Sola Deo gloria

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hisalone
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

Hisalone

Guest
The forgotten Sola.
Why did the Reformists think it was necessary to include this?
 
The forgotten Sola.
Why did the Reformists think it was necessary to include this?
Because they took it upon themselves to deny the historical teaching of the Communion of Saints, which was first articualted by an ECF in 335 AD?
 
The forgotten Sola.
Why did the Reformists think it was necessary to include this?
🤷

Who knows? They included Sola Gratia, which is something the Church did, and has always, taught.

By the way, does having 5 ‘solas’ make any sense at all? Wouldn’t having just 2 be one too many? :hmmm:

God bless
 
🤷

Who knows? They included Sola Gratia, which is something the Church did, and has always, taught.

By the way, does having 5 ‘solas’ make any sense at all? Wouldn’t having just 2 be one too many? :hmmm:

God bless
Where would the RCC be today with indulgences if it hadn’t been for the reformers? (A lot less money problems, I guess)
 
Where would the RCC be today with indulgences if it hadn’t been for the reformers? (A lot less money problems, I guess)
Why are you being such a terrible witness for our Lord?

Is this the fruit of Protestantism?

God bless
 
The forgotten Sola.
Why did the Reformists think it was necessary to include this?
Because Protestants think that Catholics try to earn our salvation, and so we would get the glory for getting ourselves to Heaven.
 
I think it had to do with the common conception that the Church, in the persons of her leaders, were too often seeking their own glory than that of the God they claimed to serve.

A quick look at the history of the renaissance papacy makes it difficult to disagree.

Anyway, it’s a predominantly Calvinist instistence. Lutherans are content with three solas for the most part, while the Calvinists tend to include two more:

Lutherans:
  1. Sola Fide
  2. Sola Scriptura
  3. Sola Gratia
Calvinists historically have added:
  1. Solus Christus, and
  2. Soli Deo Gloria
Lutherans tend to consider these superfluous.

It’s worth noting too, that with no real alteration of intent or definition, Catholics can and should gladly embrace three of the five.
 
It’s worth noting too, that with no real alteration of intent or definition, Catholics can and should gladly embrace three of the five.
Sola Gratia, Sola Christus, and Sola Deo Gloria.
 
Soli Deo gloria is one of the five solas propounded to summarise the Reformers’ basic beliefs during the Protestant Reformation; it is a Latin term for Glory to God alone.

The emphasis was allegedly in contradistinction to the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church of the day.
The doctrine states essentially that everything that is done is for God’s glory to the exclusion of humankind’s self-glorification and pride. The idea is that Christians are to be motivated and inspired by God’s glory and not their own.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soli_Deo_gloria
 
Soli Deo gloria is one of the five solas propounded to summarise the Reformers’ basic beliefs during the Protestant Reformation; it is a Latin term for Glory to God alone.

The emphasis was allegedly in contradistinction to the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church of the day.
The doctrine states essentially that everything that is done is for God’s glory to the exclusion of humankind’s self-glorification and pride. The idea is that Christians are to be motivated and inspired by God’s glory and not their own.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soli_Deo_gloria
HisAlone, I just wanted to say that the post below by nbtb has really made me appreciate you. I know you didn’t have a good experience with the Catholic Church and you don’t agree with its doctrines, and you are sometimes very adamant about your disagreement, but the below poster makes you look like roses. I am being completely honest that it has made me appreciate you.
Where would the RCC be today with indulgences if it hadn’t been for the reformers? (A lot less money problems, I guess)
 
I think it had to do with the common conception that the Church, in the persons of her leaders, were too often seeking their own glory than that of the God they claimed to serve.

A quick look at the history of the renaissance papacy makes it difficult to disagree.

Anyway, it’s a predominantly Calvinist instistence. Lutherans are content with three solas for the most part, while the Calvinists tend to include two more:

Lutherans:
  1. Sola Fide
  2. Sola Scriptura
  3. Sola Gratia
Calvinists historically have added:
  1. Solus Christus, and
  2. Soli Deo Gloria
Lutherans tend to consider these superfluous.

It’s worth noting too, that with no real alteration of intent or definition, Catholics can and should gladly embrace three of the five.
The problem is that if they miss #1 it doesn’t matter what they believe about the rest. Satan knows all those doctrines are true. He just doesn’t cling to Christ alone for his salvation (and of course can’t, because God will not draw him to himself.)
 
Honestly, i think that it is more because they did not want to seem “Catholic” anymore. That one sola created the ability to claim that we worship saints and Mary
 
Honestly, i think that it is more because they did not want to seem “Catholic” anymore. That one sola created the ability to claim that we worship saints and Mary
Speaking of Mary, I found this post on another thread. Is this view widely held in the RCC?:

***Simeon Blessed them and said to Mary His Mother: “This child is destined to be the downfall and the rise of many in Isreal, a sign that will be opposed and YOU YOURSELF shall be PIERCED with a SWORD-so that the THOUGHTS of MANY HEARTS be LAID BARE.”

Mary is is going to be Pierced with a Sword FOR THE MANY hearts yours mine and the china man overseas, everyone!

I ask you don’t go there and say that Virgin Mary was not Pierced for the Many when the Bible said she will be.***
 
The problem is that if they miss #1 it doesn’t matter what they believe about the rest. Satan knows all those doctrines are true. He just doesn’t cling to Christ alone for his salvation (and of course can’t, because God will not draw him to himself.)
Is that “trite rhetoric” or what?..

My oh my oh my…it would seem that some people have little or no “literary” training or studies in foreign languages…

The word “SOLA” has a particular meaning…

It means “alone”…and given that there are so many different “solas”, it seems that someone was deeply confused.

Multiple “solas” = an “oxymoron”. Afterall, How many “only’s” can you have??
 
Speaking of Mary, I found this post on another thread. Is this view widely held in the RCC?:
Beats me…without any verifiable linkage or alliteration to source, its little more than a bunch of purple words.

Care to provide a reference point?

Or maybe you’d like to sample my “fun routine” where I make the statement that “all protestants worship Paul and ignore Jesus Christ”?

😃
 
The forgotten Sola.
Why did the Reformists think it was necessary to include this?

They were trying to correct the balance from widespread Mariolatry & an attitude to the Saints as little gods, to the service of the One God Who is revealed in the Bible.​

BTW, does no one know study Latin ? The phrase should be Soli Deo Gloria
 
Is that “trite rhetoric” or what?..

My oh my oh my…it would seem that some people have little or no “literary” training or studies in foreign languages…

The word “SOLA” has a particular meaning…

It means “alone”…and given that there are so many different “solas”, it seems that someone was deeply confused.

Multiple “solas” = an “oxymoron”. Afterall, How many “only’s” can you have??
Well, sir, let me see if I can do the near -impossible and improve your astounding understanding…There can, in fact be more than one ‘sola’ Sola Scriptura would be making a statement about the one and only authority. Sola Fide would be making a statement about the one and only act necessary for salvation. I won’t confuse you with a third example. Ponder this for a while and the logic will come to you, even if the Light doesn’t.
 
Well, sir, let me see if I can do the near -impossible and improve your astounding understanding…There can, in fact be more than one ‘sola’ Sola Scriptura would be making a statement about the one and only authority. Sola Fide would be making a statement about the one and only act necessary for salvation. I won’t confuse you with a third example. Ponder this for a while and the logic will come to you, even if the Light doesn’t.
Whoa! Bless you my Brother.
 
Well, sir, let me see if I can do the near -impossible and improve your astounding understanding…There can, in fact be more than one ‘sola’ Sola Scriptura would be making a statement about the one and only authority. Sola Fide would be making a statement about the one and only act necessary for salvation. I won’t confuse you with a third example. Ponder this for a while and the logic will come to you, even if the Light doesn’t.
Nice try…but your twisting of the meanings of words doesn’t fly any better than "lead ducks’ in a pond of quicksand.

You cannot change the meanings of words simply to fit your “desires” despite what your false teachers want you to believe.

“Sola” which is a root derivative of the word in Spanish… “Solamente” means “alone”… The word “alone” means "by itself, and is a singular word…not a multiple of “ones”…

No need to ponder an “oxymoron” or “paradox”… it will never change according to your desires, except possibly in your imagination… 🙂

Good try though…
 
Whoa! Bless you my Brother.
Nah-na-na, hey-hey, nice try, but no sale

I can feel you reaching…but I fear no matter how much you stretch you’ll never quite make it… Do you ever feel like you are bungee jumping and after having measured the distance to the ground you realized just after jumping off the bridge that the rope was fed out in “meters” not in “feet”?? You should…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top