Church words - are they legit or is there problems?

[Eternally Grateful]

Sure, you're welcome. I mean, as long as you're not advocating for "Free Grace," then I guess we can say we more or less agree about God's Grace in Christ.

But if you're advocating for "Free Grace," then I'd have to tell you that I'm going to lean toward referencing Wayne Grudem's book, "Free Grace" Theology: 5 Ways It Diminishes the Gospel (2016),

I honestly do not know what you are meaning about free grace. Grace came at a cost the greatest cost of all eternity. The death of Gods soon the cross.

Not if you think that grace must be paid for by us. Well them you need to talk to Paul who totally debunked that

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I honestly do not know what you are meaning about free grace. Grace came at a cost the greatest cost of all eternity. The death of Gods soon the cross.

Not if you think that grace must be paid for by us. Well them you need to talk to Paul who totally debunked that

The "Free Grace" error, as Wayne Grudem (2016) explains it, is the interpretation about the interplay between grace and faith which asserts "...that faith occurs by itself when a person is justified, in the sense that no other human actions necessarily accompany faith (such as repentance from sin or doing good works after we are justified)." (p. 19)

As you may be able to tell, there are those folks out there who define 'Grace' in such a way that it then also colors how they interpret and define what faith is and does, among other concepts. The result being that they then have a truncated notion of both grace and faith. And this is one reason why I say it's not enough to simply read the biblical texts and assume we can take it for granted that a biblical word like "grace" can immediately, and with absolute clarity, be understood the way the original New Testament writers intended for it to be understood.

Another reason is given by D.A. Carson (1996) in that, hermeneutically, it's not enough to rely upon mere word studies alone when trying to understand concepts like 'grace' in the Bible since word studies alone can result in the committing of various interpretive fallacies, like those Carson cites in the following list (pp. 27-64):

1) root fallacy​

2) semantic anachronism​

3) semantic obsolescence​

4) appeal to unknown or unlikely meanings​

5) careless appeal to background information​

6) verbal parallelomania​

7) [false] linkage between language and mentality​

8) false assumptions about technical meaning​

9) problems surrounding synonyms and componential analysis​

10) selective and prejudicial use of evidence​

11) unwarranted semantic disjunctions and restrictions​

12) unwarranted restriction of the semantic field​

13) problems relating to the Semitic background of the Greek New Testament​

14) unwarranted neglect of distinguishing particularities of a corpus​

15) unwarranted linking of sense and reference​

All of these fallacies could, possibly, even be committed by someone who thinks they're reading the word "grace" in the New Testament and who then assumes, all too easily, that they understand the full semantic context and conceptual linkages of that term with everything else he or she reads, all the while being in error.

So, we ALL have to be careful and not just assume that singular words in the Bible, like 'grace,' are easily understood in every case in which we encounter them.

Of course, none of us earns God's grace; if we did, it wouldn't be grace, it'd instead be merited favor.

REFERENCE

Carson, D.A. (1996). Exegetical Fallacies.

Grudem, Wayne. (2016). "Free Grace" Theology: 5 Ways It Diminishes the Gospel.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Hi Eternally grateful

I've been reading through the thread and I'm a bit confused with what exactly it is you are asking?

In the OP you mention the words "interpretation" quite a few times. You also mention wanting to do a deep dive concerning a list of words. What exactly do you want to discuss about these words. Its origins, its meaning in context. The manner in which it is explored? Is it to see as you say why people use them differently, ie comparison of meaning? Also you say it's actual meaning that are valid? How is validity determined?When you use the word "interpretation" you automatically venture into the area of hermeneutics.

So if you care to please elaborate what the focus of the discussion should be. I've read quite a few posts attempting to unravel the words and/or rather trying to understand the questions about unraveling the words, resulting in more confusion (to me at least, as I'm not entirely sure about the question?)

Good morning (at least it is morning here) my origional goal was to pick a word and look at it but it quickly got away from that.

I have thought of this over the years hearing people say something that make no sense when looking at the word. It appears to go contrary to the meaning of the word or phrase

My hope was to discuss these words and see what they really mean and maybe determine why people interpret them other ways. Which may help us in our studies

 

[Eternally Grateful]

The "Free Grace" error, as Wayne Grudem (2016) explains it, is the interpretation about the interplay between grace and faith which asserts "...that faith occurs by itself when a person is justified, in the sense that no other human actions necessarily accompany faith (such as repentance from sin or doing good works after we are justified)." (p. 19)

As you may be able to tell, there are those folks out there who define 'Grace' in such a way that it then also colors how they interpret and define what faith is and does, among other concepts. The result being that they then have a truncated notion of both grace and faith. And this is one reason why I say it's not enough to simply read the biblical texts and assume we can take it for granted that a biblical word like "grace" can immediately, and with absolute clarity, be understood the way the original New Testament writers intended for it to be understood.

Another reason is given by D.A. Carson (1996) in that, hermeneutically, it's not enough to rely upon mere word studies alone when trying to understand concepts like 'grace' in the Bible since word studies alone can result in the committing of various interpretive fallacies, like those Carson cites in the following list (pp. 27-64):

1) root fallacy​

2) semantic anachronism​

3) semantic obsolescence​

4) appeal to unknown or unlikely meanings​

5) careless appeal to background information​

6) verbal parallelomania​

7) [false] linkage between language and mentality​

8) false assumptions about technical meaning​

9) problems surrounding synonyms and componential analysis​

10) selective and prejudicial use of evidence​

11) unwarranted semantic disjunctions and restrictions​

12) unwarranted restriction of the semantic field​

13) problems relating to the Semitic background of the Greek New Testament​

14) unwarranted neglect of distinguishing particularities of a corpus​

15) unwarranted linking of sense and reference​

All of these fallacies could, possibly, even be committed by someone who thinks they're reading the word "grace" in the New Testament and who them assumes, all too easily, that they understand the full semantic context and conceptual linkages of that term with everything else he or she reads, all the while being in error.

So, we ALL have to be careful and not just assume that singular words in the Bible, like 'grace,' are easily understood in every case in which we encounter them.

Of course, none of us earns God's grace; if we did, it wouldn't be grace, it'd instead be merited favor.

REFERENCE

Carson, D.A. (1996). Exegetical Fallacies.

Grudem, Wayne. (2016). "Free Grace" Theology: 5 Ways It Diminishes the Gospel.

Again you do not seem to understand what I am trying to do

A car is a car. It can be called an automobile. But it can not be called a boat or an airplane.

I do not need hermenuetics to understand when someone calls a car an airplane I can know that they are in error

And when someone comes and says we must listen to them. Or we are using our private interpretation or we need to use this thing like heremneutucs then we can see that an airplane is a car. That something is wrong in a serious way

I guess my point is more focused on wrong defenition not right one hence the term church words

I can see a Chevy can be a car. A ford can be a car a dodge ican be a car. We will get no argument ta

But when we see someone trying to pass an f18 eagle fighter jet as a car. Well we should come to pause sadly there are whole groups of people (churches) who in effect would stand there and lfight with you that this f18 is a car

Now most of us would say no one would do that. But people do it every day. Not in this example but other examples I have given.

That is what I wanted to discuss. If you do not understand this I am sorry please forgive me

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Again you do not seem to understand what I am trying to do

A car is a car. It can be called an automobile. But it can not be called a boat or an airplane.

I do not need hermenuetics to understand when someone calls a car an airplane I can know that they are in error

And when someone comes and says we must listen to them. Or we are using our private interpretation or we need to use this thing like heremneutucs then we can see that an airplane is a car. That something is wrong in a serious way

I guess my point is more focused on wrong defenition not right one hence the term church words

I can see a Chevy can be a car. A ford can be a car a dodge ican be a car. We will get no argument ta

But when we see someone trying to pass an f18 eagle fighter jet as a car. Well we should come to pause sadly there are whole groups of people (churches) who in effect would stand there and lfight with you that this f18 is a car

Now most of us would say no one would do that. But people do it every day. Not in this example but other examples I have given.

That is what I wanted to discuss. If you do not understand this I am sorry please forgive me

As an educated person, I think I grasp essentially what you're wanting to focus upon. I'm just letting you know that even though you and I may fortunately agree on what God's grace is and does, words-----even biblical words like 'grace'----- have connotations that are not bound up and understood automatically by the person who reads those words, even if he/she understands the denotation of those words.

Words have both denotative qualities as well as connotative potentialites. And this discordance between denotation and connotation is what often brings about a lot of the confusion and disagreement among Christians over common biblical words.

 

[Rose_bud]

Good morning (at least it is morning here) my origional goal was to pick a word and look at it but it quickly got away from that.

Its a very hot late afternoon this side. Yes, this is CF, so chances of this staying the course are very slim.

I have thought of this over the years hearing people say something that make no sense when looking at the word. It appears to go contrary to the meaning of the word or phrase

My hope was to discuss these words and see what they really mean and maybe determine why people interpret them other ways. Which may help us in our studies

Maybe if you could provide that example of what you heard the people say. Then, what you believe it is and why? This would explain why to you it made no sense and why you thought it went contrary to the meaning.

 

[Clare73]

Yes, I can see these basic understandings.

But lets take grace for example. I see you have given what many see the biblical definition.
But does it go deeper than this. in a general term. what does the word actually mean.

I find it sufficient that Biblical words mean what they mean in their Biblical usage.

So that where Scripture makes an end to teaching, I make an end to learning in its regard.

 

[NewLifeInChristJesus]

Like most Christians, I believe that the Lord, through the Holy Spirit, directs us in an essentially intangible way.

However, let's just say that even with Christian Pneumatology in tow, I'm under absolutely NO charismatic illusions whatsoever.

Intangible? I had to look up the definition to make sure I wasn't misunderstanding.

Intangible: impossible to touch, to describe exactly, or to give an exact value​

You must be using "intangible" in it's first sense, i.e., that what He reveals to us is impossible to "touch" with our physical senses, as in 1 Corinthians 2:9-10, right?

9 But as it is written:​

​

“Eye has not seen, nor ear heard,​

Nor have entered into the heart of man​

The things which God has prepared for those who love Him.”​

​

10 But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit. (1 Co 2:9–10)​

Because otherwise you would be saying in essence that we are unable to fully grasp the exact meaning of what He reveals to us.

But I think this actually points to why we are not all anywhere close to being on the same page when it comes to the things of God. The reason is that we are not all "holding fast to the Head", who is Christ. If we were all learning from Him, injesting and digesting the the things He reveals to us, then we would be knit together and growing up together in Him. But that is not what we see in all these divergent views of Scripture.

18 Let no one cheat you of your reward, taking delight in false humility and worship of angels, intruding into those things which he has not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, 19 and not holding fast to the Head, from whom all the body, nourished and knit together by joints and ligaments, grows with the increase that is from God. (Col 2:18–19)​

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Intangible? I had to look up the definition to make sure I wasn't misunderstanding.

Intangible: impossible to touch, to describe exactly, or to give an exact value​

You must be using "intangible" in it's first sense, i.e., that what He reveals to us is impossible to "touch" with our physical senses, as in 1 Corinthians 2:9-10, right?

9 But as it is written:​

​

“Eye has not seen, nor ear heard,​

Nor have entered into the heart of man​

The things which God has prepared for those who love Him.”​

​

10 But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit. (1 Co 2:9–10)​

Because otherwise you would be saying in essence that we are unable to fully grasp the exact meaning of what He reveals to us.

Right. Thank you for taking the time to look up the word.

But I think this actually points to why we are not all anywhere close to being on the same page when it comes to the things of God. The reason is that we are not all "holding fast to the Head", who is Christ. If we were all learning from Him, injesting and digesting the the things He reveals to us, then we would be knit together and growing up together in Him. But that is not what we see in all these divergent views of Scripture.

18 Let no one cheat you of your reward, taking delight in false humility and worship of angels, intruding into those things which he has not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, 19 and not holding fast to the Head, from whom all the body, nourished and knit together by joints and ligaments, grows with the increase that is from God. (Col 2:18–19)​

We live in a time, now, when the bible is handled "critically," both textually and historically, and it is an additional challenge that most common people didn't have to face before the 19th century.

Also, we have to be careful with how we interpret the admonishment regarding "philosophy" which we find in the Letter to the Colossians. In fact, the term "philosophy" in Col. 2:8-9 is one of those words that is hermeneutically troublesome and it isn't necessarily clear as to its exact referent.

With that aside, from what is clear in the New Testament, I think we can all grasp the generally theological implications of our understanding of the Holy Spirit, which is why I referred earlier to Pneumatology, the sort of study we'd find in the following books, for instance:

​

Hamilton Jr, J. M. (2006). God's Indwelling Presence: The Holy Spirit in the Old and New Testaments. B&H Publishing Group.​

​

Kärkkäinen, V. M. (2018). Pneumatology: The Holy Spirit in ecumenical, international, and contextual perspective.​

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Intangible? I had to look up the definition to make sure I wasn't misunderstanding.

Intangible: impossible to touch, to describe exactly, or to give an exact value​

You must be using "intangible" in it's first sense, i.e., that what He reveals to us is impossible to "touch" with our physical senses, as in 1 Corinthians 2:9-10, right?

9 But as it is written:​

​

“Eye has not seen, nor ear heard,​

Nor have entered into the heart of man​

The things which God has prepared for those who love Him.”​

​

10 But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit. (1 Co 2:9–10)​

Because otherwise you would be saying in essence that we are unable to fully grasp the exact meaning of what He reveals to us.

But I think this actually points to why we are not all anywhere close to being on the same page when it comes to the things of God. The reason is that we are not all "holding fast to the Head", who is Christ. If we were all learning from Him, injesting and digesting the the things He reveals to us, then we would be knit together and growing up together in Him. But that is not what we see in all these divergent views of Scripture.

18 Let no one cheat you of your reward, taking delight in false humility and worship of angels, intruding into those things which he has not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, 19 and not holding fast to the Head, from whom all the body, nourished and knit together by joints and ligaments, grows with the increase that is from God. (Col 2:18–19)​

In sum, the point I was essentially making in my previous post---and being that I meant to refer to verses 8-9 and had to edit my mistake---is that what we think Paul means in verses 8-9 in turn colors what he means from verses 10-19.

 

[Clare73]

Right. Thank you for taking the time to look up the word.
We live in a time, now, when the bible is handled "critically," both textually and historically, and it is an additional challenge that most common people didn't have to face before the 19th century.
Also, we have to be careful with how we interpret the admonishment regarding "philosophy"which we find in the Letter to the Colossians. In fact, the term "philosophy" in Col. 2:8-9 is one of those words that is hermeneutically troublesome and it isn't necessarily clear as to its exact referent.

I'm thinking Ac 17:18 is pretty clear.

With that aside, from what is clear in the New Testament, I think we can all grasp the generally theological implications of our understanding of the Holy Spirit, which is why I referred earlier to Pneumatology, the sort of study we'd find in the following books, for instance:

Hamilton Jr, J. M. (2006). God's Indwelling Presence: The Holy Spirit in the Old and New Testaments. B&H Publishing Group.​

Kärkkäinen, V. M. (2018). Pneumatology: The Holy Spirit in ecumenical, international, and contextual perspective.​

 

[seeking.IAM]

As a kid, I always wondered what a "round yonvirgen" was, but I reckon that is not what this thread is about?

 

[Clare73]

As a kid, I always wondered what a "round yonvirgen" was, but I reckon that is not what this thread is about?

All is calm and all is bright around the yonder virgin tender and mild.

 

[Dan Perez]

Being a member of many christian chat rooms, and having conversation with many people all over the country about God and his word. I have come to notice that it appears there are some what I call "church words" or terms. These words, or terms seem to be taken outside of their actual definition, and appear to be given their own interpretation. I can remember many times (I just had one here this past week) where people will say something, and I wince, or an taken back, and I am like, "where did you get that interpretation from" And I know for a fact. I will say things to others. and get the same reaction from them. which tells me this is a great problem in the church.

I was wondering if anyone else notices this. and wanted to discuss some of these terms and see if we can see why people seem to have different interpretations of them, which appear to not follow the general interpretation of the word or words. but appear to mean something totally different.

I will first start a list of words I see where this happens. and hope others can add to this list. so we can take a deep dive into these words. Then lets try to take these words and see what the differences are. and why people have certain interpretations. and are these interpretations valid. As I think of these, I am sure some will cause alot of controversy, But I also must remember, the things of God are not our ways. And they are foolishness to the world.. which means in our flesh, they may sound foolish (I think we will see as we move forward)

A short list I have thought of the last few days

1. Grace
2. Eternal Life
3. Church
4. Saved or rescued.

Look forward to others ideas or input.

Just check the Greek text is # 1 thing to do !!

The Greek EKKLESIA do not mean church as it means ASSEMBLE , EKK , means out of and KLESIS , means a calling .means

ASSEMBLY .

No Greek word for PURGATORY .

There are many different Greek words for BAPTISM , BAPTO , BAPTISMA , BAPTISMOS and for GOSPEL also ~~

dan p

,

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Free Grace theology.

I have not heard of this before. I have heard of Cheap Grace and hyper grace. But have never heard of this. Is this another church term?

I looked it up and this is what I found.

Drjackson.com
Christian movement emphasizing that salvation comes solely through faith in Jesus Christ, independent of good works or obedience. It’s rooted in the idea of God’s grace being a free gift, unearned by human efforts.

Wikepedia
Free grace theology is a Christian soteriologicalview which holds that the only condition of salvation is faith, excluding good works and perseverance, holding to eternal security.

Gotquestions.org
The basic teaching of Free Grace Theology is that responding to the “call to believe” in Jesus Christ through faith alone is all that is necessary to receive eternal life.

I found a few other sites, and they are all making the same claim.

so from what I Gather, this is a doctrinal view that eternal salvation is “free” to the believer” it is based on that persons “faith” apart from any works of merit. And since we all no matter what we believe, think that we are saved by Grace, they add the term “Free”to the term Grace, because they believe the people who follow this so terminology believe in free grace. I can see Cheap grace falling in step with this, as the people who use these terms believe those who believe in this believe in this cheap or free grace.

One of the largest arguments I have heard from those who appose this cheap grace is the argument against the fact one can just believe, or say some sinner’s pray and they are saved forever.

the sad part is i agree 100% with this thinking. Mere believe has never saved anyone. Neither is just saying a sinners prayer. Just because someone says some prayer does nto mean they have faith. And as I explained earlier using the Niagara Falls example. i can believe in something, yet not have faith in that something. And considering we are said to be saved by grace though faith. If a person does not have faith, then grace would not be applied to them. Hence they would not be saved.

Scripture speaks of these people. James talks about the dead faith of people. And hoe whti mere belief could not save anyone, And Jude speaks of those who turn the grace of God into licentiousness. And how they kept into the church. Whose condemnation is assured.

But what does the word say about grace (a church word I was wanting to discuss)

As we already have said, The word grace is a word which speaks of being kind, showing favor, beauty, goodwill, a gift. Charm It comes from the greek word Charis, Many of us may recognize it in a term where we say a person who can speak, and be charm to be charismatic. We also have a movement called the Charismatic movement, a movement based on the “gifting” of the Holy Spirit. So both of these fit the defenition of the term grace or Charis.

But what about grace as it relates to salvation? When I see this word in context. I immediately think of the terms of God being Kind, Showing favor, Goodwill, and a gift. All of which are possible meanings of gthe word Grace. But what does the Bible say?

so this is not broken up. I have spent the last hour or so typing this response in. Document, so i can cut and paste it in this thread and hopefully nothing will come in between, beause it is lengthy and I like to break things up so they are easier to read. And respond. So hear goes.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Acts 15: context is jews trying to add works of the law to the gospel. And attacking paul who is teaching against it. Peter defends paul and says that the gentiles by receiving the HS just as they did saying in conclusion (vs 11) But we believe that through the graceof the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved in the same manner as they.”

The next time we hear about grace and being saved is in romans, where we are told

Romans 3: 21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22 even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe. For there is no difference; 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, 26 to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

Here we see the word Justified freely by GRACE through the redemption of Christ. Whom God set forth as a propitiation.

So here we see a few things.

1. Righteousness is given to the one who has faith
2. All have sinned, meaning all are guilty, and need saved
3. Justification (a legal term which means found innocent, or found to be righteous) is according to Gods grace, this grace was paid for (redemption) by Christ, whom god set forth as a propitiation (A place of propitiation, a means of forgiveness, a means of expiation (Ex·pi·a·tion - the act of making amends or reparation for guilt or wrongdoing; atonement:
   "an act of public expiation"
4. The price of redemption was the price of atonement,, which which know per the law. That the atonment was paid by blood. Christ of course is the one who redeemed us through his blood as peter says in 1 peter 1 18 knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold, from your aimless conduct received by tradition from your fathers, 19 but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot. Again taking us back to the law. And the day of atonement, and the lamb without sport.

The second time we see in in Romans 4:

Romans 4: 4 What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh? 2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” 4 Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt. 5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness,

1. Again we see the word or term justified, or a righteousness that was given
2. Again, we see it is through faith that Abraham is justified.
3. This time works are added to the equation. Only in the negative. We also see for the first time, works and boasting in the same view
4. Grace, We are told that it is not of works, for works are counted as debt. Not grace
5. We are told again, It is through faith, And it is through this faith that we are accounted as being righteous 9justified) which means our sins are forgiven, we are seen as right before God. But not of ourselves. it is Gods righteousness applied to us

The same theme is seen on romans 5

1. We are justified by faith, and in this we have peace (vs 1). Vs 9 Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him. 10 For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.
2. again, justified or declared righteous by his blood
3. In this we shall be saved
4. We are reconciled, by his death.
5. In vs 15 we see the graceous gift. By the death of one. Results in the salvation. Of many

Romans 11: And if by grace, then it is no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace. But if it isof works, it is no longer grace; otherwise work is no longer work.

1. Here we see a major differentiation between grace and works. It can not be grace plus works, or works plus Grace, it can only be one or the other. This keeps in line with everything we have seen to this point
2. Paul is clear. If works is added to grace. Grace is no longer grace. Ie, grace can not be merited by works

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Ephesians

Chapter 1: 6 to the praise of the glory of His grace, by which He made us accepted in the Beloved. 7 In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace

1. It is by grace by which we have been made accepted by God
2. again the term redemption, which just means to purchase, through the blood. The cost of Grace is the cross. While it appears to be free to the receiver, it has a great price for the giver.
3. The riches of Gods grace. Shows the massive amount of grace God is capable of giving, based on the cross

Chapter 2: an excellent chapter on the grace of God and how it relates to our salvation.

Eph 2: 4 But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 5 even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved),

1. Again we see that God is very rich in his mercy and grace because of his great love
2. We were dead because of sin (the wage of sin is death) and we have been made alive in christ (The term made alive as in justification in romans here is related to salvation, for it is by grace we have been saved, or made alive, mashed on the great riches of Christs mercy
3. Mercy and grace are seen as synonymous, Gods grace is based on his mercy and love

8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, 9 not of works, lest anyone should boast

1. Our salvation which in this case is past tense (we have been saved) is by grace period
2. This salvation is not according to works, it is not something we do, or we can earn.
3. The Chanel the grace (salvation) is given is through our faith (God will not force us to recieve it, He wants us to recieve it, But unless we trust God as I showed earlier in my example of mere believe vs true faith, we will never recieve it, we will reject it. Or we will try to get it our way. Not Gods way(

Of note. In vs 10. Paul shows us where works come in, It is after we are saved by Grace Through faith, that works appear.

As I have said many times, if you trust someone, you will tend to do what they wish, if you do not trust someone, you will not.. Which is what James was calling out in chapter 2. When he spoke to people who CLAIMED to have faith, but were hearers not doers. And had no works.. He called their faith dead. Because as paul said here, we are saved by grace, not work.. but we who are saved will have works. But we are not saved by those works.

I will finish my look at the word by taking us to titus. if people would like to look at other passages feel free to share.

Titus 3: 5 not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, 6 whom He poured out on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior, 7 that having been justified by His grace we should become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.

1. As I showed above. Grace and mercy are synonymous, here again we see both in the same conversation
2. Here we are told we are saved by His mercy, Not by any good or righteous deeds we have done,
3. This salvation is based on the washing and new birth of the Holy Spirit
4. Again, this salvation is based on us being justified (declared innocent or righteous) by his grace and by it, we should become hers according to the hope of eternal life

Which brings us to faith. The author of hebrews tells us faith is the substance of things hoped for. The evidence of things not seen

Paul here tells us what our trust is in, The hope is in eternal life 9another church words) whcih literally means this new life in christ is eternal. It is forever, it will never end/ That s the hope by which we place our faith in, according to the promise of God

It is through this faith in this hope in this promise of God. By which we trust God and recieve the grace gift of salvation/justifiation/redemption.expiation/propitiation/ which was paid in full by Christ on the cross (it is finished)

So in conclusion.

1. Grace is not free, it had a great cost. The cost was bore by Christ himself on the cross
2. Grace is the means by which we are saved. It is not of works, lest anyone should boast. It is bot of doing any work of righteousness, be it of the law or any work of righteousness which we can do
3. Looking at the defenition of grace - we see that salvation is based on Gods kindness, his goodness,his goodwill, and it is a gift of God.
4. 4. Free grace, the term is nonsensical. grace is free to the receiver, but it was very costly to the giver.
6. As a church words, we can see all through this, that grace can not be merited by any means. If it is something we can merit, it is not of grace it is of works. So when you see someone say free grace is in error. We can know they are missing the defenition of grace. When we hear someone say Grace must be merited. That it must be earned by our works (obedience, giving, doing religious works, such as baptism, communion, taking the Eucharist, tithing, praying, going to church or any works of righteousness we do. We can know that something is wrong. And we can question them.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

As an educated person, I think I grasp essentially what you're wanting to focus upon.

Sadly, your till mistaken. But thats ok.

I'm just letting you know that even though you and I may fortunately agree on what God's grace is and does, words-----even biblical words like 'grace'----- have connotations that are not bound up and understood automatically by the person who reads those words, even if he/she understands the denotation of those words.

Words have both denotative qualities as well as connotative potentialites. And this discordance between denotation and connotation is what often brings about a lot of the confusion and disagreement among Christians over common biblical words.

Grace is not merited. There is nothing in the defenition or in scripture which shows us grace can be somethign we earn. It came at a cost. That cost was the blood of jesus.

If you are wanting me to think that grace can be merited in any way. Then something’s appears to be wrong with your thinking. Because not only is not not found in any defenition of grace. It is not found in scripture. Quite the apposit is found

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Its a very hot late afternoon this side. Yes, this is CF, so chances of this staying the course are very slim.

Maybe if you could provide that example of what you heard the people say. Then, what you believe it is and why? This would explain why to you it made no sense and why you thought it went contrary to the meaning.

I hope I have done this with the term Grace (although I was responding to free grace which was brought up before) it is a quite a lengthy post (I believe 3 posts) but it hopefully will be a start.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

I find it sufficient that Biblical words mean what they mean in their Biblical usage.

So that where Scripture makes an end to teaching, I make an end to learning in its regard.

Can their biblical usage mean something they do not mean in any other usage?

or can it mean one thing in the Bible. But mean the totally opposite in anything outside of the Bible?