Is There a Relationship Between Luther and Seventh-day Adventists?

Lutheranism and the third angel's mes­sage are both reform movements. Neither the teachings of Luther nor ours are intrinsically original. A study of ideas, es­pecially revolutionary ideas, reveals that they are original in that they are conceived in new terms and are put forth with new vigor, at the right time, in the right place, and by the right man. Ideas appear new when in reality they have been forgotten or overlooked.

Luther's message, like God's special message for this generation, produced a reform move­ment in an era of apostasy. Lutheranism ap­peared at a time of great doctrinal confusion and corruption in the Roman Catholic Church. God's message today has also come at a period of liberal Protestant apostasies. Scripture has foretold the "falling away" and the appearance of the "man of sin" who would eventually en­deavor to usurp God's place (2 Thess. 2:3, 4; Dan. 8:9-12). Both movements recognize the Roman apostasy as the Antichrist; it is true that Luther saw also in the Turks an applica­tion of a "physical" Antichrist. (This will be discussed further in the next article.)

"Luther rebuked sinners, from the Pope in Rome to the ordinary listeners in Wittenberg." ' Adventism announces the judgment hour. It proclaims this message of Revelation 14 to in­clude the Roman hierarchy as well as the or­dinary listeners the world over. It calls the world out of Babylon. "Those who accept this reform message to-day must do so under a gen­uine conviction."'

Both movements are truth restoring, and both have been announced in Bible prophecy: the seven churches and the seven seals. Luther was the monk who shook the world and set it ablaze with a new vision. "Zealous, ardent, and devoted, knowing no fear but the fear of God, and acknowledging no foundation for religious faith but the Holy Scriptures, Luther was the man for his time; through him, God accom­plished a great work for the reformation of the church and the enlightenment of the world."

On these basic evangelical teachings, Luther and Seventh-day Adventists hold similar views and establish the essential postulates of Prot­estantism.

The Universal Priesthood of Man

God's grace is open to all. Grace is not con­fined within a church that teaches salvation by faith and works and conceives of a heavenly treasury where supererogatory works are stored up, from which saving graces may be dispensed at the volition of the pope. Luther was con­vinced that, in order to be saved, a man needs no church ritual. Nor need he assent to the divinity of the Virgin and the meritorious works of the saints. His contact with God should be direct, immediate, and total.

Seventh-day Adventists teach the priesthood of Christ. If there is one original teaching with us, it concerns the High Priest in the heavenly sanctuary. Luther also believed in the priest­hood of Jesus. To him, Christ is our priest in the New Testament; thus we no longer need the earthly priest. "Christ is a spiritual priest for the inner man; and He sitteth in heaven and maketh intercession for us as a priest... [He] does everything a priest should do in mediating between God and man."

While our view goes further in its present-day application, both points of view have a similar aim. Luther stressed the thought of the universal priesthood of man—that is, that every man may have direct access to Christ. That was fundamental in Reformation thought. We hold exactly that view, although we particularly em­phasize the priesthood of Christ. The end result is the same in the sense that both believe that an individual can come directly to Jesus Christ. We have defined this doctrine more correctly. But a more important question is whether we value it and appreciate it as much as Luther

The Bible

Like Luther, we hold that God's Word is available to every man without the priest's in­terpretation. No church need edit the Sacred Canon for us. The Holy Scriptures in their en­tirety are accessible to us. For Luther, the Bible was the only standard by which all dogmas and all teachings must be valued and judged. It is so with us.

While he was a student at Erfurt, Luther was told by an Augustinian professor: "Brother Martin, let the Bible alone. Read the old teach­ers. They give you the whole marrow of the Bible—reading the Bible breeds unrest." Later, as a teacher of the Word and a church leader, Luther would teach nothing outside of the Word of God. "Not even an angel shall establish articles of faith," he declared with Paul.

We need not try to prove that Luther read, loved, and defended the Bible. No one, even from among his enemies, has any doubt about this. Luther translated the Word of God so well that its beauty and clarity, unattained by anyone else, have enshrined it in the hearts of his people. "It is worthy of notice that in no other modern language have so many Biblical words and phrases come into the use of com­mon life as in ours [German]." There is no doubt, either, that Luther considered the Word of God as final, everlasting, and unimpeach­able. As it is said in the Smalcald Articles:

"God will not deal with us except through His external Word and Sacrament, and whatever proudly introduces itself as the Spirit instead of the Word and Sacrament is the very devil." ⁶

Catholics have also given credit to Luther's endearing contribution. Audin, for instance, said:

"Luther's translation of the Bible is a noble mon­ument of literature, which seemed to require more than the life of man, but which he accom­plished in a few years. . . . Both Catholics and Protestants regard it an honor done to their ancient idiom."7

Luther had peculiarly personal views on the New Testament. To these, Seventh-day Advent­ists cannot subscribe. He openly pointed to some books as more important than others. Some, he felt, could even be left out entirely. He held at first that the Revelation was obscure and that it was "neither apostolic nor prophetic, . . . therefore I stick to the books which gave me Christ clearly and purely." Later he re­vised this opinion and said that the Scriptures, "although they were written by man, are not of man, nor from man, but from God."' Luther did eventually, however, before the end of his life, come to see Christ even in the book of Revelation, and in the second edition of 1545 he used the book of Revelation much more because he was being more drawn to prophetic interpretation. To him the book of Revelation was the supreme consolation that Christ will overcome all tribulations, evil angels, and be generally triumphant.

He first rejected allegorical interpretations as indulged in by some of the church Fathers. However, he forgot his statements on this point and later used allegorical interpretations of his own. But he did reject Augustine's spiritual interpretation of creation and preferred to be­lieve that Moses meant just what he said, "six literal days." "

In one of the great Reformation tracts, The Babylonian Captivity, of 1520, commenting on the method of studying the Holy Scriptures, Luther said:

"No violence is to be done to the Word of God whether by man or angel. They are to be retained in their simplest meaning wherever possible and to be understood in their grammatical and literal sense unless the context plainly forbids; lest we give our adversaries occasion to make a mockery of all the Scriptures." ⁸

"Yes," says the historian Philip Schaff, "with a Bible in his hand, head, and heart, he went forth to fight his battles against the Pope and the devil, being assured that 'one little word' of the Almighty can slay them." That was es­pecially true in Luther's finest hour, the Diet of Worms.

It need hardly be said that Seventh-day Ad­ventists have the same absolute confidence in the Word of God. With Luther we believe that the Old and the New Testament were given by inspiration of God. Seventh-day Adventists, "the people of the Book," endeavor to carry the Bible in its entirety to the ends of the earth. They put forth every effort to open the Word to the people in cooperation with Bible so­cieties. They have had some part, though mod­est, in translating portions of the Sacred Scrip­tures. The Bible is the foundation and the very life of our movement. It has been studied and is studied ceaselessly and with an open mind. A. G. Daniells, speaking of Uriah Smith at the time of his funeral, said that "in the early days of the message, he stood with James White, J. N. Andrews, and J. H. Waggoner in the diligent, thorough, critical study of Bible doc­trines." "

Justification by Faith

It has often been claimed that Luther was the most eloquent and persuasive preacher of justification by faith since Paul. To quote Luther on this, we would have to go to all his commentaries, sermons, and postils, his pri­vate conversation, his catechisms, and his cor­respondence. Justification by faith was to him the breath of life. It shaped his thinking. It was the key that solved his own personal sal­vation. "No marvel," said Cardinal Newman, "that he has given us the clearest, fullest, joy­fulest exposition of saving faith extant in Chris­tian literature."

To Seventh-day Adventists this teaching of justification by faith is just as important? It was somewhat neglected in the early years of our movement, but at the Minneapolis General Conference of 1888 we came to rather a crisis on this point, and our movement was saved from extreme legalism by the warnings given by some leaders, and especially by the clear counsels of the Spirit of prophecy. Sister White deplored the spiritual dearth of our movement. The reason, she felt, was "because Jesus was not in it." She declared that "the principle that man can save himself by his own works lay at the foundation of every heathen religion; it had now become the principle of the Jewish religion. Satan had implanted this principle. Wherever it is held, men have no barrier against sin."

Justification and forgiveness of sin, which are the work of God, can be obtained by man only through faith in Jesus Christ, without the deeds of the law. When we stress obedience to law, we mean it as the result of a regenerated nature. Like Luther, we hold that good fruits do not make a good tree; it is the good tree that produces good fruit.

We certainly agree with Luther when he says, "The law makes us sinners, and sin makes us guilty of death. Who has conquered these twain? Was it our righteousness or our life? Nay, it was Jesus Christ . . . bestowing on us His merits." We too recognize that we can never attain to the righteousness of God through our own efforts to keep the law.

Baptism

As with some of his other teachings, Luther had contradictory views on baptism, especially as to the mode of the rite. In the early days of his ministry, he held immersionist views, for he writes in 1519:

"Baptism is called in the Greek language baptismos, in Latin mersio, which means to plunge something entirely into the water so that the water closes over it. And although in many places it is the custom no longer to thrust and plunge children into the font of baptism but only to pour the bap­tismal water upon them out of the font, neverthe­less the former is what should be done; and it would be right, according to the meaning of the word Taufe [German word for baptism] that the child, or whoever is baptized, should be sunk en­tirely into the water and then be drawn out again." ¹⁷

A year later in The Babylonian Captivity, he says:

"I will have the candidates for baptism com­pletely immersed in the water, as the Word says and as the sacrament signifies. not that I deem this necessary." ¹⁸

It is too bad that Martin Luther did not continue to deem this mode of baptism neces­sary. He later partly rejected the practice of immersion because it became the dominant practice and teaching of the Anabaptists. In 1523 he still conceded that immersion might be allowed, but did not directly commend it. From then on he was more interested in stress­ing, in the sacrament of baptism, the expres­sion of faith, and indicating that all "works" connected with this sacrament, including the mode of baptism, were immaterial.

Whatever his practice was regarding baptism, Luther held that baptism might be administered to infants as well as any believer. He never dis­approved of infant baptism. In the Augsburg Confession of 1530, Article IX, it is taught that baptism is necessary "because thus grace is ac­corded, and that children also should be bap­tized so that they could be placed under God's guardianship. For this reason the Anabaptists, who teach that infants should not be baptized, are rejected."

Baptism, for Martin Luther, signified death and resurrection. It was a work of justification and meant regeneration and inner birth. It conferred a spiritual grace and was an everlast­ing covenant with God. Obviously, Seventh-day Adventists do not go along with Luther in his belief that infants should be baptized, nor do we accept his changed view on the mode of baptism.

(Concluded next month)

REFERENCES

¹Review and Herald, Feb. 3, 1903.

² Ibid.

³ Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy, p. 120.

⁴ H. T. Kerr, A Compend of Luther's Theology, p. 58.

5 F. von Schlegel, Lectures on the History of Literature, pp. 348-350.

6 Cited by T. Engelder in Four Hundred Years: Commemo­rative Essays on the Reformation of Dr. Martin Luther and Its Blessed Results, p. 99.

⁷ Audio, Life of Luther, chapter 24.

⁸ Luther, Works (Holman ed.), vol. VI, p. 488.

⁹ Kerr, op. cit., p. 11.

¹⁰ Luther, Commentary on Genesis, cited by Kerr, op. cit., p. 30.

¹¹ Luther, Works (Holman ed.), vol. II, p. 189.

¹² Review and Herald, March 10, 1903.

¹³ Cited by 0. C. Kreinheder in "Tributes to Luther," Four Hundred Years, p. 288.

¹⁴ See the excellent Master's Theses by N. F. Pease, Justi­fication and Righteousness by Faith in the Seventh-day Adventist church before 1900. (S.D.A. Theological Seminary, 1948). See also A. G. Daniells, Christ Our Righteousness, pp. 41-63.

¹⁵  White, The Desire of Ages, pp. 35, 36.

¹⁶ Kerr, op. cit., p. 56.

¹⁷ Luther, Schriften (Watch ed.) vol. X, cols. 2112-2114. Ibid., vol. XIX, col. 66.