the five solas unbiblical

[submariner2]

Ok lets provide some evidence to support my position.

stated that This was in repsonse to several theologians including Fr. Raymond Brown where they did Whereas Ratzinger held that This problematic view can be seen in Fr. Raymond Brown’s book “The Virginal Conception & Bodily Resurrection of Jesus” where he concludes that Whereas the Catholic Church has always held and again

He never mentioned Fr Brown and you should not presume it. In fact he praises the critical scholars but criticizes how they may be used. He points out that the actual intent of the apostles is not how dogma is made. To say that history cannot support a fact in scripture is not a surprise. He does not deny the virginal birth. Did you read the entire book or just take a phrase out of context? I have read it all. I see no problem with it and do not question the virgin birth.

As far as inerrancy no one suggested treating the bible like a history book. But I agree with Pope Benedict when he was Cardinal Ratzinger and note in Die Verbum it states

Why dont you read a Fr Brown book and tell me whats wrong with it instead of your general accusations without support.

Please highlight my comments and not yours so I can punch the quote button and get them automatically.

Rob.

 

[tarboy]

I don’t believe the five solas are grounded in scripture. Before I give my defense, I would be curious to find out what others think. Its interesting to me that historically, and theologically, each of the five is a direct repudiation of a specific catholic doctrine. I will give my evidence later, meanwhile. if ye wish, what say ye?

I’m a bit shocked that anyone would even suggest the five solas are not rooted in biblical scripture. They could not exist without supporting scripture.

The question is really about whether they were built through prooftexting, or whether they reflect the broader intent of the scriptures. I think they mostly cherry pick their verses.

 

[JonNC]

I’m a bit shocked that anyone would even suggest the five solas are not rooted in biblical scripture. They could not exist without supporting scripture.

The question is really about whether they were built through prooftexting, or whether they reflect the broader intent of the scriptures. I think they mostly cherry pick their verses.

Grace alone seems completely gospel. Is there another way of coming to salvation, other than by grace?

Jon

 

[sambos671]

Why dont you read a Fr Brown book and tell me whats wrong with it instead of your general accusations without support.

I’ll be glad to. And If I come across problematic issues would you mind my stating so? I might start a new thread just about his writings. Would that be ok?

Please highlight my comments and not yours so I can punch the quote button and get them automatically.

Rob.

I will attempt to do so.

 

[rinnie]

This reply is for rinnie. I agree with what you are saying about one having the free will to choose Christ and not sin and I understand that the Apostle Paul says, paraphrasing, that we should not slip back into the clutches of sin because it would be openly putting Christ to shame. However, I am not a Lutheran, but I feel that people view belief that one is saved through the grace of Christ alone as saying that we can merely accept Christ then continue living in sin. But i believe that it is saying that it is only through Christ that we can gain salvation, sure we have to work to choose Christ’s gift of salvation, but it is not our own efforts or merits that brings us salvation for every man is a sinner and none, except Christ, can be justified before God through their own individual efforts… I hope you get this message, but I’ve never had an account before, so I’m not sure how to use it.

You did fine, and I indeed got you message. Also may I welcome you to the thread.

While I agree with you, I think that we are saved through the grace of God, I believe that if we are blessed with that Grace, know not to sin, but continue to live in that sin, and refuse to repent we lose our Salvation.

While I admit our Salvation is gained through Christ, I believe our Salvation is lost if we sin, refuse to repent and continue to sin.

Christ made it possible for us to repent, confess, and quit the sin, But if we choose sin over God we lose our Salvation.

I believe while Christ gained our salvation for us, it IS our effort and the way we live and choose to live that we can keep or lose our salvation given to us.

I do not think we are once saved always saved. THe bible tells us Salvation can be lost. It is of course not Christ who loses it for us, it is our sin our refusal to quit the sin.

If salvation was that easy, and could not be lost by our sins, the road would not be narrow.

 

[rinnie]

Grace alone seems completely gospel. Is there another way of coming to salvation, other than by grace?

Jon

Yes, it is not only the grace of God given to us by him, but our own free will to accept or reject that grace.

Use it or lose it as they say.

It is not only faith without works that is fruitless, it is also Gods grace given to us and not used that is fruitless.

What good would it do for God to give me the grace to help others, if I had the grace but did not use it to help others. Fruitless would you not say.

 

[JonNC]

Hi rinnie,
How’s my old Pa. stomping grounds?

=rinnie;9396221]Yes, it is not only the grace of God given to us by him, but our own free will to accept or reject that grace.

Lutherans take a more passive route regarding free will. Sure, certainly we can reject that which we have received (as contrasted to accept) as a free gift. When our new granddaughter came to visit a couple of months back, my wife and I gave her gifts. She was unable to accept them, but she did receive them. As she grows, however, she is capable of rejecting them.

Use it or lose it as they say.

It is not only faith without works that is fruitless, it is also Gods grace given to us and not used that is fruitless.

What good would it do for God to give me the grace to help others, if I had the grace but did not use it to help others. Fruitless would you not say.

I would say. Of what good is grace were we not to use it to His will? I would go further, to receive grace, then say, well we have grace and need do nothing, is frankly an abuse of that grace.

Jon

 

[submariner2]

sambos671;9395514]I’ll be glad to. And If I come across problematic issues would you mind my stating so? I might start a new thread just about his writings. Would that be ok?

sambos,

I think that would be great. But that is a big subject since he wrote 35 books. Why not pick one, since that would be easier for others to prepare for? I would suggest The Churches the Apostles Left Behind. Or Antioc and Rome. Both are excellent.

Rob

 

[YendisAgev]

I don’t believe the five solas are grounded in scripture. Before I give my defense, I would be curious to find out what others think. Its interesting to me that historically, and theologically, each of the five is a direct repudiation of a specific catholic doctrine. I will give my evidence later, meanwhile. if ye wish, what say ye?

"The five solas are five Latin phrases popularized during the Protestant Reformation that emphasized the distinctions between the early Reformers and the Roman Catholic Church. The word sola is the Latin word for “only” and was used in relation to five key teachings that defined the biblical pleas of Protestants. They are:

1. Sola scriptura: “Scripture alone”
2. Sola fide: “faith alone”
3. Sola gratia: “grace alone”
4. Solo Christo: “Christ alone”
5. Soli Deo gloria: “to the glory of God alone”

Each of these solas can be seen both as a corrective to the excesses of the Roman Catholic Church at the start of the Reformation and as a positive biblical declaration.

Sola scriptura emphasized the Bible alone as the source of authority for Christians. By saying, “Scripture alone,” the Reformers rejected both the divine authority of the Roman Catholic Pope and confidence in sacred tradition. Only the Bible was “inspired by God” (2 Peter 1:20-21) and “God-breathed” (2 Timothy 3:16-17). Anything taught by the Pope or in tradition that contradicted the Bible was to be rejected. Sola scriptura also fueled the translation of the Bible into German, French, English, and other languages, and prompted Bible teaching in the common languages of the day, rather than in Latin.

Sola fide emphasized salvation as a free gift. The Roman Catholic Church of the time emphasized the use of indulgences (donating money) to buy status with God. Good works, including baptism, were seen as required for salvation. Sola fide stated that salvation is a free gift to all who accept it by faith (John 3:16). Salvation is not based on human effort or good deeds (Ephesians 2:9).

Sola gratia emphasized grace as the reason for our salvation. In other words, salvation comes from what God has done rather than what we do. Ephesians 2:8-9 teaches, “For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.”

Solo Christo (sometimes listed as Solus Christus, “through Christ alone”) emphasized the role of Jesus in salvation. The Roman Catholic tradition had placed church leaders such as priests in the role of intercessor between the laity and God. Reformers emphasized Jesus’ role as our “high priest” who intercedes on our behalf before the Father. Hebrews 4:15 teaches, “For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.” Jesus is the One who offers access to God, not a human spiritual leader.

Soli Deo gloria emphasized the glory of God as the goal of life. Rather than striving to please church leaders, keep a list of rules, or guard our own interests, our goal is to glorify the Lord. The idea of soli Deo gloria is found in 1 Corinthians 10:31: “So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.”

The five solas of the Protestant Reformation offered a strong corrective to the faulty practices and beliefs of the time, and they remain relevant today. We are called to focus on Scripture, accept salvation by grace through faith, magnify Christ, and live for God’s glory."

Taken from: gotquestions.org/five-solas.html

 

[Woody87]

Not sure if anyone has mentioned it yet but I don’t really see a huge problem with Sola Deo gratia

Posted from Catholic.com App for Android

 

[Aefensang]

Not sure if anyone has mentioned it yet but I don’t really see a huge problem with Sola Deo gratia

Friend, the term is Soli Deo gloria - glory is due to God alone. Indeed, there’s nothing wrong at all - unless someone who likes Liguori’s “Glories of Mary” has a problem with that.

We basically agree on Sola gratia, in Christendom: without grace, we can do nothing toward salvation. Grace alone must be given first, by God, before we can have any faith.

Sola fide can be left aside for now, as it is a very tenuous topic.

As for Sola scriptura, consider what the Scripture says about itself:

2 Timothy 3:15
And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. we can learn our whole salvation from the scriptures, and salvation is our goal. What else is there?]

Psalm 119:105
Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. You’d think the Priesthood or Aaron or the Church would be the light, were divine truth more than just Scripture.]

Psalm 119:99
I have more understanding than all my teachers: for thy testimonies are my meditation. The teachers are those who pass on paradosis, the teaching/tradition, and yet the Psalmist has more understanding of God’s truths than even his teachers, for God’s testimonies/word/commandment/scripture are his focus.]

John 20:31
But these the Gospel of John] are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name. John not only proposed Scripture as enough for our salvation, but even just his one Gospel was enough!]

James 1:21
lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted i.e. written] word, which is able to save your souls.

John 5:39
Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. Nothing else is mentioned that testifies of the Lord Jesus.]

Acts 17:11
These [in Berea] were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. The Bereans are commended for not accepting Paul at his word, but searching the Bible before giving him any credit.]

 

[Woody87]

Thankyou,
I understand what you are saying, but I believe that the point of Sola Deo Gloria is that we give glory to God alone. That may not be what it was originally intended for but that is the way I see it. God is able to impart his glory to whomever he wants (in this case I am referring to Mary), but that is something he gives not us. I am not vary good with the intricacies of the catholic faith I do believe though that the RCC agrees with me on this point.

 

[meme1961]

Friend, the term is Soli Deo gloria - glory is due to God alone. Indeed, there’s nothing wrong at all - unless someone who likes Liguori’s “Glories of Mary” has a problem with that.

We basically agree on Sola gratia, in Christendom: without grace, we can do nothing toward salvation. Grace alone must be given first, by God, before we can have any faith.

Sola fide can be left aside for now, as it is a very tenuous topic.

As for Sola scriptura, consider what the Scripture says about itself:

2 Timothy 3:15
And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. we can learn our whole salvation from the scriptures, and salvation is our goal. What else is there?]

Psalm 119:105
Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. You’d think the Priesthood or Aaron or the Church would be the light, were divine truth more than just Scripture.]

Psalm 119:99
I have more understanding than all my teachers: for thy testimonies are my meditation. The teachers are those who pass on paradosis, the teaching/tradition, and yet the Psalmist has more understanding of God’s truths than even his teachers, for God’s testimonies/word/commandment/scripture are his focus.]

John 20:31
But these the Gospel of John] are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name. John not only proposed Scripture as enough for our salvation, but even just his one Gospel was enough!]

James 1:21
lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted i.e. written] word, which is able to save your souls.

John 5:39
Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. Nothing else is mentioned that testifies of the Lord Jesus.]

Acts 17:11
These [in Berea] were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. The Bereans are commended for not accepting Paul at his word, but searching the Bible before giving him any credit.]

newadvent.org/cathen/12495a.htm

I recommend this site for basic information about this subject.

But Sola Scriptura can be falsified quite simply, using the fundamental principles of formal linguistics.

Absent the Magisterium and Apostolic Tradition, the Bible is just a collection of signs (words, etc.) and signs have no meaning. Meaning is what you bring to signs, not what you take from them.

To base one’s faith solely on a long string of signs leaves one in danger of creating a tendentious religion, allowing one to find what ever one wishes to find by changing the meanings one brings to the words.

As an example, consider the interpretation of the US Constitution. Even such explicit and straightforward wording as can be found in the First Amendment can be used to justify more than ninety separate Federal laws, created and passed by Congress, in direct violation of the clear and explicit meaning of the First Amendment.

The Catholic Church avoids this problem by solving it. The Bible is one leg of a triad of Tradition. All three legs must be in agreement, and they must remain in agreement.

In a church that follows Sola Scriptura, one can end up bringing to the words a meaning not in coherence with original intent, and that divergence can be increased by adding another mild divergence to the first. Over time, you end up with a quite radical set of divergences.

Another way to discuss this is as a form of informational hygiene. To make sure the deposit of faith remains clean, correct and complete, Holy Mother Church uses “triple entry” bookkeeping.

Analogous to this is the “original intent” school of Constitutional Interpretation, where in a loose oral tradition is used, in combination with supporting writing and the traditions of the Founders, to attempt to create an authoritative set of meanings that it is valid to apply to the words of the Constitution.

Holy Mother Church has the additional advantage of the Holy Father.