5 questions and the 5 solas

The Cripplegate ^ | July 2, 2014 | Jesse Johnson

[RnMomof7]

The Protestant Reformation threw the Christian world into chaos. At the beginning of the 1400’s the Pope’s authority was absolute and the only means of salvation were the sacraments given under his auspices. There was a secular/sacred distinction that was ironclad, meaning that the priests and laity lived in practically two separate worlds. There was no concept of church membership, corporate worship, preaching, or Bible reading in the churches. And as far as doctrine was concerned, there was no debate—the creeds and declarations from Rome (and soon to be Avignon) were the law.

Things had been this way for six hundred years. In a world where life expectancy was in the 30’s, that is essentially the same as saying that the church had been in the dark forever.

But if you fast-forward to the end of the 1500’s, all of that had been turned on its head. The absolute nature of the Pope’s rule and vanished—in large part owing to the Babylonian Captivity of the church (the 40 year period were two rival popes both ruled, and both excommunicated each other—finally to both be deposed by a church council). Church councils themselves had contradicted themselves so many times that their own authority was openly ridiculed. The Holy Roman Empire was no longer relevant, and the political world had simply passed the Pope by. 

Protestants found themselves in the wake of this upheaval, and there was one major question to be answered: what, exactly, was this new kind of Christian? What did a Protestant believe? The reformation had followed similar and simultaneous tracks in multiple countries, yet at the end of it all the content of Protestantism was pretty much the same. On the essentials, German, English, Swiss, and Dutch Protestants all stood for the same theology. But what was it?

It was easy to understand the beliefs of Catholicism—all one had to do was look at their creeds and the declarations from their councils. But Protestants were so named precisely because they were opposed to all that. So what council would give them their beliefs then?

This is where the five solas came from. These were five statements about the content of the Protestant gospel, and by the end of the 1500’s, these were the terms which identified Protestantism. These five phrases are not an extensive statement on theology, but instead served simply as a way to explain what the content of the gospel was to which Protestants held.

Sola Fide—Faith alone

Solus Christus—Christ alone

Sola Scriptura—Scripture alone

Sola Gratia—Grace alone

Soli Deo Gloria—God’s glory alone

These five solas still live on to this very day. They define what the gospel is for evangelicals worldwide, and also provide a helpful summary—a cheat sheet even—of what marks the true gospel from a religion of works. But historically, these five solas make the most sense when viewed from the perspective of answering the question: what do Protestants believe? In fact, each one of these five is an answer to a particular question:

What must I do to be saved? Sola Fide

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.

Sola fide declares that In addition to faith, you can do absolutely nothing in order to be saved.

What must I trust? Solus Christus

In a world with deposed Popes in the unemployment line, this question has profound importance. Keep in mind that for six hundred years, nearly every European would have answered that question by pointing at the sacraments. You trust them for your salvation. Perhaps some would point you to the church, the priest, of even to Jesus himself. But only a Protestant would say “trust Jesus alone.”

Solus Christus is a simple declaration that salvation is not dispensed through Rome, priests, or sacraments. There is no sense in putting hope in extreme unction, purgatory, or an indulgence. Instead it comes through Jesus alone.

What must I obey? Sola Scriptura

When the Council of Constance deposed both Popes, this question took on a sense of urgency. If a council is greater than a Pope, then does one have to obey the Pope at all, or is it better to simply submit yourself to the church as a whole? Are believers compelled to obey priests in matters of faith?

Sola Scriptura says “no.” In matters of faith, believers are compelled by no other authority than that of Scripture. There is no room for a mixture of history and tradition—those cannot restrain the flesh and they cannot bind the conscience. Instead, believers’ only ultimate authority is the Bible.

What must I earn? Sola Gratia

Is there any sense in which a person must earn salvation? For the Protestant, the answer is obvious: NO! Salvation is of grace…ALONE. It is not by work or merit. God didn’t look down the tunnel of time and see how you were going to responded to the gospel, then rewind the tape and choose you. He does not save you in light of what you did, are doing, or will do in the future. Instead, his salvation is based entirely upon his grace.

What is the point? Soli Deo Gloria

What is the point of the Reformation? Why are these doctrinal differences worth dividing over? Because people were made for one reason, and one reason alone: to glorify God. God is glorified in his creation, in his children, in the gospel, and most particularly in his son. The highest calling on a persons’ life (indeed, the only real calling in a person’s life) is that he would glorify God in all he does. Nevertheless, we always fail to do that. Yet God saves us anyway through the gospel.

Soli Deo Gloria is a reminder that by twisting the gospel or by adding works to the gospel, a person is actually missing the glory that comes through a gospel of grace and faith, through Jesus, and described by Scripture. The first four questions really function like tributaries, and they all flow to this body—God’s glory.

Do you think these five solas retain their importance today, five hundred years later? Are they still adequate for describing the gospel of Grace?

[billys kid]

I know what I Know! And if I were you, I wouldn’t dismiss me so quickly.

[Gamecock]

My, my. Such potty talk!

[metmom]

It’s LDS - Luther Derangement Syndrome.

It causes all kinds of symptoms, including but not limited to irrational behavior, fanciful claims, foaming at the mouth......

[xone]

I know what I Know! And if I were you, I wouldn’t dismiss me so quickly.

It is very easy to dismiss one who rants and when challenged offers zero proof. Fortunately, I'm not you so I again recommend that you restrict your postings to Caucus'ed threads. These open threads appear to be a challenge to your temper. This over the top howling does whatever side you are advocating no service. Or the Muslim god you serve.

[metmom]

I know what I Know! And if I were you, I wouldn’t dismiss me so quickly.

Well, if you do know something, there's no evidence of it yet.

Back it up.

And you aren't being dismissed because of what you claim you know that you haven't shared yet, but because of the potty mouth.

Language like that destroys credibility faster than anything else I can think of.

[xone]

Hey Mom, He Knows what he knows, He just ain’t telling us how or why, trust him, He seems Credible.

[Gamecock]

I know what I Know! And if I were you, I wouldn’t dismiss me so quickly.

[CynicalBear]

>>Read all of Romans instead of proof-texting and you will discover that the "works of the law" that Paul is discussing are those of the law of Moses.<<

Only those who do not know scripture or who have an agenda would use that line. And only those who don't know scripture would fall for it.

Romans 4:4 Now to the one who works (ἐργαζομένῳ - ergazomenō), wages are not credited as a gift but as an obligation. 5 However, to the one who does not work (ἐργαζομένῳ - ergazomenō) but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness.

Greek - ἐργαζομένῳ - ergazomenō - from ergon - I work, trade, perform, do, practice, commit, acquire by labor. [http://biblehub.com/greek/2038.htm]

Now, let's look at the verse trotted out by Catholics to make the claim "it's not faith alone".

James 2:14 What is the profit, my brethren, if faith, any one may speak of having, and works (ἔργον - ergon) he may not have? is that faith able to save him?

Romans 3:20 wherefore by works (ἔργον - ergon) of law shall no flesh be declared righteous before Him, for through law is a knowledge of sin.

Greek - ἔργον - ergon - I work, trade, perform, do, practice, commit, acquire by labor.

>>To try to apply what he is saying to a discussion of the relationship between faith and obedience to the moral law is to take Paul completely out of context.<<

So tell us then. Is James saying that faith without the law is nothing? Which law? Moral law or Mosaic law? Was Paul saying without the law of Moses or any law? Was James talking about Mosaic law moral law? In Romans 4 was Paul talking about a different kind of work in verse 4 then he was in verse 5? Perhaps you or some other Catholic could give us your interpretation on all of that? Surely you would all want to be consistent correct?

[billys kid]

She was opposed to the premise in the Protestant belief that if you were not healed by Jesus from whatever ailment it was because of your unworthiness or some failure on your part that did not deserve healing.
What she announced to the Protestant was that there was in fact Redemption in their suffering.
They were joining their suffering with Christ.
So therefore, it didn’t much matter whether healed or dying they were with Christ and there suffering was joined to the sufferings of Christ Himself in the Agony, Death and Resurrection.

[CynicalBear]

>>The very fact that this man in his disobedience and changing the scripture to suit his prideful beliefs, cries out to the world his acclamation of “I will not serve.”<<

Please explain to us how "by itself" is different from "alone".

[daniel1212]

Read all of Romans instead of proof-texting and you will discover that the "works of the law" that Paul is discussing are those of the law of Moses. The whole purpose of Romans was to contradict the idea that Christians were still bound to the Mosaic law.

Rather, more precisely the issue was that of exclusion of justification by the merit of works, which extended to all systems, but which the Law represented "for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law." (Galatians 3:21)

In Titus 3:5, writing to a Greek, works in general are excluded as salvific in this sense, and Abraham had done works before Gn. 15:6, yet it is clearly stated, in denying that Abraham was justified by works, "Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness." (Romans 4:3)

What precisely justifies one is what Paul is dealing with, in which God justified the unGodly, by counting their faith as righteousness, for our sins were imputed to Christ.

Meanwhile James deals with what manner of faith is salvific, which is one the effects works, which justifies one as one that is a saved believer. Which Paul also teaches, "For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified." (Romans 2:13) Not that the works make them holy enough to be with God, but that those who believe with a faith which effects obedience shall be justified, as works justify one has having faith. (Heb. 6:9,10; Mt. 7:20; Ja,. 2:18) . And believers are justified by faith so "that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." (Romans 8:4)

The difference is btwn souls faith appropriating justification, with the heart believing unto righteousness, and thus confessing Christ confirmatory of salvation, so that the penitent publican could be justified and the contrite criminal could be with Christ at death, and that even death-bed conversions by paralyzed persons are possible;

versus being formally justified and made fit to being with God in Heaven due to their inherent holiness, and thus usually having to suffer postmortem torments in order to attain this moral perfection, and to atone for sins, as per RC teaching.

[CynicalBear]

>>I know what I Know! And if I were you, I wouldn’t dismiss me so quickly.<<

From the language you use and the lack of documentation I think we can dismiss you forthwith.

[xone]

Protestant belief

So it is yours and Mother Angelica's opinion that if you were not healed by Jesus from whatever ailment it was because of your unworthiness or some failure on your part that did not deserve healing. Is this correct? If so, it should be easy to show that all Protestants believe this. Here is a link to the Book of Concord. http://www.bookofconcord.org/ While Lutherans don't usually like to be referred to as Protestants, I waive my objections. Go to the link, find the reference to the above teaching and I will give you a symbolic bow. If you can't find it, then you must disavow your statement I know what I Know! And if I were you, I wouldn’t dismiss me so quickly.

What she announced to the Protestant was that there was in fact Redemption in their suffering.

Another reason to avoid Mother Angelica, there was only redemption in Christ's suffering and death and resurrection.

[billys kid]

Please do.

[xone]

I do however enjoy the occasional potty talk.

You are Catholic right? Then the Muslim god you serve likes it as well.

[Gamecock]

Great Christ-like behavior you are modeling!

[xone]

You do realize that according to Catholic teaching you worship the same god as the Muslims. Betcha didn’t know that; in all what you knew before.

[CynicalBear]

She also thought whatever religion you were was good enough.

"If in coming face to face with God we accept Him in our lives, then we are converting. We become a better Hindu, a better Muslim, a better Catholic, a better whatever we are. ... What God is in your mind you must accept" (from Mother Teresa: Her People and Her Work , by Desmond Doig, p. 156, as quoted by Dave Hunt, Global Peace and the Rise of Antichrist , p. 149).