Loading...Two events in 1516-1517 CE unexpectedly altered the field of biblical studies for all time. Yesterday I discussed the first published edition of the Greek New Testament by Erasmus (1516); today I discuss the “95 Theses” of Martin Luther. Neither scholar would likely have approved the tenets or conclusions of historical criticism that emerged from the foundation they laid. But emerge they did.
On October 31, 1517, Martin Luther, an Augustinian friar and ordained Catholic priest, posted his “95 theses” – traditionally said to have nailed them to the door of All Saints Church in Wittenburg. This moment is usually regarded as the beginning of the Protestant Reformation, even though Luther had no plans/intentions to break off from the Catholic church at this point. He was wanting reform from within, specifically with respect to the collection of “indulgences” to pay for St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome.
Indulgences were the system by which someone could donate money to the church to reduce their time in Purgatory.
Purgatory itself
Get access to Dr. Ehrman's library of 4,000+ articles plus five new articles per week about the New Testament and early Christianity. It costs as little as $2.99/mth and every cent goes to charity!
Unlock 4,000+ Articles Like This!
Hi Bart,
I wanted to ask an unrelated question about the feeding of the multitude stories found in the four gospels. The traditional interpretation is that Jesus multiplied food to feed the crowd. But when I read the stories it doesn’t seem to explicitly say that that’s what Jesus did, just that the entire crowd is fed at the end.
I also know there’s an alternative interpretation that Jesus’ act of sharing encouraged others to share the food they secretly had with them. Although I find the traditional interpretation more convincing I was wondering what you thought the gospel authors were intending to portray with the story. Thanks!
It’s because he breaks the bread (then the fish) and gives it to the disciples who distribute it. So it’s not him suggesting peole take out their picnic baskets. Furhter evidence is that later he reminds the disciples that he did that and points out that they aren’t understanding yet that he is the Son of God.
So, Luther set protestants on to the premise of sola scriptura and Erasmus turned it into scriptura errata..:All in two years. Today you can get a bumper sticker that says: “If it ain’t King James it ain’t Bible!”
I am grateful to have learned about the groundbreaking developments in biblical textual criticism that began in the sixteenth century. Since then, the field has continued to develop, and it seems to me that considerable progress has been made even during the past 100 years.
From your answers to my previous questions, however, I understand that some recent developments have involved changes in scholars’ perspectives, methods, and understanding of what textual criticism can accomplish, rather than simply producing major changes in the reconstructed text itself.
Since the field has developed considerably over the past 100 years, I assume that it will also make substantial progress over the next 100 years. What I find difficult to imagine is what will make that progress possible. If no important new manuscripts or other ancient documents are discovered, what kinds of advances do you think can still be made?
How do you imagine the field of textual criticism will look 100 years from now? Could new technologies, such as AI, lead to significant advances in the analysis of manuscripts, scribal practices, or relationships among textual traditions, even without major new manuscript discoveries?
It’ll be interesting to see, and anyone’s guess is about as good as mine. What strikes me the most about the past 100 years is that despite all the manuscript discoveries, new theories, new methods, and new technology, the wording of our Greek New Testaments have not changed much at all. Most of today’s standard edition is exactly like those of 1926, in most important ways. That’s one reason I got out of the field of research. Lots to do, and important internally to the discipline, but not a great deal of pay-off when it comes to what we think the authors originally wrote.
Where is the rest of the text?
If you’re not seeing it, Click Help and write a note to our support team.
Thank you for the concise overview of Luther’s unintended consequences in creating biblical scholarship.
I will pass it on to my Missouri Synod Lutheran Church pastor friend(!)
Good luck…