[Luther] begins the preface to the Epistle to the Hebrews with a sentence which applies to all four separated writings: “Up to now we have had a clear conscience in presenting books of the New Testament; but the four which follow have long had a different standing.” He writes of James in the preface to that epistle: “. . . I do not consider it as the writing of an apostle . . .” In the same preface Luther writes on the Epistle of Jude: “. . . no on can deny that it is an extract or copy of St. Peter’s second Epistle, since the words are almost the same. He also speaks of the apostles as one of their disciples long after; and refers to a text and narrative which are found nowhere in Scripture. This moved the old Fathers also to exclude this Epistle from the main Scripture.” On Revelation, he writes: “There is nothing in this book which would make me consider it either apostolic or prophetic.” The last sentence is deleted from [Luther’s translation from] 1530, together with an entire preface to the September Testament . . . On the Epistle to the Hebrews, he writes with reference to the denial of repentance for backsliding sinners after baptism (Heb 6 and 10), and to Esau, who sought repentance without finding it (Heb 12), which he calls a “hard knot” in Scripture: “It is against all the Gospels and the Epistles of Saint Paul.” His argument directly against the Epistle of James is similar: “First, against Saint Paul and other Scripture, it gives justification to works . . .” He adds a second argument: “Secondly, he wants to teach Christian people, but does not think once of such a long teaching as that of the passion and resurrection and Spirit of Christ; he mentions Christ a few times, but he teaches nothing about him, but speaks of common faith in God.” And Luther links this directly with what is for him the positive note by which true evangelical testimony may be recognized: “For the office of a true apostle is to preach of Christ’s passion and resurrection and office, and to lay the foundation of faith in him . . . Therein all true holy books agree, that they together preach and apply Christ.” On the Epistle of Jude, he does not consider it necessary “to count [it] among the books used to lay the foundation of faith.” In Revelation he cannot see any signs that the Holy Spirit was its author, and confesses: “My spirit cannot penetrate this book; and it is enough for me not to esteem it highly that Christ is neither taught or recognized in it . . . I therefore remain with the books which present Christ clearly and purely to me” (Preface to the 1522 September Testament, deleted from 1530; WADB 7.404).
Klaus Dietrich Fricke, “The Apocrypha in the Luther Bible” in The Apocrypha in Ecumenical Perspective, ed. Siegfried Meurer (trans. Paul Ellingworth; New York: United Bible Socities, 1991), 46-87, here, pp. 72-73; first two comments in square brackets my own added for clarification.