The Five solas - are any of them justifiable from the holy scriptures.

[MoreCoffee]

During the protestant revolt and subsequent Catholic reformation some of the protesting leaders and theologians made a point of summarising their theological divide under five heads of doctrine which have since become knows and the the five solas. Check wikipeidia if you want to see the five listed out in Latin.

Are any of the five justified by direct teaching in the holy scripture or are they all the product of theological speculations based approximately on some selected statements in the scriptures?

 

[Josiah]

IMO, the view in justification (narrow) of Sola Gratia - Solus Christus - Sola Fide is correct. I know that the Council of Trent of your denomination anathmatized this view a few years after Luther's death, but I hold it to be true.

IMO, the Rule of Scripture in the norming of disputed dogmas among us (Sola Scriptura) is sound; I know of no norma normans to be preferred to Scripture and I do not accept the objection of the RCC and LDS that an individual person, denomination, sect, cult is exempt from examination or norming if the self same claims that the self same is.

IMO, all the "work" of justification (narrow) is that of God since I believe that Jesus is the Savior. Thus, yes, I hold that all the glory or credit for such belongs to God (Soli Deo Gloria). Of course, Catholic credit self and pat self on back so they will protest this "sola."



- Josiah

 

[Lamb]

Sola Fide, by faith alone. Romans 5:1
Sola Scriptura, by Scripture alone. 1 Corinthians 4:6
Solus Christus, through Christ alone. John 14:6, 1 Timothy 2:5, John 1:1, 14
Sola Gratia, by grace alone. Ephesians 2:8
Soli Deo Gloria, glory to God alone. 1 Peter 2:24, Isaiah 43:7

 

[MoreCoffee]

Sola Fide, by faith alone. Romans 5:1
Sola Scriptura, by Scripture alone. 1 Corinthians 4:6
Solus Christus, through Christ alone. John 14:6, 1 Timothy 2:5, John 1:1, 14
Sola Gratia, by grace alone. Ephesians 2:8
Soli Deo Gloria, glory to God alone. 1 Peter 2:24, Isaiah 43:7

Romans 5:1 does not say "faith alone" and it doesn't mean it either.

1 Corinthians 4:6 refers to the old testament scriptures and it does not teach or mean that one's doctrine and practise must comes from direct teaching in the old testament scriptures.

John 14:6, 1 Timothy 2:5, John 1:1, 14 speak to Christians under the new covenant yet many were accounted righteous and accepted by God under the old covenant without any direct knowledge of Christ so it is both misleading and inaccurate to assert that these passages teach that through Christ alone [is one saved]. For that a much deeper examination of the holy scriptures and the teaching of the Church is needed.

Ephesians 2:8 does teach (along with many other passages) that everything good and wholesome comes from God's goodness graciously given to the faithful.

1 Peter 2:24, Isaiah 43:7 since everything is from God and given by God graciously to the faithful (and also to unbelieving people too) one can argue in favour of the proposition that all is for the glory of God but one must take time and make considerable effort to understand what glory means.

 

[Lamb]

Ah, you want specific word by word... Like trinity. And bible. Gotcha

 

[MoreCoffee]

Ah, you want specific word by word... Like trinity. And bible. Gotcha

I want precisely what I asked for - Are any of the five justified by direct teaching in the holy scripture or are they all the product of theological speculations based approximately on some selected statements in the scriptures?

 

[MoreCoffee]

IMO, the view in justification (narrow) of Sola Gratia - Solus Christus - Sola Fide is correct. I know that the Council of Trent of your denomination anathmatized this view a few years after Luther's death, but I hold it to be true.

IMO, the Rule of Scripture in the norming of disputed dogmas among us (Sola Scriptura) is sound; I know of no norma normans to be preferred to Scripture and I do not accept the objection of the RCC and LDS that an individual person, denomination, sect, cult is exempt from examination or norming if the self same claims that the self same is.

IMO, all the "work" of justification (narrow) is that of God since I believe that Jesus is the Savior. Thus, yes, I hold that all the glory or credit for such belongs to God (Soli Deo Gloria). Of course, Catholic credit self and pat self on back so they will protest this "sola."

Good post except for the parts struck out by me

 

[Rens]

Sola Fide, by faith alone. Romans 5:1
Sola Scriptura, by Scripture alone. 1 Corinthians 4:6
Solus Christus, through Christ alone. John 14:6, 1 Timothy 2:5, John 1:1, 14
Sola Gratia, by grace alone. Ephesians 2:8
Soli Deo Gloria, glory to God alone. 1 Peter 2:24, Isaiah 43:7

That's weird. By faith alone but also by grace alone and by Christ alone ehm why not just say: by Christ faith grace and Scripture. Ephesians 2 already has 3: grace faith Scripture and from Christ of course, 4.

 

[Josiah]

That's weird. By faith alone but also by grace alone and by Christ alone ehm why not just say: by Christ faith grace and Scripture. Ephesians 2 already has 3: grace faith Scripture and from Christ of course, 4.

Sola Gratia - Solus Christus - Sola Fide is ONE united, singular doctrine/teaching/belief. For God so loved the world (Sola Gratia) that He gave His only begotten Son (Solus Christus) that whosoever believes in Him (Sola Fide) will not perish but has everlasting life. That's the Protestant view of justification (narrow), which the individual RC Denomination anathmatized at the Council of Trent and excommunicated Luther for teaching. Luther taught that there is one Savior - and it's Jesus (not the one you see in the mirror): the individual RC Denomination was infuriated by that, split itself over that, excommunicated Luther for that. The Soli Deo Gloria point simply states that God alone is the Savior and thus God alone gets the glory, the credit, the thanks - rather than patting self on the back.


Sola Scriptura concerns an entirely different issue, it has NOTHING to do with justification (narrow)... nor is it a doctrine. Sola Scriptura (aka "The Rule of Scripture") has to do with epistemology, not justification. The Rule of Scripture is the practice ("praxis") of using Scripture as the rule in the norming of disputed doctrines among Christians. It's similar to the Rule of Law where the written Law is used as the rule in the norming of disputed civil behaviors among citizens. The RCC and LDS (the two main opponents of this practice) passionately protest this practice but only in the sole case of itself alone since both of these denominations insist that it itself is exempt from norming, immune from error (in formal doctrine, AT LEAST) and each itself insists that whatever it itself alone says (in formal doctrine AT LEAST) is just to be docilicly swallowed whole because it itself teaches it: exempt from any accountability since self is infallible and thus cannot be wrong.


Pax Christi



.

 

[visionary]

Nothing is ever "alone".. although I understand the need to keep it "narrow" as we all know that the path of faith is narrow.