Holy Scripture
Via Pieper’s Christian Dogmatics, vol. 3: 363
Exposing the fraud perpetrated by the “enthusiasts,” who, under the guise of interpreting Scripture, by referring to John 6 entirely did away with Scripture, Luther wrote: “It is the arrogance and fatuous malice of the wicked devil who would in this serious matter make fools of us through these ‘enthusiasts’ by pretending a readiness to accept the instruction of Scripture if only he be first permitted to get rid of Scripture or twist it to suit his prejudice. Just as if I would deprive my opponent of his weapons by cunning words and gave him in place thereof painted paper weapons – just like his – and then would dare him to vanquish me with them and fight me off. Oh, that would be a daring hero – fit to be spit upon!” (St. L. XX:780) Back of the proposal of the “enthusiasts” to explain the words of institution with John 6 lay the thought, more or less clearly expressed, that the sense of all Scripture passages, including the clear ones, must be determined by comparing them with other passages. Luther had no use for such an exegetical method. He wrote: “The result of this method will be that no passage in Scripture will remain certain and clear, and the comparison of one passage with another will never end… To demand that clear and certain passages be explained by drawing in other passages amounts to an iniquitous deriding of the truth (nequiter veritatem illudere) and the injection of fog into the light (nebulas in lucem vehere). If one set out to explain all passages by first comparing them with other passages, he would be mixing up Scripture into an uncertain and wild chaos (totam Scripturam in infinitum et incertum chaos confundere). Is not this pain enough? No doubt you will see that this is the case.” Luther is unalterably convinced that God gave Holy Scripture such a form that the entire Christian doctrine is revealed and submitted in passages which need no “exegesis” (exegesis in the sense of removing obscurities).
