Good morning, this looks a bit more crowded than it was when I was here several years ago when Pastor Bixby was here, but appreciate the opportunity to be with you. There are five core truths that lay at the heart of the Reformation because they lay at the heart of what it means to be right with God. And I'll have a lot more to say about that later, but those basic core truths are scripture, the authority on salvation, Christ, the agent of salvation, faith, the means of salvation, grace, the basis of salvation, and God's glory, the divine motive in salvation. The problem is that each of those truths came to be in time overshadowed and corrupted and to such an extent corrupted that a reformation was necessary. Really, you could almost describe this as a revolution in terms of truth. And again, I'm going to go into more detail on this in the next message, but just to kind of cover these bases briefly as a background for us, scripture became superseded by tradition. Christ was supplanted by the church. Faith was overshadowed by works, grace was swallowed up by the concept of merit, and God's glory was, because of all that, eclipsed by human achievement, human accomplishment. And that's why the Reformation had to formulate these truths in a way that would combat that error. So scripture became sola scriptura. The focus on grace became sola gratia, sola Christus, sola fide, soli Deo gloria. And in each of those phrases, the nouns are the weight-bearing words. Scripture, Christ, grace, faith, God's glory. Those are the weight-bearing words in those phrases, but in each case, the sola is the indispensable qualifier. The sola simply highlights the fact that these were not newly discovered truths. They were recovered truths. They were truths that had become diluted over time with additions and accretions that fundamentally changed the nature of each of those truths. Now sometimes the five solas are described as the battle cry of the Reformation. Yes and no. Three of those terms, sola gratia, sola fide, and sola scriptura, are found in many of the early 16th century reformers' writings. They use that language, they use that terminology quite a bit in their writings. The phrase Solus Christus and Solideo Gloria actually don't seem to show up until later, even though the Reformers wrote a great deal, obviously, about Christ and about God's glory. Either way, the biblical principles captured in these phrases, these five kind of summary mottos, were certainly very much at the heart of what the Reformation was all about. So the subjects of the five solas were addressed in the writings of the reformers in that era and most of the sola phrases were actually consciously used by the reformers in their writings. But they weren't compiled into a single comprehensive list as here's what the reformation was about until much later. And there's a reason for that, I think. Great men in great movements rarely have 20-20 foresight of where their movements are going, let alone 360-degree awareness of everything else that's going on in their culture and the history around them. So none of the reformers sat down and made a list of five things, okay, these are the big ideas that we're going to accomplish in this reformation. None of them thought in those terms. They found themselves in the middle of this, in a sense, before they were aware of what was happening, I think. So movements like the reformation develop very gradually. They develop piece by piece. They develop person by person in the providence of God. So a comprehensive perception and a comprehensive evaluation of these kinds of movements require the benefit of hindsight, where we can look back and have much closer to 360-degree sense of everything else that's going on culturally and historically and theologically and among different men in different countries. They didn't have cell phones. They couldn't communicate instantly with each other. News was slow to travel. But that's why we can look back now and see the broader writings of these men over a larger span of their historical and their theological context and discern that it was in fact God who was weaving together all of these men and women and events into a single tapestry that becomes for us Reformation history. Now there are some dark spots in that historical tapestry. That's inevitable when you're dealing with fallen people, even regenerated fallen people. But that's another subject. All the solas that we're going to focus on today revolve around salvation. They revolve around atonement. That's a key point to understand. They're at the heart of the Reformation because they're at the heart of what it means to be right with God and to know that you are right with God. The last sola, soli deo gloria, answers the question, why? What is God's ultimate end or goal in doing this? The three middle solas, moving from the backwards up, the three middle solas answer, how do we get it? How are we saved? By faith alone, by grace alone, by Christ alone. We'll talk about those in the morning worship service. The first sola answers the question, says who? What's our authority? How can we be sure? How can we know this? What is the ultimate authority on this question? And in many respects, the first is the most important, it is the most foundational. Because whatever you believe about all the others, and about everything else for that matter, revolves around this question, what is your authority? Everybody has to answer that, atheists have to answer that question. What is our authority? Everybody has an ultimate authority for everything they believe. It may be, in some cases, their parents. It might be their teacher. It might be their pastor. It may be their church. It may be some author that they've read. It may even be some movie that they have watched. Some church teaching. And the Reformers grew up and lived in a context in which the ultimate authority of truth was the church and its traditions. And the nexus and the mouthpiece of that truth was the Pope. Because the sole guardian of the truth was the church. Because the sole possessor of the truth, in terms of scripture, was the church. And when you're the only one with the Bible, you get to tell everybody else what it means. And That became profoundly corrupted over time. And it was only as people in the church, people like John Huss, and Wycliffe, and Tyndall, and Luther, and many others probably that we don't even, whose names we don't even know. It's as people in the church got hold of the church's Bible. that they began raising questions about the church's teachings and practices as compared to what is actually in the Bible. And if there is one book of the Bible, more than any other, out of whose soil sprang the Reformation, it would be Paul's letter to the Romans. In the 16 chapters of Romans, you will find a phrase that occurs 16 times that captures, I think, the gist of this first psalm. It is the phrase, as it is written. Paul appeals to that phrase repeatedly to ground every single doctrine, every exhortation, every application, not in reason, not in tradition, not in the words of any man, not in a rabbinical tradition, but in the written words of God. So, for example, if you would just turn to Romans 1, we'll just, we'll survey a few of these just to kind of get them on the table language in our thinking. And I'm really just going to look at the first four. In Romans chapter 1, he introduces the concept of the gospel as the power of God unto salvation to everyone who believes. Because, he says, verse 17, in it is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith, or from faith for faith, as it is written. So he's grounding everything he just said in a text of scripture. As it is written, the just shall live by faith. That, of course, was probably the central text for Luther, coming to grips with what that meant. Look at chapter two, verse 24. He's arguing for the Jews and their unfaithfulness, their disobedience to the laws that they put on everybody else. And he says, verse 24, as it is written, the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you. He's grounding his argument in scripture. Chapter three, verse four, let God be true though everyone were a liar, as it is written. that you, God, may be justified in your words and prevail when you are judged. Chapter 3, verse 10, as it is written, none is righteous, no not one. The point is he keeps grounding his exhortations, his teachings in scripture, in scripture, in scripture. That's what matters. He doesn't go to a rabbi. He doesn't argue on the basis of anything other than what scripture says. That is the gist of Sola Scriptura. You don't have any text in scripture that I'm aware of that says Sola Scriptura. but the principle is clearly illustrated all through the Bible itself. In the Gospels, even the Son of God, who could, if anybody could speak on his own authority, did not do that. He even said, the words that I'm giving you, they're not my words, they're the words that the Father has given me to give to you. And even the Son of God repeatedly makes the very same appeal to the definitive authority of Scripture as he argues with the Pharisees and with the elders. On at least two dozen occasions, he uses the same phrase as it is written, as it is written. Even in his argumentation, even the Son of God's argumentation, he goes back to ground his arguments in Scripture. Not in himself, even, in Scripture. 24 times, two dozen different, I should say, two dozen different occasions. That's not counting parallels in the Gospels. That's excluding all the parallels. Passages that are, you know, in Matthew and Mark. 24 different occasions throughout the Gospels where Jesus is grounding his argument, his teaching, in scripture with that phrase or something very like it as it is written. Jesus never appealed to any rabbinic tradition. to settle any point of doctrine or practice. He did refer to the rabbinic tradition sometimes to demonstrate the inconsistency of those with whom he was arguing, but not to ground his teaching. And it was the practice of all the New Testament writers to ground what they taught in the scriptures themselves, and ultimately in the scriptures alone. Why is that? because of what you could call a sextet of characteristics that the scripture gives to us about itself. Six things that scripture teaches about itself that explain why it's the authority and guarantee the legitimacy of its authority. The first of those is inspiration. Its source is divine. You know the passages, 2 Timothy 3.16, all scripture is given by inspiration of God. All scripture is God breathed. In other words, that doesn't mean God is exhaling. It means that the words, these are the word breaths of God. If you've ever noticed, have you ever put your hand in front of your mouth when you're speaking? I have my class do this just to illustrate this. When you start saying words, you feel your breath hitting your hand. That's all it's talking about. The words in scripture are the words that have been spoken by God, breathed out in that sense by God. It's inspiration, its source is divine. 2 Timothy 3.16, 2 Peter 1.20-21 as well. Secondly, it's inerrancy. Its contents are incapable of error. So for example, here's a passage, Numbers 23.19, the reason that its contents are incapable of error is because its source is incapable of error. God is not a man that he should lie. Neither the Son of Man that he should repent. Hath he said, and shall he not do it? Hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good? If that's true of the author, that's true of the author's words. Titus 1-2, God who cannot lie, therefore his words are inerrant. Here's a third scriptural claim of its characteristics. Infallibility. That means that its assertions cannot fail to be realized. That's particularly true of its prophecies. If God says something happened, then it happened. That can't be proven not to have happened. If God says something is going to happen, it cannot fail to happen. My favorite passage here is Isaiah 55, 10 and 11. Perspicuity, number four. That's not a word that you probably use every day. But it just has reference to clarity, the basic clarity of the scripture. Its message is accessible. Its message is understandable. That doesn't mean there's nothing hard to understand in the Bible. Peter acknowledges that with some of Paul's writings especially, 2 Peter 3. But the basic message is accessible and understandable. It doesn't require a whole gaggle of scholars and a whole bunch of priests to tell us, explain to us what it means. Passages on that, something like Deuteronomy 30, 11 to 14, Romans 10 actually cites that same passage with reference to the truth of the gospel. Number five, its sufficiency. Its guidance for our faith and practice is adequate. It's all we need. It's ultimately all we need. It is in itself sufficient. And number six, its authority. Its pronouncements are normative. Jesus said in chapter 10 of John, verse 35, the scripture, he's arguing for a line of reasoning, and part of his argumentation is, he's citing scripture and he says, and the scripture can't be broken. The scripture is, if you want a more technical term, the scripture is irrefragable. It can't be argued against. It is normative. John 12, 48, Jesus taught that Anybody who disagreed with him would be judged on the basis of his words. And Hebrews 4.12 describes an aspect of its authority as well. So inspiration, inerrancy, infallibility, perspicuity, sufficiency, and authority are the characteristics that scripture teaches about itself that demonstrate, that ground, that justify that this is the only and ultimate authority. Luther observed, Scripture alone is the true Lord and Master of all writings and doctrine on earth. If that is not granted, what is Scripture good for? Now, does that mean that we don't use creeds and catechisms and commentators and church traditions? Well, by no means. Protestantism has always valued such sources, but only as secondary theological norms. which are themselves sourced in and subject to the ultimate authority of scripture alone. The problem the reformers confronted was a church hierarchy that had come to regard scripture and tradition as co-equal norms, at least theoretically. And in reality, tradition was regarded and treated as the primary norm for reasons that I'll mention in just a moment. I grew up Catholic in Charleston, South Carolina. In fact, I was an altar boy. Not because I was particularly devout, but because it was much more interesting than just sitting in the pew all through Mass. So it was kind of neat to be up there and pour the wine in the water and ring the bells and do something during church. And I still have in my possession a December 4th 1960 copy, this is almost as old as I am. It looks a lot worse than I do, I hope. But it's a copy of the Catholic Banner, which describes itself as the official newspaper of the Diocese of Charleston. And actually, it was my mother's. So I was about 11 months old at the time and not reading much yet, so this was my mother's. but I hung on to it, because she hung on to it for a while after she was converted. And it contains a number of really interesting articles, including one titled The Humility of Mary. And it describes her, and I mean, it's quoting standard Catholic language. It says, we regularly refer to her as co-redemptrix of the world. She's a co-redeemer of the world along with Christ, the son of God, and queen of heaven and earth. So that's an interesting read. But the one I want to go to is called The Catholic Attitude Toward the Bible, written by a Reverend Martin Schoenberg, professor of scripture in Fort Wayne, Indiana at the time, who presents in the article three reasons that, quote, tradition is more important than the Bible, end quote. Those are his words. Theoretically, tradition and scripture are co-equal authorities. In reality, in practice, tradition trumps scripture. And that's exactly what he's arguing in the article. And he gives three reasons. Number one, because tradition is more complete than the Bible. There are some questions that the Bible doesn't answer, and tradition fills in those gaps. Therefore, tradition is more complete than the Bible. Therefore, tradition is more authoritative than the Bible. Number two, because tradition is a necessary means toward understanding the Bible. You would not know how to understand it if we didn't have all these traditional interpretations that explain to you how you're supposed to understand it. So tradition is the necessary means to understanding it. Tradition is the interpretive filter for scripture. And thirdly, because tradition is prior to the Bible. You say, well, how can that be? Well, the argument is it took the apostles and so forth several decades before they actually wrote down the words of scripture. Up until that time, it was all oral. It was all basically tradition. So tradition is older than the Bible. Therefore, it is also more authoritative. Now the essence of Sola Scriptura is not only Scripture is an acceptable source. The essence of Sola Scriptura is only Scripture is the ultimate and final authority of all other sources. All other authorities, all other ecclesiastical doctrines, all other human interpreters. So any idea, or observance, or ritual, or practice, if it is not consistent with Scripture, has no authority. It might be okay, but it doesn't have authority over people. But if any idea, observance, or ritual, or practice actually contradicts or conflicts with Scripture, that's to be rejected. Scripture is the norm. Scripture is the authority. So scripture, and in the final analysis, only scripture, is the norm, the standard, the rule for faith and practice, the guide for what we believe and how we worship and how we live. So how does sola scriptura affect you, apart from kind of the obvious ways that we've talked about in terms of doctrines and so forth? How does it impact your relationship to God? To know that your salvation and the security of your soul does not rest on the decisions of popes, or the disposition of human priests, or the changing and conflicting traditions of churches, or the opinions of scholars, which change, or any other human authority, but on the reliable words of God himself, who does not change and cannot lie. The writer of the Hebrews tells us in chapter 6 of Hebrews, beginning in verse 17, when God desired to show more convincingly to the heirs of the promise, and you're talking about the Abrahamic promise here, the unchangeable nature of his, the unchangeable character of his purpose, he guaranteed it with an oath. So that by two unchangeable things. Have you ever gone through that passage and thought about, okay, what exactly are the two unchangeable things that he's talking about in the context? The first is God's own self, God's own character, that's unchangeable. The other is God's word of promise, that's unchangeable. So that by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled for refuge might have strong encouragement to hold fast to the hope set before us. We have this as a sure and steadfast anchor of the soul. Sola Scriptura is an anchor for your confidence, an anchor for your assurance. What could possibly be more reassuring? I have a section, what time do I have till? 25? Okay, I've got enough time to do this then. I was thinking 10, 20. Let me take you to a passage. Go to 2 Peter chapter one. It's actually a passage I alluded to earlier, but what could be more reassuring? Well, how about a personal direct revelation from God? Wouldn't that be more reassuring, confidence building, that you had the truth than a book? And some claim to have had those. The problem with that is you can't have one just for the asking. And God doesn't seem to choose to do it very often. In fact, God himself tells us in scripture that scripture itself is more reliable and therefore more reassuring than even a direct personal revelation from God. And in fact, he tells us that through somebody who actually had a personal direct revelation from God. And that's Peter. 2 Peter 1, verse 16, Peter says, we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. So what is he talking about here? Is he just, just that they witnessed Christ in the incarnation, they were eyewitnesses of his majesty? We'll keep reading. Verse 17, for when he received honor and glory from God the Father, and the voice was born to him by the majestic glory, quote, this is my beloved son with whom I am well pleased. So when was that exactly? Verse 18, we ourselves heard this very voice born from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain." Oh, so he's talking about the transfiguration, right? Described back in the Gospels. Well, that was a pretty dramatic, spectacular, certified vision, right? And yet, if you remember, Peter himself was basically clueless about the meaning and the significance of that vision. Visions are very subjective experiences. They can be misconstrued. They can be misinterpreted. They can even be counterfeited, as Paul explains in Corinthians about Satan being transformed into an angel of light. And they're not repeatable. Once you've had it, it's over. It's not on videotape. You can't go back and watch it and watch it and watch it and watch it and reanalyze what was said and what you said. So what's better than a personal vision? Verse 19, he continues, we have the prophetic word more fully confirmed to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts. And by prophecy, he doesn't just mean predictions of future events. Unfortunately, our default mental definition of the word prophecy is prediction. Somehow you need to reach into your brain and recalibrate your thinking when you hear that word, because the basic scriptural sense of prophecy is proclamation. Might be prediction, might just be preaching or exhortation or any other kind of proclamation. But prophecy is the standard scriptural term for a revelation from God, whether again that takes the form of prediction, or as is far more often the case, just proclamation or preaching or exhortation. Genesis is prophecy, all of it. Judges is prophecy, all of it in the biblical sense. Job is prophecy, Psalms is prophecy, Proverbs is prophecy in the biblical definition. Isaiah and Amos, Jeremiah and Obadiah, Ezekiel and Jonah, Daniel and Haggai and Malachi, all that is prophecy too. But if you actually read those prophets, you discover that most of their prophecies isn't prediction. It's mostly preaching, it's mostly proclamation, it's mostly exhortation. So verse 19, we have the prophetic word more fully confirmed, more fully confirmed than what? Even than a personal direct vision like the transformation. That's what he's saying in the context. To which you do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place. Drop down to verse 20, knowing this first, that no prophecy of scripture, whether it's proclamation or prediction, no statement, no proclamation of scripture, comes from someone's own interpretation. In other words, the prophetic writers didn't make this stuff up. Where did it come from? Verse 21, no prophecy has ever been produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. Visions, again, are not permanent, they're not repeatable. You can't, but you can go back to scripture. You can go back to this passage over and over and over and over and the words are the same. And you can analyze and measure your thinking by it over and over and over. You can pray over it. You can reread it. You can understand it for yourself. It is the most reliable form of revelation that God could have given to us. It is the voice of God. It doesn't change. It doesn't require as I say, a flock of priests or a gaggle of scholars to tell you what it means. It is the scripture itself that judges the teachings of popes and priests and sages and scholars and catechisms and creeds. Did anybody see the play last night at Bob Jones University? How many of you saw that? Okay, several of you. 28 Steps, about Luther. It was, among other things, a great illustration over and over again of sola scriptura. And the clincher, of course, comes at the end after the girl climbs the 28 steps of that shrine in Rome on her knees, kissing each step. And when she reaches the top, she asks, who knows if this is true? That's why sola scriptura. is the only anchor for your creed, for your confidence, and for our assurance. Let's pray. Father, we are so grateful that you have given to us and preserved for us a reliable record of your revelation to us through men. We thank you, Lord, for the labors of many, many people who have gone before us men and women who have hazarded their lives and given their lives for the propagation of the scriptures, for the reprinting, for the distribution of the scriptures, so that people could have it in their own language. And we are so far removed from that, Lord, that we forget how much we are blessed and how much we owe to the sacrifices and the labors of others before us. Teach us, Lord, to treasure our Bibles and to treat them as though we treasure them and to open them to hear your voice and to rejoice in the confidence and the assurance that we can have because only your word is the ultimate authority for us. We pray in Jesus' name, amen.