Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

5 questions and the 5 solas
The Cripplegate ^ | July 2, 2014 | Jesse Johnson

Posted on 02/07/2015 9:54:25 AM PST by RnMomof7

ImageThe 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 FideFaith alone

Solus ChristusChrist alone

Sola ScripturaScripture alone

Sola GratiaGrace alone

Soli Deo GloriaGod’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?


TOPICS: Apologetics; Evangelical Christian; Mainline Protestant; Theology
KEYWORDS: catholicbashing; reformation; scripture; solas
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 281-283 next last
To: RnMomof7; MamaB; Salvation
Update reply to Salvation's #30:

Second ‘source’ The requested URL /bstanley/luther.htm was not found on this server.

Not located on the server, but located here:

EWTN Re History of Protestants.

Oh yeah, EWTN for all the unbiased news about Protestants.

The sourcing and composition of the post requires that the poster be Hereby DENIED an Indulgence normally given for the posting of RCC propaganda. Reason: Even dumb protestants could figure out the links. ByDir Cardinal Vaselli Chief Propagandist Vatican.

41 posted on 02/07/2015 12:29:43 PM PST by xone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: xone

Thanks. They just toss stuff out there, hoping people will not look it up and just take their word for fact. They should know better by now.


42 posted on 02/07/2015 12:48:55 PM PST by MamaB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7; Salvation; Mark17; metmom; boatbums; daniel1212; imardmd1; Resettozero; WVKayaker
The word used in Romans 3:28 is χωρὶς (chōris) which according to Strong, Thayer, and all translators means without, apart from, or "by itself". It's also used in the following verse.

John 20:7 And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself. Yet Catholics go apoplectic if someone changes "by itself" to "alone". Petty anyone?

43 posted on 02/07/2015 1:03:03 PM PST by CynicalBear (For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: metmom
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. 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. For even in Romans Paul states that his mission is to bring about the obedience of faith (Romans 1:5). Salvation is more than just an intellectual assent to the saving work of Jesus Christ.
44 posted on 02/07/2015 1:07:58 PM PST by Petrosius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Why bother? It’s the Protestant along with the Muslim-in-chief who sit on their high horses condemning the Catholic Church for so called atrocities that have been committed against the poor Muslims in the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition.
“I will not serve! Came out of the depravity of Luther. He could have been a great Saint in reforming the Catholic Church as did St. Francis of Assisi, But no, he rebelled and said “I will not serve and changed Bible verses to justify and serve his own purposes. (Judas).
Henry the VIII, I will not serve! Which introduced divorce and later Birth Control.
So tell me, who destroyed the FAMILY?
“I will not serve!”
It’s the Catholic who will have to explain to their fallen away brothers that there will be no Rapture. It will be the Catholic who will have to explain to their fallen away brothers that it’s not the end of the world.
It will be in Humility and Love that the Catholic will embrace with Love and Mercy their lost brothers and sisters who were deceived by the Ant-Christ because of their disobedience. “I Will Not Serve.”

St. Michael, “Who Is Like Unto God?”

I’m sorry, but you justify unto hate. For you are the rebellions ones.

You prefer not to look back to the Fathers of the Church but prefer the easy way out which is wide and met with no resistance.
I pity you.


45 posted on 02/07/2015 1:22:28 PM PST by billys kid (My beloved is mine and I am thine...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: xone; RnMomof7; MamaB; Salvation
>>Oh yeah, EWTN for all the unbiased news about Protestants.<<

Wait...what? Are you saying that Catholics would chastise us or using a site biased against Catholics then hypocritically use a site biased against Protestants? How can this be? Surely they would have petitioned to have such a biased site banned from being used.

46 posted on 02/07/2015 1:23:17 PM PST by CynicalBear (For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Petrosius; RnMomof7
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.

I am very familiar with Romans. ALL of it.

*Proof texting*???

Now THAT'S funny coming from a Catholic. If you object to proof texting, then there's a whole bunch of random Scripture verses that Catholicism that it hangs its hat on that I'd like to discuss.

The whole purpose of Romans was to contradict the idea that Christians were still bound to the Mosaic law.

Yes.

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.

And you know that how? Is that your interpretation of the passage?

For even in Romans Paul states that his mission is to bring about the obedience of faith (Romans 1:5).

OK.

Salvation is more than just an intellectual assent to the saving work of Jesus Christ.

True, but it happens before works. One is saved first, then produces the works to demonstrate it.

But the righteousness we have is the righteousness of Christ that has been credited to our account by faith in Him.

Rnmom states it very well here.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3254531/posts?page=336#336

"I can say with confidence I am saved now ... I am working out that salvation as God wills.. and on the day of my death I will stand Before Christ clothed in His righteousness .. not my own ... "

and here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3254976/posts?page=15#15

" But I know with certainty that as I breath my last breath I will be in His presence wearing His robe of righteousness.. "

We enter heaven clothed in HIS righteousness, not our own. Our righteous deeds, done as the out flowing of our faith are for the praise and glory of God and we will be rewarded for faithful obedience but they do NOT contribute to our salvation because OUR righteous deeds are as filthy rags in God's sight.

47 posted on 02/07/2015 1:29:57 PM PST by metmom (...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7

Well, now that that’s been thoroughly discussed (after some 45 posts), how about discussing the Five Remonstances of Arminius and the Five Points of Calvinism as set forth in reply by the Synod of Dordt?

That should keep us off the streets for a while!


48 posted on 02/07/2015 1:32:40 PM PST by TIElniff (Autonomy is the guise of every graceless heart.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: billys kid
Your rant makes little sense but as to some of it......

It’s the Protestant along with the Muslim-in-chief who sit on their high horses condemning the Catholic Church for so called atrocities that have been committed against the poor Muslims in the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition.

What prots have ever condemned the Catholic church for so-called atrocities against the muslims?

And as far as calling them *so-called* atrocities, do you not consider burning someone at the stake with pages from the Bible as fuel an atrocity?

Do Catholics not think that that would qualify?

“I will not serve! Came out of the depravity of Luther. He could have been a great Saint in reforming the Catholic Church as did St. Francis of Assisi, But no, he rebelled and said “I will not serve and changed Bible verses to justify and serve his own purposes. (Judas).

The Catholic church ex-communicated him.

And did he ever say *I will not serve*? Can you point to the quote?

49 posted on 02/07/2015 1:34:55 PM PST by metmom (...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: billys kid

We look to Jesus. No need to look to man.


50 posted on 02/07/2015 1:35:42 PM PST by MamaB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

Comment #51 Removed by Moderator

To: Salvation; RnMomof7
TIME-OUT! All of those links are to Roman Catholic sites. Not one it to Beggers All.

But I will provide the link: Luther Added The Word "Alone" to Romans 3:28?

What out FRoman Catholic FRiend Salvation didn't provide, for whatever reason is the rest of the article, which actually refutes the above FRoman Catholic Polemic. Here is what you will find regarding Luther and adding the word "alone:" 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.

What? All of those early "Catholics" held to faith alone?!?

Out of curiosity Salvation, why did you not post the entity of this article, but just the part about where the author is laying out the Catholic Polemic and not the response?

52 posted on 02/07/2015 1:37:44 PM PST by Gamecock (Joel Osteen is a minister of the Gospel like 0bama is a POTUS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear
Surely they would have petitioned to have such a biased site banned from being used.

I know, I'm at a loss to explain it as well. Perhaps a Papal mis-translation on the laity level. You never know about these tolerant Catholics.

53 posted on 02/07/2015 1:42:32 PM PST by xone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: billys kid

Another great Catholic historian in the making. LOL.


54 posted on 02/07/2015 1:44:37 PM PST by xone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

Comment #55 Removed by Moderator

To: RnMomof7
Many people are not aware that

Many people are not aware that we are aware that Luther was neither alone in adding "alone," nor in his exclusion of certain books re the canon.

56 posted on 02/07/2015 1:53:22 PM PST by daniel1212 (Come to the Lord Jesus as a contrite damned+destitute sinner, trust Him to save you, then live 4 Him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: metmom

Actually, he proclaimed himself to be the beginning and the end of Scripture proves he believed himself to be the authority of at least hundreds of years of the Catholic Church. Disregarding the Fathers and Doctors of the Church. “HE knew better, don’tcha know?

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.”


57 posted on 02/07/2015 1:54:21 PM PST by billys kid (My beloved is mine and I am thine...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: MamaB

Amen!


58 posted on 02/07/2015 1:57:44 PM PST by billys kid (My beloved is mine and I am thine...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: billys kid
Actually, he proclaimed himself to be the beginning and the end of Scripture

And where's the source for that claim, too?

You can provide the link along with the one from the other quote you claimed he made.

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.”

Where are those words found?

And he would not serve whom? Or what?

His disobedience to whom or what?

And his objection to the abuse of indulgences? Is that without merit?

59 posted on 02/07/2015 1:58:19 PM PST by metmom (...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: billys kid
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.”

Between the potty mouth and these fanciful proclamations it might be better for you to stick to the Caucus'ed threads.

Actually, he proclaimed himself to be the beginning and the end of Scripture

Seriously, these threads require proofs, not polemics. You seem over-wrought.

60 posted on 02/07/2015 2:00:02 PM PST by xone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 281-283 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson