The primary interest of this study is to determine what it is about the nature of Martin Luther's thought that has lent itself to a variety of interpretations. Its "context-dependency" is identified as this factor. His thought is context-dependent in the sense that he consistently structured his remarks in relation to the particular concern he had in view. The variety of interpretations has arisen because the different concerns Luther addressed led him to use diverse conceptuality for most doctrinal loci. Consequently, very distinct theological proposals can validly claim the Reformer as their source of inspiration. They are insufficient though, to the degree that each tends to "systematize" the Reformer's thought by designating one set of concerns and its correlated images as primary. As a result, all his other remarks are interpreted in relation to the primary notions, and in that way distorted or ignored.

In order to demonstrate this, specific limits are placed upon the scope of the analysis. In all cases the areas of inquiry are sufficiently typical and significant to lend a degree of credibility to generalizations that will be made on the basis of this limited study. Thus only the doctrine of God, and specifically the relationship between divine wrath and love in Luther and his interpreters, is considered. This locus is chosen because it provides insights for all elements of one's theological position. Among Luther's interpreters only the proposals of Werner Elert, Gustaf Aulen, and Regin Prenter are analyzed. They are selected because they embody collectively a typology for every viable interpretation of Luther's doctrine of God. It is demonstrated that all these viable options are correct to some extent in the way they represent Luther. Each one is correct in regards to remarks made by the Reformer where he addressed concerns analogous to the interpreter's own. This suggests that there may be a pattern in the use of Christian thought. Of course the "contextuality" of theology is widely recognized. Yet the dissertation seems to indicate the systematic thoroughness of this phenomenon, that certain doctrinal configurations are especially useful in some situations and not in others.

In certain portions of the dissertation the implications of this insight for ecumenical inquiry are noted. This may indicate that Luther's thought can be a helpful tool for indicating areas of ecumenical agreement among theologians. In fact, the specific contexts identified in facilitating the study may also have a more general use in that connection. They may provide more refined criteria for determining when theologians are actually addressing analogous contexts. All these observations imply a constructive theological proposal with implications for a "contextual" approach to theological education and pastoral ministry.