Martin Luther is unquestionably one of the most prominent figures of the past millennium, and there is certainly no shortage of books about him. Yet he remains a fascinating and enigmatic figure. He is in many ways foreign to twenty-first century sensibilities, but he continues to speak deeply to many people–myself included–nearly five hundred years after his death. He introduced Europeans to a God who was not concerned with their good works, their personal piety, or their religious observation, but who simply reconciled sinners to himself by grace. In doing so, Luther initiated a theological revolution that splintered the Christian church and ushered in the modern world. This is his story.

Issues and Problems in Luther Study

A new treatment of Luther is an enormous task–far larger than I had anticipated when I first began to write this book. Nevertheless, I soldiered on to produce the volume that you now hold in your hands. A part of the problem is the immense volume of source material there is to work with. Luther's own writings fill more than a hundred large volumes in the standard Weimar edition used by scholars. Only some of these have been translated into English, but the standard English translation still fills 55 large volumes. In addition to this, there are tens of thousands of books and articles about Luther's life and thought, with hundreds more coming out each year. Even the most dedicated scholar can only hope to absorb a small fraction of this material.

An additional challenge is the fact that, unlike many theologians, Luther never developed his thought in writing in anything like a systematic fashion. Most of his writings are direct responses to particular events in his life, making it difficult to understand his theological and philosophical views without first having a concrete understanding of his life and times. Thus, any student of Luther's thought must first master the intricacies of Luther's life, and have at least a passing acquaintance with the political and social history of the early sixteenth century.

And there are also interpretive problems with the sources themselves.