What do you think?
Rate this book
On the Jews and Their Lies
"In fact, they hold us Christians captive in our own country. They let us work in the sweat of our brow to earn money and property while they sit behind the stove, idle away the time, fart, and roast pears. They stuff themselves, guzzle, and live in luxury and ease from our hard-earned goods. With their accursed usury they hold us and our property captive." Martin Luther (1483 -1546) was a German priest, professor of theology and father of the Protestant Reformation. On the Jews and Their Lies was written in 1543. In the first ten sections, Luther compares Jews and Judaism to Christians and Christianity, and in the remainder of the book, advises that unless Jews give up Judaism and become Christians, they should be expelled from all Christian lands. He called for the burning of synagogues, the destruction of their religious writings, the execution of rabbis, for the abolition of usury and for Jews to be made to do manual labour.
148 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1543
13 people are currently reading
400 people want to read
About the author
Martin Luther
5,064 books812 followersMartin Luther (1483-1546) was a German monk, theologian, university professor and church reformer whose ideas inspired the Protestant Reformation and changed the course of Western civilization.
Luther's theology challenged the authority of the papacy by holding that the Bible is the only infallible source of religious authority and that all baptized Christians under Jesus are a spiritual priesthood. According to Luther, salvation was a free gift of God, received only by true repentance and faith in Jesus as the Messiah, a faith given by God and unmediated by the church.
Luther's confrontation with Charles V at the Diet of Worms over freedom of conscience in 1521 and his refusal to submit to the authority of the Emperor resulted in his being declared an outlaw of the state as he had been excommunicated from the Roman Catholic Church. Because of the perceived unity of the medieval Church with the secular rulers of western Europe, the widespread acceptance of Luther's doctrines and popular vindication of his thinking on individual liberties were both phenomenal and unprecedented.
His translation of the Bible into the vernacular, making it more accessible to ordinary people, had a tremendous political impact on the church and on German culture. It furthered the development of a standard version of the German language, added several principles to the art of translation, and influenced the translation of the English King James Bible. His hymns inspired the development of congregational singing within Christianity. His marriage to Katharina von Bora set a model for the practice of clerical marriage within Protestantism.
Much scholarly debate has concentrated on Luther's writings about the Jews. His statements that Jews' homes should be destroyed, their synagogues burned, money confiscated and liberty curtailed were revived and used in propaganda by the Nazis in 1933–45. As a result of this and his revolutionary theological views, his legacy remains controversial.
Luther's theology challenged the authority of the papacy by holding that the Bible is the only infallible source of religious authority and that all baptized Christians under Jesus are a spiritual priesthood. According to Luther, salvation was a free gift of God, received only by true repentance and faith in Jesus as the Messiah, a faith given by God and unmediated by the church.
Luther's confrontation with Charles V at the Diet of Worms over freedom of conscience in 1521 and his refusal to submit to the authority of the Emperor resulted in his being declared an outlaw of the state as he had been excommunicated from the Roman Catholic Church. Because of the perceived unity of the medieval Church with the secular rulers of western Europe, the widespread acceptance of Luther's doctrines and popular vindication of his thinking on individual liberties were both phenomenal and unprecedented.
His translation of the Bible into the vernacular, making it more accessible to ordinary people, had a tremendous political impact on the church and on German culture. It furthered the development of a standard version of the German language, added several principles to the art of translation, and influenced the translation of the English King James Bible. His hymns inspired the development of congregational singing within Christianity. His marriage to Katharina von Bora set a model for the practice of clerical marriage within Protestantism.
Much scholarly debate has concentrated on Luther's writings about the Jews. His statements that Jews' homes should be destroyed, their synagogues burned, money confiscated and liberty curtailed were revived and used in propaganda by the Nazis in 1933–45. As a result of this and his revolutionary theological views, his legacy remains controversial.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews
October 22, 2024
Based and True
November 30, 2024
Martin Luther's scintillating takedown of the Jewish people and their religion. For the unsophisticated minds or biased tribal activists who would shrilly denounce this classic treatise for "antisemitism", it must be remembered that Luther is almost equally as vituperative in his critique of "papists" (Catholics) and "saracens" (Muslims) in it.
August 6, 2025
Due to concern over my rating of this book, it was recommended that I comment on what I liked about it.
Through personal anecdote and Biblical exegesis, Luther staunchly defends the honor of his blessed Savior, Jesus Christ, against blasphemous words and gross misrepresentations. Yes, he does so in a punchy manner. His tone does not negate his love of Christ Jesus and his sincere desire that His name be honored, not blasphemed. God does not defend blasphemy and usury and neither did Luther. Overall, I appreciated this work on those grounds.
It’s worth noting that His tone is no more severe than the Church Fathers on this topic, just grounded in a different cultural context than the Fathers.
Through personal anecdote and Biblical exegesis, Luther staunchly defends the honor of his blessed Savior, Jesus Christ, against blasphemous words and gross misrepresentations. Yes, he does so in a punchy manner. His tone does not negate his love of Christ Jesus and his sincere desire that His name be honored, not blasphemed. God does not defend blasphemy and usury and neither did Luther. Overall, I appreciated this work on those grounds.
It’s worth noting that His tone is no more severe than the Church Fathers on this topic, just grounded in a different cultural context than the Fathers.
April 11, 2024
“The sun never did shine on a more bloodthirsty and revengeful people as they who imagine to be the people of God who desire to and think they must murder and crush the heathen” — Martin Luther
🤐
🤐
November 12, 2018
I read this book/ pamphlet to understand better the thinking of antisemitism. Most of the reasons for hating Jews stems from their collecting usury in the past. Luther also talks of how the Jews curse the Christians and blaspheme God, and he speaks with conviction on how much it offends him. Essentially, Luther is highly offended and this causes him to despise Jews.
The book includes much Biblical scriptures to try to support the belief that Jesus is the messiah that the Jews are waiting for, and while some scriptures seem to support this possibility, I am not entirely convinced based on Luther's explanation. I would have to read the Jews side of the argument to see who has more evidence for their beliefs. Most of Luther's assertions have to do with a 77 week period of time when Jerusalem is destroyed and the "scepter falls from the throne", etc., and this time is when the Messiah is to have come and then be killed. 77 weeks is supposed to mean years, but he does briefly explain the Hebraic translation of time and numbers. So, historically, the book taught me a few things and was not all hate spewing.
A few things are interesting and humorous, mostly how Luther describes how he would rather be a sow or pig than believe in the Jewish Messiah. The Jewish messiah differs from Jesus mainly in the fact that the Christian Jesus promises eternal life, and the Jewish messiah merely makes the Jews rule the world again. Luther would rather be a pig that does not worry about death and is satisfied with just being alive than have the sword of death hanging above his neck. He intersperses similar statements throughout the whole book, and these aid in my understanding of the time period the story is written.
All in all, the book was an easy, interesting read, but Luther's persuasiveness does not change my affections for present day Jews. As far as I am concerned, Jews can believe and live how they want.
The book includes much Biblical scriptures to try to support the belief that Jesus is the messiah that the Jews are waiting for, and while some scriptures seem to support this possibility, I am not entirely convinced based on Luther's explanation. I would have to read the Jews side of the argument to see who has more evidence for their beliefs. Most of Luther's assertions have to do with a 77 week period of time when Jerusalem is destroyed and the "scepter falls from the throne", etc., and this time is when the Messiah is to have come and then be killed. 77 weeks is supposed to mean years, but he does briefly explain the Hebraic translation of time and numbers. So, historically, the book taught me a few things and was not all hate spewing.
A few things are interesting and humorous, mostly how Luther describes how he would rather be a sow or pig than believe in the Jewish Messiah. The Jewish messiah differs from Jesus mainly in the fact that the Christian Jesus promises eternal life, and the Jewish messiah merely makes the Jews rule the world again. Luther would rather be a pig that does not worry about death and is satisfied with just being alive than have the sword of death hanging above his neck. He intersperses similar statements throughout the whole book, and these aid in my understanding of the time period the story is written.
All in all, the book was an easy, interesting read, but Luther's persuasiveness does not change my affections for present day Jews. As far as I am concerned, Jews can believe and live how they want.
February 4, 2025
Never judge a book you’ve never read.
If Luther was around today, the staunchest of Reformed bros would hang him.
If Luther was around today, the staunchest of Reformed bros would hang him.
October 16, 2025
This was short, but somehow still too long. Luther has an axe to grind—a horse to flog—and he doesn’t seem to mind that it’s long since dead. His case is made, and made well enough, within the first few pages. I was persuaded early on; he simply refused to stop persuading.
Still, I should like to commit the cultural sin of nuance. Luther’s fury toward the Jews of his day was not conjured out of thin air. Sproul and Ligonier have done yeoman's work in this regard. There were grievances, both moral and theological, yet he binds all together in one great bundle, and the whole thing burns far too hot.
On Usury.
Usury is vile—an evil that corrodes nations and souls alike. Luther’s moral sense is keen here, and modern readers might do well to listen and look at themselves rather than their neighbor. The Jews of Luther's time were deeply entangled in the practice, but this was (and is) no peculiarly Jewish vice. Middleman minorities have often found themselves driven into such trades when all others were closed to them. Thomas Sowell’s essay “Are the Jews Generic?” makes this plain.
On the Rejection of Christ.
Luther’s charge against Talmudic Judaism—that its rejection of Christ is not mere unbelief but active blasphemy—is fierce and, his biblical reasoning, formidable. This is Luther at his strongest, and he refutes every so-called argument from the Talmudian. He speaks with the thunder of the prophets, setting before us the antithesis between the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent, between gathering with Christ and scattering against Him. Yet even here, the brush grows too broad. There were—and are—Talmudians who revile Christ and demand the right to do so publicly, and such should be answered with forthrightness. But it does not follow that all Jews, even those devout in their own way, ought to receive the same civil and political treatment, even if they receive the same theological rebukes.
Moses’s Jews and Caesar’s Jews.
I found this distinction unexpectedly helpful. “Jew” is a word too easily wielded, and Luther’s dichotomy gives it a needed edge of precision. It may yet serve us moderns in our discourses.
Luther’s Counsel to Church and State.
His advice to pastors and parishioners—to warn, to preach, to distinguish the Church from the blasphemies of the Talmud—is good and right. But his proposals for the magistrate are another matter. As a Christian nationalist of the classical magisterial two-kingdom persuasion, I hold that Luther's prescriptions may be lawful, yet they would be decidedly unwise in the American republic we inhabit. Public blasphemy of Christ ought not to be shielded by law, for the public square belongs to Christ and the Christian. Still, I would suffer synagogues to stand, provided they neither proselytise nor propagate open scorn for our Lord. America, I think, has walked this line with a measure of prudence, and her decline has permitted not merely the Talmudian but the Mohammeden and the Freudian an empty stage and a microphone. This is not their action as much as it is Christian America's slothful inaction, but I digress. Though I read Romans 11 through a preterist lens, I find myself drawn to the Deuteronomic vision—that the Jew might be provoked to holy jealousy when he sees the blessings of God resting upon the Christian who obeys Christ.
In the end, this is not the infamous book it is often imagined to be. It is too long for what it says and too bound to its own moment to speak clearly to ours. Some of its insights still glimmer with truth; much of its temper does not. Luther’s words were born of his century and culture. It would be folly to lift his medieval quarrels whole cloth and drop them into the modern age. One ought not to confuse his personal crusade with timeless theology. Similarly, one ought not allow personal vendettas to justify poor literary analysis and application. Context, as ever, is the better part of discernment.
Still, I should like to commit the cultural sin of nuance. Luther’s fury toward the Jews of his day was not conjured out of thin air. Sproul and Ligonier have done yeoman's work in this regard. There were grievances, both moral and theological, yet he binds all together in one great bundle, and the whole thing burns far too hot.
On Usury.
Usury is vile—an evil that corrodes nations and souls alike. Luther’s moral sense is keen here, and modern readers might do well to listen and look at themselves rather than their neighbor. The Jews of Luther's time were deeply entangled in the practice, but this was (and is) no peculiarly Jewish vice. Middleman minorities have often found themselves driven into such trades when all others were closed to them. Thomas Sowell’s essay “Are the Jews Generic?” makes this plain.
On the Rejection of Christ.
Luther’s charge against Talmudic Judaism—that its rejection of Christ is not mere unbelief but active blasphemy—is fierce and, his biblical reasoning, formidable. This is Luther at his strongest, and he refutes every so-called argument from the Talmudian. He speaks with the thunder of the prophets, setting before us the antithesis between the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent, between gathering with Christ and scattering against Him. Yet even here, the brush grows too broad. There were—and are—Talmudians who revile Christ and demand the right to do so publicly, and such should be answered with forthrightness. But it does not follow that all Jews, even those devout in their own way, ought to receive the same civil and political treatment, even if they receive the same theological rebukes.
Moses’s Jews and Caesar’s Jews.
I found this distinction unexpectedly helpful. “Jew” is a word too easily wielded, and Luther’s dichotomy gives it a needed edge of precision. It may yet serve us moderns in our discourses.
Luther’s Counsel to Church and State.
His advice to pastors and parishioners—to warn, to preach, to distinguish the Church from the blasphemies of the Talmud—is good and right. But his proposals for the magistrate are another matter. As a Christian nationalist of the classical magisterial two-kingdom persuasion, I hold that Luther's prescriptions may be lawful, yet they would be decidedly unwise in the American republic we inhabit. Public blasphemy of Christ ought not to be shielded by law, for the public square belongs to Christ and the Christian. Still, I would suffer synagogues to stand, provided they neither proselytise nor propagate open scorn for our Lord. America, I think, has walked this line with a measure of prudence, and her decline has permitted not merely the Talmudian but the Mohammeden and the Freudian an empty stage and a microphone. This is not their action as much as it is Christian America's slothful inaction, but I digress. Though I read Romans 11 through a preterist lens, I find myself drawn to the Deuteronomic vision—that the Jew might be provoked to holy jealousy when he sees the blessings of God resting upon the Christian who obeys Christ.
In the end, this is not the infamous book it is often imagined to be. It is too long for what it says and too bound to its own moment to speak clearly to ours. Some of its insights still glimmer with truth; much of its temper does not. Luther’s words were born of his century and culture. It would be folly to lift his medieval quarrels whole cloth and drop them into the modern age. One ought not to confuse his personal crusade with timeless theology. Similarly, one ought not allow personal vendettas to justify poor literary analysis and application. Context, as ever, is the better part of discernment.
October 16, 2025
“O God, Heavenly Father, relent and let your wrath over them be sufficient and come to an end, for the sake of your dear Son! Amen.”
Idk if most of the people who hate this have even read it, but I kinda doubt it.
Idk if most of the people who hate this have even read it, but I kinda doubt it.
January 20, 2023
Gut zu lesen, sehr interessant, schreckliche Denkweise!
October 11, 2025
surprisingly edifying
January 30, 2025
Ich wusste zwar im Vorhinein, dass Luthers Denken vom Antisemitismus geprägt war, doch das Ausmaß des geradezu wahnhaften Hasses, den er in diesem kurzen Pamphlet freien Lauf lässt, hat mich dennoch sehr erschreckt.
Augenscheinlich ist, dass Luther seine eigenen gegen Juden gerichteten Gewaltvorstellungen mittels pathischer Projektion den Juden selbst zuschreibt.
Besonders gruselig ist, dass Luther – ähnlich wie später die Nationalsozialisten (und wie heute noch einige Rechtsextreme und Islamisten) – die Juden als Todfeinde der eigenen Gemeinschaft dämonisiert: Er wiederholt gleich mehrmals, dass es für die christliche Gemeinschaft außer dem Teufel selbst keinen gefährlicheren Feind gebe als die Juden. Das erinnert stark an die NS-Parole: „Die Juden sind unser Unglück.“
Erschreckend sind seine ganz offen und aggressiv vorgetragenen Aufrufe zu Brandstiftung und Vertreibung sowie die zumindest implizite Aufstachelung zu körperlicher Gewalt und Pogromen.
Auffällig ist, wie bei Luther bereits ähnliche antisemitische Klischees vorkommen, die auch heute noch – also gut 500 (!) Jahre später – wirkmächtig sind.
In Luthers Text wird übrigens auch ganz offensichtlich, was im Antisemitismus sonst häufig eher verdeckt mitschwingt: der elementare Zusammenhang zwischen protestantischer bzw. später deutscher Arbeitsideologie und Antisemitismus. Was Luther den Juden vorwirft, ist, dass sie zu ehrlicher Arbeit nicht fähig seien und deshalb durch parasitäre „Wucherei“ die hart arbeitenden christlichen Gemeinschaften ausnutzen würden – weshalb man sie unbedingt loswerden müsse. Das erinnert doch sehr stark an die nationalsozialistische Entgegensetzung von „ehrlicher deutscher Arbeit“ und „parasitärer jüdischer Nicht-Arbeit“. (Nicht zufällig stand über Auschwitz der Satz: „Arbeit macht frei.“)
---
Alles in allem ein schrecklicher, aber (aus kritischer Absicht!) sehr lesenswerter kurzer Text, um sich über die Geschichte des Antisemitismus und über bis heute zentrale Elemente des Antisemitismus klar zu werden.
Augenscheinlich ist, dass Luther seine eigenen gegen Juden gerichteten Gewaltvorstellungen mittels pathischer Projektion den Juden selbst zuschreibt.
Besonders gruselig ist, dass Luther – ähnlich wie später die Nationalsozialisten (und wie heute noch einige Rechtsextreme und Islamisten) – die Juden als Todfeinde der eigenen Gemeinschaft dämonisiert: Er wiederholt gleich mehrmals, dass es für die christliche Gemeinschaft außer dem Teufel selbst keinen gefährlicheren Feind gebe als die Juden. Das erinnert stark an die NS-Parole: „Die Juden sind unser Unglück.“
Erschreckend sind seine ganz offen und aggressiv vorgetragenen Aufrufe zu Brandstiftung und Vertreibung sowie die zumindest implizite Aufstachelung zu körperlicher Gewalt und Pogromen.
Auffällig ist, wie bei Luther bereits ähnliche antisemitische Klischees vorkommen, die auch heute noch – also gut 500 (!) Jahre später – wirkmächtig sind.
In Luthers Text wird übrigens auch ganz offensichtlich, was im Antisemitismus sonst häufig eher verdeckt mitschwingt: der elementare Zusammenhang zwischen protestantischer bzw. später deutscher Arbeitsideologie und Antisemitismus. Was Luther den Juden vorwirft, ist, dass sie zu ehrlicher Arbeit nicht fähig seien und deshalb durch parasitäre „Wucherei“ die hart arbeitenden christlichen Gemeinschaften ausnutzen würden – weshalb man sie unbedingt loswerden müsse. Das erinnert doch sehr stark an die nationalsozialistische Entgegensetzung von „ehrlicher deutscher Arbeit“ und „parasitärer jüdischer Nicht-Arbeit“. (Nicht zufällig stand über Auschwitz der Satz: „Arbeit macht frei.“)
---
Alles in allem ein schrecklicher, aber (aus kritischer Absicht!) sehr lesenswerter kurzer Text, um sich über die Geschichte des Antisemitismus und über bis heute zentrale Elemente des Antisemitismus klar zu werden.
August 10, 2020
Martin Luther was a gifted writer. Unfortunately, he put his talents to use in this extremely inflammatory and racist booklet. I knew he had written this, but I wanted to see for myself how awful it was, and Luther fully convinced me that he was an extremely unpleasant, racist prick.
Read
March 31, 2025To have a better understanding of church history, thorns and all, I've wanted to acquaint myself with some of the more controversial writings in church history including the works of Knox on female rulers, Dabney on race, and this volume by Luther.
November 2, 2025
My purpose in reading this work by Luther was to witness with my own eyes where his theology led him pertaining "The Apple of [God's] Eye" (Zechariah 2:8) in his later days - as this work was penned a mere 3 years before L's death.
A review in a word: deranged.
This book is evidence that L suffered from a bad case of the "boastful branch syndrome" (Romans 11:11+).
Yes, Luther was grieved, it seems, by the blindness of the Jews (as he ranted at length concerning their not seeing what Scripture plainly says about the Messiah's first coming). Unfortunately, this work seems to not only reflect his pent-up angst, but his own blindness of key Scriptures such as Romans 11:25+ that speak of the Jews blindness to Messiah for the Gentile's sake! How could he express anything but compassion towards [Jews] who are (temporarily) cut off, for the sake of [Gentiles], who were once without Hope!
Further, God is not and never was done with the Jews, as many, such as Luther, assert (dispensationalist/replacement theology). For "thus says the Lord:
“If heaven above can be measured,
And the foundations of the earth searched out beneath,
I will also cast off all the seed of Israel
For all that they have done, says the Lord." (Jeremiah 31:37).
Embarrassingly, L promotes in several parts of this rant several erronious anti-Jew propagandas (poisoned wells, kidnapped gentile children for their blood, etc.); which he himself admits are just "stories" and he is "well aware they deny all of this" (p. 193), but he slanders the Jews as capable because he likens Jews as demon-possessed or the devil himself.
I could go on in great length, but I shant, of the vulgar speech L used to describe Jews. In summary, and in his own words: "...a desperate, thoroughly evil, poisonous, and devilish lot are these Jews, 1,400 years have been and still are our plague, our pestilence, and our misfortune" (p. 190 of my copy that includes a forward by a questionable T. Dalton).
May God be true, and every man a liar. I have heard many defend Luther by saying that he was "near the end of his days and possibly out of his mind". This is speculation at best, and uncovering his true heart at worst - for out of the mouth (or, pen) flows what lies in the heart.
We would be foolish to elevate any man (Luther, etc.) above what Scripture plainly says, and the Lord’s Firstborn is still a blessing to all nations (Genesis 15, Romans 11, etc.), or God is a liar and unfaithful to His covenants. And God is neither liar nor unfaithful; in His Son and Promises we put our full faith and allegiance.
In general, might I suggest: stick to God's Word first and foremost - allowing God's Spirit to illuminate what Scripture (ergo, God) plainly intends us to understand. Secondly, find teachers/scholars that more completely align with *all* of it's teachings, in a historical-context-grammatical-language-and-syntax hermeneutical way.
I would be loathe to put myself under, or promote in any way, an outted hate-spewing anti-semite, when our Messiah *is* Jewish, and we are grafted in to the commonwealth of Israel, and He (Jesus) commands us to love *all*, including those we consider to be enemies.
May the Name of God be kept Holy and Sacred, may His people be ones that worship Him in Spirit and Truth, foresaking all others. Selah, and Shalom.
A review in a word: deranged.
This book is evidence that L suffered from a bad case of the "boastful branch syndrome" (Romans 11:11+).
Yes, Luther was grieved, it seems, by the blindness of the Jews (as he ranted at length concerning their not seeing what Scripture plainly says about the Messiah's first coming). Unfortunately, this work seems to not only reflect his pent-up angst, but his own blindness of key Scriptures such as Romans 11:25+ that speak of the Jews blindness to Messiah for the Gentile's sake! How could he express anything but compassion towards [Jews] who are (temporarily) cut off, for the sake of [Gentiles], who were once without Hope!
Further, God is not and never was done with the Jews, as many, such as Luther, assert (dispensationalist/replacement theology). For "thus says the Lord:
“If heaven above can be measured,
And the foundations of the earth searched out beneath,
I will also cast off all the seed of Israel
For all that they have done, says the Lord." (Jeremiah 31:37).
Embarrassingly, L promotes in several parts of this rant several erronious anti-Jew propagandas (poisoned wells, kidnapped gentile children for their blood, etc.); which he himself admits are just "stories" and he is "well aware they deny all of this" (p. 193), but he slanders the Jews as capable because he likens Jews as demon-possessed or the devil himself.
I could go on in great length, but I shant, of the vulgar speech L used to describe Jews. In summary, and in his own words: "...a desperate, thoroughly evil, poisonous, and devilish lot are these Jews, 1,400 years have been and still are our plague, our pestilence, and our misfortune" (p. 190 of my copy that includes a forward by a questionable T. Dalton).
May God be true, and every man a liar. I have heard many defend Luther by saying that he was "near the end of his days and possibly out of his mind". This is speculation at best, and uncovering his true heart at worst - for out of the mouth (or, pen) flows what lies in the heart.
We would be foolish to elevate any man (Luther, etc.) above what Scripture plainly says, and the Lord’s Firstborn is still a blessing to all nations (Genesis 15, Romans 11, etc.), or God is a liar and unfaithful to His covenants. And God is neither liar nor unfaithful; in His Son and Promises we put our full faith and allegiance.
In general, might I suggest: stick to God's Word first and foremost - allowing God's Spirit to illuminate what Scripture (ergo, God) plainly intends us to understand. Secondly, find teachers/scholars that more completely align with *all* of it's teachings, in a historical-context-grammatical-language-and-syntax hermeneutical way.
I would be loathe to put myself under, or promote in any way, an outted hate-spewing anti-semite, when our Messiah *is* Jewish, and we are grafted in to the commonwealth of Israel, and He (Jesus) commands us to love *all*, including those we consider to be enemies.
May the Name of God be kept Holy and Sacred, may His people be ones that worship Him in Spirit and Truth, foresaking all others. Selah, and Shalom.
November 4, 2025
I wanted to read this primary source in preparation for teaching on Martin Luther. Goodness, I know he was a man of his times but this was horrific. Luther bears some culpability for later German antisemitism and even the Holocaust - the Nazis drew on this pamphlet to justify their blend of antisemitism and German nationalism. Sow the wind and reap the whirlwind.
September 27, 2025
Martín Lutero expone en este ensayo todos sus argumentos por los cuales, en su opinión, el pueblo judío es hipócrita y malicioso. Como cristiano, considero que este libro debería ser lectura obligatoria en los catecismos para comprender nuestras diferencias con los judíos; queda a criterio de cada cristiano si Lutero tenía razón o no.
Read
February 27, 2025It seems that my previous rating and review for this book was deleted
June 14, 2024
There is a reason different populations of unrelated peoples have all come to similar conclusions about the Jewish people. The famed Martin Luther presents his reasons, from his time, here in this work. A people are not exiled from numerous nations throughout 2 millenniums simply because of superstitious animosity.
October 15, 2025
This is so obviously reasonable. Those who condemn this man in regards to what he believed about the Jews, without actually reading what he wrote, are stupid, and I do mean that in the most academic sense possible.
May 23, 2024
Also watch this. WatchEuropa.com
Read
October 15, 2024I read this to get Martin Luther's argument against the Jews and found it lacking. He really did not give specific examples in the last couple pages and the example is from 300 AD.
October 13, 2025
Nunca había leído a un autor ser tan pasivo-agresivo, sarcastico y hacer criticas tan denigrantes a un selectivo, fue muy comico.
Read
October 29, 2025-4/10 rage bait atleast be creative with it
November 4, 2025
Definitely an important read as it gives insight into the Talmudic religion of today; how they twist and pervert the scriptures to say that Jesus is not the Messiah.
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews