Sola Scriptura

Sola Scriptura
Sola Fide
Sola Gratia
Solus Christus
Soli Deo Gloria

I believe in Sola Fide, but the argument against Sola Scriptura is pretty devastating.

Retard. Literal middle ages heresies based on nominalism in which the church never believed.

Do you even know what Martin Luther did

Why do you care? Aren't you a "National Socialist"? As far as you're concerned Christkikery is just Jewish pilpul

Shut up kike, humans are speaking

Hahaha Luther fucked over those stupid Cathoholics and their dumb popery!

NO YOU CAN'T SAY THAT ABOUT THE JEWS! THAT IS LITERALLY NAZISM! REEEEEEE

I do actually, but you're the one following his stupid heresy, not me.

All that matters is that Martin Luther stood up against Indulgences. You most likely wouldn't have, out of fear. And if you wouldn't have taken his side, you're dumb.

Suck masonic cock

The translation of the Bible into the vernacular was the greatest thing Luther ever did. Nations that were more protestant than Catholic had higher literacy rates and a higher IQ.
The Church had clearly found itself enjoying the material world too much, it's still doing it to this day by adopting secular morals which sre simply not supported by scripture. The Bible lays out that there is a natural hierarchy in the world, let's not pretend that equality or egalitarianism are Christian ideals rather than secular enlightenment ones.

if you hate Catholicism, you're a Freemason!!

He should have became Orthodox, not make fake schismatic heretical groups.

You know he reached out to the Orthodox right? Probably long before he ever even mentioned Sola Fide. They probably cucked and told him to submit to the Pope and their Indulgences. If so, that was a cuck move. But I don't know the history.

google.com/search?q=5 solas

Catholic Church still exists and has the most amount of members of any religion

Congrats on the heresies though, lol.

Hinduism still exists, I guess that means it's good.

scripture alone

By the church's interpretation of scripture alone; For the holy spirit has guided the church into all truth, and Peter will restore the other apostles when they go astray. To separate yourself from the church, is to separate yourself from the holy spirit's guidance, and lacking any assurance of truth; you risk following a false prophet.

(of course, you can have individual views on unsettled matters, I'm only saying when the church pronounces doctrine and settles a matter definitively, you must accept it. You can't be some heretic making up whatever you like, if it involves explicitly condemned views.)

faith alone

You are saved by faith, but not by faith alone, nor is it at all by mere assent of belief, but through one's faithfulness to God. The only place in all of scripture that says "faith alone" is James 2:24: "As you can see, a man is justified by his deeds and not by faith alone." and yet somehow we're the one's that go against scripture.

grace alone

grace alone is absolutely essential (you cannot be saved without grace, and so you cannot be saved by works alone) and grace alone is fully sufficient for salvation, but the grace of God truly transforms man, so that his works become truly good and valuable, such it is not by grace alone that we are saved, but by the works of man and God cooperating together; mans works are not intrinsically essential to salvation - but they do in fact make up for wrongs because they can be good. That can be practically necessary for salvation for the grievous sinner, who has fallen out of grace. (Of course, one relies on graces here too, typically primarily so, but you cannot say it is by grace alone when there is valuable and sacrificial human deeds also that contribute beneficially to salvation.)

God's glory alone

Man will also be glorified tho... Don't you know we will judge angels? Nothing impure can enter heaven, we are becoming perfect.

You are saved by faith, but not by faith alone, nor is it at all by mere assent of belief, but through one's faithfulness to God.

So are you saying God can leave or forsake us Christians? Yes or No.

The idea of there being 5 Solas always makes me think of this:
youtu.be/umVyjrV9w6I
Still, I can't fault Luther for wanting to set up his own church without blackjack and hookers.

what is it?
"the white question" annihilates all the arguments i've seen against it.

basically:

"How did the believing Jewish person know that Isaiah and 2 Chronicles were Scripture fifty years before Christ?” That’s the question that the Protestant apologist James White asked of his (then-) Catholic opponent Gerry Matatics in a 1993 radio debate. And for the next twenty-nine years, he’s repeated this question, even dubbing it “The White Question” after himself. According to White, Roman Catholics don’t have an answer for it.

White’s interest in the question isn’t to prepare for the “first-century Judaism” category on Jeopardy! Rather, it’s to respond to a common Catholic objection against sola scriptura (the idea that all doctrines are derived from “Scripture alone”). The Catholic argument, as it’s often presented, goes something like this: sola scriptura can’t be true, because without an infallible Church to tell you which books belong in the Bible, you wouldn’t have a Bible to begin with; without a Bible, there’s no “scriptura” from which to derive the rest of your beliefs. But as White rightly observes, people were citing various books of the Bible long before the Council of Trent dogmatically defined the canon of Scripture in 1546.

heresy

You always say that and pretend you said anything at all. Heresy based on what? That's the point. Luther stood on the word of God, the papacy stood on hot air and self-righteousness. They SOLD salvation to people, do you understand how anti-Christian this is? Your Babylonian church is a gigantic heresy, but Roman Catholics have an unclean spirit that leads them to believe that Rome is somehow the authority. Worship of splendid ornaments and golden cups and long robes and Latin phares, that is not Christianity.
The Word of God is the authority, it's not our fault that you can't handle plain words.

btw. Luther merely tried to reform the church, he called for repentance, as a Christian is supposed to do, as Jesus also did according to scripture.

And here is what Luther had to say about all this:

What is Luther? The teaching is not mine. Nor was I crucified for anyone … How did I, poor stinking bag of maggots that I am, come to the point where people call the children of Christ by my evil name? … I simply taught, preached, wrote God’s Word; otherwise I did nothing. And while I slept, or drank Wittenberg beer with my friends Philip and Amsdorf, the Word so greatly weakened the papacy that no prince or emperor ever inflicted such losses upon it. I did nothing; the Word did everything. - Martin Luther, March 10, 1522

it is possible for a christian to lose his salvation, if that is what you mean. But that is more us abandoning God in allegiance than the other way around. Like how a cheater abandons their wife by their actions.

Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.

(notice how he said they were washed and sanctified, as if the washing sanctifies and justifies us; this is alluding to the fact that baptism saves you, it is where you are cleansed of your sins, and is the mechanism that applies Christ's benefits to us, not through assent of belief. Its why early Christians used a fish as a symbol for themselves - Christians are born of water like fish, so we fishies.)

So the St. Paul says God will never leave or forsake us, but you say God will. I think that makes you a Heretic.
2 talking points: The formation of the Canon. How we know things despite a lack of internal evidence (I.e. Matthew wrote Matthew).

is the gateway to atheism and liberalism

did you not read the greentext?
those 2 points are dead, demolished, deleted, destroyed, damaged, dismantled, diminished, dissolved, decimated, discarded, defaced, disintegrated.

do you remember which verse it was? i dont

Of course. Hebrews 13:5. It's also in Joshua.
James White (slob) did not answer anything in regards to the New Testament Canon. What is even supposed to be the implication in the silence? "They just knew"?

Remember anon, the Corinthians were believing christians, not non-believers, so he was saying to the believers that they should not be deceived, if they sin greviously, they will go to hell. (and thereby it is possible for them to lose their salvation.) The bible is full of warnings like this, it is certainly not a one off thing. Even if you do not stop interpreting things without the help of the church, please at least accept this, once saved always saved is certainly false. One works out their salvation in fear and trembling, this is biblical.

Philippians 2:12

Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed—not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence—continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling,

The example you gave in Hebrews seems very out of the way to interpret it as meaning you can't lose your salvation. I mean look at the context, it has nothing to do with salvation, but is about money concerns, like lacking food, and then the next is about being held in the power of enemies (prison). God will not abandon you, so take heart; and then that such is the life that the leaders of the church endured, and so be like them, all are things Jesus talked about already said another way.

the argument is basically

the old testament could be known without an infallible magisterium ratifying the canon

therefore, the new testament canon can be as well

and the response is always

uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

trust me bro

Look at this silly papist.
Where in the bible does it say that I need to learn latin?

Well, a lot of problems there Kraut. You are under the heretical assumption that the "Word of God" is only the written text, which is factually false. Also, how do you know what's God's written Word ? Who gave you the Canon of the Bible ? Luther wanted to eliminate books from the New Testament because they contradicted his dumb heresies. Even in the Old Testament, he took the Kike Masoretic canon without the Deuterocanonical books and not the Church's Septuagint canon. Heresy based on the Ecumenical Synods, that decided the Bibles's Canon among all other Christian dogmas. Also, an epistemological remark, know that when you're saying "The Word of God is the authority" you're always referring to your own interpretation of the Bible as ultimate authority which is satanic and retarded.

the cat is God if it turns out ur wrong.

i agree, no christian has ever been justified by ourselves, it is always and only by our faith in Jesus, and it is Jesus who justifies us.

I can agree with that without contradiction, because there are two aspects to justification, and this is one of them. You cannot just share this aspect of salvation, and ignore the other, or you will contradict scripture. Scripture says it is both by faith, but it also says it is not by faith alone, the only way there can be a solution to the dilema is some kind of in between position. It cannot simply be one over another.

There is a sense in which grace is essential, and exclusively responsible. No matter my works, there is nothing I can do to earn a baptism, there is nothing I can do to cure original sin, i NEED grace to be saved, it is impossible to be saved without it, no matter my wisdom, works or anything, and this is what the pope is referencing.

But this does not mean that my wisdom and works and goodness does not also contribute to your salvation. Your salvation is not because of the contribution of wisdom and works, its because of christ, because no amount of works could save you alone! but that is not to say your wisdom and works, contribute nothing to salvation. Once you are already saved by grace through baptism, only then do works contribute and add to you, in which they really do help save you and restore your relationship to God, because of course what you do restores or harms your relationship with God, how could it not? What kind of "personal relationship with Jesus" would it be, if nothing you did mattered to him, and he cannot reject those that reject him? There is no love in that, it is an abusive relationship, is he a robot to please you? No, what you do matters a grave deal, you have to be faithful to him, if you do not obey him, you do not love him, and if you forsake his name, he will forsake you. He explicitly says this.

Your problem is you can't bring yourself to say that he was right about Indulgences. Why is that so hard? To be empathetic? You also have never seen a Septuagint, neither have I. We only have corrupted copies. This is evidenced by all the times the Saints quoted passages that are absent in all existing Old Testaments.

I have no problem saying he was right about indulgences, heck he was right about the papacy too and a lot of other Catholic retarded inventions. But the thing is, we've already condemned them for it and kicked them out of the Church. Fuck papists.

Let's look at some times that people were saved by Works:

"Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?" St. James 2:25

According to you understanding, Rahab was saved from Hell the moment she lied about the spies. According to my understanding, she was saved from Hell the moment her heart melted (Joshua 2:11), and she was saved from physical death the moment she lied about the spies.

"And it came to pass by the way in the inn, that the Lord met him, and sought to kill him. Then Zipporah took a sharp stone, and cut off the foreskin of her son, and cast it at his feet, and said, Surely a bloody husband art thou to me." Exodus 4:24-25

Again, my understanding: Moses was saved from physical death by his works.

"By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned."

Self evident. Saved from physical death by the work of obedience.

still trust kike telephone calls from 3k years ago

80 IQ

Most amount of browns ayy lmao

think of it this way, the more justified you are, the closer you are to God. The more condemned you are, the further away you go from God. To be saved is simply to be restored in relationship to God, so I think this is an agreeable way to look at things. Only grace can make you God's child, and make you friends with God again; Being a righteous man does not make you his friend, even if you are righteous you are condemned to hell without christ; only Christ can restores. But once you have received Gods grace and become his child, and you then become a very righteous man, aren't you surely going to be closer to God than say, an unrighteous christian who has pushed God away? And if you are more closer than he is, then you are naturally more justified than he is?

You see how this righteous man can say "I am not saved by my own righteousness" in this circumstance , because there is a sense where he is not saved by his own righteousness at all - and yet there another aspect where his righteousness certainly does save him from the death that comes from falling away into sin, and makes him closer to God in friendship, in which he literally is being saved in part by his righteousness.

This is how the works / faith dilema is solved, this is why salvation seems to be in some sense be both with and without works in faith through grace. All christians think you need to do works to be saved, as faith without works is dead (non-salvific) and we also all agree that righteousness without christ doesn't save you. Like, works isn't "dead" because righteousness didn't bring you closer to God - we constantly see examples of unrighteousness condemning you from God, and bringing one closer to God, it's because if all you had was righteousness and no jesus, it wouldn't save you, everyone needs christ for salvation. Once you have christ, an increase in righteousness and holiness put you further from eternal death, and so literally does save you. Get it?

i realize thats something you're not going to accept, cuz you don't think its possible to lose salvation, but if you did think that like a normal christian, you should hopefully find it quite reasonable.

All christians think you need to do works to be saved

There are at least 50 million Christians in America alone that reject that, so what are you saying?

we also all agree that righteousness without Christ doesn't save you

even if you are righteous you are condemned to hell without Christ

I'm assuming you're Roman Catholic from your flag, and in that case, no, not even your church believes that. Nostra Aetate says Kikes are saved through a "Divine Mystery". And Kikes believe Jesus is burning in hell.

I'll stick to just sitting

sola scriptura

cherrypicks books of the bible to include

if they think works are not nessisary, then they do not agree with James. A James aware protestant does agree with what I said. They think you need to do works as Christ commanded, even if the works themselves don't in themselves save.

typically they'll say it like, a saving faith has works.

Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way? St. James 2:25

Explain this verse according to your understanding of James 2 and you'll sound ridiculous.

Sola Scriptura

Never ask protestants where in the scripture it's written which books are part of the scripture

um, im not a protestant, im catholic. I don't think it is by faith alone.

and yes i do believe unbelievers can possibly be saved through mysterious means, that is actually biblical, i don't remember which verse says it. In that case, they would still be being saved by christ, no one gets saved without him. The mechanism is probably a baptism of spirit, because that is the most obvious choice for the job, but who knows. All I know is God can save whom he wants to save, so we shouldn't limit him. He is God of all, men not just the christians.