Quotes from Martin Luther

Indeed, to spur your Baal to action, I will taunt and challenge you ... to create as much as a single frog in the name and by the power of free choice, though the heathen and ungodly magicians in Egypt were able to create many.... I will not set you the heavy task of creating lice, which they could not produce either

here where we are concerned not with the dogma of Scripture and the Corycian cavern only, but in very truth with the awful secrets of the Divine Majesty (namely, why he works in the way we have said), here you smash bolts and bars and rush in all but blaspheming, as indignant as possible with God because you are not allowed to see the meaning and purpose of such a judgment of his.

Without Christ there is no access to the Father, but futile rambling; no truth, but hypocrisy; no life, but eternal death.

Peter erred in life and in doctrine. Paul might have dismissed Peter's error as a matter of no consequence. But Paul saw that Peter's error would lead to the damage of the whole Church unless it were corrected. Therefore he withstood Peter to his face. The Church, Peter, the apostles, angels from heaven, are not to be heard unless they teach the genuine Word of God.

You see then, that Diatribe truly possesses a free choice in her handling of Scriptures, so that words of one and the same type are for her obliged to prove endeavor in one place and freedom in another, exactly as she pleases.

Here again Diatribe confidently brings in a gloss to suit herself, just as if Scripture were under her complete control. As for considering the prophet's meaning and intention, what need was there for a man of such authority to do that? All we need is: Erasmus says so, therefore it is so.

I ask for the Scripture, and Eck offers me the Fathers. I ask for the sun, and he shows me his lanterns. I ask, "where is your Scripture proof?" and he adduces Ambrose and Cyril. . . . With all due respect to the Fathers, I prefer the authority of Scripture.

It was expected, however, that [Erasmus] should make some reply and give some definition. But instead, by availing himself of a rhetorical transition, he drags us who knew nothing of rhetoric away with him, as if the matter at issue here were of no moment, but simply a lot of quibbling, and dashes bravely out of the crowded court, crowned with ivy and laurel.

When you understand this—and you should because "what hast thou that thou didst not receive?"—you will not flatter yourself on the one hand and on the other hand you will not carry yourself with the thought of resigning from the ministry when you are insulted, reproached, or persecuted.

So also in the gospel (Matt. 16:13, 15) "Who do men say that the Son of Man is? But you (that is, you who are gods), who do you say that I am?

for Isaac was neither afraid nor terrified, but of his own accord obeyed his father and God. For not terror but spontaneous obedience and fortitude should be attributed to the saints. For fear signifies that sin is ruling, and sin was not ruling in Isaac, but an obedient spirit. Although the flesh fought back, nevertheless the spirit, which subjected the flesh to itself, conquered and gained dominion. But

We need a millstone around our neck to keep us humble.