Answering the 5 Answers to the 5 Dogmas of the Reformers
Intro
When "Leeqe Ttebebt" Zerihun growls that the EOTC has scriptural explanations for anything written by any Ethiopian at any time in any place, nothing but the biblical words he reads has any coherence. Dr. Fr. Zebene Lema fairs slightly better.*
5 Pillars of the Tehadiso (Reformers) *
I didn't know where Dr. Fr. Zebene was going with his title until he spoke. I tried to stay away from watching it, because I fear the Satanic nature of baseless division (and many teachings about the nebulous "tehadiso" are of this nature), but it was pure clickbait. Kudos on the title. Seriously. It is a stroke of genius. What he calls the 5 Pillars of the Tehadiso are the 5 statements of faith that the early Protestant reformers held as dogma. As he rightly proclaims, there are tens of thousands of denominations of Protestants now, and so only the Lord knows how many of them steadfastly hold on to these 5 dogmas today, but we (Tewahido/Miaphysite Orthodox) surely do not.
EP
1scripture alone - he did really well, there is a little room for improvement
2faith alone - he answered this perfectly
3grace alone - he did really well, there is a little room for improvement
4Christ Alone - he answered this terribly and showed us the classic strawman fallacy (explain)
5glory to God alone - he answers this terribly and showed us the classic strawman fallacy. (he says that this separates God and Christ in unbiblical ways. Newsflash, the Bible distinguishes betwixt and between God (the Father), and Christ (God the Son).
LP
1) Dr. Fr. Zebene fails to affirm what we believe, but does well in taking apart the dogma of sola scriptura. We stand for Prima Scriptura - the primacy of scripture within and as a part of Holy Tradition. Apophatic theology, the study of God through negations or what we know He is not, is a helpful beginning, but any critic of anything (including me right now) should keep their mouthes shut until they have at least proposed an one alternative. They need not be dogmatically (see what I did there) committed to this alternative, but they must be able to supply one if their goal is to win converts to their kritik. Furthermore, if all we do is protest, do we not become Protestants?
2) Dr. Fr. Zebene answered this point perfectly.
3) Ephesians literally says, "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God— not because of works, lest any man should boast" (2:8-9 RSV). And Gospel Singer Zerfey Kebede sings this well (in Englsih I might add). Dr. Fr. Zebene quotes and admits that this is the case. But, as the prophets and apostles and the Lord Jesus preached and taught, there is a coming day of judgment - for both the living and the dead (slumbering). Our redemption is an unearned free gift of the loving submission of Jesus Christ unto death on a cross, but it is not something we can use to threaten the Lord.
A few quick examples are in order. All of them center on the idea that the sole proprietor and owner of the universe is God. When Willy Wonka gave out golden tickets to his much sought after Chocolate Factory, he reserved the right to kick anyone out at any time for any reason. Restaurants generally accept many peoples, but reserve the right to refuse service (this example breaks down quicker than the former because of the 1964 voting rights act and its legislative children). You can be in the VIP section of a club and have paid $800 to "pop bottles", but the nightclub owner can still whimsically tell you to skedaddle and scram. Salvation and redemption must never be separated from the idea that there is only ONE God and thus ONE judge, and it sure as death and taxes is not you or me.
4) Is the fresh blood of Christ enough? This is a rhetorical question, like መኑ ፡ ይመስለከ ፡ እምነ ፡ አማልክት ፧ (who is like you amongst the gods?) መኑ ፡ ከመ ፡ አምላክ ፧ (who is like God? aka the Hebrew meaning of Michael). There is no one like God, amongst gods or men. The blood of Christ is 100% enough.
Christ is the only intercessor/mediator/middle man and he isn't. OT scholar Dr. Michael Heiser notes that the Bible is always saying "it is and isn't". The key to differentiating is context, context, and you guessed it context. Many heresies originate in the biblical text because though the Bible is simple, it takes the revelation of the Holy Ghost, time, patience, focus, and a heart of flesh to interpret correctly.*** The honorable blood of the Lord Jesus Christ, spilled on the cross one time and one time alone, eternally advocates for us by forgiving us of our sins. Jesus does not argue with The Father. Jesus does not bow down and prostrate and make intercessory prayer (as He did whilst on Earth). Jesus' intercession is different than the intercession of the Church militant (us) and the Church triumphant (those who have fallen asleep).
5)Dr. Fr. Zebene spends all of his time arguing against pummeling a man made of straw in this particular section. This time this man of straw believes that Jesus is not God, in any sense. It is best, for this point, that we never forget that the glory of the holy triune God is reflected through the thoughts, words, and deeds of His holy ones on earth and in the heavens.
Post Scriptum:
*Garb/dress code and titles in the EOTC are a hodgepodge at best and a haphazard at worst. Who wears a dress/gown? who wears a hat? what type of hat do you get to wear? what type of hat do you have to wear? when do you get to or have to wear it? Where do nettelaoch (white garb) and capes fit in? The title leeq ttebebt means sage or master of wisdom. This man Zerihun is not wise. He is a grad of Qidist Silasay which for whatever reason churns out less wise folks than its sister colleges Sewasiw Birhan Qidus Pawlos and Kesatey Birhan Abune Selama
**Memhir Dr. Zebene, along with many others, translate tehadiso as reformers and associate this movement with the Protestant Reformation. the word tehadiso is more accurately translated as renewel or cleansing. Renewal is more literal or word-for-word and cleansing more dynamic or thought-for-thought.
*** a heart of flesh is biblical language for which the 21st Century American would know as open-mindedness. Though the terms are self-reflexively absurd, many 21st Century Americans would also call a person like this a non-ideologue or non-partisan. I would suggest the virtually unknown edits to these terms - multi-ideologue or poly-ideologue and poly-partisan or multipartisan. Essentially, someone who has biases, but acknowledges them publicly and privately, and is willing to hear another voice or other voices. In the religious context, hopefully only the one voice of the triune God.