Soli Deo Gloria

Automated transcript of the sermon audio, generated with OpenAI Whisper (small.en). It has not been checked against the recording and may contain errors, especially in names and Scripture references.

Well, tonight we’re going to continue our study of the five solas that largely define the Reformation. And just by way of reminder, those five are Sola Scriptura, Sola Fide, Sola Gratia, Solas Christus. And tonight we’re going to look at Soli Deo Gloria, and that will wrap up in our study of these five solas. Soli Deo Gloria, of course, being to God alone be the glory. Now you might think that of the five solas, this one would be the least controversial. Who is going to argue with the idea of to God alone be the glory? Historically, the five solas together have pitted Roman Catholic teaching against the teachings of the Reformers.

Largely if you want to understand what was the beef between the Reformers and the Catholics, just look no further than the five solas to get a feel for what the theological differences were. The Rome has taken a very vocal stand against some of the solas, such as scripture alone and faith alone. I was reminded of that recently. I had a meal with a good lifelong buddy of mine who’s actually an ordained deacon in the Catholic Church, and we were talking about the differences. And he says, yeah, we definitely do not agree with scripture alone or faith alone.

But they have never, Rome has never made a statement against the idea of to God be the glory alone. And then in a later section of this message, we’re going to take a look at some of the controversies that surround this particular doctrine and see if in fact Rome does support this doctrine or not. In preparing for the message tonight, I read a book titled God’s Glory Alone, the Majestic Heart of the Christian Faith and Life, What the Reformers Taught and Why It Still Matters by David Van Druinen. And Van Druinen says, Soli Deo Gloria can be understood as the glue that holds the solas in place or the center that draws the other solas into a grand unified whole. And another writer said Soli Deo Gloria is the logical implication of the other four points. This really makes sense when you think about it. When you put together faith alone, grace alone, Christ alone, and Scripture alone, eliminate any opportunity for men to claim their own merits or to make any kind of boast in their own accomplishments. You end up with then, to God be the glory alone. So all those

other solas really feed into this one, to God be the glory. As we take a closer look at this doctrine, I’ve outlined my message then into six sections so you can follow along. You can use these as six points if you’re taking notes. And I’ll repeat these as we go through, but the six points are the doctrine stated, the origin of the doctrine, defining the terms in the doctrine, scriptural support for the doctrine, controversy surrounding the doctrine, and then lastly, applications of the doctrine. So we’ll structure our message that way. So first off, the doctrine stated. So what does solely, Deo, Gloria, mean? If we translate it woodenly, it translates into, as God, it translates as, alone to God, glory.

But we usually translate it as glory to God, alone. Either way, it isn’t hard to get the drift. God alone is the one who’s supposed to receive the glory. Now the three key concepts that we need to grasp to understand this doctrine are God, glory, and alone. If you understand those three concepts, We have a pretty good handle on this doctrine. By God, I suspect that most of us have a notion of what it is meant by God and alone, but what about glory? If we want to be sure that God alone gets the glory, we need to understand what is meant by the term glory. And I’ll attempt to come up with a working definition of that in a few minutes.

I don’t know about you, but every time I’ve heard the word glory, I just, I have a vague notion in my head what we’re talking about, It’s kind of hard to describe. But for now, suffice it to say that whatever glory is, it belongs to God alone. So then now let’s talk about the origin of the doctrine. So where did the five solas originate? You can find the truth about these five doctrinal statements contained within the body of the reformers’ writings, but they actually were never systematized, as we know them, until sometime after the reformers. Again, you can go through all their different writings, and you can say, oh, that sounds like he’s talking about sola scriptura, or whatever other soul that you want to talk about.

But nowhere in the reformers’ time period was there ever these five solas stated as a unified body. It was only after they were gone that as theologians continued to wrestle with the teachings that these things came together as we know them today. Now, there is no reason to doubt that the reformers would have supported these five doctrinal truths, even though they might have quibbled over some of the minor details. As you read about the different reformers, you’ll find little minor points of doctrine that they might have argued back and forth on some of these, but by and large, they all subscribe to these. For example, John Calvin would have had no problem with Soli Deo Gloria.

Here’s a sample from his writing. “‘We never truly glory in him until we have utterly discarded our own glory.

elect are justified by the Lord in order that they may glory in him and in none else.” Sounds like Soli Deo Gloria to me, although he never uses words. In reading about what the Reformers thought about the idea of Soli Deo Gloria, I was surprised at first to find out that Luther actually was opposed to what he called a theology of glory. As I was doing my reading, I thought, well, that’s kind of odd. Why would he be opposed to the theology of glory? And in its place he argued for a theology of the cross. And then actually in 1518, the year 1518, the head of the Augustinian order, which Luther belonged to, or I should say the head of the order in Germany, which Luther belonged to, he called for a meeting where Luther could express his concerns. We know this now as the Heidelberg Disputation, where they got a bunch of theologians together, and Luther was allowed to make a presentation on what his concerns were. Luther, who was never one to be and lack words, but to express his thoughts,

remember 95 theses, in this opening theses for this particular disputation he had 28 points that he wanted to defend. And in point 21 it reads this way, it says, a theology of glory calls evil good and good evil. A theology of the cross calls the thing what it actually is. So I’ll read a few excerpts from this disputation that will then help shed some light on what he was actually troubled by and what he was trying to correct. So here’s some words describing what he went by, the theology of glory. He says, he does not know Christ, he who does not know Christ does not know God hidden in suffering. Therefore he prefers works to suffering, glory to the cross, strength to weakness, wisdom to folly, and in general good to evil.

These are the people whom the apostle calls enemies of the cross of Christ, for they hate the cross and sufferings and love works and the glory of works. Thus they call the good of the cross evil and the evil of a deed good. Because men do not know the cross and hate it, they necessarily love the opposite, namely wisdom, glory, power, and so on. Therefore they become increasingly blinded and hardened by such love, for desire cannot be satisfied by the acquisition of those things which it desires. Just as the love of money grows in proportion to the increase of the money itself, so the drop sea of the soul becomes thirstier the more it drinks.

This holds true of all desires. As Christ shows in John 4 13 where he says everyone who drinks in this water will thirst again. So when He was talking about the theology of glory. He was opposed to basically man trying to achieve his own glory through works and and his own accomplishments and he saw a problem within the church occurring in this way too and so he was denouncing that and instead he was proposing what he calls a theology of the cross which a statement on that was the remedy for the remedy for curing desire does not lie in satisfying it but in extinguishing it. He who wishes to have much power, honor, pleasure, satisfaction in all things, must flee rather than seek power, honor, pleasure, and satisfaction in all things.

This is the wisdom which is the foliage of the world. So he was saying by renouncing those things and not pursuing those, and instead relying on the power of the cross and what Jesus did for us, that was the key, and to him he summed that up as the theology of the cross. So I think we could all agree largely these sentiments that Luther expresses here. And it turns out, as I read up more, that he does not have a problem with solely Deo Gloria at all. In fact, he very much was in favor of it. He was all about that doctrine. He was trying to show in his disputations how trusting and human achievement blocks our ability to see the glory of God. He wrote, it is not sufficient for anyone and it does him no good to recognize God in his glory and majesty unless he recognizes him in the humility and shame of the cross. Again he saw the gateway to understanding God’s glory, to seeing God’s glory was to be able to see it through the cross and through the work of Christ on the cross.

Van Drunen, the author of that book, summed up Luther’s theology of the cross this way, to behold the glory of the cross we must behold God beaten, mocked, and crucified. To gain everlasting beatitude, we must utterly humble ourselves and find refuge only in a cursed cross.” So what about Calvin? That was kind of some thoughts from Luther. What about Calvin? What did he have to say on this subject? He wrestled with an issue sometimes raised when discussing solely Deo Gloria. And the issue is this. The emphasis on God’s glory and God’s glory alone implies man’s debasement. If God’s going to get all the glory, then what are we?

And that’s probably where the idea of what we call worm theology came from. If God gets all the glory, then we’re just nothing but worms grovelin’ before this glorious God, right? That’s got to be the conclusion. On the one hand, we would say, well, yeah, we are debased. But on the other hand, doesn’t Scripture say we are God’s image bearers and we have all been created a little lower than the angels? How does that fit with worm theology? was an ardent defender of God’s glory, but he also recognized that God manifests much of his glory in his creation, both in the firmament and in mankind. He wrote, in every part of the world, some liniment of divine glory are beheld.

He understood that glory belongs to God alone, but that God manifests that glory in his creation, and the creation should then reflect that glory back to the Creator. Calvin reconciles the tension between God’s glory in man’s debasement by saying this, two ends must be kept especially in view, namely that the glory of God be maintained, unimpaired, and that our consciences in the view of this tribunal be secured in peaceful rest and calm tranquility.

So we can simultaneously hold to the view that God alone be the glory, and also recognize that we in our position before God can stand there with peaceful rest in calm tranquility. The point is this, to God belongs all the glory, but he manifests his glory by reconciling men to himself and then letting them share in that glory. That should give us, as Calvin said, peaceful rest in calm tranquility. Romans 8, 17, the Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are the children of God, and if children, then heirs, heirs of God, and fellow heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with Him, in order that we may also be glorified with Him.

So let’s talk now about defining some of the terms in the doctrine. I mentioned earlier that there’s three key concepts we have to get our hands on. God, glory, and alone. So again, I’m assuming that we know what is meant by God and alone. So I’m only going to deal with glory, or more specifically, the glory of God. If we can get our minds wrapped around that, then we can have a good handle with this doctrine is telling us to do. When you think about God’s glory, what comes to mind? What does it mean to say He is glorious? I imagine most of us would do better at recognizing a display of God’s glory than defining it. If somehow we saw glory appear now, if this Shekinah glory manifests in itself right now, we could probably recognize it. But if I said, give me a definition of it, we might be at a loss to do that. Miriam Webster, which I don’t recommend as the official definition, but there’s a starting place.

It describes glory like this. It says praise, honor, or distinction extended by common consent. Something that secures praise or renown or a state of exaltation. And then John Piper, I was reading up on it, and then John Piper in an interview, he said this. He said, defining the glory of God is impossible because it is more like the word beauty than the word basketball. Now that’s very piperian, right? It’s like, thank you very much, John. That did not help me at all. But he does go on to explain then what he meant. He says that a basketball is something that you could probably explain reasonably well to someone who’s never seen one before.

You talk about its shape and it’s this round thing and it bounces and you put air into it and you shoo through a hoop. And you can just, you put enough descriptions in there that somebody can get a mental picture of what a basketball is all about. But how do you describe a word like beauty? How do you define beauty for somebody? If you can’t show them beauty, how do you describe it? He then takes a stab at defining the glory of God by first considering the holiness of God, and then he observes in scripture where holiness and glory are used together to try to come up with his definition. So first, he defines holiness of God as he, God, being distinct and separated into a class by himself, infinite perfections, infinite greatness, infinite worth.

His holiness is what he is as God that nobody else is. That’s Piper’s working definition of what he means by the holiness of God. And so from that definition, then Piper then observes in Isaiah 6.3, the scene that’s described there where the angels are crying out, Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God almighty. The whole earth is full of his, and you would expect what? Holiness. But it doesn’t say that. The whole earth is full of his glory. From this definition of holiness and the connection to glory that we see in Isaiah, Piper then defines the glory of God as the infinite beauty and greatness of his holiness or manifold perfections put on display.

Glory is, Piper would say, the glory of God is his holiness on display for everybody to see. I like to picture his holiness as a perfect diamond with an infinite number of facets on it, and then the rays of light that are coming off of that diamond are what we would call his glory being displayed. It’s just a picture in my mind that helps me understand it. For lack of a better definition then of God’s glory, I’m going to go with Piper’s definition, and I think it’s a reasonable definition. So then, let’s talk about scriptural support. All this background on solely day of glory is great, but it doesn’t matter at all if we can’t back it up scripturally.

Can that doctrine actually be supported from the Word of God? And so following is just a couple samples of scripture that support the view that God alone should receive the glory. First point, God does not share His glory with others. Exodus 34.14, you shall worship no other God for the Lord whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God. And then in Isaiah 42.8, I am the Lord, that is my name, my glory I give to no other nor my praise to carved idols.” Those two verses alone seem to almost close the deal right there. Pretty clear that God does not share His glory with others. He’s a jealous God. He guards His glory jealously.

Jealously. Not like we would because He is just in His jealousy. Because He is worthy of being the only one being glorified. As an aside, while God doesn’t give His glory to others, He does let his children share in his glory, which again, I think is a tremendous, talks about how awesome our God is. You know, he’s not a God who hoards his glory and who says, all you worms just wiggle around there and bow down to me and adore me. But, you know, he says, rise up children and come enter into my glory and share in my glory. That’s the kind of God that we serve. Well, secondly, in scripture, we are told that all glory should be given to Him.

Ephesians 3, 20 through 21, now to Him who is able to do far more abundantly than all we can ask or think, according to the power at work within us, to Him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations forever and ever, amen. And in 1 Corinthians 10, 31, so whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do all what? To the glory of God. everything we do should be glory directed back to God. Thirdly, God judges harshly those who glorify themselves. I pulled out two examples from scriptures where God wasn’t messing around. You know both the stories pretty well. Nebuchadnezzar, remember him, the passage here where he is getting a little full of himself, says at the end of 12 months, he was walking on the roof of the royal palace of Babylon.

And the king answered and said, is this not the great Babylon, which I have built by my mighty power as a royal residence for the glory of my majesty. While the words were still in the king’s mouth, there fell a voice from heaven, O King Nebuchadnezzar, to you it is spoken. The kingdom is departed from you and you shall be driven from among men and your dwelling shall be with the beasts of the field and you shall be made to eat grass like an ox and seven periods of time shall pass over you until you know that the most high rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whom he will. And immediately the word was fulfilled against Nebuchadnezzar.

He was driven from among men and ate grass like an ox and his body was wet with the dew of heaven till his hair grew as long as eagles feathers and his nails were like birds claws. That was Daniel 4, 29 through 33. Can you just picture that scene? Here he is up on his rooftop and beating his chest. Look at what I’ve done, how awesome I am. And then this voice from heaven. Oh Nebuchadnezzar. I just, you know, he used to chills when he tried to picture that situation. And I imagine what must have been going through Nebuchadnezzar’s mind just thinking, oh boy, am I in trouble now? From the New Testament we have an example.

You remember Herod? Says on an appointed day, Herod put on his royal robes and took his seed upon the throne and delivered an oration to them. And the people were shouting the voice of a God and not of a man.

And immediately an angel of the Lord struck him down because he did not give glory to give God the glory and he was eaten by worms and breathed his last. Acts 12 21 to 23. Again what a graphic situation. Up there making this great speech the people are just praising him voice of a God and he obviously was soaking it up and you know four more give me more and not giving the glory to God and immediately the judgment of God came upon him immediately got infested with maggots and was eating alive. Not a good way to go. Fourth, point out of scriptures, all things ultimately find their origin and purpose in God as Paul’s doxology in Romans 11 36 says, for from him and through him and to him are all things to him be the glory forever. Amen. Did you get that? I mean, is there anything missing under this umbrella for from him and through him and to him are all things.” That sounds pretty comprehensive. I can’t think of anything that gets outside of that area of description. I believe these verses make a strong case

for solely day of Gloria. In addition, consider Psalm 8, 3-5, which shows once again God’s graciousness to let us share in His goodness. When I look at your heavens and the work of your fingers, the moon and the stars which you have set in place, what is man that you are mindful of him and the Son of man that you care for him? Yet you have made him a little lower than the heavenly beings and crowned him with glory and honor.” You know, when you read passages like that, it’s absolutely crazy to think of how often we seek our own glory, considering that God wants to share His glory with us. why would we be satisfied with anything else?

Well that brings us up then to taking a look at some of the controversies surrounding the doctrine. And specifically the only controversy really that comes up is a what I believe is a controversy between the reformed view of God’s glory and the Catholic view. Now again if you were asking, if I was asking my Catholic deacon friend, do you believe in the solely day of glory? He’d say, I salute, I sign up, I believe that totally absolutely 100%. But as we’re gonna see in a minute, I’m gonna ask you to be the judge and jury and decide if you believe based on their doctrines, what you think. That again, most Catholics, I think all Catholics would say yes, we believe in that.

The problem arises with how they view and treat Mary and the saints. We would say that what they give honor, we would say that when they give honor to these, They give honor to the saints and Mary in a way that we would say is only reserved for God. They would argue back that what they extend to Mary and the saints is different. And to get around the charge that they worship Mary and the saints, they have defined three levels of honor. And in Latin, those terms are, and Shawn, help me out here, is it pronounced Latria, L-A-T-R-I-A, Latria, which is reserved for the Trinity. dulia for saints in general, and hyperdulia for Mary.

So you got that? So to God be Lotria. To the saints, you get dulia, and Mary, you get hyperdulia, okay? These levels of veneration were first identified at the Second Council of Nicaea in 787. Part of the reason for that meeting was to settle the question of venerating icons. Up until that point in time, had been the custom of them to offer up veneration, which, again, is some form of adoration, worship, honor, to the icons. But the practice had been banned by Constantine. But not everybody agreed with what Constantine had done when he had banned that practice. And so after all the squabbling and fighting, they decided, let’s get together and let’s have a council and discuss these things and decide what we’re going to do about it.

So it was at that council where they then came up for these terms to try to differentiate what’s really going on. We don’t have time here to delve into these three terms, but suffice it to say, they differ only in degree of adoration or honor paid to the recipient. Perhaps more telling would be a quick survey of some of Rome’s teachings about Mary that comes straight out of the Catechism of Catholic Doctrine found on the Vatican website. You can actually go to, it’s, I forget what it was now, but it’s a .va is the website, you can go to the Vatican website and start looking up Catholic doctrine. And I just went out there and I found quite a few little quotes about Mary right out of their catechism.

And so I’m going to read these to you. And so Judge, jury, as I read this, you’re trying to answer the question, do the Catholics believe into God alone be the glory? Can they say, honestly, they believe that if they also hold to these teachings about Mary that I’m about to read to you. Okay, so here we go. No man goes to Christ, but by his mother, the encyclical of Pope Leo XIII on the value of saying the rosary. Next one, Christ alone truly offered the sacrifice of atonement on the cross. Yea, so far so good. In the power of the grace of redemption merited by Christ, Mary, by her spiritually, spiritual entering into the sacrifice of her for divine Son for men made atonement for the sins of man and merited the application of the redemptive grace of Christ.”

Basically, it sounds like a fancy way of saying Mary is a co-redemptress. In this manner, she cooperates in the subjective redemption of mankind. And that comes out of the fundamentals of Catholic dogma. Next one, all our hope do we repose in the most blessed virgin, in the all fair and immaculate one who has crushed the poisonous head the most cruel serpent and brought salvation to the world. Pope Pius IX, ineffable deuce. Next one. You, Mary, conceived the living God and by your prayers will deliver our souls from death. Can’t remember, you’re supposed to be thinking through these statements align with the idea of solely day-o-gloria.

The liturgical feast dedicated to the mother of God and Marian prayer, such as the Rosary, an epitome of the whole gospel, expresses this devotion to the Virgin Mary. Next, the Holy Spirit prepared Mary by His grace. It was fitting that the mother of Him, in whom the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, should herself be full of grace. Next, therefore, the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the title of advocate, helper, benefactress, and mediatrix. By asking Mary to pray for us, we acknowledge ourselves to be poor sinners, and we address ourselves to the mother of mercy, the all holy one. Next, after speaking of the church, her own origin, mission, and destiny, we can find no better way to conclude than by looking to Mary.

And then it was she, the second Eve, who free from all sin, original or personal, and always more intimately united with her son, offered him on Golgotha to the eternal Father for all the children of Adam. So you got that? Sinless Mary offered up her son to the Father on behalf of us sinners. A few more. By entrusting ourselves in her prayer, we abandon ourselves to the will of God together with her, thy will be done. So what do you think? Does it sound like Rome’s teachings on Mary are consistent with solely Deo Gloria? Sounds like there’s a problem there, no? Rome honestly believes, they believe in solely Deo Gloria, but they also firmly believe in these views on Mary.

I personally, as many of you knew, I attended a Catholic school up until the eighth grade. I think, you know, I actually won Alter Boy of the Year Award in my eighth grade year, So I was the best altar boy. Which doesn’t really mean anything, but I got the word. I remember annually that we would have this special day. And I can’t remember if I was tied to what they call a novena or not. My memory’s gotten foggy on it. But what I do remember is the whole student body, a couple hundred kids, first through eighth grade, we would have this procession that would go around the grounds. And at the head of the procession, there would be a a couple of altar boys carrying a, I don’t know, pretty good size statue of Mary.

The priests would be up there, and then there’d be several other altar boys, and then basically the student’s body would line up kind of two by two, and we would just march up and down and all over the campus, saying the rosary over and over again, and then we would usually end up in the church building and have a mass at the end of the thing.

Is that just saying thanks, Mary, for having Jesus? You know, what was the point of that? It’s difficult to see how these beliefs and practices are consistent with the doctrine of solely day-oh-glory. And then that brings me up then to the application of the doctrine. And in case you didn’t infer from my comments, I would say the Catholics definitely have a problem with saying they believe in solely day-oh-glory. So what application does this doctrine have for our lives? What would giving God the glory look like? We’ve already read a key verse earlier. So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.

First Corinthians 10.31. That answers the scope of when to give God glory, which is whenever you do whatever. Whatever hat you wear in life, husband, father, son, wife, mother, daughter, employee, employer, employee, did I leave anybody off the list? Whatever you do, do it all to the glory of God. Now, when I think about applying this doctrine, There are a couple of things that I think about, and so I’ll just kinda let you inside my head and what goes through my mind, and maybe you’ll find some of this beneficial for you as you think about applying solely day O glory to your life. First, I consider that one of God’s greatest displays of his immeasurable glory was to what?

Humble himself to the point of dying on the cross. I mean, God said, what can I do to show off my glory, my magnificence? How about if I come and be born in a manger? What if I die on a cross? That’s what our God did to show off. If this is how the creator displays his glory, then what should our reflection of his glory look like? If humility is not prominently displayed in what we’re reflecting, then we’re not reflecting God’s glory, but we’re in fact just jinging up our own glory. Humility has to be a key characteristic of our reflection of the glory of God. Now this doesn’t sit well with our human understanding of glory and it’s a real stumbling block to both the Jews and unbelieving Gentiles.

No way would God ever stoop to man’s level. When you try to explain the gospel to the unbelieving person it blows their mind, wait, you’re telling me God came and humbled himself and died on a cross. That is absolutely crazy. It is foolishness to those who are perishing. Human boasting is so wicked that the Apostle John lists the boastful pride of life as one of the three major sins that makes up worldliness. The other two being lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes. If you may all know the passage he says, all that is in the world, all that is worldliness, the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life.

Secondly, I consider how God does not hoard his glory but wants to share it. Not in the sense that we are somehow shareholders in his glory with God, but rather we’re vessels that show off his glory. What does he do with his glory? He shares it. He says, come on, enter in. He says, let me wear you like a belt around me for my renown and my praise, and let me show you off. And much in the same way that a wife is the glory of her husband that Dave was talking about last week, God wants us to be that display of his glory. Romans 8.30, and those whom he be destined, he also called, and those whom he called, he also justified, and those whom he justified, he also glorified.

When you consider that God is totally self-sufficient and does not need us for anything, it is beyond remarkable that he delights himself by letting us share in his glory. There is no other reason for God to do that, other than God is that kind of a God who gives, who shares of Himself. And again, what does that pattern set for us? It sets a pattern for how I should be in relationship to others. Do I hog the limelight? Do I struggle with sharing the credit or recognition? Is my focus on me getting the attention, or am I more attentive to other people around me? Thirdly, I think about why on earth I would ever want to pursue my own glory when God is inviting me to share in His.

I made that point earlier. It seems absolutely ludicrous for us to want to do that. The Psalmist says it well in Psalm 84.10, for a day in your courts is better than a thousand elsewhere. I would rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God than dwell in the tents of wickedness. I remember in high school, a guy, one of these, you know, probably, he was probably a drug addict kind of guy, all black, you know, the long, stringy hair, you know, and, you know, I think his shirt says something like, better to rule in hell than to serve in heaven. I just thought, wow, what a stupid thing to put on your shirt. When I think about this verse I just read, though, I have my own version of that verse that I picture in my head, and it goes something like this.

to be the street sweeper at the end of God’s parade than to be leading the march in my own parade. And I actually picture scooping up the elephant poo-poo and stuff as I’m going along. Better is that than to be at the head of my own parade. Any glory we can gin up for ourselves is like a milliwatt light bulb next to God’s jigawatt flood lamp. And even that’s probably an overstatement. Human pride is laughable in light of God’s glory. To To put it in more biblical terms, why would we be happy drinking out of broken cisterns when we can drink from an abundant, never-ending fountain? And then fourth and final, I think of how the basic spiritual disciplines are necessary for me to drive solely day-o-gloria into my own heart.

Those spiritual disciplines that I’m referring to are prayer, corporate worship, trusting God, obedience to his word, and receiving his gifts for Thanksgiving. Neglecting one or more of these areas leaves us more vulnerable to the enemy’s attacks and will make the glory of men look more attractive than the glory of God. Prayer reminds me of how dependent I am on God for everything. I am reminded that I can do nothing on my own. When I’m praying, I’m being forced to think about the fact that I am dependent on God. There’s nothing I can do on my own. Every heartbeat and every breath I have only happens because he’s decided to make it so.

As I pray from a right heart, it forces me into greater humility and greater appreciation for who God is in all his glory. Do you wanna become more focused on God’s glory? Pray. Similarly, corporate worship helps me to orient my thinking rightly. I draw encouragement from fellow Christians who are looking to glorify God rather than self. Lone Ranger Christians just don’t survive very long in a world system driven by lust of the flesh, lust of the eyes, and the boastful pride of a life. You will get sucked into that way of thinking. Trusting God is a daily exercise in learning not to lean on my own understanding, but to trust in Him.

When I do this, when I don’t do this, then my accomplishments become an opportunity for me to boast in myself. And my failures are an occasion for me to curse my bad luck. Trusting in God helps me to see that both victories and defeats come from Him. And if I trust that He’s good and just, I can glorify Him in both situations.

The next one, obedience to God. Obedience to God’s word drives solely day of glory into my heart because it keeps me from sinning, which impairs my relationship with God and blinds me to His glory. Sin always begets more sin, which makes the glory of God dimmer and dimmer in my eyes. And so it’s only through obedience that I can have my spiritual eyes kept open and aware so that I can make sure I am focused on God and His glory alone and not getting sucked into that world system’s view of glory. And then lastly, receiving God’s gifts for thanksgiving causes me to glory in God because I am acknowledging that He is the source of all that I receive.

When I forget to be thankful, I increase in my sense of entitlement, and then I become grumpy when I don’t receive the things that I think I deserve. If I just walk through my day not thankful, I pretty soon start thinking, hey, I deserve the good stuff that comes in my way, and I don’t deserve the bad stuff. And it begins to develop a wrong mindset. By being consistently thankful for what I receive, it keeps me oriented back to the giver of gifts, which then in turn causes me then to want to give glory to God. So in summary, we’re almost there. For as much as the doctrine of solely day-o-glory makes sense, it’s shocking how often we don’t give God the glory alone.

We so easily accept the fool’s gold Satan offers for the real thing. When we honestly consider the options before us, the only sane response is to agree that God alone gets the glory. That’s the only rational way of thinking, if you really are thinking it through. As image-bearers, man is never truly the source of his own glory. At our best, we are still only reflections of his glory. That’s all men can be, is reflectors. We’re never the source of anything. We’re always just a reflector of something. A mirror can never produce glorious images on its own. It can only reproduce a clear or a distorted reflection of the original image.

That’s all we can do. So I want to make sure that my mirror stays clear and unfogged and enmarred so that it can reflect the image of my creator better. God’s grace, then may we reflect in such a way that men everywhere will clearly see our good works and then do what? Give glory to our God who’s in heaven. Amen. Let’s pray. Well, Father, we thank you as you wrap up this study of the five solas. We thank you for the men who went before us, many of them who died defending these truths, and for the men who came along later and were able to systematize them and help write books about them and explain them for us that we could see the value in them and treasure them.

And Father, it is our desire, certainly, that in our lives, our individual lives, our corporate life here as TEC, that you alone would get the glory. Would you please, this week, examine our hearts. Would you reveal any areas where we may be trying to get glory from somewhere else, taking glory for ourselves, and to repent of that foolishness, and instead turn our hearts back to you, the one and only true source of glory. And then may we gladly enter into that glory that you are sharing with us, and may we find our delight and joy in that alone. Thank you Father for your goodness, and as the young people head off tonight to their meetings, may that be a sweet time for them, and for the rest of us, give the safety on the way home and just a blessed week as we go out and do what you called us to do. In Jesus name, amen.