How Martin Luther Came to Understand Repentance

Luther translating the Bible.

The following is a quote from Hasting's Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, showing how Martin Luther came to understand the true meaning of repentance: 

The Reformation started as a protest against false or inadequate conceptions of repentance. “Luther, it will be remembered, first saw the practical value of philological study, when he was puzzling over the expression poenitentiam agite, ‘do penance,’ which the Vulgate uses for the Greek word that in the English translation is rendered ‘repent.’ Was it possible, he said to himself, that Christ and the Apostles could really bid men do penance? Did the New Testament really stand on the side of his opponents, and of all the gross corruptions which the doctrine of penance had introduced? Melanchthon solved this difficulty by showing to Luther that the Greek word metanoeite, which Jerome had translated ‘do penance,’ really and etymologically meant ‘change your mind.’ From that moment the Reformation entered into a conscious alliance with the new learning, to which it was already akin in its independent love of truth, its rebellion against human authority, and its interest in the Bible as a real living book.”[1]

According to the Protestant theologian and church historian Philip Schaff, Luther first learned the true meaning of the word repent (from the original Greek) in 1518, a year after he famously nailed his Ninety-five Theses to the church door in Wittenberg. Thus it should come as no surprise if Luther's Ninety-five Theses (written in 1517) don't specifically reflect his later understanding of metanoia as meaning “a change of mind”. Indeed, Philip Schaff writes: 

“The Theses represent a state of transition from twilight to daylight. They reveal the mighty working of an earnest mind and conscience intensely occupied with the problem of sin, repentance, and forgiveness, and struggling for emancipation from the fetters of tradition. They might more properly be called ‘a disputation to diminish the virtue of papal indulgences, and to magnify the full and free grace of the gospel of Christ.’”[2] 

In a letter to John von Staupitz, dated May 30, 1518, Luther affirms: “Afterwards, by the favor of the learned, who are so zealously transmitting to us the Greek and Hebrew, I learned that the same word in Greek is metanoia, so that repentance or metanoia is ‘a change of mind.’ This corresponded so aptly with the Pauline Theology, that, in my judgment, scarcely anything can more aptly illustrate Paul.”[3]  This is the meaning of repentance (Gr. metanoia), which Luther came to understand in 1518 with the help of Melanchthon by going back to the Bible in the original language, as opposed to following the man-made traditions of the Roman Catholic church. 

Sadly, nowadays some proponents of Reformation theology are following in the footsteps of the Roman Catholic church rather than in the footsteps of the Reformers (who went back to the Bible in the original languages) and are adding their own man-made traditions to the meaning of repentance! For example, although John MacArthur states that the word repentance literally means a “change of mind,” he goes on to embellish that definition with his own man-made theological traditions about repentance so that in the end, his definition of repentance doesn't simply mean “a change of mind” but instead he says it means all kinds of other things in addition to simply meaning “a change of mind”![4] Charles Bing (a Free Grace author) points out this tendency among Reformed theologians to embellish the meaning of the Greek word for repentance when he says, “it is unfortunate that the basic meaning of ‘to change the mind’ is eclipsed by the Lordship [Reformed] insistence on something more from the word itself in the New Testament.”[5] Bing goes on to say: “It is interesting how often Lordship teachers agree with the meaning ‘change of mind,’ then invest the term with theology that demands much more.”[6]

Let's follow in the footsteps of Luther by going back to the Bible in the original languages (rather than relying on our own man-made theological traditions) to understand the meaning of repentance!

References:

[1] James Hastings, Editor, Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1919), Vol. 10, p. 734.

[2] Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church (New York: 1916), 2nd Edition, 8 Vol., Vol. 6, pp. 158-159, italics his. Note: A very clear statement by Luther on God's free grace is appropriately found in his Commentary on Galatians, in which Luther writes that “we do constantly affirm with Paul (for we do not reject the grace of God) that either Christ died in vain, or else the law justifieth not. But Christ died not in vain: therefore the law justifieth not. Christ, the Son of God, of his own free grace and mercy, has justified us: therefore the law could not justify us, for if it could, then had Christ done unwisely in that he gave himself for our sins, that we thereby might be justified. We conclude therefore, that we are justified neither by our own works and merits before grace or after, neither yet by the law.” (Luther, A Commentary on St. Paul's Epistle to the Galatians [Philadelphia: Smith, English & Co., 1860], p. 280, commentary on Gal. 2:21.)

[3] Martin Luther, quoted by Henry E. Jacobs, Elements of Religion [Philadelphia: The Board of Publication of the General Council of the Evangelical Lutheran church in North America, 1913], p. 281. Cf. “To John von Staupitz, Wittenberg, May 30, 1518,” Martin Luther, Edited and Translated by Gottfried G. Krodel, Luther's Works (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1963), 55 Volumes, Vol. 48., pp. 66-67. Another English translation, which is in some ways clearer, is titled: “Letter of John Staupitz Accompanying the ‘Resolutions’ to the XCV Theses” by Dr. Martin Luther, 1518, Works of Martin Luther, Adolph Spaeth, L.D. Reed, Henry Eyster Jacobs, et al., Translators and Editors (Philadelphia: A. J. Holman Company, 1915), Volume 1, pp. 39-43.

[4] John MacArthur, The Gospel According to Jesus (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1988), p. 162. Cf. John MacArthur, The Gospel According to Jesus, Revised and Expanded Anniversary Edition (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2008), p. 178. For example, commenting on 1 Thessalonians 1:9, MacArthur says that “Paul...described the repentance of the Thessalonians: ‘You turned to God from idols to serve a living and true God’ (1 Thess. 1:9). Note three elements of repentance: a turning to God, a turning from evil, and the intent to serve God. No change of mind can be called true repentance if it does not include all three elements. The simple but all too often overlooked fact is that a true change of mind will necessarily result in a change of behavior.”  (Ibid., p. 178.) But MacArthur here seems to be combining repentance with the fruit of repentance, which is a change of behavior (cf. Matt. 3:8; Luke 3:8; Acts 26:20). When the apostle Paul says in 1 Thessalonians 1:9, “You turned to God from idols”: that is biblical repentance. When Paul goes on to say, “to serve a living and true God”: that is the fruit of repentance, i.e. service for Christ (cf. Rom. 7:4-6). MacArthur is saying that good intentions (“the intent to serve God”) must be part of true repentance, but as the saying goes, “The road to hell is paved with good intentions!”

[5] Charles Bing, Lordship Salvation: A Biblical Evaluation and Response, Chapter 3: Repentance and Salvation. www.gracelife.org/resources/lordshipsalvation/?id=3

[6] Ibid. See footnote 32. www.gracelife.org/resources/lordshipsalvation/?id=3#ref32