scripture , so tha t Scriptur e remain s th e servant of th e gospel and , hence ,
of th e Christ who is th e gospel's glorious them e an d Scripture's sovereign
Lord .
I n treatin g Luther' s concept of biblical authorit y an d its theological
basis, therefore, one mus t carefully atten d to these cardina l distinctions
between th e personal, spoken, an d written Wor d of God, especially th e
fundamenta l dis• tinction between Scriptur e an d gospel. Such distinctions
immediatel y pu t us on alert tha t Luther' s position is multifacete d an d
multidimensional . Beneat h th e surface simplicity of his linguistic usage ther
e is at work a profoun d an d complex theological dynami c involving subtle
nuance s in meanin g an d inten• tion, to which interpreter s of Luther' s
though t mus t ever remai n sensitive.
Why, then , was th e Bible authoritativ e for Luther ? Wh y did he ascribe to
it sole normativ e authorit y for the church' s teachin g an d preaching ? In
effect I have already answered tha t question by showing how Luther' s
approac h to Scriptur e is completely Christ-centered an d gospel-centered.
As th e source an d nor m of churc h doctrine , Scriptur e exists for th e sake
of Christ an d his gospel. In the m Scriptur e has its vital center an d
definitive content . Even so Scriptur e always remain s their servant an d mus
t always be interprete d an d used in their favor. Thu s when Christians stan d
before an d unde r Holy Scrip• tur e so as to acknowledge its bindin g authorit
y for faith an d life, they do so because they thereby stan d before an d unde r
th e personal Wor d of God, Jesus Christ, their Savior an d Lord ; an d
because, at th e sam e time , they stan d before an d unde r th e living Wor d
of the gospel, the apostolic witness to Jesus Christ, throug h which Christ an
d his Spirit continually creat e an d sustain faith. I contend , therefore,
tha t in urgin g "Scriptur e alone " Luthe r was urgin g "Christ alone. " It
remain s to analyze, explain, an d defend this conten• tion in fuller detail .

2. Biblical authority: Some possible solutions.

Ther e are, in fact, a numbe r of possible an d plausible answers to th e

ques• tion of why th e Bible was authoritativ e for Luther . I n th e first place ,
th e Bible ha d been received an d acknowledged as th e source an d standar d
of revealed trut h within th e churc h down throug h th e centuries, in
Medieval Catholicism no less tha n in th e age of th e churc h fathers. T h e
normativ e authorit y of Scriptur e was thus a commo n theological assumptio
n which Luthe r accepted without question, an d which h e share d with all
his opponents . Luther , how• ever, ma d e a revolutionary brea k with his
antagonists —and with virtually the
 Sola Scriptura : Luther on Biblical Authority
In te rpr et at i o n

whole of patristi c a n d Medieval theology—whe n h e denie d th a t Holy Scriptur

e a n d th e church' s traditio n of interpretati o n constitut e a n indissoluble unity
25

Luther' s radicality, accordingly, shows itself no t in asserting th e sola scrip

tura (for in principl e tha t was widely, if no t universally, acknowledged) , bu t in
repudiati n g th e age-old, unquestione d assumptio n th a t Holy Scriptur e an
26
d th e hermeneutica l traditi o n ar e a t all point s congruen t a n d comp atible .
I n Luther' s eyes, then , th e exigent issue of biblical authorit y was no t
simply a m at te r of appealin g to Scriptur e as a forma l no r m (since every
orthodo x teache r concede d its forma l authority) . It involved, rather , th e
right under standing of
Scripture , th e prope r comprehensio n of its tru e content , in th e light of
which Luthe r judge d traditiona l churc h teachin g a n d foun d it sorely wanting
. For Luther , in short, th e questio n of biblical authorit y was above all a
question of biblical interpretatio n a n d orientation , rathe r th a n of biblical
27
citation .
I n this light a second possible solution mus t also b e rejected as inadequat
e an d misleading : th a t Luther' s position o n biblica l authorit y was base d on ,
28
o r derived from, a doctrin e of Scripture' s plenar y inspiratio n a n d inerrancy .
T o b e sure, in accor d with lon g established teaching , Luthe r fully believed
th a t Scriptur e is th e divinely inspire d a n d infallible Wor d of God . O n e ca n
assem ble hundred s of quotation s in which h e speaks of th e Bible as th e uniqu
e crea tio n of th e Holy Spirit, as th e on e boo k whose autho r is God . His
reverence for Scriptur e knew n o bounds , no t least becaus e h e confessed it to
b e God's own Wor d and , as such, a truthfu l a n d trustworth y Word .
Admittedly , h e di d no t

25 See Β A Gernsh , "Biblica l Authorit y a n d th e Continent a l Refo rmat ion , " SjT h
10 337-60(195 7 )
26 See F Kropatschek , Das Schriftpnncip der lutherischen Kirche, I Die Vorgeschieht e
Das Erbe des Mittelalters (Leipzig, A D ei ch e n , 1904), a n d esp Heik o A O b e r m a n , The
Harvest of Medieval Theology (G ra n d Rapid s , W m Β E erd ma n s Publishin g Co , 1967), p p
361 412, Forerunners of the Reformation The Shape of Late Medieval Thought (Lond on ,
Lutterwort h Press, 1967), p p 53-6 6
27 Cf G e r h a r d Ebehng , " 'Sola Scriptura ' a n d T r a d i t i o n , " in The Word of God and Tradi
tion, p p 102 47 , " L u t h e r u n d die Bibel, " m Lutherstudien I (Tubingen , J C Β Mohr , 1971),
286-30 1
28 A Skevmgto n Wood , Captive to the Word Martin Luther—Doctor of Sacred Scripture
(Lond o n Paternoste r Press, 1969), ma in ta i n s th a t "for Luthe r , th e suprema c y of th e biblica
l revelatio n arose from its supernatur a l origin , a n d this in t u r n was b o u n d u p wit h th e fact of
in spiratio n All th a t Luth e r taug h t abo u t th e authorit y of th e Bible a n d th e n a tu r e of revela
tio n foun d its clima x a n d corollary in his doctrin e of inspiration " ( p 139) I n reference , ho
w ever to W A 46, 780 ("If [wha t th e c hur c h teaches ] agree s wit h wha t Chris t t aug h t us, th e
n let us accep t it a n d d o accordi n g to it" ) , Wo o d concede s "W e ca n detec t her e wha t is t o b
e foun d agai n m Luth e r —namely , a st and ar d even with m th e st and ar d [of Scripture ] The
Word is the Word of Christ, and its authority is really his" ( p 122, italics added ) Woo d fails t o
unpa c k thi s crucia l distinctio n betwee n Scriptur e a n d W o r d of Christ , no r does h e resolve th e
pat e n t contr a dictio n betwee n a concep t of biblica l authori t y whose "clima x " is th e doctri n e
of inspiratio n a n d a n app roa c h wherei n biblica l authorit y is "really " (') predict e d o n
Christ' s authori t y Woo d himself clearly sees, a n d at least acknowledge s in passing, th a t
Luther' s christocentris m break s entirel y th rou g h th e framewor k of a forma l bibhcis m

267
hesitate to point out apparen t contradiction s an d discrepancies in Scriptur e
— in th e Old Testamen t historical books, for example , an d in th e
Synoptic Gospels. H e also showed little patienc e with pious efforts at
harmonizin g dis• crepan t accounts. Nevertheless, he attribute d all such
problem s to our lack of exact historical an d philological knowledge rathe r
29
t ha n attribut e any defects to Holy Scriptur e itself.
An d yet, for all that , Luthe r did no t derive th e Bible's authorit y from a
for• ma l Scriptur e principle , in the manne r of bot h Medieval
scholasticism an d late r Protestan t neo-scholasticism. T h e best evidence for
this assertion, in my judgment , is th e often-remarke d fact tha t one looks in
vain to Luther' s works for anythin g like a systematic locus ' O n Holy
Scripture. " Thi s circumstanc e is usually attribute d to Luther' s vocation as
a n exegetical rathe r tha n a dog• mati c theologian or to his presume d lack
of talen t for systematization. Yet it is now a scholarly commonplac e tha t
Luthe r was a far mor e careful craftsman an d rigorous thinke r tha n allowed
by th e old caricatur e of hi m as a n undisci• pline d religious genius.
Moreover, ther e is no compelling reason, in principl e at least, why Luthe r th
e exegete could not have articulate d a full-blown doc• trin e of Scripture ,
replete with biblical an d traditiona l proofs, to be inserted at relevant points
in his academi c lectures an d disputation s or into his polemi• cal writings. Th a
t Luthe r di d no t pursu e such a course ca n only b e attribute d to a prio r
theological decision which itself carries weighty theological conse•
quences. It is scarcely surprising, then , tha t th e first section of this e s s a y
- devoted to basic terminological distinctions —should already show
beyond doub t tha t Luther' s theology is incompatibl e with a formal
30
biblicism.
Luthe r canno t contemplat e speaking abou t th e Bible in isolation from
th e Bible's incomparabl e content : Jesus Christ an d th e gospel which
proclaim s him . Biblicism is thereb y rule d ou t of cour t from th e outset.
Wh a t is surprising, however, at least from a historical standpoint , is tha
t Luthe r was not 2L biblicist. On e would initially expect tha t Luthe r —of all
th e theologians in churc h history—would have bee n most insistent on th e
Bible's formal authorit y as th e verbally inspired an d inerran t Wor d of God;
tha t he ,

29 . Luther' s statement s o n biblica l inspiratio n an d inerranc y ar e conveniently

summariz e d an d discussed i n j . Michae l Reu , Luther and the Scriptures (Columbu s , T h e
W a r t bu r g Press,
1944), p p . 65-116
.
30. I tak e "biblicism " to denot e a view of Scriptur e a n d its authorit y whic h is base d o n
th e divine attribute s ("perfections") of th e Bible as a "supernatura l book. " T h e Bible's
authorit y is thereb y locate d in its "form " as a n inspire d book, r ath e r th a n its "matte r " o
n content . T h e Bible's divine inspiratio n a n d factua l inerranc y gua ra nt e e th e trut h of its
message, with th e result tha t faith , thou g h directe d ultimatel y to Christ , is first directe d
to th e Bible as writte n W o r d of God . For Luther , by contrast , th e Bible's authorit y is self-
authenticatin g owin g to its conten t (Christ an d his gospel), an d th e object of faith is, from
first to last, Christ himself (even as Christ remain s th e actin g subject or creato r of faith throug
h tha t presen t proclamatio n which is ground e d on , a n d no rm e d by, th e apostolic proclamati o
 Sola Scriptura: Luther on Biblical Authority
Interpretation

before all others, would have sought iron-clad proofs for the Bible's total per•
fection as a divine book in order to defend its sufficient authority for Christian
faith and morals. Instead, in direct opposition to these reasonable expecta•
tions, Luther has articulated a subtly nuanced, highly dialectical, intrinsically
complex approach to Scripture. He sharply distinguishes between written
Word and spoken Word, asserts Scripture's servant status relative to Christ
and the gospel, and locates the church's "total life and substance" in the
gospel rather than in canonical Scripture as such. One can hardly conceive a
less formal, less biblicistic approach to Scripture. Yet Luther remained confi•
dent that the Bible would authenticate itself as Word of God through the
faithful proclamation of the Christ who is in Scripture; or, more accurately,
that the Bible would demonstrate its authority through the self-authentication
of the risen Christ who is himself the acting subject in this proclamation.

3. Biblical authority: Scripture's christological concentration.

Why, then, was the Bible authoritative for Luther? Th e answer, as my

find• ings indicate, must take account of many complex considerations. One
thing is certain: Luther did not assert or defend the sola scriptura on purely
formal grounds, by appeal to the Bible's divine origin and its external
characteristics as a supernatural book. His entire approach to Scripture,
unlike that of his neo-scholastic successors, is not formal or "logical"
(analytical-deductive) in nature, but is consistently christological and
soteriological.
Luther submitted himself totally to the authority of Holy Scripture because
in and through that biblical Word the God and Father of Jesus Christ had en•
countered him in judgment and mercy, disclosing himself in Christ as friend
of sinners, yes, even as the Righteous One who displays his righteousness, and
thereby confounds human wisdom, by justifying the ungodly. In a phrase,
albeit one sadly overworn, Luther reverenced Scripture because it was for him .
the one trustworthy medium of a genuine "existential encounter" with that
gracious God whom he had so fervently sought and whom he had finally
found, or, more wonderfully, who in Christ had found him. Whatever else one
must add in explanation, it would be no exaggeration to hold that at its base
Luther's doctrine of biblical authority is profoundly doxological, rooted in
heartfelt praise of the Living God who in Christ has spoken, and still speaks,
31
his Word of unconditional forgiveness.

31 . Cf. LW 32, 193/W A 8, 82 ("Against Latomus," 1521): ". . . In order that we may
have unfailing peace, [God] has given us his Word in Christ, o n which we rely with
confidence, secure from all evil. Th e gates of hell, together with all sins, do not prevail against
that Word . This is our rock of refuge where we, with Jacob, can wrestle against God and, so to
speak, dare to press hard upon him with his promises, his truth, and his own Word. Wh o
will judge God and his Word? Wh o will accuse or condemn faith in his Word?" Passages
such as this one,

269
 T h e God who speaks in an d throug h Scriptur e is non e other , of
course, tha n th e God who speaks in an d throug h Jesus Christ. An d this
sam e Jesus Christ is th e one , above all, of who m Scriptur e speaks. Thi s
"christological concentration " is the decisive element in Luther' s
interpretatio n an d use of Scripture . It is also the key to his concept of
biblical authority , as th e following considerations show.
Th e assertion tha t Christ is in Scriptur e as its hear t an d center ca n b e expli•
cate d by reference to thre e of Luther' s distinctive
themes :

(1) Christ is the center of Scripture because all the Scriptuies are oriented
to him Luthe r advance d this claim tim e an d again ; it is his fundamenta l
her- meneutica l principle . "Tak e Christ from th e Scriptures, " h e queries
3 2
Erasmus , "an d what mor e will you find in them?" "If you would
interpre t well an d confidently," he writes in his Preface to the Old Testament
(1545), "set Christ
3 3
before you, for he is th e m a n to whom it all applies, every bit of it." So
also he confides: "Every tim e I find a text tha t is like a har d nut , whose shell
I can• not crack, I quickly throw it against the Rock [Christ], an d the n I find
34
its deli• cious kernel." Luthe r prizes th e Old Testamen t writings because
35
they ar e "th e swaddling cloths an d the mange r in which Christ lies." T h
e gospel is thus found in the Old Testamen t in the form of promises of the
Christ who is to come . As for th e New Testament , "what is [it] bu t a publi c
proclamatio n of Christ set forth throug h th e sayings of th e Old
3 6
Testamen t an d fulfilled throug h Christ?" Th u s Christ is th e Bible's
essential conten t an d th e focal point of all its teaching .
(2) Christ is the center of Scripture because he is the goal and content of the
law-gospel dialectic As exemplified in "Moses an d th e prophets, " th e
preach • ing of the divine law —of God's holy will an d of God's righteous
judgmen t on hum a n sin —has as its ultimat e purpose to lead to Christ an d
to th e apostolic gospel concernin g him . Th e prophet s "hold fast to th e
purpose of keeping th e people conscious of their own impotenc e throug h a
3
right understandin g of the law, thus driving the m to Christ, as Moses did."
7
Thi s preachin g of th e law functions as God's "strange work" {opus
ahenum) whereby he calls sinners to account , to the recognition
an d confession of sin and , hence, to the humbl e

whic h ca n b e multiplie d at will, establish th e skopos or "target " for all tha t Luthe r says
abou t Scriptur e as God's writte n Wo r d Luthe r ever "aims " at Christ, the Word , whenever h
e speaks of th e Bible an d its authorit y
32 W A 18, 6 0 6 / L W 33 , 26 ("De servo arbitrio, " 1525) See also th e docu mentati o n given
in not e 9
33 L W 35 , 247/W A - D B 8, 28
34 W A 3, 1 2 / L W 10, 6 ("Dictat a super Psalterium, " 1513-15 )
35 L W 35 , 2 36/W A- D B 8, 12 ("Preface to th e Ol d Testament,"154 5 )
36 L W 3 5 , 23 6/ W A DB 8,11
37 L W 35 , 2 47 / W A DB 8, 29
 Sola Scriptura : Luther on Biblical Authority
Interpretati o n

plea for mercy, namely, for God's "prope r work" {opus proprium), his recon•
ciling love displayed in Jesus Christ an d proclaime d in an d actualized by th
e gospel. I n this way, then , th e law-gospel dialectic is directe d to Christ an d
ha s Christ as its content .

(3) Christ is the center of Scripture because he himself is present as acting

subject in the gospel proclamation, offering himself to , an d enterin g int
o unio n with, th e person who hear s in faith. T h e gospel is "of Christ" in two
pri• mar y an d inseparabl e senses: It certainly proclaim s Christ, bu t at th e
sam e time , an d of chief importance , Christ proclaims
himself in an d throug h th e gospel. Christ thus make s
himself present for faith. H e "re-presents" himself everywhere today throug
h this ongoin g proclamation , even as h e once "pre • sented" himself in th e
flesh in Palestine. Th rou g h his Spirit he creates faith an d gives himself to
faith, so tha t Christ an d th e Christian becom e "on e per• son" ( = fides
Christi; incorporatio Christi; fides Christo formata).** Thu s
Christ shows himself to be th e preeminent Wor d in Scriptur e an d its
living Lord . Scripture's authorit y is therefore his authority . Thi s "real
presence" of Christ in Scripture is th e bedrock , th e fundament , of Luther'
s teachin g o n biblical authority .
Tradition a l Luthera n theology has usually restricted th e doctrin e of
Christ's real presence to th e province of sacramenta l theology, specifically th e
doctrin e of th e Eucharist . But in Luther' s own theology th e presence of
Christ "in, with, an d under " th e proclaime d Wor d receives n o less stress
tha n Christ's presence "in, with, an d under " th e visible elements of brea d an
3 9
d wine. I n my judgment , ha d late r Lutheranis m (an d Protestan t
Christianity as a whole) manage d to retai n Luther' s profoun d teachin g
tha t Christ's real presence in th e gospel is th e on e sure groun d of tha t
Word' s inne r effectiveness an d authority, it would no t have fallen prey to
biblicistic distortions of classical Lutheranism' s Scriptur e principle . No r
would it have sought to demonstrat e or buttress Scripture's authorit y by
formal proofs based on th e Bible's divine origin. It would have contente d
itself, rather , with sharin g Luther' s own unshakeabl e confidence tha t
Scripture's authorit y is self-authenticating by vir-

38 . T h e fides Christi motif, whic h recur s througho u t Luther' s theologica l corpu s a n d is

th e key to his doctrin e of justification, receives lumino u s tre atme n t in his 1535 Galatian s
lectures See David W . Lotz, Ritschl a n d Luther : A Fresh Perspective o n Albrech t Ritschl's
Theolog y in th e Ligh t of His L uthe r Stud y (New York/Nashville , Abingdo n Press, 1974), p p
. 127-37 , for a brief exposition an d analysis of this them e as well as for pertinen t
documentatio n .
39. I a m no t contending , of course, tha t Christ's real presenc e as th e actin g subject of
th e gospel is identica l to his sacramenta l presenc e in th e eucharisti e elements . T h e poin t
is tha t Christ is truly presen t in th e ora l W o r d n o less th a n in th e "visible" Word , an d tha t
his active presence in th e gospel proclamatio n —alon g with his material presence as th e tru e
conten t of Scriptur e —is, for Luther , th e basis of th e Bible's normativ e authorit y a n d of its
self-authenti• catio n as God's Wor d .

271
tu e of th e sovereign authorit y of th e risen Christ who still speaks
throug h
Scripture
.
For Luther , therefore, Scripture's christological concentratio n determine
s not only th e Bible's prope r interpretatio n an d salutary use, bu t n o less
estab• lishes its sole normativ e authorit y for Christia n faith an d life. If any
further proof of this conclusion is required , one nee d only recall th e
remarkabl e way in which Luthe r exercised biblical criticism, or canonica l
criticism, in th e nam e an d for th e sake of Christ. Th a t is, while Luthe r
used Scriptur e to criti• cize th e church' s doctrina l tradition , h e also used
his Christ-principle to criti• cize th e biblical cano n itself. If Scriptur e must
often be opposed to tradition , th e need ma y also arise to oppose Christ to
Scripture .
Luthe r showed tha t h e was prepare d to do this, in th e first instance,
by undertakin g a christocentric determinatio n of th e "tru e an d noblest
books of the New Testament, " thereb y creating , so to speak, a cano n within
th e canon .
'John' s Gospel an d St. Paul's epistles, especially tha t to th e Romans , an d
St. Peter's first epistle ar e th e tru e kernel an d marro w of all th e books, "
indee d th e "foremost books" {Hauptbücher).™ Why? Because

in them you do not find many works and miracles of Christ described, but you do
find depicted in masterly fashion how faith in Christ overcomes sin, death, and
hell, and gives life, righteousness, and salvation. This is the real nature of the
41
gospel. . . ,

Luthe r was not primaril y interested in th e Scriptures as historical texts, bu t

as testimony to th e Christus victor whose voice continues to sound from
them . For this reason he scored th e epistle of Jame s as "a n epistle of straw":
No t only does it contradic t th e Paulin e exclusion of justifying works, bu t
it "does no t once mentio n th e passion, th e resurrection, or th e Spirit of
4 2
Christ." I n short, confesses Luther , "I stick to th e books which present
43
Christ to m e clearly an d purely."
Luthe r not only ranke d th e New Testamen t books, bu t proceede d to
employ the touchstone of was Christum treibet ("whatever promote s Christ")
to deter• min e th e apostolicity, an d henc e canonicity, of th e New Testamen t
writings:

40 . LW 35, 3 61 -6 2/ WA -D B 6, 10 ("Preface to the Ne w Testament,"

1522).
41 .
Ibid.
42 . LW 35, 396/WA- D B 7, 385 ("Preface to the Epistles of St. James and St. Jude,"
1546). Luther's disparagement of James as an "epistle of straw" ("eyn rechte stroern Epistel")
originally appeared in his 1522 "Preface to the New Testament" (see LW 35, 362/ WA - D B 6,
10). It was not repeated in editions of the Ne w Testament after 1539 and of the complete Bible
from 1534. Throughout his career, however, Luther persisted in his low estimate of this epistle.
Cf. LW 54,
 Sola Scriptura : Luther on Biblical Authority
Interpretati o n

That is the true test by which to judge all books, when we see whether ornot they
incul• cate [treiben] Christ . . . . Whatever does not teach Christ [was Christian nicht
leret] is not yet apostolic, even though St. Peter or St. Paul does the teaching. Again,
what• ever preaches Christ [was Christum predigt] would be apostolic, even if Judas,
44
Annas, Pilate, and Herod were doing it.

Luther' s line of argumen t here merits careful attention . H e uses th e

principl e "what preache s Christ" to determin e the boundarie s of the biblical
canon , to indicat e which books truly deserve to be include d in th e canon
. But what makes a book canonica l or normative? Obviously not its defacto
inclusion in
th e church' s approve d cano n of Scripture , since Luthe r rejects this facile
argu• men t from traditio n . Perhaps , then , th e book's divine
inspiration? Thi s answer seems plausible since in 1522, for example , Luthe
r expressed doub t abou t th e apostolicity of th e Book of Revelation,
noting : "I ca n in no way detect tha t the Holy Spirit produce d it. " Yet
inspiratio n is not the critical fac• tor since Luthe r goes on to say tha t "for m e
this is reason enoug h not to thin k highly of it: Christ is neithe r taugh t no r
known in it. But to teac h Christ, this is th e thin g which a n apostle is boun d to
45
do."
Apostolicity, therefore, is based not on inspiratio n as such, bu t on preach
• ing an d teachin g Christ. For this reason a given book canno t even be
consid• ered canonical on th e groun d of its presume d or demonstrate d
apostolicity, tha t is, on strictly historical ground s of authorship . For only tha t
book is genu• inely apostolic, all historical considerations apart , which preache
s Christ, even if such preachin g be don e by Judas , Annas , Pilate, or Herod!
An d even thoug h a book be Peter's or Paul's, an d not preac h Christ, it
would no t be apostolic. Th e Christ-principle thu s determine s apostolicity
an d canonicity, an d there• with determines biblical authority . Th e Bible's
authorit y is clearly a derived authority .
All these considerations show tha t Luther' s total doctrin e of Scriptur e
is consistently "material " rathe r tha n "formal " in nature , concentrate d
through • out on th e soteriological weight of th e Bible's res rathe r tha n on th
e supernat • ura l characte r of th e Bible's verba. It is no less plai n tha t
Luther' s doctrin e of Scripture's authorit y is also based on th e Bible's
essential conten t an d vital center: Jesus Christ an d th e gospel of Christ.
Whil e it is not mistake n to hold tha t Luthe r asserted th e sole normativ e
authorit y of th e Bible over, an d if need b e against, ecclesiastical tradition
s an d the teachin g authorit y of popes an d councils, such a view is too
restricted. No r does it say what is decisive. By urgin g Scriptur e alone Luthe r
was in fact urgin g Christ alone . Solus Christus is th e presupposition an d
groun d oí sola scriptura.

44 . LW3 5 , 396/WA-DB7 ,
384.
45 . L W 35 , 3 98 - 99 /W A - D B 7,
404 .
 ^ s
Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual
use according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and
as otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.

No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without

the copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling,
reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be
a violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission
from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal
typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article.
However, for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the
article. Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or
specific work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or
covered by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the
copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,
or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS®) collection contains electronic versions of previously

published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS
collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association
(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.

The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American
Theological Library Association.