Monthly Archives: June 2011

Luther on the “Five Solas”

Posted on by
Reply

THE NECESSITY v. THE SUFFICIENCY OF GRACE

Martin Luther and his Reformers had 5 main slogans, all using the word “Sola,” which is the Latin word for “alone.” It was this word “alone” that designated the true biblical Gospel and set it apart from all other pretenders.

Rome believed (then as it does now) that justification is by grace, through faith and because of Christ. What Rome does not believe is that justification is by faith alone, or by grace alone, or by Christ alone. For Rome, justification is by grace plus merit, through faith plus works; by Christ plus the sinner’s contribution of inherent righteousness. In contrast, the Reformers called the Church back to the one true Biblical Gospel: based on the assured foundation of Scripture alone, God declares a person “just” or right in His sight, by grace alone, through faith alone in Christ alone, to the Glory of God alone.

I would like to recommend some resources regarding the Five Solas. I do not believe I am over-stating the situation when I say that nothing is more vital to the health of today’s Church than a widespread return to these biblical doctrines.

(1) This excellent short article here discusses Luther’s own embracing and proclamation of the solas.

(2) I cannot speak more highly of Dr. James Montgomery Boice’s book “Whatever Happened to the Gospel of Grace?” It continues to have a profound effect on my life and ministry. If you do not have it yet, I would encourage you to do all you can to get it. You can do so here.

(3) Dr. Sproul’s series “God Alone” is an outstanding historical and biblical study of the five solas. For the next few days, Ligonier Ministries is making the entire 10 message series on CD available for any size gift here.

(4) I personally love to preach and teach on this theme. It is central in all I seek to communicate. You can hear my sermon on “The Five Solas of the Gospel” here.

(5) You can also read a short series of articles I wrote on this theme here, and about how it is entirely possible for five things to stand together alone here.

What do you think about this?

Posted on by
5

Its interesting to note the content of the apostle’s preaching in the New Testament. They did not preach “divine healing” as such, though they certainly were used mightily by God in healing. They preached Christ as the crucified and risen Lord and Savior and summoned people to turn to God in repentance and faith. Having said this, I believe healing can certainly be a means whereby God opens people’s hearts bringing attention to His reality, in order to draw people to Himself.

Signs are meant to point to something. A road sign is put up to point people in a certain direction. The sign is not something to be wondered at or marvelled at. Its whole purpose is to point people to something other than itself.

Not all signs should be followed. If someone in Dallas, Texas (in central southern USA) wishes to get to Los Angeles (to the west), he should avoid signs that point to Florida (to the east). There are false signs and lying wonders just as there are true signs that are ordained by God. Peter spoke of “how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power. He went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him.” (Acts 10:38) God has often used signs, both in the Old Testament and the New, to point people to Himself as the one true God and to the Lord Jesus Christ, and especially to Christ’s substitutionary work on the cross for sinners.

The sign is never meant to take the place of the cross; just the opposite; its whole purpose is to point people to it. In the same way, Divine healing is a sign of God’s great heart of compassion for sinners and is meant to point people to the cross, where Christ crushed the powers of sin, death, hell and the grave.

Healing is not the gospel, but is meant to point people to it. The gospel is Christ Himself, His Person and His work, which includes His virgin birth, His sinless life pleasing the Father, fulfilling every requirement of the law of God in thought, word and deed, as well as His substitutionary death on behalf of sinners on the cross, as well as His triumphant resurrection. The Gospel includes all that He achieved because of this, and especially that although all of us have commited high and cosmic treason against God because of our sin, He has shown His great love for the world. Based on the God breathed Scriptures alone, sinners are brought into right standing with Himself (justified) by grace alone, through faith alone, in the Lord Jesus Christ alone, all to the glory of God alone. All those who put their trust in Christ as Lord will find Him to be the perfect Savior; He will save them completely for they will in no way perish but instead have everlasting life.

As wonderful as any testimony of healing is, unless it is accompanied by the gospel, it is like a sign without information; utterly useless. Jesus said, “what does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?” I would also ask, “What does it profit a man if he gains healing for his entire body, if he then loses his soul? and what does it profit a man should he see even the dead raised to life, if he does not hear the only gospel that saves?”

Romans 10:14 How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? 15 And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!” 16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed what he has heard from us?” 17 So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.

Though I do not doubt God’s ability to raise even the dead, I do wish the Church at large would herald the one true biblical gospel and I very much wish it was present in this video clip (below).

After a massive heart attack took this man’s life, the cardiologist felt an overwhelming urge to pray over his body.

This man, rather than the other…

Posted on by
2

Also He spoke this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others: “Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, ‘God, I thank You that I am not like other men—extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this tax collector. I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I possess.’ And the tax collector, standing afar off, would not so much as raise his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me a sinner!’ I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted” (Luke 18: 9-14).

It is an unfair, gross distortion to hold that Rome teaches justification by works, while we Protestants teach justification by faith. The more accurate distinction recognizes on both sides the necessity of the work of Christ. Rome affirms that His righteousness is necessary for our salvation, that without it we are without hope. That righteousness, however, becomes ours through infusion. Protestants affirm also that His righteousness is necessary for salvation, that we have no hope without it. It, however, becomes ours through imputation.

Some here are quick to affirm that our differences now amount to nothing more than a tempest in a teapot. We are arguing over two, thick, theological terms that are not a part of our ordinary language. Surely such a nuance must be insignificant. But it’s not, as Jesus’ parable illustrates. Let’s look at these two men, what they have in common and what separates them.

First, it is an unfair, gross distortion to hold that the Pharisee believes he justifies himself. How quickly we pass over the one good part of his prayer, “Lord, I thank you…” The Pharisee knows from whence came the power to make him righteous. He knows that he needed the grace of God, that God had to work in him, that God is due all the glory for his obedience. The publican likewise looks to God and His grace as His only hope. He knows where to turn, even as the Pharisee knows whom to thank.

The difference, however, is here. The Pharisee believes that God’s grace has made him whole, that he is now, albeit by the grace of God, just in himself. God helped him out. God stood him up. But now he is standing on his own two feet. He gives thanks to God that he is better than other men, that he doesn’t commit this sin and that, that he performs this duty and that. God has poured righteousness into him, and there he stands.

The publican, on the other hand, knows what he still is, a sinner. The mercy he cries out for isn’t that he would be made a saint, but that he would be a forgiven sinner. He cannot cooperate. He cannot stand. He can only, and even this is the grace of God, cry out for the mercy of God, which is found in Christ alone.

The bigger difference than the differing approaches of these two men, however, is what it meant for their eternities. Only one of these two men went home justified. Only one of these men was an adopted son of the living God. Only one of these two men will spend eternity walking with God in paradise. The other will spend eternity weeping and gnashing teeth. Teapot tempests have no such eternal consequences.

– Dr. R. C. Sproul, Jr.