Defining Grace.

[frienden thalord]

Yes Paul clearly taught us how to walk. He taught us to walk in and by faith not by sight. Walking by faith is not keeping a set of rules it is simply looking to the complete and finished work of Christ.

Yes believers ought to seek to honor their Lord and Master in their daily lives but we are nowhere told to look at others to see if they are walking according to what we think is right. Even when we are told to look at ourselves it isn't to see if there is sin in our lives, for there surely is, but whether we are in the faith. We are to examine ourselves to see if we are trusting in the finished work of Christ alone or in something we do.

First let me say I have no animosity towards you in any way.
but I have to ask what bible are you reading.
we are NOT supposed to examine each others walk or faith.
Really, this is not true at all.
We , or any who is truly seasoned must look out for all.
And when I see you again I might perfect that which is lacking in your faith.
paul said that.
or how often did james , peter, paul warn the church to look out , to seperate
to correct , to rebuke to etc
Let us love truth.

 

[frienden thalord]

WE do all , to correct , remind exhort etc because we LOVE .
but I have seen something on a very small scale .
the more abundantely I love you the less I be loved.
I know why paul said that.
because love corrects and if men don't want it, they often hate on the messenger.

 

[twin1954]

and the HOLY SPIRT is our witness for it is written
in their minds and on their hearts I will write me law
and I shall be their GOD , dwell in them and they shall be my people.
Jesus is NOT the minsitir of SIN
for if I , PAUL, build again the things which once I destroyed I make myself a transgressor.
oh I think it would do us a heap of good
to flee them denominations and just go back to bible reading.

That would be wonderful if you understood the Scriptures as I do but obviously we don't both understand them the same. You want to focus on what man can learn from them and I would simply point you to Christ in all of them.

 

[frienden thalord]

what is so hard about putting down Calvinism , or Baptist
or catholocism or whatever religion
and just for a time STUDY the bible for yourselves.
you will come to the same conclusion many others have , who have done this.
they said..........man we were deceived.

 

[frienden thalord]

That would be wonderful if you understood the Scriptures as I do but obviously we don't both understand them the same. You want to focus on what man can learn from them and I would simply point you to Christ in all of them.

Anyone who knows me , and I don't say this to boast in me
for all I was , was a nasty vile pig in sin,
and I KNOW the only goodness I have is from GOD
but anyone who knows me , knows I don't point to the law
I point to Christ , who just happens to not be no minister of sin.

 

[twin1954]

WE do all , to correct , remind exhort etc because we LOVE .
but I have seen something on a very small scale .
the more abundantely I love you the less I be loved.
I know why paul said that.
because love corrects and if men don't want it, they often hate on the messenger.

First remove the beam in your own eye before you try to take the splinter out of mine. You cannot show me from the Scriptures, which I have extensively read and studied for many years, that we are ever to examine each other. No if we see a brother fall we are to pick him up and remember the Gospel is about forgiveness. We are told to let the tares grow with the wheat because we can't tell the difference. Much harm has come from the unbiblical way that discipline has been used in the so-called church. My sin is between my and Christ not between me and you. I am to encourage you in faith and walk beside you in love but never to judge what you do or do not do.

 

[frienden thalord]

Believe me , I don't need calvins view on the scrips.
most in churchs were taught mans views on salvation.
but if we read the word , if the Holy ghost is in us
we learn. and we look out for one another.

 

[frienden thalord]

and on that note I must leave .
but often men who love their teachers more than CHRIST the teacher
refuse to abandon their doctrinal views.
this is all I have to say for now.

 

[Stephen Douglas]

"But God who is rich in Mercy and because of His great love for us, even when we were already dead in our trespasses and sins, made us alive with Christ and raised us up with Him - by grace you have been saved - and has seated us with Him in the heavenly places so that in the coming ages He might show the immeasurable richness of His grace through kindness shown to us through Christ Jesus.". Ephesians 2:4-7

There is nothing that I can add to that!

Doug

 

[twin1954]

what is so hard about putting down Calvinism , or Baptist
or catholocism or whatever religion
and just for a time STUDY the bible for yourselves.
you will come to the same conclusion many others have , who have done this.
they said..........man we were deceived.

Calvinism means nothing to me any more than what are called Baptists today. I am a student of the Scriptures and walk according to what I am convinced by the Spirit is the light given me by the Spirit. The Spirit always points us to Christ and never to ourselves. I am not deceived for I know whom I have believed and am persuaded that He is able to keep that which I have committed unto Him against that day.

I use labels for convenience sake so that I don't have to give a whole lesson in theology every time I talk to someone.

 

[twin1954]

and on that note I must leave .
but often men who love their teachers more than CHRIST the teacher
refuse to abandon their doctrinal views.
this is all I have to say for now.

My teacher is the Spirit of God. I take what men say according to the truth of the Scriptures. I refuse to abandon my doctrinal views until the Spirit shows where they are wrong. I have done so many times over the years in fact. Well actually they were simply made to conform to what the Scriptures actually say rather than what I was taught to believe.

I stand firm on what the Spirit has opened up to me from the Scriptures which is Christ is all. He is the theme, focus, message and whole of the Scriptures. As did the Lord, Peter, Paul and the other Apostles I interpret the Scriptures in the light of Christ and His Gospel. I do so without apology or compromise.

 

[AFrazier]

So it was recently brought to my attention (by my own wandering thoughts, thanks brain) that if I was asked to clearly define what exactly God's grace is and how it works and where one can find it and how it shows up in life for the believer to a nonbeliever, I wouldn't know how exactly to define it for them (and I'm a little fuzzy on a correct definition for myself). I'd be interested if you guys could help me find a good answer not just for me but if it comes up in a conversation with someone who has questions...

In the garden of Eden, God declared that man would die if he ate from the tree. Under the law, God obligated himself by oath to judge and punish his enemies, which are sinners who break the covenant.

By these two acts, God is bound by the infallibility of his own word and by his oath to render judgement and to punish the world. So all those who are yet "under the law" are under God's obligatory condemnation and are subject to death and curses.

But for those in Christ, the law has been satisfied. Through Christ, we have become dead in the eyes of the law. By suffering death through the surrogacy of Christ, God's declaration in the garden has been satisfied. By being judged, condemned, and slain through the surrogacy of Christ, God's oath-bound obligation to judge and punish his enemies has been fulfilled.

We are now quickened together with Christ, or resurrected. The price has been paid. We are new creations, descended from a new Adam. The declaration of death in the garden no longer exists in this new creation. The law and the promise of judgment no longer exists in this new creation.

Whereas God was formerly unable to simply say, "I forgive you" and let that be the end of it, being bound by his word and oath to render judgement, "under grace," God is now able to do so. Rather than being forced to judge us, he is now free to extend his mercy and good will, even though we don't deserve it. This is what it means to be under grace.

 

[Stephen Douglas]

God's grace allows the rain to fall on the unrighteous as well as the righteous. His grace allows us to continue to survive within this microcosm of an incubator we call planet Earth. Every breath that we take is only by His grace.

It is only by God's grace that we live and move and have our being.

Doug

 

[twin1954]

God's grace allows the rain to fall on the unrighteous as well as the righteous. His grace allows us to continue to survive within this microcosm of an incubator we call planet Earth. Every breath that we take is only by His grace.

It is only by God's grace that we live and move and have our being.

Doug

Sorry but that is not Scriptural. He makes it to rain on the just and the unjust but it is nowhere implied that it is grace to the unjust. It is grace to His own when He makes it to rain on the unjust. He uses them to bless His people but it isn't grace to those who are under His wrath. Moreover the Scriptures nowhere teach that it is by God's grace that the reprobate lives and moves and has their being. Yes the very breath of man is from God but it isn't necessarily the grace of God that does it. He may give breath to a man like Hitler in order to accomplish some good for His own and to glorify His name.

The idea of common grace is simply nowhere taught in the Scriptures.

Sorry to come across as combative it isn't intentional. Your post simply struck a nerve concerning how much tradition has influenced the understanding of the Scriptures. Common grace has been taught so much it has been accepted without question but it simply isn't found anywhere in the whole of the Scriptures. It is swallowed without question because it just feels right not because it is right.

There is nothing common about God's grace.

 

[St_Worm2]

So it was recently brought to my attention (by my own wandering thoughts, thanks brain) that if I was asked to clearly define what exactly God's grace is and how it works and where one can find it and how it shows up in life for the believer to a nonbeliever, I wouldn't know how exactly to define it for them (and I'm a little fuzzy on a correct definition for myself). I'd be interested if you guys could help me find a good answer not just for me but if it comes up in a conversation with someone who has questions...

Hi Derpytia, I too would define God's saving grace as His "unmerited favor" towards us (although His grace is hardly, "unmerited", is it ). Rather, it's only unmerited by its recipients, by us. It is, in fact, "merited" by Another, and it is on this basis, the basis of His life, and of His death on the Cross, that God chooses to be "gracious" towards us

We are saved by God's grace, through faith (which is itself a "gift" given to us by God by which we believe .. as has already been mentioned here), not because of anything we did (or will do), but because of Christ, and what He did for us alone .. e.g. Ephesians 2:8-9.

Yours in Christ,
David

Romans 4
5 To the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness.
​

 

[Tree of Life]

So it was recently brought to my attention (by my own wandering thoughts, thanks brain) that if I was asked to clearly define what exactly God's grace is and how it works and where one can find it and how it shows up in life for the believer to a nonbeliever, I wouldn't know how exactly to define it for them (and I'm a little fuzzy on a correct definition for myself). I'd be interested if you guys could help me find a good answer not just for me but if it comes up in a conversation with someone who has questions...

Unmerited, surprising favor.

 

[bugkiller]

what is so hard about putting down Calvinism , or Baptist
or catholocism or whatever religion
and just for a time STUDY the bible for yourselves.
you will come to the same conclusion many others have , who have done this.
they said..........man we were deceived.

Yeppers!!!!

bugkiller

 

[twin1954]

what is so hard about putting down Calvinism , or Baptist
or catholocism or whatever religion
and just for a time STUDY the bible for yourselves.
you will come to the same conclusion many others have , who have done this.
they said..........man we were deceived.

And that is exactly the way every heresy started since the beginning. Man will devise his own way and use the Scriptures to back it up.

A man called and gifted of God to preach and teach the truth of the Scriptures are a gift from Christ to His church.
Eph 4:8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.
(Eph 4:11) And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;

(Eph 4:12) For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

(Eph 4:13) Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

You may notice that I left out verses 9 and 10 but you may also notice that those verses are in parenthesis which means they can be removed without harm to the thought. While the parenthetical statement is as inspired as the rest the thought flows smoother with it removed. It is perfectly acceptable to do so.

So to make the claim that we don't need men to teach us is not only nonsense but against the teaching of the Scriptures. The trick is finding that God called man. But when you do, give that man your full support and attention.
He was sent by Christ as a gift to you.



Edit after some reflection:
Now I get it. You are supposed to be the teacher. I will follow your teachings when they actually align with the Scriptures.

 

[Soyeong]

Law and grace can never mix.

I made an argument that it is false to say that God's grace is opposed to His Law where I cited a number of verses as well as Greek lexicon, so please interact with what I said rather than just assert the opposite. For example:

Psalms 119:29 Keep me from deceitful ways; be gracious to me and teach me your law.

If law and grace do mix, then do you think that this verse is false? Did David misunderstand God's grace?

Titus 2:11-14 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people, 12 training us to renounce ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age, 13 waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, 14 who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works.

If our salvation involves God's grace training us to do what is godly, righteous, and good and to renounce doing what is ungodly and sinful, and that is essentially what God's Law was given to instruct us how to do, then how can God's grace be opposed to His Law. Was God acting against His grace when He gave the Law at Sinai? Can a house divided against itself stand?

According to Strong's "grace" is defined as "the divine influence upon the heart, and its reflection in the life".

I think it is pretty straightforward that if God makes His will known through His commands, and His grace influences us to do his will, then His grace influences us to follow His commands. So again, I see no support in Scriptures that Law and grace don't mix, but just the opposite.

The legalism continues.

Please define what you mean by this. It it legalism to think that the laws of your country should be obeyed? Was Jesus being legalistic when he lived in perfect obedience to God's Law? Is it legalism to think that the 613 commands of the OT should be obeyed, but not legalism to think that the 1,050 commands of the NT should be obeyed? I think one law can be obeyed legalistically, while thousands of laws can be obeyed in a way that isn't legalistic, so legalism is not in regard to whether you think one or many laws should be obeyed, but rather it is in regard to the manner in which you think a law should be obeyed. In others words, is it someone's goal to follow a law exactly how it is written without regard to its intent, or is it their goal to follow a law according to its intent?

You are correct in that we are taught to keep His commandments but His commandments are not found on Sinai. They are found in 1
John 3:22-23. You might notice that there are only two:

(1Jn 3:22) And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.

(1Jn 3:23) And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.

We have more than two commands of Jesus recorded just in Matthew 5, so it is absurd to say that he gave only two commands. In 1 John 2:3-6, the imperative to follow his commands is associated with the imperative to walk in the same way he walked, which was in obedience to the Mosaic Law. Jesus did not hypocritically say to do one thing and do something else, but rather he taught by both word and by example, and even if he had commanded nothing, he still would have taught obedience to the Mosaic Law by example, which we are told to follow (1 Peter 2:21-22). Jesus was not in disagreement with the Father about what commands we should be obeyed, but rather he said that he came only to do the Father's will (John 6:38), that his teachings were not his own, but that of the Father (John 7:16), and that whoever does not love him will not keep his teachings, which were that of the Father (John 14:24).

Rather John 3:22-23 is summary statement of Christ's other commands. Jesus summarized the Law and the Prophets as being God's instructions for how to love Him and our neighbor (Matthew 22:36-40), so if you correctly understand his command to love and you have faith in him to guide you in how to rightly live, then you will live in obedience to the Mosaic Law. Likewise, in Romans 10:5-10, it quoted Deuteronomy 30:11-14 in regard to what it means to confess Jesus as Lord, so if you correctly understand what it means to believe that Jesus is Lord, then you will submit to the Mosaic Law. It is those who have a carnal mind who refuse to submit to God's Law (Romans 8:7).

If you are going to keep the commandments given on Sinai then you will have to keep them all including the sacrifices as well as the temple, the priesthood and all that are found not just the Ten.

If you keep the sacrifices Christ shall profit you nothing. Gal. 5:2.

Indeed, I would be required to keep the whole law if I were seeking to be justified by it, but it is important to correctly understand which law he was talking about. The law Paul was referring to includes the requirement for all Gentiles to become circumcised in order to become saved, so please cite where the Mosaic Law requires this or grant that Paul was not speaking about the Mosaic Law. Furthermore, if you can cite where God required this of all Gentiles, then please explain why we should follow what Paul said on this matter rather than what God said.

In addition, even if Paul were talking about the Mosaic Law, I have never suggested that we need to obey it in order to become justified, but rather trying to do so is in fact a legalistic perversion of the Mosaic Law because it was never given for that purpose. It doesn't follow that because we shouldn't obey the Mosaic Law for a purpose for which it was never intended that therefore we shouldn't obey the Law for the many purposes for which it was given.

If you go back to Sinai then you go back to bondage and seek to do that which the Jews never were able to do.

Many Jews practiced obedience to God's law and not a single one of them had such a low opinion of God that they considered obedience to His commands to be bondage. Throughout the Psalms, David had nothing but extremely high praise for God's Law, and I don't think it is a stretch to say that observant Jews were in agreement with the Psalms. David loved God's law, delighted in obeying it, thought those who walked in obedience to it were blessed, and meditated on it day and night. Paul also said he delighted in obeying God's Law, so he was on the same page as David (Romans 7:22). God did not free the Israelites from bondage in Egypt in order to put them back under bondage to His Law, but rather it is for freedom that God sets us free (Galatians 5:1), and God's law is a law of freedom (Psalms 119:45), while it is sin in transgression of God's Law that puts us in bondage.

The Law is not just the Ten Commandments but the whole given on Sinai and is never once separated in the Scriptures. There is no such thing as the ceremonial, civil, moral and dietary law but simply the Law and it means all of them.

Agreed.

 

[twin1954]

I made an argument that it is false to say that God's grace is opposed to His Law where I cited a number of verses as well as Greek lexicon, so please interact with what I said rather than just assert the opposite. For example:

Psalms 119:29 Keep me from deceitful ways; be gracious to me and teach me your law.

If law and grace do mix, then do you think that this verse is false? Did David not understand God's grace?

Titus 2:11-14 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people, 12 training us to renounce ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age, 13 waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, 14 who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works.

If our salvation involves God's grace training us to do what is godly, righteous, and good and to renounce doing what is ungodly and sinful, and that is essentially what God's Law was given to instruct us how to do, then how can God's grace be opposed to His Law. Was God acting against His grace when He gave the Law at Sinai? Can a house divided against itself stand?

According to Strong's "grace" is defined as "the divine influence upon the heart, and its reflection in the life".

I think it is pretty straightforward that if God makes His will known through His commands, and His grace influences us to do his will, then his grace influences us to follow his commands. So again, I see no support in Scriptures that Law and grace don't mix, but just the opposite.



Please define what you mean by this. It it legalism to think that the laws of your country should be obeyed? Was Jesus being legalistic when he lived in perfect obedience to God's Law? Is it legalism to think that the 613 commands of the OT should be obeyed, but not legalism to think that the 1,050 commands of the NT should be obeyed? I think one law can be obeyed legalistically, while thousands of laws can be obeyed in a way that isn't legalistic, so legalism is not in regard to whether you think one or many laws should be obeyed, but rather it is in regard to the manner in which you think a law should be obeyed. In others words, is it someone's goal to follow a law exactly how it is written without regard to it intent, or is it their goal to follow a law according to its intent?



We have more than two commands of Jesus recorded just in Matthew 5, so it is absurd to say that he gave only two commands. In 1 John 2:3-6, the imperative to follow his commands is associated with the imperative to walk in the same way he walked, which was in obedience to the Mosaic Law. Jesus did not hypocritically say to do one thing and do something else, but rather he taught by both word and by example, and even if he had commanded nothing, he still would have taught obedience to the Mosaic Law by example, which we are told to follow (1 Peter 2:21-22). Jesus was not in disagreement with the Father about what commands we should be obeyed, but rather he said that he came only to do the Father's will (John 6:38), that his teachings were not his own, but that of the Father (John 7:16), and that whoever does not love him will not keep his teachings, which were that of the Father (John 14:24).

Rather John 3:22-23 is summary statement of Christ's other commands. Jesus summarized the Law and the Prophets as being God's instructions for how to love Him and our neighbor (Matthew 22:36-40), so if you correctly understand his command to love and you have faith in him to guide you in how to rightly live, then you will live in obedience to the Mosaic Law. Likewise, in Romans 10:5-10, it quoted Deuteronomy 30:11-14 in regard to what it means to confess Jesus as Lord, if you correctly understand what it means to believe that Jesus is Lord, then you will submit to the Mosaic Law. It is those who have a carnal mind who refuse to submit to the Mosaic Law (Romans 8:7).



Indeed, we would be required to keep the whole law if we were seeking to be justified by it, but it is important to correctly understand which law he was talking about. The Law Paul was referring to includes the requirement for all Gentiles to become circumcised in order to become saved, so please cite where the Mosaic Law requires this or grant that Paul was not speaking about the Mosaic Law. Furthermore, if you can cite where God required this of all Gentiles, then please explain why we should follow what Paul said on this matter rather than what God said.

In addition, even if Paul were talking about the Mosaic Law, I have never suggested that we need to obey it in order to become justified, but rather trying to do so is in fact a legalistic perversion of the Mosaic Law because it was never given for that purpose. It doesn't follow that because we shouldn't obey the Mosaic Law for a purpose for which it was never intended that therefore we shouldn't obey the Law for the many purposes for which it was given.



Many Jews practiced obedience to God's law and not a single one of them had such a low opinion of God that they considered obedience to His commands to be bondage. Throughout the Psalms, David had nothing but extremely high praise for God's Law, and I don't think it is a stretch to say that observant Jews were in agreement with the Psalms. David loved God's law, delighted in obeying it, thought those who walked in obedience to it were blessed, and meditated on it day and night. Paul also said he delighted in obeying God's Law, so he was on the same page as David (Romans 7:22). God did not free the Israelites from bondage in Egypt in order to put them back under bondage to His Law, but rather it is for freedom that God sets us free (Galatians 5:1), and God's law is a law of freedom (Psalms 119:45), while it is sin in transgression of God's Law that puts us in bondage.



Agreed.

I will respond to this long post when I have more time.

In the meantime the word law as it is used in the Scriptures, and as you quoted David using it, does not always mean the commandments given on Sinai. In the context it can mean just the first five books of the Bible, the Sinaiatic commandments or the whole of the Old Testament Scriptures.