Refuting Pseudo-Scholar Trent Horn On Sola Fide And Early Church History

• Defining the Issues:

          The purpose of this article is to address Trent Horn's critiques of the Protestant doctrine of Sola Fide (justification by faith alone), particularly through his interpretations of early church fathers and related theological concepts. His arguments often conflate justification and sanctification, misrepresent key Protestant ideas, and selectively interpret historical sources. Each bolded excerpt represents a key statement or claim made by Horn, followed by a critical assessment under various sections.

• Lack of Support for Sola Fide in Early Church Fathers:

          "They admit sola fide was fairly or even entirely unknown in the early church."

          "For the first 350 years of the history of the church, her teaching on justification was inchoate and ill-defined."

          Horn says that Protestant scholars like Alister McGrath admit the concept of justification by faith alone is not overtly articulated in the early church. However, this does not disprove Sola Fide as a biblical doctrine. It highlights that the doctrinal language of the time was still developing. Many Protestant scholars argue that foundational principles of Sola Fide are present in Scripture and reflected indirectly in early writings, even if not systematically articulated.

          For instance, Clement of Rome (cited by Horn) writes in 1 Clement 32: "We are not justified by ourselves... or by works which we have wrought in holiness of heart, but by that faith through which from the beginning Almighty God has justified all men." While Horn attempts to harmonize this with later works emphasizing good works, Clement's affirmation of justification apart from works aligns closely with Paul's teaching in Romans 4:5.

          Further, it is anachronistic to expect the early church to use later Reformation-era terminology like "imputed righteousness." The New Testament itself, however, uses language consistent with Sola Fide, such as Paul’s declaration in Romans 3:28: "For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law." These principles were embedded in Scripture, even if they lacked systematic expression in early writings.

• On Claims of Early Writers Emphasizing Works as Part of Salvation:

          "The Shepherd of Hermas makes salvation contingent on good works."

          "Clement seems to be exhorting believers to do these things because... not doing them would jeopardize their justification."

          Horn's interpretation of Clement and The Shepherd of Hermas reflects a misunderstanding of the Protestant framework of Sola Fide. Good works are essential to the Christian life, not as a means of justification, but as evidence of saving faith. James 2:26 explicitly states, "Faith without works is dead." However, this does not contradict Sola Fide, as the role of works is evidential rather than causative. Paul and James are complementary: true faith naturally results in works, but works are not the basis of our justification (Ephesians 2:8-10).

          When Clement urges believers to perform good works or avoid sin, this can be understood as exhortation toward sanctification, not justification. Sanctification, the process of growing in holiness, is distinct from justification, which is a one-time, declarative act of God. Trent Horn conflates these two categories, creating a false dichotomy where none exists.

          Moreover, Horn's reliance on texts like The Shepherd of Hermas and The Didache, which are not doctrinally authoritative even within Roman Catholicism, raises questions about their use as rebuttals to Protestant soteriology.

• Good Works Are Necessary to Maintain Salvation?:

          "In First Clement, one gets in by faith, but one stays in through works."

          "Blessed are we beloved if we keep the commandments of God in the harmony of love, that so through love, our sins may be forgiven us."

          The idea of "maintaining" salvation through good works risks creating a works-based system contrary to the gospel's message of grace. While Clement and other patristic authors may stress the importance of obedience, such exhortations align with sanctification—the outworking of faith—not the maintenance of justification before God. The Apostle Paul’s admonitions to "work out your salvation with fear and trembling" (Philippians 2:12) emphasize this same dynamic while affirming in the next verse that it is God who works in believers.

• Contradictory Assertions in Catholic Interpretation:

          "Catholics must perform an arbitrary number of good works to get to heaven, which is not true. The only good work a Catholic must do to get to heaven is to just not die in a state of mortal sin."

          This claim introduces an internal contradiction within Roman Catholic soteriology. While Trent Horn denies the necessity of "arbitrary good works" for salvation, he affirms that avoidance of mortal sin (i.e. a form of obedience) is required. This raises the question: how does one avoid mortal sin apart from works, which involve human effort?

          Furthermore, the Catholic distinction between mortal and venial sin lacks biblical support. James 2:10 states, "Whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it." This underscores the impossibility of achieving righteousness through any kind of works, pointing instead to the necessity of Christ’s imputed righteousness.

• The Early Church Lacked Sola Fide Because of Moralism?:

          "A strain of moralism is quite apparent in that man was taught to depend for salvation on faith and good works."

          "Early Christian writers did not choose to express their soteriological convictions primarily in terms of the concept of justification."

          Trent Horn’s concession that the early church's teachings included "a strain of moralism" ironically supports Protestant critiques of the medieval Church's departure from Pauline doctrine. Protestants argue that the Reformation sought to reclaim the biblical gospel over against the moralistic tendencies that had crept into the church.

          Further, the claim that early writers focused less on justification does not negate Sola Fide. It simply reflects the historical and doctrinal context of the time. The early church was primarily preoccupied with Christological and Trinitarian debates. The doctrine of justification, while biblical, became a central issue only later in response to specific theological challenges.

• Present Justification by Faith Alone vs. Final Justification by Works (Clement of Rome):

          "Present justification is received as a gift by faith apart from our own works... and final justification is in accordance with the believer’s subsequent works."

          Horn’s bifurcation of justification into "present" (by faith alone) and "final" (in accordance with works) creates unnecessary theological complexity and undermines the sufficiency of Christ’s atonement. Scripture teaches that justification is a completed act of God that cannot be altered or supplemented by human effort (Romans 5:1: "Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.").

          Clement’s statement, "We are not justified by works which we have wrought in holiness of heart, but by that faith through which from the beginning Almighty God has justified all men" (1 Clement 32*), clearly aligns with Sola Fide. Horn’s attempt to reconcile this with statements about works jeopardizing justification misreads Clement’s exhortations as addressing justification rather than sanctification. Scripture consistently urges believers to pursue holiness (Hebrews 12:14) without implying that justification itself depends on their success in doing so.

• Immortality Through the Eucharist and Works (Ignatius of Antioch):

          "Breaking one and the same bread, which is the medicine of immortality in the antidote to prevent us from dying."

          "Let your works be the charge assigned to you that you may receive a worthy recompense."

          Ignatius’ language about the eucharist as the "medicine of immortality" reflects the sacramental theology of his time, but does not contradict Sola Fide. Protestants can affirm the value of the sacraments as means of grace (e.g., baptism and the Lord's Supper) without ascribing to them a causal role in justification. John 6:35 describes Christ Himself as "the bread of life," emphasizing faith as the key to eternal life, with the eucharist serving as a reminder of Christ's sacrifice.

          Ignatius' use of metaphors like "works as recompense" can be understood in light of rewards in heaven rather than justification (1 Corinthians 3:14). Paul speaks of believers receiving rewards for their service, but this is distinct from justification, which is wholly dependent on faith (Ephesians 2:8-9). Trent Horn conflates these categories by implying that Ignatius equates works with justification rather than obedience as part of sanctification.

• Synergism in Salvation (Polycarp of Smyrna):

          "Knowing that by grace you are saved not of works, but by the will of God through Jesus Christ."

          "He who raised Him from the dead will raise us up also if we do His will and walk in His commandments."

          Polycarp’s affirmation of salvation "by grace" and "not of works" mirrors Ephesians 2:8-9, a cornerstone of Sola Fide. His later exhortation to "do His will and walk in His commandments" aligns with the biblical principle that faith results in obedience (James 2:17). Polycarp does not suggest that works contribute to justification before God, but underscores the inseparable relationship between true faith and good works as evidence of salvation.

          Horn cites the Princeton theologian Michael Holmes, who describes Polycarp's soteriology as synergistic. However, synergy in sanctification, believers acting on God’s grace in growing in holiness, is distinct from justification. Horn’s failure to distinguish between these doctrines leads to an apparent contradiction that does not exist in Protestant theology.

• Personal Righteousness and Commandment-Keeping (Justin Martyr):

          "Each person shall be saved by his own righteousness."

          "Everlasting punishment or salvation according to the value of his actions."

          While Justin Martyr emphasizes righteousness and obedience, his statements about faith and the Law do not negate Sola Fide. Protestants would argue that Justin’s apparent focus on works reflects an ethical framework where true faith manifests itself in righteous living. However, it is crucial to distinguish between justification (a legal declaration of righteousness) and sanctification (the believer’s moral transformation).

          Justin’s statements about obedience align with passages like Philippians 2:12, which exhorts believers to "work out your salvation with fear and trembling." This is not a denial of justification by faith, but an acknowledgment of the transformative power of faith in a believer's life. When Justin states that salvation is "according to the value of his actions," he likely refers to the believer’s participation in sanctification and the resulting rewards, not the basis of their justification.

• Faith and Works in the Moral Law (Irenaeus of Lyons):

          "The Lord did not abrogate the natural precepts of the law by which man is justified."

          "Faith and obedience and righteousness... justify us."

          Irenaeus’ emphasis on the moral law and obedience reflects the reality that faith produces a life of holiness. However, this does not mean that the moral law itself is the means of justification. Romans 3:28 states unequivocally that "one is justified by faith apart from works of the law." Irenaeus’ insistence on obedience can be understood as a reflection of sanctification rather than justification.

          Trent Horn’s interpretation of Irenaeus relies on a conflation of categories. The "faith that empowers us to do the works that justify us" is better understood as the process of sanctification, where believers grow in righteousness through the indwelling Holy Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23). This does not undermine Sola Fide but rather affirms that justification leads to sanctification as its necessary consequence.

• Conduct After Baptism Determines Standing Before God (Irenaeus):

          "After baptism, our conduct has a direct connection to our standing before God."

          "Those then are the perfect who have had the spirit of God remaining in them and have preserved their souls and bodies blameless."

          While Irenaeus emphasizes holy living and obedience, Horn’s reading assumes this conduct affects justification rather than sanctification. Protestants distinguish between justification—a once-for-all declarative act based on Christ's atonement—and sanctification, the believer's growth in holiness. Irenaeus' discussion of post-baptismal conduct aligns more with the biblical view of sanctification than with an argument against Sola Fide.

          For example, Ephesians 4:22-24 speaks of believers "putting off the old self" and living in righteousness after salvation, without suggesting these works contribute to or maintain justification. Irenaeus’ focus on faith-directed works indicates the fruit of salvation, not its cause.

• Baptism as Transformative Justification (Odes of Solomon):

          "He uncovered my inward being toward him and filled me with his love and his circumcising became my salvation."

          Horn interprets the language of the Odes of Solomon as teaching transformative justification linked to baptism. However, Protestants affirm baptism as a sign of salvation and a means of grace while maintaining that justification is a forensic (legal) act. The reference to circumcision as salvation in Colossians 2:11-12 highlights baptism as a symbolic identification with Christ’s death and resurrection, not as the mechanism of justification itself.

          Romans 4:11 describes circumcision as a "seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised," separating the act from justification. The Odes can be understood similarly, with transformative language emphasizing sanctification rather than altering the basis of justification.

• The Epistle of Diognetus and the Sweet Exchange:

          "The wickedness of many should be hid in a single righteous one and that the righteousness of one should justify many transgressors."

          "Faith... is only mentioned four or five times, and none of them talk about salvation through faith in Christ."

          Trent Horn argues that the Epistle of Diognetus does not explicitly teach Sola Fide, claiming the "sweet exchange" reflects transformative rather than forensic justification. This interpretation, however, overlooks the profound Christ-centered atonement described in the text. The "sweet exchange" echoes 2 Corinthians 5:21: "For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God." The passage strongly supports the concept of substitutionary atonement and imputed righteousness, core elements of Sola Fide.

          While the epistle does not employ Pauline terminology like "reckoning" (logizomai), its themes are consistent with Paul's teachings on justification. The absence of explicit language about faith’s role in justification does not negate the doctrine, as the epistle assumes the salvific work of Christ is received by believers. The focus on God's righteousness covering human sin aligns with Sola Fide’s emphasis on grace rather than human effort.

          Horn’s insistence on transformative justification rests on ambiguous textual inferences rather than definitive evidence. Protestant scholars like Michael Byrd and Brandon Crowe acknowledge the epistle’s forensic elements, which Horn minimizes. Even if the text allows multiple interpretations, it does not undermine the broader biblical basis for Sola Fide.

• Imputed Righteousness as an Assumption (Diognetus):

          "Imputed righteousness at best is a possible corollary of the text, not part of its content."

          Horn dismisses imputed righteousness in Diognetus, arguing the text describes Christ’s righteousness as enabling transformative salvation rather than being legally imputed to believers. However, the forensic understanding of justification is deeply rooted in Scripture. Romans 4:6-8 explicitly states that God counts righteousness apart from works, and Philippians 3:9 emphasizes a righteousness that comes "not from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ—the righteousness from God that depends on faith."

          The Epistle of Diognetus’ depiction of Christ assuming humanity's sin and offering His righteousness supports this forensic view. Even if imputation is not explicitly defined, the text’s emphasis on divine substitution and grace aligns with the core tenets of Sola Fide. The insistence on an exclusively transformative interpretation imposes an unnecessary limitation on the passage’s theological richness.

• The Epistle's Lack of Influence:

          "The work is never quoted again by any church father, even early medieval writers."

          Trent Horn argues that the Epistle of Diognetus lacks historical significance because it was not widely quoted. However, the weight of a theological idea does not depend on its historical popularity but on its fidelity to Scripture. The early church lacked the doctrinal development and systematic theology seen in later periods, but this does not disqualify implicit or underdeveloped expressions of biblical truth.

           Moreover, Horn's critique is inconsistent with Catholic reliance on tradition, as many early texts—including some cited by Horn—are not universally authoritative yet are treated as evidence. Doctrine must be judged by Scripture (2 Timothy 3:16-17), and the principles in Diognetus resonate strongly with biblical teaching.

• Roman Catholics Reject the Great Exchange:

          "Christ was not literally punished on the cross for sin, but he underwent a punishment sinners deserve so they would not have to endure it."

          Horn rejects the Protestant understanding of the "great exchange," dismissing the imputed guilt of sin to Christ and the imputed righteousness of Christ to believers. Yet this view is supported by Scripture: Isaiah 53:5 declares, "He was pierced for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities." This language depicts Christ bearing the penalty of sin on behalf of believers.

          The legal framework of justification is evident throughout Paul’s epistles. Romans 5:19 says, "For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous," demonstrating the representative nature of Christ’s righteousness. Horn’s analogy of Christ paying a debt without bearing guilt diminishes the depth of substitutionary atonement and fails to account for the full biblical witness.

• Forensic and Transformative Justification Coexist:

          "Justification necessitates a forensic change in status from lawless to righteous, so too is a change implied in moral state from godlessness to being worthy of life and from corruption to a fitness to receive immortality."

          While Horn claims that justification implies both a forensic and transformative aspect, Protestants hold that these two changes are distinct processes: justification is a declarative act, while sanctification is transformative. Romans 5:1 declares, "Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ." This peace is a result of a settled, legal status before God, separate from the ongoing moral renewal of sanctification described in passages like Romans 6:1-4.

          Equating justification with moral transformation risks conflating the objective, finished work of justification with the subjective, lifelong process of sanctification. Protestants maintain that the imputed righteousness of Christ (2 Corinthians 5:21) is the sole ground for justification, while the transformative work of sanctification flows as its necessary fruit.

• Second-Century Fathers on Works of the Law:

          "The second-century church fathers saw that works of the law in Paul, i.e. what we are not justified by, they’re primarily works of the Mosaic law, not good works in general."

          Horn leans on Matthew Thomas’ interpretation that "works of the law" in Paul refer primarily to Mosaic ceremonial practices. However, Paul’s teachings transcend the Mosaic Law to address the futility of any works, including moral ones, as a basis for justification. Romans 3:20 states, "For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin." Paul further emphasizes in Galatians 2:16 that justification is "not by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ."

          Even if second-century fathers focused on Mosaic distinctions, Paul’s broader argument against works-based justification remains central to Sola Fide. Patristic reflections on works in sanctification do not invalidate the Protestant understanding of justification by faith alone.

• Transformative Exchange as Exemplified by the Unforgiving Servant:

          "Even though he was given the opportunity to be transformed by this gracious gift, he was not and so then he suffers the consequences because his works did not follow what he graciously received by faith."

          Horn’s analogy of the unforgiving servant assumes that transformation (works) is an intrinsic aspect of justification. However, the parable illustrates the fruitlessness of hypocrisy and ingratitude, not a theological formula for justification. The servant is condemned not for failing to merit forgiveness but for his lack of genuine repentance, evident in his actions.

          Protestants would argue this parable aligns with James 2:18-26, showing that true faith produces evidence in works. It does not suggest that works are the basis of justification but underscores their role as indicators of a heart transformed by grace. Horn’s interpretation conflates salvation’s evidence (works) with its cause (faith).

• Diognetus and Transformative Grace:

          "This is an incredible passage and a really great example of the inconceivable gift and the transformation it brings, that while humanity apart from Christ is unable to enter God’s kingdom, it is now possible by the sweet exchange of grace."

          While Trent Horn highlights the transformative language of the Epistle of Diognetus, this does not negate the forensic nature of justification. Grace transforms believers’ lives through sanctification, but justification is based solely on Christ’s imputed righteousness.

          The "sweet exchange" described in Diognetus aligns with 2 Corinthians 5:21, where Christ takes on sin so that believers might become the righteousness of God. This exchange focuses on substitutionary atonement rather than personal moral transformation as the means of justification. Sanctification, the evidence of justification, naturally follows, but does not contribute to the believer’s standing before God.

• Critique of Faith Alone in the Parable of the Unmerciful Servant:

          "The gift is meant to be transformative in the servant’s life... but he suffers the consequences because his works did not follow what he graciously received by faith in the king."

          The parable of the unmerciful servant illustrates the importance of forgiveness and the responsibility of believers to reflect God’s mercy. However, it does not undermine Sola Fide, as the servant's condemnation stems from hypocrisy, not a failure to merit justification. The parable warns against presuming on grace without evidence of transformation. Horn’s interpretation imposes a works-based paradigm inconsistent with the biblical emphasis on faith as the sole instrument of justification (Ephesians 2:8-9).

• Fitness to Receive Immortality Requires Transformation:

          "From corruption to a fitness to receive immortality."

          Horn interprets "fitness to receive immortality" as requiring transformation beyond forensic justification. However, Protestant theology asserts that believers are made fit for eternal life solely through Christ’s righteousness, imputed at the moment of justification (Philippians 3:9). While sanctification conforms believers to Christ’s image (Romans 8:29), it does not enhance their legal standing before God.

          The phrase “fitness” reflects the sanctification that flows from justification, but does not imply that such transformation is necessary to secure salvation. Scripture consistently affirms that eternal life is a gift, not a reward for human effort (Romans 6:23).