<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Trash
Review: Herein Luther puts forth his heresy that the just shall live by faith alone. Since the original greek did not say 'alone', he added to scripture. When he realized that this heresy was counter to the teaching of the Epistle of James(2:24 "Ye see that by works a man is justified, and not only by faith"), he wanted to throw that epistle out of scripture.I would heartily warn anyone against buying this thoroughly evil book. My only regret is that I had to give it a star.
Rating: 
Summary: Sad.
Review: I find it sad that Athanasius chose to use the forum as a means of expounding his personal opinion of theology or lack of rather than review the book in a helpful and critical manner. So, I must reply in defense of one of Christendom's greatest theologians. So, let's look at Romans 3 verses 27 and 28 "Where then is boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith. For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the law." Hmmmmm.... how about Ephesians 2:8-9 "For it is by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, that no one should boast." Galatians 2:21 "I do not nullify the grace of God; for if righteousness comes throught he Law, then Christ died needlessly." Finally, how about Romans 5:1-2 "Therefore having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have obtained our introduction by faith into this grace in which we stand; and we exult in hope of the glory of God." So there would appear to be a contridiction between the above Pauline quotes and that from James (2:24). But if our friend had studied the context of the general epistle then he would have discovered that James was writing, as Matthew Henry said, to "reprove Christians for their great degeneracy both in faith and manners, and to prevent the spreading of those libertine doctrines which threatened the destruction of all practical Godliness." True faith should spring forth a well of good works. Read yourselves. Don't let he or I decide for you. Read the scriptures and see for yourself. Oh, yeah. And the Luther commentary rocks. Not very helpful, I know, but this is getting too long.
Rating: 
Summary: worthy commentary, but find a better edition
Review: I really wanted to give a higher rating to this little book, but the further I read, the more frustrated I got. The translator and editor adopted a rather annoying convention of including parenthesised explanatory notes in italics. 90% of the time these notes are redundant and serve only to interrupt the flow of the text (for instance, indicating the antecedent of a preposition when it is perfectly obvious). In a few cases, these notes actually distort the sense of what Luther is saying. Beyond that, it's difficult to know exactly how to rate Luther's writing itself. Being from the Reformed tradition rather than the Lutheran, I would obviously take issue with Luther on some minor points, and perhaps suggest Calvin's or Murray's commentary instead. Luther does have the rather annoying habit of arguing against works and reason in extremely strong terms and then later coming back to explain that he is not rejecting works but only the reliance upon them or reason, but only the wrong use of it. This is understandable in the context of the original writing, but a more careful use of terms that avoids the problem entirely would have been preferable. The book has considerable historical merit. Most of the content comes directly from his lectures in the second decade of the 16th century and was not significantly revised when it was published later. The preface on the other hand, written in 1557 gives a clearer indication of Luther's mature theology and is frequently quoted in works about Luther. If you are looking for essential Luther, Bondage of the Will or his Commentary on Galatians would be a better fit for that purpose. Finally, we must note that the book is what I call a pastoral commentary. That is, the interest of the author is primarily in assisting the reader in applying God's Word in his or her life. As such, it devotes no time to questions of the date and circumstance of Romans, and very little to matters of translation or text criticism. If you are looking for what I would call a "scholarly" commentary to assist you in preparing lessons, sermons, or what not, this is not what you are after. If it weren't for the awful italic insertions, I probably would have given it a 4.
Rating:
Summary: worthy commentary, but find a better edition
Review: I really wanted to give a higher rating to this little book, but the further I read, the more frustrated I got. The translator and editor adopted a rather annoying convention of including parenthesised explanatory notes in italics. 90% of the time these notes are redundant and serve only to interrupt the flow of the text (for instance, indicating the antecedent of a preposition when it is perfectly obvious). In a few cases, these notes actually distort the sense of what Luther is saying. Beyond that, it's difficult to know exactly how to rate Luther's writing itself. Being from the Reformed tradition rather than the Lutheran, I would obviously take issue with Luther on some minor points, and perhaps suggest Calvin's or Murray's commentary instead. Luther does have the rather annoying habit of arguing against works and reason in extremely strong terms and then later coming back to explain that he is not rejecting works but only the reliance upon them or reason, but only the wrong use of it. This is understandable in the context of the original writing, but a more careful use of terms that avoids the problem entirely would have been preferable. The book has considerable historical merit. Most of the content comes directly from his lectures in the second decade of the 16th century and was not significantly revised when it was published later. The preface on the other hand, written in 1557 gives a clearer indication of Luther's mature theology and is frequently quoted in works about Luther. If you are looking for essential Luther, Bondage of the Will or his Commentary on Galatians would be a better fit for that purpose. Finally, we must note that the book is what I call a pastoral commentary. That is, the interest of the author is primarily in assisting the reader in applying God's Word in his or her life. As such, it devotes no time to questions of the date and circumstance of Romans, and very little to matters of translation or text criticism. If you are looking for what I would call a "scholarly" commentary to assist you in preparing lessons, sermons, or what not, this is not what you are after. If it weren't for the awful italic insertions, I probably would have given it a 4.
Rating:
Summary: From The Man Who Longed To Understand Romans
Review: It's a great book for us, because have the principle SOLA FIDE in Rm 4.3 = Gn 15.6 = Abraham was justified by faith in James 2.24= Gn 22 = The faith of abraham was proved or justified by works Sola Gratia Sola Fide Sola Scriptura Solo Christi Soli Deo Gloria
Rating:
Summary: Wonderful for the modern "luterans"
Review: It's a great book for us, because have the principle SOLA FIDE in Rm 4.3 = Gn 15.6 = Abraham was justified by faith in James 2.24= Gn 22 = The faith of abraham was proved or justified by works Sola Gratia Sola Fide Sola Scriptura Solo Christi Soli Deo Gloria
Rating: 
Summary: A Classic
Review: Martin Luther's Romans is a classic--even moreso than Calvin's. For a man who himself found liberation from sin in the text of Romans, Luther's treatment of the epistle is full of zeal and freshness--even 500 years after his groundbreaking discovery turned into the most important event in Protestantism. Luther's German is homy and heartfelt, and this particular translation is commendable. Luther's exposition of Romans gave rise to one of the rallying cries of the Reformation, sola fide, 'justification by faith alone!' While this doctrine is truly central to the book of Romans, and while its 'discovery' was tantamount to the reformation of the church; it seems as though, for Luther, the gospel can be simplified down to this singular doctrine. While without question a fundamental of Paul's thought, sola fide does not exhaust the gospel he preaches, nor is it even the pre-eminent element of his gospel. While Luther touches on the redemptive-historical moment at key junctures in the book, he seems to run back to what for himself was so liberating. And that has led to a brand of subjectivism which threatens to obscure the objective foundation of the doctrine of justification itself. Because of his piety Luther himself does a decent job of avoiding that pitfall, but he leaves the pit uncovered so that his readers are susceptible to that danger. Enjoy Luther's Romans. Appreciate it for its original magnitude and historical impact. It's a classic. Embrace the doctrine of justification by faith. But take care to read it with some perspective.
Rating:
Summary: From The Man Who Longed To Understand Romans
Review: Perhaps the following quote from Luther will help clarify how he viewed this Bible Book:
"I greatly longed to understand Paul's Epistle to the Romans, and nothing stood in the way but that one expression, 'the righteounses of God', because I took it to mean that righteousness whereby God is righteous and deals righteously in punishing the unrighteous .. Night and day I pondered until ... I grasped the truth that the righteousness of God is that righteousness whereby, through grace and sheer mercy, he justifies us by faith. Thereupon I felt myself to be reborn and to have gone through open doors into paradise. The whole of Scripture took on a new meaning, and whereas before 'the righteousness of God' had filled me with hate, now it became to me inexpressibly sweet in greater love. This passage of Paul became to me a gateway to heaven."
Knowing what the Book of Romans meant to him makes it worth reading this commentary and finding out from this great theologian why there was a reformation at all.
<< 1 >>
| 
