Talk:Martin Luther and antisemitism

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


On Luther's "turning point" towards anti-semitism[edit]

It would be very helpful to add a little clarification to the first paragraph of the Anti-Jewish agitation section that talks about Luther's 'decisive turning point" towards anti-semitism. Currently, the section does not make very clear what the turning point was. Instead, this section begins by talking about Luther's lack of sympathy towards the Jews of Saxony, while the previous section outlines his older stances protesting the persecution of Jews. The latter section should be more explicit about what caused Luther to change his mind.

I have a feeling that a little more info can be found in the book cited in the "turning point" quote: Heiko Oberman, Luther: Man Between God and the Devil (New York: Image Books, 1989). I'll take a look at this work to see if Oberman was any more specific about what exactly caused Luther to change his views about Jewish people. But if anyone would like to beat me to that, feel free :-) Enderandpeter (talk) 18:46, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I heartily concur. The entry is enigmatic as it stands. Who can take up the task? Bazuz (talk) 11:15, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Diarrhea[edit]

Scat Vandalism[edit]

This paragraph seems like vandalism to me: A few years later, in 1528, Luther reported a nearly fatal bout of diarrhea brought on by his consumption of Kosher food. In a letter to Melancthon, Luther suggested that the Jewish community had attempted to poison him. Luther further suggested that Kosher foods, which he believed to be disagreeable with the constitution of Gentiles, were eaten by the Jews (who, presumably, would not experience adverse effects from their consumption) as a show of superiority over the Gentiles and as a means of separating themselves from the mainstream German culture. He suggested that Kosher foods be banned from Christian nations.

I have NEVER come across this in any written source. This has spread to other wiki Luther related articles. Even on google, the ONLY source I got on this was a blog citing this article as its source. I can't believe such childish vandalism on so an important a topic has been allowed to last for years. --Gary123 (talk) 01:59, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Did Luther really get diarrhea from Kosher food?[edit]

So the wikipedia article on Luther and Anti-Semitism used to say that Luther's anti-semitism began when he ate Kosher food and got violent diarrhea. I assumed it was vandalism, because all my google hits lead back to wikipedia.

This was the quote on the Martin Luther and antisemitism : "A few years later, in 1528, Luther reported a nearly fatal bout of diarrhea brought on by his consumption of Kosher food. In a letter to Melancthon, Luther suggested that the Jewish community had attempted to poison him. Luther further suggested that Kosher foods, which he believed to be disagreeable with the constitution of Gentiles, were eaten by the Jews (who, presumably, would not experience adverse effects from their consumption) as a show of superiority over the Gentiles and as a means of separating themselves from the mainstream German culture. He suggested that Kosher foods be banned from Christian nations."

But now I was reading Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy by Eric Metaxas and I came across this passage: http://books.google.com/books?id=qsjhrs_SKvgC&pg=PT76&dq=luther+kosher+1528&hl=en&ei=HTXNToKDDOfL0QGG3cEO&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=diarrhea&f=false

"The troubles started in 1528 when, after a large meal of kosher food, he suffered a shattering attack of diarrhea. ... But the tragicomedy became purest tragedy when, three years before his death, Luther advocated actions against the"

I'm wondering if perhaps the author borrowed this from wikipedia without doing the research or if there really is truth to this story? --Gary123 (talk) 19:51, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

More on Luther's kosher diarrhea[edit]

I've moved this section to the article Talk: page:

It has been argued that Luther's views on Judaism started to change dramatically when he suffered a shattering attack of diarrhea after consuming a large kosher meal.<ref name=lutherandjews>{{cite book|title=Saving Darwin|author=Karl W. Giberson|date=2010|publisher=Harper One|location=New York, NY|accessdate=05-18-13}}</ref> In the time following this health scare, Luther's health rapidly deteriorated and he became increasingly anti-Semitic.<ref name=lutherandjews /> Luther concluded that the Jews had tried to poison him and eventually abandoned his efforts to reach out to them.[1]

The reference given does not mention a page number, and the source itself only mention Luther on page 77, and there never mentions anything about this. Jayjg (talk) 01:53, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Looking into this further, it appears that this may be a longstanding hoax. The claim was first inserted into the article On the Jews and Their Lies by 4.228.189.72 (talk · contribs) on September 15, 2007, the only edit ever made by that IP. The text read as follows:

A few years later, in 1528, Luther reported an epic bout of diarrhea brought on by his consumption of Kosher food. In a letter to Melancthon, Luther suggested that the Jewish community had attempted to poison him. Luther further suggested that Kosher foods, which he believed to be disagreeable with the constitution of Gentiles, were eaten by the Jews (who, presumably, would not experience adverse effects from their consumption) as a show of superiority over the Gentiles and as a means of seperating themselves from the mainstream German culture. He suggested that Kosher foods be banned from Christian nations.

The material never had a source, and none was never found for it. The claim was moved from the On the Jews and Their Lies article to this one as part of a larger content move on March 29, 2008.[1][2] It remained in the article unsourced until November 11, 2010, when an IP editor removed it as "unsourced tripe".
Meanwhile, the hoax appears to have spread to a small number of webpages (which all cite Wikipedia), other language Wikipedias, and (as pointed out in the Talk: page section above) at least one book, Eric Metaxas's Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy. Published on April 20, 2010, it states in passing that "The troubles started in 1528 when, after a large meal of kosher food, he suffered a shattering attack of diarrhea. He concluded that the Jews had tried to poison him."[3] Metaxas cites no source for this, and appears to have been taken in by the hoax on Wikipedia. No other source on Luther that I can find has any knowledge of this key incident; none of Luther's many biographers make any mention of it, nor do any historians of Germany, Lutheran church history, or the Protestant Reformation. Jayjg (talk) 04:36, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jeez, that's embarrassing. I think you're right. Thanks for finding and removing that! – Quadell (talk) 11:13, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It was cited in the book Saving Darwin that Luther's anti-semeitism likely started in 1528 after he caught diarrhea after eating a kosher meal. Read a cited snippet of it for yourself.[4] I am a staunch Lutheran myself and it personally offends me if this article is written in manner that is slanderous. It needs to be accurate and in compliance with the NPOV Policy.JoetheMoe25 (talk) 13:25, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As Jayjg stated above, Giberson's book Saving Darwin does not say that at all. The website you link to quotes Eric Metaxas, who is in turn quoting the Wikipedia hoax content. – Quadell (talk) 15:36, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In addition to Quadell's point, the internet posting is from a "soon to be published book", though the posting was made in 2010 and there's no sign of any such book. The alleged author of that book, if it ever is published, is Gerald R. "Jerry" Bergman, apparently a creationist who teaches various science courses at Northwest State Community College. In other words, this is not a WP:RS on Martin Luther. Also, you should review WP:SAYWHEREYOUREADIT - you can't cite a source that you haven't actually read (Saving Darwin), and this is a perfect example of why. Jayjg (talk) 16:47, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Do you think it would qualify for our "hall of blame" at Wikipedia:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia already?
--Matthiaspaul (talk) 21:58, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Still being added[edit]

I saw this same claim on the article and thought it sounded very much like vandalism, so I googled it, and saw pretty much what the above editors have been saying - almost all mentions of it appear to be either mirrors of Wikipedia or to be taking it from Wikipedia with even extremely similar phrasing. I then saw this discussion, and felt confident to remove the paragraph. If someone finds a genuinely reliable source—or, better, a couple genuinely reliable sources, as this is an extraordinary claim (thus requiring extraordinary evidence) and it seems clear that the falsehood has already spread from Wikipedia to be mentioned by lazy writers who may appear at first to be reliable—then they can add it back in, with those sources cited. But I feel very confident that won't happen, and for now the paragraph should be kept out. So anyway, I'm just adding this here to alert future editors that this bit of vandalism appears to still be something we need to look out for. BreakfastJr (talk) 04:55, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

TO PHILIP MELANCHTHON[edit]

Luther warns his friend against poison in a letter dated april 21, 1541. It is listed as letter 418. and you can read it here: http://www.godrules.net/library/luther/208luther2.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richard Eldritch (talk • contribs) 21:53, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

punctuation[edit]

Please. This is 2014. Look at this edit. Didn't we settle all this in about 2005? How does an article get to be as long and well developed as this while disregarding something so simple and basic? Michael Hardy (talk) 05:16, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't make any of these edits, but I've never seen the difference between the "good" dashes and the "bad" dashes and I can't be the only one. Not trying to sound jerky or belittle your irritation, I have my own pet peeves as well, but I mean - yes - that was clearly a large number of changes all on the same issue, but is it possible you are overstating the stupidity of us your fellow editors... Ckruschke (talk) 19:15, 24 January 2014 (UTC)Ckruschke[reply]

antisemitism versus anti-Semitism[edit]

I did some research long ago that indicated to me that "antisemitism" was preferable despite obvious reasons to think otherwise. Anyway, could we please reach consensus and consistency in the article? Thanks in advance... Dontreader (talk) 02:40, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Racism in modern Europe[edit]

One guy said outside our synagogue: "we want to communicate with others, but it's easier to slay Jews than to love them" you may delete my comment but you cannot delete what he said. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:587:4114:C800:D889:A530:D235:968A (talk) 16:53, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No one enacted all Luther's recommendations... except?[edit]

In the section, The influence of Luther's views, after listing officials who implemented some of Luther's ideas, the article states, "Nevertheless, no ruler enacted all of Luther's anti-Jewish recommendations". While Luther's recommendations contradicted themselves, and so really couldn't ALL be enacted, this statement seems to give a pass to the Third Reich. Perhaps it could be modified to: "Nevertheless, until Hitler, no ruler systematically enacted Luther's anti-Jewish recommendations", or something like that. BTW, as a Christian pastor, I am not recommending this as a way of piling on Luther. (He did enough piling on himself to last throughout history.) I'm recommending this because the sentence, as it is, seems to be mostly false. To agree with the statement, one must either be overly particular about what Luther's "recommendations" were, or overly particular about how the NAZIs went about implementing their anti-Semitism. Bob Enyart, Denver KGOV radio host (talk) 16:59, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Martin Luther and antisemitism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:26, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

After checking, one link doesn't work[edit]

I can't get the URL: http://www3.baylor.edu/American_Jewish/everythingthatusedtobehere/resources/hh.htm

I retrieved this: https://web.archive.org/web/20090105144135/.baylor.edu/American_Jewish/everythingthatusedtobehere/resources/hh.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richard Eldritch (talk • contribs) 22:05, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

lede[edit]

I think the lede, or intro section or whatever you want to call it, should be expanded. Right now it is just one sentence.PopSci (talk) 16:41, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 15 external links on Martin Luther and antisemitism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:47, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Redundancy change[edit]

In the section called "Debate about Luther's influence on the Nazis" these two sentences appear independently a couple lines from each other that pretty much say the same thing.

Hans Hillerbrand argues that to focus on Luther's role in the development of German antisemitism is to underestimate the "larger peculiarities of German history.

Hans J. Hillerbrand states that the view that "Luther significantly encouraged the development of German anti-Semitism... puts far too much emphasis on Luther and not enough on the larger peculiarities of German history"

I would change it myself but I'm not sure how to rearrange the bibliography. I would suggest removing the first one as the second sentence has a citation to other scholars that share the same view. LuckerDawg (talk) 21:39, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

hello @LuckerDawg:, you can tell me which reference link in bibliography you desire to rearrange, i will try to help with my knowledge Ahendra (talk) 14:14, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would suggest taking out the sentence "Hans Hillerbrand argues that to focus on Luther's role in the development of German antisemitism is to underestimate the "larger peculiarities of German history."
because this sentence already covers this notion: "Hans J. Hillerbrand states that the view that "Luther significantly encouraged the development of German anti-Semitism... puts far too much emphasis on Luther and not enough on the larger peculiarities of German history""
And remove reference 50 in the bibliography, the citation in the second more elaborate sentence is from the same source anyway (55).
Thank you! LuckerDawg (talk) 21:47, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference lutherandjews was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Martin_Luther_and_antisemitism&oldid=1219458107"