Among the glorious gifts of grace that God had placed in the blessed D. Martin Luther, as the chosen instrument of the blessed Church Reformation, one of the most distinguished was that he not only loved the divine Word with all his heart and indeed held it higher than many thousands of pieces of gold and silver; but also possessed a deep insight into it and was proficient in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments. The goodness and wisdom of God had united both in a high degree in his soul. He was indeed a great lover of the divine word, and found in it his greatest pleasure, when he could deal with it, recognize from it the way he should walk, fortify himself in his faith by it, and in the many and various tribulations he had to experience, draw from it some consolation, of which he gave many samples and at the same time left behind unimpeachable testimonies, which confirm what is praised of him in this respect. For he showed such love and respect for the Scriptures at every opportunity. From the beginning of his academic office until its conclusion, he read constantly and tirelessly about it and sought to make it known to his listeners: he based his teachings solely on it and was therefore firm and immovable in them. Against his adversaries he used it as the sword of the spirit; thereby he drove them into a corner and refuted them with all their errors, so that they were unable to do anything against him, which happened especially with the papists. He gives the most emphatic praise to such divine Scripture and admonishes all,
to read it diligently and to call upon God for true enlightenment if they want to attain the right knowledge and promote their salvation. Among other things, he says: "Therefore, the word of God should be held in honor and esteem. For it bringeth forth much fruit; and though it doeth not so with the crude and ungodly, yet it doeth so with the thirsty that receive it, and they are made superfluous, and are refreshed with a river thereby"; and again, "Thou shalt know that the holy scriptures are such a book, which maketh foolish the wisdom of all other books, because none teacheth of eternal life without this only." As he also writes in another place: "Therefore see, read gladly in the holy Scriptures; do not become weary; nor let yourself think that you are full and know everything well, otherwise you will understand nothing of it, if you think you have understood everything, that a man of God is perfect, sent to all good work. Although there are many books that are very useful, and can make fine, skilful, learned people, yet everything is directed to this transitory life alone. But worldly wisdom and righteousness, if one learns from such "books," cannot make a man of God, nor teach him, punish him, correct him, chasten him to righteousness, and make him skillful or perfect for all good works. All this must be done by the Holy Scriptures, inspired and taught by God Himself." Many more such testimonies could be cited, if necessary. As much as the blessed man loved the divine books, he was well versed in them, and God had given him great gifts to understand and use them.
He did not get stuck on the outer shells, nor did he seek to apply a broad human scholarship to his interpretations. He did not get stuck on the outer shells, nor did he try to apply a broad human erudition to his interpretations; but came to the right ground, to the true and proper intention of the Spirit of God, he might have the legal or evangelical word before him, and knew how to show in a clear and emphatic way what is the true meaning and will of God in this and that passage, especially of the sinful general and very deep corruption of men, of the grace and merciful love of God, of Jesus, the core of the entire Holy Scripture, of righteousness by faith, of the active and active nature of faith, as well as other points of teaching and life, which he did no less in the stories told in Scripture.
Luther received such gifts from God precisely because he had been chosen as an instrument of the Reformation and they were necessary for this. For through the Scriptures, light had to dawn in the darkness that covered the land and the abominations of the papacy had to be made manifest. Therefore, he took it upon himself to seek them out again, since they had been hidden for so long, to bring them into the hands of the people, to explain them, and to show what one should believe according to these guidelines, and how one should live, if one wanted to attain salvation. He did this by translating the Bible with much effort and care from the basic text into the German language in a pure, clear and understandable way, and thus promoted the progress of the Reformation in such a way that the evangelical truth spread quickly and the pabstry received an enormous blow in a short time, precisely because everyone now had the opportunity to recognize the truth from God's Word itself and to see the errors of the Roman Church. This was such an important matter that it must be said that if the blessed Luther had earned his merit with nothing else than with such a translation of the Scriptures, nevertheless, his thereby attained
The author is not to be held in low esteem, and the effort expended in the process is to be acknowledged with constant gratitude. It is true that a German translation already existed before, and that the one that Luther made afterwards did not turn out so perfect that one and the other could not be improved on it; but just as that one was taken more from the Latin than from the basic text and was thereby written in a dark and incomprehensible manner, so the work of the blessed Luther does not lose anything of its value by the fact that here and there some deficiencies still show up in it. It is well known and easy to understand that no translation expresses the original perfectly, and even if we now find something to improve in the one that we have to thank the blessed Luther for, we would not recognize it if he had not preceded us and if we had not reached such insight through his instruction. Suffice it to say that he correctly expressed all the truths on which our faith is based and according to which we must conduct our lives and lives, according to the true meaning of the spirit, showed great experience in the Hebrew language, and used a good and clear German style of writing, especially in accordance with the times; and thus his translation remains an excellent work and a special blessing of God. However, he did not leave it at that. He gave the Bible back into the hands of the people in such a way that he showed at the same time how all Christians who wanted to attain blessedness had a right to read it, and were even obliged to do so, and since in the papacy poor people had been drawn away from God and His Word to people and their sayings with power and cunning, he, on the other hand, turned the matter around and proved how one had to base one's faith not on human but on divine prestige, consequently on the Scriptures, and from them recognize for oneself the truths necessary for blessedness. His merits in this were even greater, in that he diligently explained the Scriptures in his sermons, academic lectures and otherwise, produced many splendid interpretations of the divine books, and showed how one should understand the Word of God and fruitfully apply it for his edification.
Just these interpretations and exegetical writings of the blessed Luther are composed with a special skill, and they have always had a special blessing, although it cannot be denied that one has an advantage over the other. Among the best is his explanation of the first book of Moses, of which I will now give a brief historical account. He produced it at Wittenberg in his lectures and spent about ten years on it, beginning the work in 1536 and finishing it on November 17, 1545, thus a few months before his end. This is reported by Joh. Mathesius in his sermons on the life of Luther, and after he mentions how he left Wittenberg for a while because of an annoyance and stayed with the Prince of Anhalt in Merseburg, he writes: "When he came home again, he finished his Genesis on November 17, 1545, on which he had worked for ten years with the greatest diligence. That he began the work in 1536, however, is noted by Veit Ludwig von Seckendorf in the third register of his Historia Lutheranismi; and that in particular the interpretation of the second and twentieth chapters was begun on October 27, 1539, is indicated in the Latin copy in the margin. Such work he brought, as already thought, not long before his death to an end, and there he made a strange conclusion of the same with these words: "This is now the dear Genesis. Our Lord God wants others to do better after me. I cannot do it anymore: I am weak. Orate Deum pro me (pray to God for me) that He may give me a blessed hour." When he began it, he is said to have said that this would be his last work, and with it, if it were God's will, he wanted to conclude his life, as Mathesius mentioned, adding: "Of course, the last thoughts are the best, if they are directed to God's word and spring from it, and old people's sermons and books are well to remember and keep. The intention, which the blessed man had at the beginning, was not that this interpretation should be made known by printing; but
he only wanted to serve his listeners at that time and to practice himself in God's word, which he says himself in the preface of the first part of this interpretation: "These lectures and interpretations of mine on the first book of Moses I have never undertaken in such an opinion that I would have been inclined to let them go into print publicly, which has been my least thought; but rather so that first of all I would serve this school of ours, as it is now, somewhat after the passage of time, and would have cause to exercise not only my listeners but also myself in God's words, and not to conclude with a rotten and useless age the dying of my body, which I feel in myself daily."
In the meantime, God, according to His wisdom, saw to it that this glorious treasure did not remain hidden, but was brought to light for the awakening of many souls, and that gradually in various parts. The beginning of such publication was made during the lifetime of the blessed Luther. For since D. Caspar Cruciger, professor of theology at Wittenberg, and M. Georg Rorarius, deacon at Wittenberg, had copied these lections and considered it good that they be published by printing, also M. Veit Dietrich, who was studying at Wittenberg at the time, took up the matter seriously and contributed his part by comparing the copies and putting them in order, Luther put up with this and agreed to the proposed and requested printing. He himself writes about this in the preface of the first part of the interpretation of the first book of Moses: "Now it happened to these lections of mine that they fell into the hands of two pious and God-fearing men, who caught and collected them, namely D. Caspar Crucigern, to whom the books he has published give sufficient evidence of the spirit and diligence with which he teaches and promotes God's Word, and M. Georgius Rorarius, deacon of our church here in Wittenberg, who has also taken both of these men's diligence and work before him and has done his part.
And so these three, all of whom are faithful and diligent workers and servants in the word of God, have deemed it good that these lectures of mine should also be communicated to others by means of public printing and that they should be of use and benefit. Thus, the first part of this work, with a short preface by Luther and a note by the aforementioned Veit Dietrich to Johann Ernst, Duke of Saxony, came to light in Wittenberg in 1544, and it conceived the interpretation of the first eleven chapters of the first book of Moses. After this, Luther and the aforementioned Dietrich both died, but Hieronymus Besoldus, preacher at Nuremberg, continued the work he had begun and published the other three parts at Nuremberg, namely the second with a preface by Michael Roting, professor at Nuremberg, in 1550, which goes from the twelfth chapter to the tenth verse of the fifth and twentieth; the third up to the sixth and thirtieth chapter in 1552, with a preface by Philipp Melanchthon, and the fourth up to the end of the first book of Moses in 1554, which he himself prefaced with a preface. For as the work begun by Dietrich on the second part of this commentary was interrupted by his death, Hieronymus Baumgärtner, city councilor at Nuremberg and a great lover of Luther's writings, instructed Hieronymus Besoldus to also promote the remaining parts for printing, which he then also undertook and happily completed the work. Melanchthon and Rorarius had approved of this. Hieronymus Besoldus had studied at the University of Wittenberg, had been in Luther's house and at his table, had listened to his lectures on Genesis and had diligently copied them, and when he undertook this work, he had received what had been awarded by Cruciger, Rorarius and Stoltz. He mentions this himself in his preface to the fourth part, and reports that when Veit Dietrich died blessedly in the Lord in 1549 and thus could not finish the work begun with the other part, the enemies of the Gospel had sought to suppress the work and to prevent the further production of the book in the terrible violence of darkness that raged and raged over all of Germany at that time.
It was therefore deemed advisable to place it in safekeeping with the aforementioned Hieronymus Baumgärtner. And although under these circumstances there was little hope that one would see such a Commentary completely in print, God had nevertheless graciously heard the sighing of the blessed, who in these same sorrowful times always had a desire for their dear Luther's last and noblest work, and had brought this work completely to light, whereupon Besoldus adds: "And he, Hieronymus Baumgärtner, has himself taken great pains to ensure that the least of what he, Veit, had written would ever go to print, since the adversaries were still raging and subordinating themselves in many ways. And since he could easily assume that everyone would like to see the entire Historia go to print, he requested that I complete the remaining part, as I also heard D. Luther in the school in Wittenberg, since he had read and taught the same, and this pleased Mr. Philippus and M. Rörer well, and M. Stoltz also gave me what he had written out, which is then very easy to read. In addition, I had also written out much myself from D. Luther's mouth, which he had read, which helped me very much, since I was not yet accustomed to the foreign hand or writing, and was very dear to me, since I saw that all copies were so finely tuned and so similar to each other. Since I was indebted to those who gave me this work for many great benefits, and since they were dear to me, and since I had come to become Luther's housemate through their and Vitus's recommendation and bragging, it would not have been proper for me to deny this to such great respectable people. In this way, this Hieronymus Besoldus not only published the fourth part of Luther's interpretation of the first book of Moses, but also brought the third part to print, and completed what Veit Dietrich had left in the other.
This commentary was written in Latin, and after it had become completely too
When the first part had been translated into German, a German translation was also made, and Basilius Faber, who died as Rector in Erfurt and was a famous schoolman, and Johannes Guden, the elder, a preacher in Brunswick, applied their praiseworthy diligence, since the former translated the first two parts into German, while the latter translated the other two. The letter of the former, which he addressed to Christoph von Steinberg, is dated in Magdeburg on the day of Michaelmas 1557, and in it it is remembered that it was considered a sin that such a treasure should have remained in the Latin language alone, and that others who did not understand it should have been deprived of it, especially since Luther was a teacher and prophet of the Germans. "Now," Faber adds, "so that everyone, and especially the fathers of the household and the common people, may benefit, improve, and be comforted by this treasure, I have, to the best of my ability, translated the first two parts of such interpretations in the simplest and most faithful manner. The dedication of the other, or Johann Guden, was also addressed to Christoph von Steinberg in the same year as the first, 1557, and was written earlier, namely on the day of Christ's appearing, so it can be concluded that these two men undertook such work together and at the same time, according to a previous agreement, and divided it between themselves, although neither of them remembers the other. This first edition of the Latin and German Commentary was followed by others, and it was not only specially reprinted, but also included in the collections of Luther's writings. The Latin copy was printed and published at various times, namely soon after the first publication, at Frankfurt, where the first part was printed in 1545, the second in 1550, the third in 1553, and the fourth in 1555 in octavo; likewise at Nuremberg, where several Latin editions were published. One of them came out in 1563, and another I have at hand, whose first part came out of print in 1555, the other in 1556, the third in 1555, and the fourth in 1554, as can be seen from the title, as well as at the end of each part, these reported years.
are shown. But how it came that the latter two were printed earlier than the former two, since they nevertheless belong together, if one is to judge by their external form and arrangement, I can not determine so precisely, although it is to be assumed that when one printed the fourth part in Nuremberg in 1554 for the first time in Latin, one then the others in the following years, as required by the circumstances, again with this and thus want to make the work complete. Be that as it may, the Nuremberg edition, as I have indicated it, is available, which was followed by a Wittenberg edition in 1556 and a newer one with annotations in 1712. In addition, this commentary can be found in Latin in the Wittenberg edition; in German also in the Wittenberg, Altenburg and Leipzig collections of Luther's writings.
Such an interpretation is to be regarded as a beautiful and splendid work and to be placed at the top of the list of Luther's writings, which have a special preference over the others. Luther himself did not make much of this work of his, and after he had thought how Creutziger, Rorarius and Dietrich found the publication of the same to be good and therefore took a lot of trouble, he added: "However, I would rather that they had spent so much Christian diligence and so many good hours on a better book and scribes; for I do not recognize myself for the one, nor am I the one of whom one could say: Neither am I the one of whom one would like to say, "He tried to do it"; but I am among the last, and may hardly boast of myself and say, "I wanted to do it. And only God would have me be worthy to be the very last and least among these last and hindmost. For all that I have introduced in these lessons, I have not considered so precisely; but have spoken it simply and plainly, as my thoughts have given it to me in a hurry and the words have come to me; have also often spoken German with them, and have made almost more words,
than is dear to me." But this is to be seen as a sample of his special modesty and humility, according to which he held himself and all his books in low esteem, attributed nothing to himself and everything to the grace of God. If he had published such a declaration himself and could have spent the necessary time on it, there is no doubt that he would have arranged it even better in some parts and would have presented the whole work in a more beautiful and perfect state than it is now. In the meantime, however, it remains a beautiful and excellent book, even in the form in which it actually came to light, and is worthy of all the praise that has been heaped upon it. Such praise can be found from time to time. In the privilege granted by the Elector August on the German translation it says: "We know that this is one of Mr. D. Luther's last and best books, which he made shortly before his death with special high diligence and enlightenment of the Holy Spirit, and certainly consider that many God-fearing people, who do not know the Latin language, will draw from this interpretation not little understanding of the Scriptures and benefit. This very book was called by our ancestors in the Concordia formula "commentarius praeclarus", or a magnificent interpretation. *) When the Leipzig and Wittenberg theologians in their final report and explanation, especially against Flacius P. 16. (Wittenberg 1571), consider that Luther's postils and other sermons, which were full of rich doctrine and powerful consolation of the Holy Spirit, and all other doctrinal books of the same, especially those written after the Diet of Augsburg in 1530, were in agreement with the Augsburg Confession, but among the most important were the explanation of several prophets and psalms, and also the epistle to the Galatians, so they include the interpretation of the first book of Moses; They call it a "rich interpretation, with which he blessedly concluded his profession, ministry and life: because of which it is rightly held in high esteem. For he
*) St. Louis edition of the Concordia Book, p. 408.
In the same commentary, he has completely and totally expressed and left behind his last opinion and confession of most articles of Christian doctrine.
Other divine scholars of our church have judged this commentary in the same way: indeed, it has been consistently held that it is to be highly respected and that Luther is to be recognized from it as a great interpreter of Scripture. If I am to cite some such judgments as proof, Basilius Faber adds this praise to such an interpretation and writes: It is true that the good man Luther "served the Church in these last times with many and various great labors, and with the interpretation of the prophetic and apostolic writings he explained, promoted and defended the doctrine of forgiveness of sins, righteousness before God and eternal blessedness in the most faithful manner, as everyone must recognize; the interpretations of his 'dear Genesin', as he used to call him, would be an exception above all his other writings and books, and a very rich treasure, in which an excellent theology is brought together and compiled, as every diligent reader will find for himself. For what has been dealt with from time to time in many of Luther's writings, comes together here in one work, which one might reasonably call D. Martin's Theology." With which also Joh. Guden agrees. He says that Luther has left behind him a rich treasure in this commentary, and adds: "What an excellent treasure this is, will be found by those who will read this interpretation with diligence. In sum, one finds in it the right core of the teaching that our Lord God revealed to us through D. Luther. Luther, as the Lord Philip, D. Jonas and other spiritual men have rightly judged." To these I add Johann Mathesius, who by the grace of God had acquired a very good taste in spiritual things, and could well know and recognize what a revivalist and spiritual book was. He believed that anyone who wanted to get to know Christ in Genesis should have instruction in the power of the divine word.
and know what sin and righteousness are, which alone are valid and exist before God; whoever desires to understand how one must comfortably hope, endure his God, be refreshed in anguish and distress, see how one must make use of the great saints' errors and faith, and what a teacher must pay particular attention to in the Scriptures, and how he must present old and new things to his listeners: He should read this commentary, especially if he is in the holy cross and thinks that God is not at home and has completely forgotten us. If one does this, one will indeed learn what the old Doctor Luther, in his last days, in which he endured manifold temptations, had put together in this book. After Mathesius had made this confession in his sermons about Luther's life, he added: "I leave my testimony of this blessed commentary behind me, so that my children and parishioners do not forget it and learn to respect it highly throughout their lives, and all those who want to tell other people about useful and necessary church matters. My Genesis and especially the last parts, which I have often read through and underlined and described for the sake of learning and comfort, will give me testimony and evidence. Notice that this interpretation has explained Christ's word and will to me, and God has spoken comfort, peace and life into my troubled and saddened heart from it. For if our cases agree with the patriarchs' cross, and the interpretation strikes one heart, as if the Doctor were actually speaking to us, then the Commentary lives and revives, and refreshes and revives one heart!" If further Joachim Mörlin in the writing, "Wie die Bücher und Schriften des theuren und seligen Mannes GOttes D. Martini Lutheri", he wants to give instructions for just such useful reading, so he praises this interpretation above all others as an excellent book and says: "Read the following consummatum est (It is accomplished) of the holy man, the dear Genesis, in which he, as in a new world, has brought forth and opened not individual pieces, but all the treasures and all the riches of the wisdom of the divine word, so that such a thing as this can be read and understood.
Book after the apostle time did not come on earth. What do they say about all the theologians? Genesis of Luther makes them all disciples." Hieronymus Weller had an equal special regard for this work of Luther, and in the following words of his Commentary on 1 Reg. IX. (sect. I. oper. latinor, p. 258.): "Luther's interpretation of the 1st Book of Moses is in truth his swan song. For although all of Luther's writings are full of manifold teaching and comfort, his interpretation of Genesis I far surpasses all others. One can hardly think of a challenge for which he would not have given a sure remedy in this explanation; indeed, Luther has surpassed himself in this commentary. Therefore, I admonish all students of theology over and over again to read this Commentary diligently and diligently and never to put it down and to try to become as familiar with it as possible. For I dare to assure without hesitation that I have had more benefit from this Commentary than from almost all of Luther's other writings; that is why I never get tired of reading it. If everything that has ever been written in the church from the times of the apostles onwards were put in a heap, it could not bear comparison with this Commentary. I know that I speak the truth, and that all truly experienced and learned theologians will agree with my opinion."
I could leave it at these praises, with which Luther's interpretation of the first book of Moses is documented, especially since it is not important and the work praises itself; however, I will add a few more, so that one may recognize all the better how this work has been held in great esteem not only by some, but consistently by the teachers of our church and how it has always rightly maintained this esteem. Timotheus Kirchner in the preface of his German Thesaurus D. Luthers (1565) has judged: All theologians must go to school for this book, and no one will study it. The Man of God Lu-
In it, he has dealt with almost the noblest and greatest articles of our Christian faith so clearly and abundantly that nothing like it, with the exception of the Holy Bible, has come into the world, nor, of course, will it. It will probably be and remain thesaurus thesaurorum (treasure of all treasures) and an inexhaustible fountain of all consolation next to the Bible. David Chyträus in Dedicat, commentar, in genesin (1557) also does not know how to praise this work enough, and says: "There exists an interpretation of the 1st Book of Moses by the venerable D. Martin Luther, which he delivered in the last decade of his life at the University of Wittenberg. This is, as it were, his swan song, a work that is perfect in all respects. This highly enlightened expositor, who in this our time is awakened and called to the restoration of the true divine teaching, has not only laid down in it a rich treasure of spiritual wisdom and learning, and that in excellent, rich words, and given an exact explanation of all passages and intricate questions, but has also developed in this speech of his a peculiar power which moves the minds of the readers and inspires them to true piety, fear of God, faith and other virtues." Whereupon he admonishes all the pious to read this last work of Luther's carefully and diligently, and to make it known to themselves before other writings, which, though learned, are not as inspiring as this one. Daniel Crämer is of the same opinion with these theologians now mentioned, and as he thinks that Luther has an advantage over all interpreters of the first book of Moses, so he says of his explanation of this divine scripture in Isagog. Petri Palladii ad libr. prophetic. et apostolic. (1630): "Whoever has not read this book is unworthy of the name of a theologian. Therefore it must be welcome to the younger ones." Abraham Calov in the preface to his commentarii in Genesin p. 19. (1671) calls this Commentary a golden book, Thomas Crenius in the Exercitiis sacris, priora quaedam Mosis tractantib. p. 76. (1704), a work which cannot be praised enough. Christian Gerber in the continuation of the unrecognized sins of the
World part. I. p. 395. sq. wishes that the writings of the blessed Luther be used more diligently; God has put such a glorious light and knowledge into this man that his books should be held in higher esteem and used more diligently; his interpretation of the first book of Moses is an excellent writing, which is not only pleasant, but also very useful and edifying to read: in it he has described and presented the virtues and piety of the holy patriarchs so beautifully that one can hardly get tired of reading once one begins. One could draw an excellent patriarchal or Christian ethics from such a commentary, and it is to be wished that a practiced Christian theologian would undertake this work, which should certainly be a very useful and splendid writing. I add that Joh. Heinrich von Seelen Philocal. epistol. p. 93. passed this judgment on such a Commentary: "It is a treasure, more precious than gold, in which priceless riches of holy thoughts are hidden, so that quite rightly some have judged that this is the best of all Luther's books. As Herr von Seckendorf in Historia Lutheranismi lib. ΙII. § 139. p. 669. sq. of this very work, he remarks, among other things, that one has to admire Luther's unbelievable gifts of explaining the Holy Scriptures in the most thorough and clear manner without much meditation, and at the same time to ridicule Pallavicinus, Maimburgen, and other clumsy judges who ridicule Luther's gifts, which they do not find among their people, and despise them in a haughty manner. He had studied these lessons very well and had looked up the most famous commentators of the time, as can be seen from the entire work; however, he had paid little attention to the words and phrases and had not dictated anything, even repeating a matter at times on other occasions, but with different words, of which he was not lacking. Other such testimonies that could still be cited, not to mention.
Such splendid testimonies and favorable judgments that one can draw from this commentary of the
blessed Luther are, however, well founded. Those who love and accept the truth, who are not in the habit of judging a matter other than without partiality, who have a taste for a witty and inspiring lecture, and who look more at the things themselves than at the words, phrases, their combinations, and their elegant arrangement, who above all have read this book diligently and attentively, will have to confess that the praise that has been attached to it is justly due to it, and that it can stand against the objections of its opponents. It is well that Richard Simon exposed various things about it, and after he judged Luther's interpretations of the Holy Scriptures in general to have interspersed all kinds of theological questions and innumerable things that did not belong to the matter, and thus to have made more theological lections and disputations than truthful explanations, he referred in particular to the Commentary on the First Book of Moses as proof, in which one encounters a large number of clumsy and not thoroughly considered digressions. Instead of explaining the words and the text of the holy scripture, he moralized and disputes vehemently against his opponents. He was not sufficiently experienced in the Hebrew language and wanted to look more at the things than at the words and their meaning, therefore he often left the true understanding behind and made many clumsy interpretations. But as one can easily see from what kind of source of mind this judgment flowed, and it is not unknown how this Richard Simon was otherwise in his opinions and testified in the censures made about other writings, one can also soon recognize that he was hasty in what he said about Luther's interpretations of the holy scriptures and especially of the first book of Moses, and that he gave in too much to his unfounded affect. Luther understood the Hebrew language well, and even if in his explanations one and the other error was expressed, that he sometimes did not explain the meaning of the words correctly, one has
The author's commentary on the first book of Moses is well-founded and edifying, so that the book's value and moral value may be increased by the fact that he was a human being subject to human errors and lived at a time when the aids necessary for interpreting Scripture were not as abundant as they are now, and when it is easy to improve here and there what others have done wrong. The elaboration of some theological matters and the moral remarks found in his Commentary on the First Book of Moses are well-founded and edifying; consequently, the book cannot be deprived of the value and esteem in which it is held; rather, it is to be held in high esteem for that very reason. In the interpretation of Scripture, however, it is better and more in accordance with the intention of the Holy Spirit that, instead of a lengthy explanation of words and all sorts of philological and critical digressions, the matter itself is explained, and after showing what the Holy Spirit actually wants to imply, it is then explained and instructions are given on how to apply everything to faith and life in a blessed way. Therefore, when the Herr von Seckendorf in Histor. Lutheran. libr. ΙII. § 139. p. 671. wants to give an excerpt of the commentary on the first book of Moses, he rightly remarks beforehand that there are so many important things and passages that with such a large number of them one almost does not know which one should precede the others.
This writing of the blessed Luther remains a magnificent work, from which scholars and unscholars can draw great benefit for the true understanding of the first book of Moses as well as for the thorough understanding of many theological matters and for their own edification. Therefore, it has been well done that such a book has been reprinted and thus given the opportunity to be read by several, especially since this edition has been put in such a state that it can claim an advantage over the previous ones. It is more correct and more accurate than those. It has been found that in the German translation and the previous editions of the same, something is often omitted, and not only individual words,
but even entire sentences, that very often something is added that was not in the Latin or original copy, and although such additions sometimes serve some explanation, they are nevertheless sometimes unnecessary; that passages are found that have no meaning at all, since in the Latin everything is to be found clearly and distinctly; Indeed, many passages have been translated quite incorrectly, and some of them are of such a nature that they not only do not reflect the true meaning of the blessed Luther, but also contain the opposite of what he said according to the Latin copy. Such deficiencies have been corrected in this new edition, and in the end the Latin text has been carefully compared with the German translation according to the two previous editions, the Frankfurt edition, which came out in 1545, and the Nuremberg edition in 1563; what was previously omitted has been added; the reprinting of the words and phrases in the Latin copy, as much as could be done; that which is not in the Latin and was nevertheless brought into the German version, as far as it was found to be useless, omitted; that, on the other hand, which could only be done to a certain extent.
The translation, too, has been improved where it was either completely wrong or where it obscured the meaning of the blessed Luther and was incomprehensible. All of this has been taken care of and accomplished by the special and praiseworthy diligence of M. Joh. Gottgetreu Müller, who in this way has rendered great service to this new edition, especially since he did not leave it at that alone. For he has also indicated before each chapter the content of the matters contained and occurring therein exactly and correctly, so that one can immediately see in a beautiful context what one has to look for and find in the same. Thus, this edition is not only more correct than the previous ones, but also more useful and convenient, especially since the publisher, who has no other intention than God's honor and his neighbor's true salvation, has chosen a convenient format in addition to good paper and printing. May the Lord make this work of the blessed Luther a blessing, so that through it His most holy name may be further glorified and many souls may be strengthened in the beatific knowledge of the Gospel or encouraged to it, for the sake of His merciful love, amen.
Jena, April 6, 1739.