1. Grace saves us: (Eph. 2:8), justifies us: (Romans 3:24; Titus 3:7) [Note: saves = justifies. They are two words that describe the same event.]

2. Grace can be continued in: (Acts 13:43)

3. Grace can be given (1 Cor. 1:4)

4. Grace can be received (2 Cor. 6:1)

5. Grace can be followed like a plan (1 Cor. 3:10)

6. Grace can be fallen from: (Gal. 5:4)

7. Grace can make us free from sin: (Eph 2:5)

8. Grace can be given for the purpose of preaching: (Eph. 3:8)

9. Grace can be ministered unto hearers: (Eph. 4:29)

10. Grace teaches us: (Titus 2:11-12)

11. Grace can be sung: (Col. 3:16)

12. Grace can be in our hearts: (Col. 3:16)

13. Grace is the opponent of sin: (Romans 5:21)

14. Grace is in Christ: (1 Tim. 1:14)

15. Grace calls us: (2 Tim. 1:9)

16. Grace was prophecied: (1 Peter 1:10)

17. Grace is brought by revelation: (1 Peter 1:13)

18. Grace calls men to Christ (Gal. 1:15)

Using these properties of Grace, is it possible to define what God’s Saving Grace actually is? I believe so.

In Truth and Love,

Ernie

First, we know that Grace is a gift that God gave to man that man did not earn in any way (Eph. 2:8-9).

It is helpful, though, to address a few misconceptions about what people think Grace is.

1. Grace is not undefinable or some nebulous SOMETHING.

If Grace is what saves us from sin (Eph. 2:5) and we can know what sets us free from sin because Jesus said that we will know the truth and be free from sin (John 8:32), then we can know for certain what Grace is.

Below is an analogous equation based on Ephesians 2:8.

For by grace are you saved through faith.

Grace + Faith = Saved (Eph. 2:8)
Flour + Water = Bread

Below we use mathematical substitution to show what would happen if Grace were the things that it is sometimes said to be.

2. Grace is not salvation: Eph. 2:8 (Titus 2:11)

Substituting Salvation for Grace in the equation we get:

Salvation + Faith =? Saved
Bread + Water =? Bread

No, all you would get is soggy bread.

3. Grace is not individual faith: Eph. 2:8

Substituting individual faith for Grace in the equation we get:

Faith + Faith =? Saved
Water + Water =? Bread

No, all you’d get is water.

4. Grace alone can’t save us

Grace =? Saved
Flour =? Bread

No, flour alone never produces bread.

Grace alone means a lack of faith. But Hebrews 11:6 says that with out faith we can not please God.

5. Grace is not the Old Law

Grace is a contrast to the Old Testament in many of Paul’s letters as well as the letter of Hebrews. Romans 6:14; Hebrews 10:4

Old Testament + Faith =? Saved
Not Flour + Water =? Bread

6. We know that Grace is NOT salvation because grace brings (is the cause of) salvation (Titus 2:11). The cause (salvation) is not the effect (salvation), too. That is not logical.

Note that in Ephesians 2:8 that Grace is the gift of God in this passage. “It” is a pronoun referring back to a noun, specifically the subject of the previous phrase which is the word “Grace”. The
word “saved” is a verb so the gift of God is not “saved” (which doesn’t make sense gramatically) but “saved” is a result of God’s gift (grace) and man’s (obedient) faith. The noun form of the word “saved”, “salvation” is not in Ephesians 2:8. Salvation is never spoken of in scripture anywhere as a gift. Salvation is simply a state of being that results from God’s gift and man’s obedient faith.

In my next post I’ll explore some of the attributes of Grace as found in scripture.

In Truth and Love,

Ernie

If you said what you believe grace is, please link to it so I can read it. If you haven’t, why not answer the question? It’s a simple enough question and very straightforward.

In Truth and Love,

Ernie

I’m not interested in conversing with someone who refuses to state his own views. I’ve stated mine at great length over the last several months. If you want to engage in the conversation, you need to tell me where you’re coming from.

Attack me all you want, but the only thing I’m interested in is can you answer the question: What is Grace? I don’t think you can, at least not from scripture. If you can’t, then admit that, and at THAT point, I’ll show you what the Bible defines grace as. If you think you can, then do so and stop wasting your time.

In Truth and Love,

Ernie

How about instead you answer my question so you can understand me when I answer yours. What is Grace?

In Truth and Love,

Ernie

Consider the illustrations in the NT which use the examples of courtroom and verdict. These verses frequently pop up in conservative dogma because they fit perfectly with the pile driver preaching of “guilty, guilty, guilty.” Aim the gavel in any direction: the denominational, the non-denominational, the unchurched, and of course all those within the CoC who happen not to be seated at the prosecutor’s table.

There is another metaphor, that of patient and physician. For some reason the firm contenders don’t reach for these verses with the same frequency, perhaps because there is no gavel, possibly because healing just isn’t as much fun, maybe because compassion requires more effort.

Both of these concepts are instructive. We need not choose one set of verses over the other. But if one desired to infer an emphasis for their own personal approach to ministry, I wonder if the appellation “The Great Physician” might be helpful?

In addressing this issue of legalism, Ernie comes to this discussion with a writ full of criticism, yet he denies he is a legalist. He accuses Jay of having little idea of what “saving grace” is, but fails to prescribe it himself. Perhaps if he were to shed a bit more light on what is being misunderstood about grace here, then we might all be healthier for it. It will be interesting to see, though, if he brings balm to the task or a subpoena.

As you say you are neither conservative nor progressive and as you refuse to say what you believe, I fail to see how we can have much of a conversation.

Please state plainly your understanding of when someone falls from grace.

Yes, the conservatives have their diocese mentality and its wrong, too, but I’m not addressing them. This is your forum and your teaching that I’m challenging, not theirs. I’m not a conservative so I won’t respond to any comments you make to or about them specifically.

And I’m sure there are plenty of denominational people that are of the same mind and judgment. Unity in truth is the goal, not unity in diversity or unity in error.

You see, once you understand grace — and understand it deep in your bones — then you indeed find yourself of “the same mind and same judgment.” It’s hard to understand it until you experience it. But I’ve been freed from fighting over imagined rules hidden in the silences in order to focus on God’s mission to the world. It’s a change too dramatic to communicate in words.

The religion “better felt than known”. This is the Gnostic approach and its almost as old as Christianity. Grace is not something that is “felt” or “experienced” the way you are using the word. Grace, saving grace, is God’s unearned gift that saves mankind. And if you think it is something “better felt” that you must “understand deep in your bones” or “experience” then you show me that you are truly ignorant of what that gift was.

Are you arguing that 1 Tim 4:16 means that salvation is found in perfect doctrinal understanding and practice? Do you contend that there is no grace for doctrinal error?

Your question is still aimed at conservatives and so is kind of hard to even answer. I contend that your doctrine is flawed because you don’t know what divine saving grace is. To ask “is there no grace for doctrinal error” doesn’t even make sense if you understand what grace is according to scripture. Salvation is found in Christ and He makes us perfect. Some of what you have said about the conservatives rings true, but discussing their lists is not my purpose here.

Is faith a work? Not in Paul’s vocabulary, where “work” is short for “work of the law.” John 6:29 is an ironic sense of “work,” just like Paul’s use of “law” in –
(Rom 3:27) Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.

I have already stated and supported from context that “the law” when referred to by Paul without qualification is only the Mosaical Law, not the concept of law in general. When he does qualify “the law” as he does here in this verse it is a reference to the New Law, the one that replaced and is superior to the Old Law (Heb. 8:6; Rom. 8:2). It is the law of Christ (Gal. 6:2), the law of liberty (James 2:12), the law of faith, the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus (Heb. 8:2). The whole book of Hebrews is about the transition from one to the other. And Romans is a comparison of Jew to Christian, of the old physical law to the new spiritual law. Read Acts. The Jews were the number one external problem the Christians faced until AD 70.

Regarding James, Todd has answered earlier. As you say, you’ve not read all our posts. You therefore misunderstand what we’re saying. I mean, you assert, “you implicitly deny that we must continue to love Christ after we are immersed into him,” which is as far removed from what I believe and teach as is possible.

I know you say that. I know you believe that you must continue to love Christ after you are immersed. But denying that it is necessary to obey him, keep his commandments, “that we should add certain works to faith in Jesus as conditions for a Christian to remain saved, to get to Heaven is an implicit denial of what you explicitly affirm. If it is necessary to obey him, to keep his commandments, to work/act/do something to remain saved, then works are necessary for salvation. You can’t have it both ways.

Nobody, conservatives or you or I, is talking about “adding” anything to scripture as the Pharisees did. What you mean by “adding” in that quote above is any action outside of faith.

We don’t address immersion because we agreed with Greg and Phil at the beginning that this is about falling from grace and not about how to first get into grace.

You have to know what grace is before you can talk about falling from it.

Let me suggest this. You’ve obviously joined the conversation late. Go back and read just the posts on 1 John, Hebrews, and Romans 5 and 15. Let’s then discuss just the Romans post. As I’ve said before, I’m looking for a conservative who will converse with me regarding the same passages at the same time. Let start with those passages and see whether we can agree on their meaning for the Churches of Christ.

Well, I’m not a conservative so you are out of luck there. I honestly don’t think you are ready for the discussion you want to have. You need to understand grace first and what Paul refers to when he talks about “the law”.

What is grace? I’m not asking for a definition. God defines grace in Eph. 2:8-9. Grace is God’s unearned gift to mankind. It is a gift given to all mankind. What I’m asking you is, what is that gift?
When you can answer that question from scripture, then you’ll be ready to move on to the discussion you want to have.

In Truth and Love,

Ernie