The printer wishes the reader good luck. When I let these notes go out in print two years ago, it happened, due to my excessive haste at the time, that they came to light somewhat shorter than they should have been. For since a certain student had collected them from the lectures of D. Martin Luther for the purpose of having a certain, but brief, interpretation of the meaning and understanding of this prophet, I thought that I would do no small favor to those devoted to the Holy Scriptures if I published the work that he had undertaken out of private diligence and presented it publicly to everyone. For since this prophet, next to Moses and
David, has the first place among all, I thought it would be useful for the church, if one, with so much of the old and new interpretations, also about this prophet a short and clear explanation publicly issued. Although I now believe that my undertaking will easily be applauded by all well-meaning people, I still found fault with the fact that the explanation was in many places shorter than it should have been. For I did not allow the one who first compiled this interpretation as much time as was necessary for this matter. Therefore, in order that I may be all the more faithful to my duty to the church and to the lovers of godliness
*) In the years 1527 to 1530 Luther gave lectures on the prophet Isaiah. In May 1527, he wrote to Wenceslaus Link (De Wette, Vol. Ill, p. 172) that he was preparing to publish the prophets in German, and at the same time to read about Isaiah, so that he would not be idle. From Mathesius, who moved to the University of Wittenberg at Pentecost (May 16, 1529) (Köstlin, M. Luther, Vol. II, p. 156), we learn that Luther was at the 45th chapter of Isaiah at that time, and concluded the whole interpretation about the end of February 1530, because he says (Mathesius, Luthers Leben, St. Louiser Ausg, p. 105), "From Doctor Luther I have about forty weeks to hear the twenty-two last chapters in the Prophet Isaiah interpreted." Our writing does not come from Luther's own pen, but a student made short notes for his own use during the lectures, which the printer Hans Lufft first published in 1532 in a shorter form, then in 1534 in more complete form, about which he reports in the latter edition in a letter to the reader. This report is here, as in the Latin Jenaer, in the Leipzig edition and Walch, prefixed to the scripture. The first edition of 1532 appeared under your title: In In Esaiam prophetam Scholia ex D. Mart. Lutheri praelectionibus collecta. Wittebergae. Excudebat Johannes Lufft 1532. The more complete edition was published by the same in 1534.
I would like to testify more, I have had these notes increased in many places that required a more extensive explanation.
Now it would be desirable that the very rich interpretation, which D. Luther has presented in the explanation of this prophet, would be completely reproduced by a true master, however, because this could not be done without the greatest work, so I have thought that one should, as it were, collect these fragments from such a delicious table, with which the students could refresh their souls and satisfy their hunger to understand this prophet in something. For here they will find in short, as it were in a bundle, the understanding of the whole prophet. And diligent readers will easily notice what main doctrines (locos communes) D. Luther has presented in the explanation, where he has dealt more extensively with faith, good works, the cross, authority, human statutes, the use of the sacraments, the law, the gospel, etc.. For the one who has copied these notes, has
The following is a summary of the teachings of Luther, which have been given to understand almost everywhere where such extensive disputes have taken place. However, if anyone should still require a further elaboration of these doctrines, he can find it in other books, which Luther has published in great quantity and for the great benefit of the church. However, it will be seen that even in this, although brief, explanation, the most important doctrines have been dealt with sufficiently here and there.
I had intended to include the entire text; however, since there was no skillful translation available, and those passages where the Latin interpreter was very much lacking have been improved here, I did not want to make this book too large, especially since the Bible is in everyone's hands, which the students can take to help them read these notes; and they want to put up with my work and dedication, and use it to good advantage. Farewell to the reader! Given at Wittenberg, August 1, 1534.
under the title: In Dsaiarü propsistai" 8o5o5a, ex Doot. Zlart. 5ut5ori praelootiouitzus oollsota, multis in loeis non parvu Mvessione auota. VitederMe N. D. XXXIIII. at the end: üxeuäedut losiunnos ImkU. ^VitteniberMe. 1534. Another edition was published in 1546 at Tübingen under the same title, but with the addition: ... aueta. Oarrasn NattUiae Ourditii Ill^rioi in obiturn I^utüsri, ^rueourn et latinurn. 'kubinF. 1546.All these editions are in octav. In the Reformation period, only individual pieces were translated into German, namely the interpretation of the 36th and 37th chapters, which appeared under the following title: "Auslegung V. Martin Luthers über das sechs und sieben drevssigste Kapititel des Propheten Esaias, über die Massen nützlich, dienstlich und tröstlich in allen leiblichen und geistlichen Anfechtungen durch Georg Spalatinum verdeutscht. Wittenberg 1535." quarto. This piece is found in the German Wittenberg (1556), vol. V p. 2735; in the Eisleben, vol. II, p. 3365; in the Altenburg, vol. VI, p. 342; in the Leipzig, vol. VII, p. 252 and in Walch, vol. VI, 670. Further, "The 5, 111 chapter of the Prophet Isaiah, Of the Passion and Glory of Christ. Interpreted by v. Mari. Luther. Wittemberg 1539." At the end: "Printed at Wittemberg by Nickel Schirlentz." Quarto. This piece is found in the German Wittenberger (1556), vol. V, 2865; in the Altenburger, vol. VI, p. 357; in the Leipziger, vol. VII, p. 352 and in Walch, vol. VI, 984. It was only for the Leipzig edition that N. Greifs translated the entire writing into German. It is found in dm collections: Latin in the Wittenberg (1552), tom. IV, lol. 1255; in the Jena (1603), toru. Ill, toi. 283 and in the Erlangen, 6X6Z. opp., torn. XXII and XXIII per totum. German in the Leipziger, vol. VII, p. 40 and in Walch, vol. VI, 1. The indication of the Erlanger: Oernmn. 5Vittsn5. IV, 125 is an oversight. We have used the text of the second edition of 1534, as do all the complete editions, but without using the brackets, which are found both in Walch and in the Erlangen edition. Walch has enclosed in brackets what is added in the 1534 edition, the Erlangen edition has enclosed in brackets what is found in the first edition of 1532. We have done neither, because in the case of a text not published by Luther himself, no one can be interested in determining exactly how much or how little an editor has added or omitted in an acknowledged hasty, defective edition. Rather, we consider the use of brackets to be an unnecessary burden on the sentence and a burden on the reader, because he is thereby drawn away from the matter and continually reminded of the defectiveness of the first redaction. It is sufficient that both relations are communicated completely. We have recorded the deviations of the first printing from the second (with the exception of a few insignificant variants) in notes. In the thorough improvement of the old translation, we have used the Erlangen edition, comparing the Wittenberg and Jena editions. The thirty-sixth and thirty-seventh chapters, which the old editions retained in Spalatin's translation, we had to retranslate because of the defective nature of the latter (it is extensive and arbitrary). We have omitted Spalatin's letter to the Electress Shbilla of Saxony, dated "Thursday after the holy Christian day 1535" (the 30th of December 1534), because it contains nothing of importance. Likewise, we have had to re-translate the 53rd chapter, which is reproduced in Walch's old edition according to the translation of 1539, because the old translation is excessively verbose.