5 questions and the 5 solas

The Cripplegate ^ | July 2, 2014 | Jesse Johnson

[Rides_A_Red_Horse]

Good works are necessary but not sufficient.

---

Faith is necessary; good works are evidence of faith and salvation.

[xone]

All your ‘sources’ go to Catholic websites! LOL for the lame attempt. After: From the BeggarsAll website:
Luther Added The Word “Alone” to Romans 3:28?, your whole post is Catholic propaganda. Very weak.

[xone]

Luther failed to take into consideration James 2:24

Hardly, Luther didn't proof text. Scripture in context.

[xone]

From Yahoo answers:

At least it isn't a Catholic site, guess Wiki wasn't available?

[RnMomof7]

Many people are not aware that Luther added the word “alone” to one of St. Paul’s writings (I can’t remember which one right now) so that it said “faith alone.”

Previous translations of the word “alone” in Romans 3:28
Luther offers another line of reasoning in his “Open Letter on Translating” that many of the current Cyber-Catholics ignore, and most Protestants are not aware of:

“Furthermore, I am not the only one, nor the first, to say that faith alone makes one righteous. There was Ambrose, Augustine and many others who said it before me.”

Now here comes the fun part in this discussion.

The Roman Catholic writer Joseph A. Fitzmyer points out that Luther was not the only one to translate Romans 3:28 with the word “alone.”

At 3:28 Luther introduced the adv. “only” into his translation of Romans (1522), “alleyn durch den Glauben” (WAusg 7.38); cf. Aus der Bibel 1546, “alleine durch den Glauben” (WAusg, DB 7.39); also 7.3-27 (Pref. to the Epistle). See further his Sendbrief vom Dolmetschen, of 8 Sept. 1530 (WAusg 30.2 [1909], 627-49; “On Translating: An Open Letter” [LuthW 35.175-202]). Although “alleyn/alleine” finds no corresponding adverb in the Greek text, two of the points that Luther made in his defense of the added adverb were that it was demanded by the context and that sola was used in the theological tradition before him.

Robert Bellarmine listed eight earlier authors who used sola (Disputatio de controversiis: De justificatione 1.25 [Naples: G. Giuliano, 1856], 4.501-3):

Origen, Commentarius in Ep. ad Romanos, cap. 3 (PG 14.952).

Hilary, Commentarius in Matthaeum 8:6 (PL 9.961).

Basil, Hom. de humilitate 20.3 (PG 31.529C).

Ambrosiaster, In Ep. ad Romanos 3.24 (CSEL 81.1.119): “sola fide justificati sunt dono Dei,” through faith alone they have been justified by a gift of God; 4.5 (CSEL 81.1.130).

John Chrysostom, Hom. in Ep. ad Titum 3.3 (PG 62.679 [not in Greek text]).

Cyril of Alexandria, In Joannis Evangelium 10.15.7 (PG 74.368 [but alludes to Jas 2:19]).

Bernard, In Canticum serm. 22.8 (PL 183.881): “solam justificatur per fidem,” is justified by faith alone.

Theophylact, Expositio in ep. ad Galatas 3.12-13 (PG 124.988).


To these eight Lyonnet added two others (Quaestiones, 114-18):

Theodoret, Affectionum curatio 7 (PG 93.100; ed. J. Raeder [Teubner], 189.20-24).

Thomas Aquinas, Expositio in Ep. I ad Timotheum cap. 1, lect. 3 (Parma ed., 13.588): “Non est ergo in eis [moralibus et caeremonialibus legis] spes iustificationis, sed in sola fide, Rom. 3:28: Arbitramur justificari hominem per fidem, sine operibus legis” (Therefore the hope of justification is not found in them [the moral and ceremonial requirements of the law], but in faith alone, Rom 3:28: We consider a human being to be justified by faith, without the works of the law). Cf. In ep. ad Romanos 4.1 (Parma ed., 13.42a): “reputabitur fides eius, scilicet sola sine operibus exterioribus, ad iustitiam”; In ep. ad Galatas 2.4 (Parma ed., 13.397b): “solum ex fide Christi” [Opera 20.437, b41]).

See further:

Theodore of Mopsuestia, In ep. ad Galatas (ed. H. B. Swete), 1.31.15.

Marius Victorinus (ep. Pauli ad Galatas (ed. A. Locher), ad 2.15-16: “Ipsa enim fides sola iustificationem dat-et sanctificationem” (For faith itself alone gives justification and sanctification); In ep. Pauli Ephesios (ed. A. Locher), ad 2.15: “Sed sola fides in Christum nobis salus est” (But only faith in Christ is salvation for us).

Augustine, De fide et operibus, 22.40 (CSEL 41.84-85): “licet recte dici possit ad solam fidem pertinere dei mandata, si non mortua, sed viva illa intellegatur fides, quae per dilectionem operatur” (Although it can be said that God’s commandments pertain to faith alone, if it is not dead [faith], but rather understood as that live faith, which works through love”). Migne Latin Text: Venire quippe debet etiam illud in mentem, quod scriptum est, In hoc cognoscimus eum, si mandata ejus servemus. Qui dicit, Quia cognovi eum, et mandata ejus non servat, mendax est, et in hoc veritas non est (I Joan. II, 3, 4). Et ne quisquam existimet mandata ejus ad solam fidem pertinere: quanquam dicere hoc nullus est ausus, praesertim quia mandata dixit, quae ne multitudine cogitationem spargerent [Note: [Col. 0223] Sic Mss. Editi vero, cogitationes parerent.], In illis duobus tota Lex pendet et Prophetae (Matth. XXII, 40): licet recte dici possit ad solam fidem pertinere Dei mandata, si non mortua, sed viva illa intelligatur fides, quae per dilectionem operatur; tamen postea Joannes ipse aperuit quid diceret, cum ait: Hoc est mandatum ejus, ut credamus nomini Filii ejus Jesu Christi, et diligamns invicem (I Joan. III, 23) See De fide et operibus, Cap. XXII, §40, PL 40:223.

Source: Joseph A. Fitzmyer Romans, A New Translation with introduction and Commentary, The Anchor Bible Series (New York: Doubleday, 1993) 360-361.

Even some Catholic versions of the New Testament also translated Romans 3:28 as did Luther. The Nuremberg Bible (1483), “allein durch den glauben” and the Italian Bibles of Geneva (1476) and of Venice (1538) say “per sola fede.”

http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2006/02/luther-added-word-alone-to-romans-328.html

[xone]

Well that’s OK then, those guys were Catholics!

[Salvation]

LOL! The first site I posted from was a protestant site.

[xone]

LOL nothing, you didn’t link anything, and the excerpt you lifted was a ‘question’. That question is examined in the article that follows. So no, you lifted verbiage, not content, then spammed Catholic propaganda. LOL indeed.

[Alex Murphy]

Many people are not aware that Luther added the word “alone” to one of St. Paul’s writings (I can’t remember which one right now) so that it said “faith alone.”

Make that "many people PLUS ONE MORE" ROTFL!

[Salvation]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3255146/posts?page=9#9

There are sources in the article

[metmom]

Luther failed to take into consideration James 2:24 which says, "You see that a man is justified by works, and not by faith alone" or "Faith without works is dead." [James 2:20].

Romans 4:1-25 What then shall we say was gained by Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness apart from works: “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not count his sin.”

Is this blessing then only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised? For we say that faith was counted to Abraham as righteousness. How then was it counted to him? Was it before or after he had been circumcised? It was not after, but before he was circumcised. He received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. The purpose was to make him the father of all who believe without being circumcised, so that righteousness would be counted to them as well, and to make him the father of the circumcised who are not merely circumcised but who also walk in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham had before he was circumcised.

For the promise to Abraham and his offspring that he would be heir of the world did not come through the law but through the righteousness of faith. For if it is the adherents of the law who are to be the heirs, faith is null and the promise is void. For the law brings wrath, but where there is no law there is no transgression. That is why it depends on faith, in order that the promise may rest on grace and be guaranteed to all his offspring—not only to the adherent of the law but also to the one who shares the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all, as it is written, “I have made you the father of many nations”—in the presence of the God in whom he believed, who gives life to the dead and calls into existence the things that do not exist. In hope he believed against hope, that he should become the father of many nations, as he had been told, “So shall your offspring be.” He did not weaken in faith when he considered his own body, which was as good as dead (since he was about a hundred years old), or when he considered the barrenness of Sarah's womb. No unbelief made him waver concerning the promise of God, but he grew strong in his faith as he gave glory to God, fully convinced that God was able to do what he had promised. That is why his faith was “counted to him as righteousness.” But the words “it was counted to him” were not written for his sake alone, but for ours also. It will be counted to us who believe in him who raised from the dead Jesus our Lord, who was delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification.

Does Scripture, God, contradict Himself?

Then explain the contradiction between what you says James means and what Paul says here in Romans 4.

[Salvation]

http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2006/02/luther-added-word-alone-to-romans-328.html

[CommerceComet]

You'll note in the attack piece that you cited, the author says that Martin Luther translated the Bible into German. It is common practice when translating to include words that are not in the original - languages seldom have a word-for-word correspondence. The translators do so in order to more accurately convey the thoughts presented. What you did in your earlier post and the author of piece you cited in a following post did is to imply evil motives to this action.

The inclusion of the word alone is consistent with the surrounding text (and the rest of Paul's writings).

Protestants should not have an issue with Paul's insistence that we are saved by faith (alone) without works and James' writing. Reading James in context makes it clear that James is saying that those who are saved will exhibit that naturally though good works. The good works don't make someone any more saved.

What Martin Luther did or didn't do with the word "alone" is really a diversion from the point of the original article. Is "faith alone" an accurate term to summarize Scriptural teaching on how one is saved? That is the real question that should be discussed. And BTW the answer to that question is YES.

[metmom]

Douay-Rheims Bible

Romans 3:28 For we account a man to be justified by faith, without the works of the law.

And that contradicts the Catholic interpretation of James.

Now, Salvation, that is the translation of the Catholic Bible. Explain THAT contradiction too, please.

[xone]

Right, and the only thing sourced from the was the question you posted. Fortunately, RnMom filled out the answer in #25. Luther wasn’t the ‘only’ one, Catholics, including some Saints did. The list compiled by another Saint.

[xone]

I’m sure that’s just a ‘mis-translation’ by a monk lost to history. The Catholic will be back with some good RCC approved propaganda site that’ll explain everything, or blame it on the evil Luther.

[xone]

There are sources in the article

There sure are:

First ‘source’

http://saint-mike.org/apologetics/qa.html

Second ‘source’

The requested URL /bstanley/luther.htm was not found on this server.

Third ‘source’

http://web.archive.org/web/20040204001847/http:/ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ407.HTM

From the author:

(as a Catholic, I prefer the term "Revolt" and the phrase "Protestant Founders" rather than "Reformers" -

Like I said, propaganda.

[MamaB]

I am thankful that we have very smart Protestants on here who see through their propaganda. Thank you.

[LearsFool]

The gospel is not a religion of works, but a religions of faith. You can’t do anything to be saved—rather, God saves you on the basis of your faith, which is itself on the basis of the work of Christ on your behalf. Protestants believe that you don’t work for your salvation, and that nobody is good enough to deserve salvation. But thankfully salvation does not come on the basis of works but instead on the basis of faith.

That's one very confused paragraph - which likely betrays one very confused author.

[xone]

Thank you, but I’m not smart, I have that site bookmarked, and am familiar with the section involved.