Evidence for God from Science

B. W. wrote:+
Hi everyone reading this and to answer Kurieuo’s inquiry,

Please let me define what I meant by Lazy Grace.

Lazy Grace refers to people being lackadaisical about the Grace that saved them; therefore, Lazy Grace.

Are they still save? Yes…

Are they confused about works verses grace? Yes…

This makes them lackadaisical about the Grace that saved them…

Ok, that puts a different spin on it... but still...

Nowhere does Scripture teach we are saved "by grace", but rather "by grace through faith." (Ephesians 2:8-10) Thus, if someone has faith in Christ, I fail to see how they could be lackadaisical about God's grace having received God's free gift of forgiveness offered through Christ.

B.W. wrote:So much so that one: some will do nothing other than enjoy the ride and from this many become bored, and uninterested, wondering if this is all there to this Christian thing? Two: for others, they become so engrossed in works orientation to perform for God that they burn out and become frustrated, then eventually lazy.

You do here appear to be associating laziness with works rather than simply lackadaisicalness. Trust me, I get what you're saying... and I agree in principle, something just doesn't sit right for me with how you are saying it.

B.W. wrote:God’s Grace saves and the Lord is at work on our hearts, changing us, by grace. From this, we learn to overflow his will and do His works in us, by grace (him working in us), those that get this are not lazy about grace. But are in effect discovering that Ephesians 2:10 is also part of Ephesians 2:8-9…

Again, it is "faith in Christ" that saves. It is by God's grace we have forgiveness through Christ...

God works in our heart, and certainly it is through His gracious forgiveness that we are transform and outworking of the Holy Spirit in our lives by whom we are refined. This relationship is between the person whose faith is in Christ and God. And we should encourage other Christians with grace and love, not judgement or in contempt of laziness. I still don't like/get why use such language.

B.W. wrote:Whether it be in small or large matters – they are about the Father’s business. Because they learned the hard way that it is He who dwells within that does the works. Most often they arrive at this conclusion due to a state of lazy grace. After they tire of rituals, mindless rhythmic duty of good deeds, or the opposite of being told they can’t do nothing at all so sit in the pew or a bar, don’t matter where, that they become so aggravated and disappointed in their faith that they are confronted to shake off the apathy of lazy grace and uncover active grace within their hearts.

Active Grace is by God’s hands that will make a person active in their faith as well as help each individual discover their purpose and meaning for their life so much so, it changes them to become a better reflection of Christ wherever they were assigned in life. After all, they have realized that God first loved them and from this they awaken to love God and it shows. For this showing, we have a tendency to tell them to be quiet, be still, you are getting into works so become lazy, and then we wonder why we cannot get many involved in the needs and life of a church group, or giving!

Hmmm. Are you talking from personal experience, or making generalisation of how every Christian is? I can not fathom how one does not awaken to the love of God when they first placed their faith in Him. It seems so strange and foreign to me.

B.W. wrote:Grace ain’t Cheap because it is Free.

This seems to me a contortion. "Free" isn't cheap because it is free. Or more... "unmerited favour isn't cheap because it is unmerited". It doesn't really make sense.

Rather, it is more correct to say Christ's gift of forgiveness isn't cheap because it is free. It may seem like I'm picking up on nuances to some, but they are very important to understanding the Gospel, in particular for those who don't understand. Sorry B.W., it really wasn't my intention to put you on the spot or criticise, but I see religious Christian terminology being used, but not with its proper meaning. I believe "grace" is not being used correctly in your words.

B.W. wrote:In summary: Grace cost God (2nd person of the trinity-the Word, task bearer, right arm, etc..) to unite himself to humanity in the role of Messiah (Philippians 2:5-8), from this he exposed our sin nature, by being betrayed, rejected, despised, mocked, beaten, and then dying a terrible death to do this exposing. Then forgives our transgressions against himself as (often also) evidenced in our thoughts actions, deeds toward others at the moment we wake to this truth and trust in Him (his work - grace) as he said – see John 3:15-16.

Forgiveness cost God, not grace. It is by God's grace we are forgiven.

Furthermore, I'd argue (contrary to popular evangelical thought) that we were forgiven while we were still in our sin. That is, Christ died which brought about forgiveness for all humanity. Those who return to God and receive God's forgiveness through faith in Christ are personally reconciled and saved. (cf. Romans 5:6,10) But they were forgiven while still in their sin before they came to Christ because of Christ's work.

B.W. wrote:We learn to live and move according to Him who dwells in us as we learn to love God because He first loved us so. For this many chide and try to shame those thus touched by God to be quiet, sit still, your too works oriented, become lazy like us. Sorry, those that have discovered this, can’t return to a state of laziness.

I do not really understand this "be quiet" of which you speak. Perhaps you are talking of personal experiences... and certainly you appear to be quite blessed in the opportunities you are being given in working for the Lord. If there are some calling you to be still, well I'd think that inappropriate. If this being still is what you call a state of laziness, then by all means don't be lazy. I think it wrong however, to extrapolate laziness to a stillness in others, because we do not know how the Holy Spirit is moving in the lives of others. That is between them and God. If your message benefits and touches some, then great!

B.W. wrote:We are after all, the arms, legs, feet, mouth, etc, called the body of Christ; Called to reach out doing our Father’s business wherever we have been assigned. Him working thru us, His will, thus transformed - Galatians 1:4, Galatians 4:19, 2 Peter 1:2-9

Those that learn this, know full well that reliance on good works to earn favoritism, brownie points, to canvass God is an affront to God because such legalist works – rituals are an attempt to overthrow God by saying our legalist works – rituals done for God are greater and better than God works. We know he alone saves and have moved beyond the torn veil and begun the journey towards the Holy of Holies.

Quite convoluted, but if I digest it right I think I can agree with you here.

B.W. wrote: We know His Grace ain’t Cheap because it is Free…

I defer to my earlier comments

May God continue to bless you and your ministry Bryan.

PS. I really didn't intend to stir in any of my comments, please don't take them personally.

jlay wrote:

That is correct. What's your point?

My point is, I am shocked. Just being candid. My response was that you would clarify. I'm shocked that where you choose to fellowship with people, yet you can't tell me about the testimony, lives or the Christian walk of those you choose to congregate and worship with. At least that is how I am understanding your comment. If I am wrong, I hope that you would clarify. That's why I asked you how long you had worshipped there.

Perhaps it comes down to the reasoning I attend, which is to bring my children up with other Christians. I never felt a need to attend a church and in fact only committed to attending a year ago for the benefit of my kids. It is a great responsibility I have to ensure they a brought up correctly in Christ, and churches offer great foundations. Myself, I got plenty of great (and better!) teachings from reading books and working through issues myself with God. And I didn't have to suffer the hurt and pain I've seen churches cause a lot of people. Furthermore, I am also a very individual and private person and prefer the company of a few rather than a lot.

jlay wrote:

Furthermore, I don't believe in "callings" since I believe we are all called and Scripture is obvious what business we're meant to be about. It's just a matter of working out how to best use our talents.

I'm not going to argue the semantics of the word calling, and I'm not sure how your are using it. My use comes from Pauls use in Ephesians. It is obvious that in this sense Paul beleived in it, and believed in it for every believer. Paul talks repeatedly in this epistle about the 'walk.' And we know from Eph 2:10 that God has prepared beforehand, good works for the believer to walk in. Walk worthy of your Calling.

Eph 2:10 is quite general. I have no real qualms here.

jlay wrote:

That's nice. Your attitude is one reason why I didn't like churches for many years. I take my kids to creche at church and stay with them so I get to see other kids. I also get to see other parents, and some I can tell struggle. I'd much prefer to focus on how the parents can be helped rather than judge them. You know, show compassion rather than judgement.

For one, that is not an attitude. It is a fact. Just as a school teacher learns a lot about the home life of a child by being with them. If parents knew what their children reveal about the homelife, I'd say many would be concerned. To show compassion requires we make sound judgements.

Ok.

jlay wrote:I find your attempts to attack my character rather disturbing. I find it devious that you would somehow imply that I am only judging and not showing compassion. Your reply is offensive and underhanded. No two ways about it. My attitude is one of concern for the great neglect we see in our Christian culture today. The fact that you have taken opportunity to jump in on this thread about God's work through a minsitry I have been blessed to serve in, and use it to somehow berrate me about speaking to the great concerns and neglects we see in the church today is nothing but absurd. You have no clue the times I have spent weeping in prayer over a child or a family. You have no idea how I have prayed for God to use me to see these children come to Christ to discover their God given destiny.

Please point out where I attacked your character? I am simply trying to understand your position, which until your previous quote seemed more concerned with condemning parents rather than showing compassion and support. I apologise if you feel I have attacked your character or been berating you. It is also great you work with children spiritually. There is nothing more important in my opinion.!

jlay wrote:The fact that we can tell a lot about a homelife through a child is simply a reality. The fact that there is a lack of discipleship in the home is a sad reality. One that our congregation is helping offer resources and strategies to deal with. It is also obvious when parents do or don't take advantage of said resources. I hardly think you are qualified to make such judgments towards me.

That is indeed sad. However, the parents in such case also need help which would also benefit of the kids. Maybe they do not fully understand the Gospel themselves? I just do not comprehend how parents could be so lax if they really are Christian. But then, I admit I do see Christians in the church that seem to just go with the flow. I makes me wonder.

jlay wrote:

Furthermore, if they are Christians then they are brothers and sisters in Christ. If a person does not wish to honour God, then this tells me something. It tells me they do not really follow after God. On the other hand, if they struggle to obey and honour God, then this I can understand they are still Christian and struggle with sin as do we all. Are you really that perfect yourself?

First. I am a dispensationalist. I am not per se talking about the salvation of these people. Your Arminian claims are just off base. I am talking about exactly what the apostle Paul talks about at length. Especially in Ephesians. He spends three chapters reminding the beleivers of what they HAVE in Christ. In chapter four he essentially says, "since you already have this, walk worthy of your calling." i just find it utterly disturbing that someone of the faith would try to make such a unfounded case against me, as if everything is just hunky dory in the Christian world." It's sickening.

I don't know you jlay. And this is probably my first encounter. So you wouldn't be the first Christian I've come across to be more on the legalistic side of the debate. I am not sure what is so sickening about this, but your repulsion is evidence enough to me to know I was reading you wrong. Please accept my apologies for any offence caused. It was unintended.

God bless!

K,

Although a great part of my growth has come from private study and prayer, another part of my growth as a believer has come from fellowship with other believers. One does not replace or supercede the other. My biggest growth from fellowship has beenwith my weekly men's group. We spend two hours each Monday night expositionally studying the Word, and interceding in prayer. I can't imagine my life without these men, or the blessings we've experience. In fact, the minsitry I serve in came through my association with these men. If there were a crisis in my life, i know the support I'd have from these godly men, as it has been put to the test on many occassion for those who attend.
The risk of fellowship is exposure. It seems by your own words that you are not willing to take this risk, but remain on the fringe. I do understand your concerns. It sounds as if perhaps you have made some judgments about the church yourself. And FWIW, my personality tends to be that of a loner.

And I didn't have to suffer the hurt and pain I've seen churches cause a lot of people.

The congregational church is not going to improve by people withdrawing from it. But, by people engaging and making a difference themselves. I'm rather confused that you would say you don't need the congregational church, yet see your children's involvement as a benefit. Can you see how one would perceive this as a contradiction?

"Do not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing..."

And do not believe that I'm advocating that the traditional church model is the only way a believer can grow or fellowship. I am most certainly not. In fact, for those that do a great job, there are many congregational churches taht do a poor job. One should be more careful in how they choose such associations.

Please point out where I attacked your character?

Your post clearly indicate that you view my position as one of unjustly condemning and attacking believers in wrong judgment and not offering support or compassion.

This has nothing to do with legalism. Carefully read Ephesians, particularly chapters 4-6. It is the Genesis of the new testament. It is for believers to learn how to conduct themselves. There is a way for a believer to walk. There are instructions. Is Paul being legalistic?

Jlay,

You can be pretty funny sometimes....really insisting on other threads that people shouldn't get so offended and yet here you certainly reacted quite strongly quite quickly to barely a suggestion and then went on the attack about K's behavior in church! What a tempest in a teapot!

Sometimes I think that if someone posted that the sky is blue, you would insist that its red just to be contrary!

Hi K and the readers,

How to respond to all of K's comments here - let me move try a diiferent approach than most are used too. I'll begin with a few quotes from commenatries then build off these.

Robertson Word Pictures says this about Eph 2:8

For by grace (tēi gar chariti). Explanatory reason. “By the grace” already mentioned in Eph 2:5 and so with the article.

Through faith (dia pisteōs). This phrase he adds in repeating what he said in Eph 2:5 to make it plainer. “Grace” is God’s part, “faith” ours.

And that (kai touto). Neuter, not feminine tautē, and so refers not to pistis (feminine) or to charis (feminine also), but to the act of being saved by grace conditioned on faith on our part. Paul shows that salvation does not have its source (ex humōn, out of you) in men, but from God. Besides, it is God’s gift (dōron) and not the result of our work.

So it is by God's grace we are saved as Eph 2:5, and Eph 2:7 states. Now look at what this commentary says about the Eph 2:8

The Peoples New Testament states this about Eph 2:8

It is the gift of God. The salvation is not due to ourselves, but is God's gift. The grammatical construction of the Greek does not allow us to make "faith" the subject of the last clause. It is not "faith," but salvation through the faith, which is the gift of God. So says John Wesley in his Notes: "This refers to the previous clause, That you are saved, etc."

Not of works. The salvation is not due to works of law, or to our own merit; hence there is no ground for boasting.

For we are his workmanship… It is God who saved us; as new creatures, he had made us through the gospel. We are not saved by works, but are his workmanship, created unto good works, designed henceforth to abound in them.

Which God hath before ordained. It is his ordination that all who believe the gospel and are saved should practice good works. God has graciously quickened us, saved us, made us new creatures, and prepared us unto good works.

So the question is - are we The Lord's ποίημα - poíēma - or our own (workmanship see verse 10)?

Who works in us to do his good pleasure?

Eph 2:10, "For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them."

Created (ktisthentes) has in its meaning used in Eph 2:10 - Eph 4:24 - and LXX Psalms 51:12 denotes to create, form, fashion as in regeneration / renewal

Next question: What did God predestine us to walk in?

Romans 8:29, 30, 31 answers: "For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. 30 And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified. 31 What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us?"

What are the good works God predestine us to walk in?

Gal 4:19 gives a clue...Eph 4:24 further leads too as well as does Philippians 2:5 - Col 1:27 and Col 3:10

2 Peter 1:1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 speaks of and as Christ went about doing his Father's buisness so are we... as Eph 5:1 leads too: "Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children. 2 And walk in love, as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God." ESV

We were predestined to this.

Now to help the reader better understand what I mean by Lazy Grace

Lazy Grace is my own term used simply to gain someone’s attention. What Lazy Grace does, is it keeps people from quickly discovering the rest and beauty of finding God's purpose in their lives during this mortal sojourn. These works begin as inner works involving a new character transformation that will later on - out of your belly - flow rivers of living water to those around you - wherever you have been assigned. In others words, you become the person God designed you to be.

Lazy Grace does not stop this - it slows down the process by creating discouragement like a sense of – why I am here that many Christians end up feeling. Lazy Grace weakens faith – not salvation but a person’s personal faith.

From this discouragement, our wondering, our weakness, well, you begin to realize that God predestined you to become something that He who began a good work will complete it. So after they tire from whatever is getting in the way of faith, they will finally reach out to God in Faith to become transformed.

That is the molasses slow method. It is made thus by a fear of legalist works - or works done to keep one saved. Some may fall into that trap due to a misunderstanding of what good works really are but that should not negate or deter others from pressing in to uncover what they were predestined to become.

There is a tendency to teach about faith but not convey it.

So hear what Paul is saying in just Romans 8:29, 31 - "For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son.... 31 What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us?" ESV

Hear it? Then why can't we live like a believer and turn our back to the deceiver as the old song goes?

Titus 2:11, 12, "For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people, 12 training (teaching) us to renounce (NIV -Say No to sin) ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age..."

Such change indeed produces and outward affect - it makes one more in the image of Christ and the likeness of the Father's Love (A Mystery note Genesis 1:26) as was intended, which God predestined us to become...

Do you reading this, have Faith? What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us?"

By Love - I mean the implications of Agape's Nurturing, building up, edifying, cherishing, fostering, training, leading by example, in order to unite - not divide as that is the Father's Love, the likeness we are to govern our own little privet world's by in order to be prepared for the things to come (Rev 21:1-5).

We squabble about - works no, no works at all allowed or this and that thing- lazy grace does keep a person busy by delaying what the Lord wants manifested in the here and now! It sure does!

Shall we be about our Father's business to our family, the store clerk, the people in our church? He who is faithful with least will be faithful with much...

Romans 8:29, 31 - "For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son.... 31 What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us?"

Read the rest...

Rom 8:32-39, "He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things?

"33 Who shall bring any charge against God's elect? It is God who justifies.

"34 Who is to condemn? Christ Jesus is the one who died--more than that, who was raised--who is at the right hand of God, who indeed is interceding for us.

"35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword?

"36 As it is written, "For your sake we are being killed all the day long; we are regarded as sheep to be slaughtered."

“37 No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. 38 For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, 39 nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord." ESV

May your faith grow... "Be strong in the Lord and the power of his might... Eph 6:10"
-
-
-
Hmmm...

Eph 1:15. “Therefore I also, after I heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus and your love for all the saints, 16 do not cease to give thanks for you, making mention of you in my prayers:

“17 that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give to you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of Him, 18 the eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that you may know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints, 19 and what is the exceeding greatness of His power toward us who believe, according to the working of His mighty power...

“20 which He worked in Christ when He raised Him from the dead and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places, 21 far above all principality and power and might and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age but also in that which is to come. 22 And He put all things under His feet, and gave Him to be head over all things to the church, 23 which is His body, the fullness of Him who fills all in all.

Do you see?? Hear???

Romans 8:31 - What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us?"

How can God's Grace remain lazy within our hearts - may it be unleashed...Amen

Eph 2:10, "For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them."
-
-
-

Jlay,

You can be pretty funny sometimes....really insisting on other threads that people shouldn't get so offended and yet here you certainly reacted quite strongly quite quickly to barely a suggestion and then went on the attack about K's behavior in church! What a tempest in a teapot!

Sometimes I think that if someone posted that the sky is blue, you would insist that its red just to be contrary!

Zoe,
People shouldn't get easily offended, including me. Does jumping in on a thread, not adding anything to the topic, but simply taking a shot at me really add or contribute in anyway? Not at all, IMO.
Did I report the thread, make a complaint? Heaven's no.

Zoe, I am/was sickened at the direction that K is trying to take this thread. By his own words he said,

but your repulsion is evidence enough to me to know I was reading you wrong.

The continued inferences to legalism demonstrate, yes, he is reading it wrong. I also took great excpetion with his insinuation that I was not compassionate or loving, when I have a track record of testimony that would confirm otherwise. This isn't a thread about how one is saved by works, (which I STRONGLY disbelive.) Which is the only reason K would have to bring up legalism, unless I have missed something. This is a thread about mission and minsitry and Christian's God given destiny. My thread points out an obvious lack within the Christian culture. A FACT. It is perplexing that someone would want to try to essentially deny such a lack, and then reduce the issue to merely being legalistic, and spend so much time arguing with what is an obvious truth. Christians are created for good works. Fact. As a dispensationalist it is nothing beyond absurd to accuse me of legalism. Especially since this is a grace alone, faith alone position. K, has repeatedly miscontrued the intent of the thread, and read into it things which simply are not in the discussion. I repeat, this has NOTHING to do with how one is or isn't saved. This is about what a saved person has available to them, and how that is being neglected. Thus Paul's admonitions in Ephesians. (I wonder if K read Eph 4-6 as I suggested. as it directly relates to my case against the church today.) Even K's last point demonstrates that he completely misses what is at discussion here, as he once again accuses, 'legalism.'

Jlay,

Chill, dude

It was primarily a humorous attempt with a bit of seriousness. It does seem like you're willing to be contrary, but my comment was primarily meant to be similar to a poke. You'd know if I was really upset....flames would be coming out of your keyboard, steam hissing from the CPU, your computer would melt, the sky would rain down sulfur...earthquakes...thunder and lightening...or rather lightening and then thunder. (lol, I remember the Monty Python skit, "How to Argue"...where John CLeese simply says , "no, it's not" to everything...but anyway, just a funny memory)

But in all seriousness, why the immediate rise to attack-mode? I simply don't get the willingness to send the attack mode "red-alert Whoop Whoop!" "danger-danger, Will Robinson" HERESY!! Heresy!! (A bit silly, just having fun with the language today). We are, in the end, very reasonable people who are happy to explain ourselves and our beliefs. If one of our posts seem to insinuate something, a very simple "hey, this is what I am hearing....is this what you are saying?"....it just seems so argumentative and overly...sensitive. For someone who wants everyone else to stop being offended, you certainly seem to be willing to take offense awfully quickly, that's all (shocked, sickened, awfully strong words for the second page/third page of a thread). One would hope that all attempts at clearing misunderstandings would be taken before the "sickened" word comes into the conversation. Otherwise it all seems too deliberate and...provocative.

If I can present an analogy....it seems that so many conversations end up in the red zone of the tachometer waaayyyy too quickly, that's all. And it just seems that we can prevent these misunderstandings very very easily.

But K and BW can certainly take care of themselves, they are big boys, manly men....just my .02, FWIW, IMHO, if you care to know, penny for my thoughts...

(this is after a LOOONNGG first week of school, so yes, I am a bit punchy and tired, so even if I were meaning to sling some mud or flame you,you might only feel a little rumble and only get a little bit singed

But yes, your ministry sounds lovely and I enjoyed the pic's. It's nice to hear what everyone is doing.

Attack mode? Just trying to fit in. My mom used to say, "boy, you'd argue with a fence post."

Watch out Zoe, I have a viscious flying elbow.
(joking)

The reason I was sickened was this thread is about a ministry I am personally involved in. just not real sure why K wanted to go in the direction he did. You combine that will all the other drama going on around the board, and well... you know. Things are touchy right now. I'd say it will pass. If not, I'll have to introduce everyone to the hammer brothers, Jack and Sledge.

Looking over the thread, it looks as if even K realized there were more agreements than disagreements.

So are fence posts good debaters?

lol. actually that would be a rather fun post to have....arguments for arguments sake....sometimes I know I am sparring for a fight. The key is for me to know who or why I feel like sparring and to have people know it's just a sparring match.

zoegirl wrote:...But K and BW can certainly take care of themselves, they are big boys, manly men....just my .02, FWIW, IMHO, if you care to know, penny for my thoughts...

K an I agree more than we disagree - as Iron sharpens Iron

We learn from each other
-
-
-

jlay wrote:

Jlay,

You can be pretty funny sometimes....really insisting on other threads that people shouldn't get so offended and yet here you certainly reacted quite strongly quite quickly to barely a suggestion and then went on the attack about K's behavior in church! What a tempest in a teapot!

Sometimes I think that if someone posted that the sky is blue, you would insist that its red just to be contrary!

Zoe,
People shouldn't get easily offended, including me. Does jumping in on a thread, not adding anything to the topic, but simply taking a shot at me really add or contribute in anyway? Not at all, IMO.
Did I report the thread, make a complaint? Heaven's no.

Zoe, I am/was sickened at the direction that K is trying to take this thread. By his own words he said,

but your repulsion is evidence enough to me to know I was reading you wrong.

The continued inferences to legalism demonstrate, yes, he is reading it wrong. I also took great excpetion with his insinuation that I was not compassionate or loving, when I have a track record of testimony that would confirm otherwise. This isn't a thread about how one is saved by works, (which I STRONGLY disbelive.) Which is the only reason K would have to bring up legalism, unless I have missed something.

I feel you did miss that I was ultimately responding to B.W.'s statement on Lazy Grace before I got jumped all over you yourself.

I was not taking any shots at anyone, but merely adding what I thought to be a needed balanced perspective. The very important doctrine of God's grace seemed to be getting attacked to me, and so I countered with a defence in order to bring some balance. Until the end when you felt I was attempting to slander you or the like, I did not realise you were so opposed to being your "legalist" type Christian (of which there are very many, and of which I accept as equally loving and beloved by God, but whom I think often need to embrace understanding others more than judging).

I feel I still contributed by adding balance or at least clarity where others like myself may have misunderstood B.W. and yourself. So I was not and did not intend to take shot at anyone, especially not for the sake of doing so. I have better things to do with my time. So, I see no reason for you to be sickened. I was not intending to take this thread in any direction against you personally. I also never insinuated or intended to insinuate that you were not compassionate or loving. The reason legalism was brought up was again, due to B.W.'s words "Lazy Grace" and what appeared to be an embracing of an extreme works-oriented/judgemental form of Christianity.

I will clarify one more thing, and I am not saying you are one so I pray you will forego judging me so quickly again. But one can certainly be a "legalist" Christian while still believing we are not saved by works.

Jlay wrote:This is a thread about mission and minsitry and Christian's God given destiny. My thread points out an obvious lack within the Christian culture. A FACT.

If this thread is about mission and ministry, why did you derail it by reacting so negatively towards me? I may have raised issue with some statements, but I feel your reaction also largely contributed to the thread being diverted. I'm not all to blame here.

Jlay wrote:It is perplexing that someone would want to try to essentially deny such a lack, and then reduce the issue to merely being legalistic, and spend so much time arguing with what is an obvious truth. Christians are created for good works. Fact. As a dispensationalist it is nothing beyond absurd to accuse me of legalism. Especially since this is a grace alone, faith alone position. K, has repeatedly miscontrued the intent of the thread, and read into it things which simply are not in the discussion.

I do not believe I am not one to overly react to something, or intentionally misconstrue intent. I take exception with what you are implying about me, and I'm sure it sounds quite ridiculous to those more familiar with me here like B.W. and Zoegirl.

If I was not clear on the implications of B.W.'s words, and then your own, then I'm sure other posters would have misunderstood. Again, I will reiterate, just because someone acknowledges a "grace alone, faith alone" (which every Christian I believe should in virtue of their being Christian!), this does not mean they are not legalistic. We are using the term "legalistic" in a different manner if you believe otherwise.

Jlay wrote:I repeat, this has NOTHING to do with how one is or isn't saved. This is about what a saved person has available to them, and how that is being neglected. Thus Paul's admonitions in Ephesians. (I wonder if K read Eph 4-6 as I suggested. as it directly relates to my case against the church today.) Even K's last point demonstrates that he completely misses what is at discussion here, as he once again accuses, 'legalism.'

thanks for your confidence in me. I wonder if you have read the first few verses in Ephesians 4.

Again, I think we are using "legalism" is different contexts if you think I was using it in a soteriological context.

B. W. wrote:Hi K and the readers,

How to respond to all of K's comments here - let me move try a diiferent approach than most are used too. I'll begin with a few quotes from commenatries then build off these.

Robertson Word Pictures says this about Eph 2:8

For by grace (tēi gar chariti). Explanatory reason. “By the grace” already mentioned in Eph 2:5 and so with the article.

Through faith (dia pisteōs). This phrase he adds in repeating what he said in Eph 2:5 to make it plainer. “Grace” is God’s part, “faith” ours.

And that (kai touto). Neuter, not feminine tautē, and so refers not to pistis (feminine) or to charis (feminine also), but to the act of being saved by grace conditioned on faith on our part. Paul shows that salvation does not have its source (ex humōn, out of you) in men, but from God. Besides, it is God’s gift (dōron) and not the result of our work.

So it is by God's grace we are saved as Eph 2:5, and Eph 2:7 states. Now look at what this commentary says about the Eph 2:8

I can agree in essence, but disagree theologically in some details of the commentary presented.

Grace is certainly God's part, and faith ours. However, this does not necessarily mean "grace" (God's part) is conditioned on "faith" (our part) which could contradict the meaning of grace.

Rather, I find it more coherent to believe "grace" does not apply to salvation broadly speaking, but rather only applies to the "issue which separates us from God". That is, it is by God's grace that the issue which separates us from God (sin) is no longer an issue, thanks be to Christ and the forgiveness and mercy offered because of His work. Thus, we are able to enter into relationship with God through faith in Christ (our part).

BW wrote:

The Peoples New Testament states this about Eph 2:8

It is the gift of God. The salvation is not due to ourselves, but is God's gift. The grammatical construction of the Greek does not allow us to make "faith" the subject of the last clause. It is not "faith," but salvation through the faith, which is the gift of God. So says John Wesley in his Notes: "This refers to the previous clause, That you are saved, etc."

Not of works. The salvation is not due to works of law, or to our own merit; hence there is no ground for boasting.

For we are his workmanship… It is God who saved us; as new creatures, he had made us through the gospel. We are not saved by works, but are his workmanship, created unto good works, designed henceforth to abound in them.

Which God hath before ordained. It is his ordination that all who believe the gospel and are saved should practice good works. God has graciously quickened us, saved us, made us new creatures, and prepared us unto good works.

There are some things I would disagree strongly with here just due to some evident contradictions I see.

To say in one instance that, "salvation is not due to ourselves, but is God's gift. Then to say in another instance it is, "salvation through [our] faith" that is a gift of God. This leads to incoherent talk - a contradiction.

Further still, the indirect quotation of Paul's words in Romans that salvation is not due to our own merit, so there is no ground for boasting... and yet, I have witnessed Christians boast in their faith (and a great many Christians!)... this seems to also be a little incoherent.

The rest, you'll be thankful to hear, I can generally embrace, that we are his workmanship, not saved by works, born again and therefore prepared for good works. In fact, the remainder of your post I didn't really have any qualms with. So the original issue is clarified, and I definitely have a better understanding what you meant by "lazy grace". Some good stuff in your last post too!

But what is the solution to the incoherency I identified above? One way out I use to take is to say that our acceptance of Christ and faith in Him is not really big enough to be a work. But then, this doesn't escape the fact that no matter how minimal a role we play, "faith" is still something on our part. Therefore, while it is through God's grace we have an opportunity to be saved, our salvation ultimately depends on us. I still believe it is wrong to claim that we save ourselves, or even that we have a large part to do with our own salvation... but I think we are on sound Christian theological grounds to claim salvation depends on us - our choice.

If our choice plays a part in our salvation, then salvation is not freely given by God's grace. We cannot say salvation is freely given by God's grace and then say our faith saves us without seeming to contradict ourselves. Furthermore, to say salvation is by God's grace alone would justify the belief of universal salvation, something clearly not taught by Jesus who taught that the path was narrow and few find it.

Thus, for coherency, I have embraced that it is the removal of the obstacle between us and God (sin) that was freely given through God's grace. This was accomplish by God through Christ who died for our sins so forgiveness and mercy could abound. It is not so much "salvation" that is given by God's grace, but rather the "antidote" to our separation from God. This was done for all. So now those who return to God to receive the forgiveness that graciously awaits them, it is they who are reunited in their relationship with Him. Is this not complemented by the story of the prodigal son who returns to the embracing and forgiving arms of his father who then celebrates his son's return?

This has just made so much more sense as I read Scripture. What were once subtle soteriological inconsistencies I was being alarmed to as I read Scripture, now seems to fall into place. Some may not see the issues I did, and although I have elaborated on them above, you may still not really see what the problem is. In which case, there is no need to take on what I have said. However, my thoughts are now there for others who might benefit.

I feel you did miss that I was ultimately responding to B.W.'s statement on Lazy Grace before I got jumped all over you yourself

Agreed.

If this thread is about mission and ministry, why did you derail it by reacting so negatively towards me? I may have raised issue with some statements, but I feel your reaction also largely contributed to the thread being diverted. I'm not all to blame here.

A fair criticsim. I regret that. Apologies.

If I was not clear on the implications of B.W.'s words, and then your own, then I'm sure other posters would have misunderstood. Again, I will reiterate, just because someone acknowledges a "grace alone, faith alone" (which every Christian I believe should in virtue of their being Christian!), this does not mean they are not legalistic. We are using the term "legalistic" in a different manner if you believe otherwise.

I guess I can accept this. So on this vein, would you consider Paul's admonishments in Eph. 4 and 5 to be legalistic? If so, is there an appropriate form of legalism for believers?

and yet, I have witnessed Christians boast in their faith (and a great many Christians!)... this seems to also be a little incoherent.

i know you are addressing BW here, but can you give an example so we can better understand. Almost every testimony I hear is boasting on one's faith. not in the sense that they are bragging that they have done something, but boasting that the promises of God are true. When we repsond in faith, God delivers. Our lives are supposed to bear witness to that. Whose lives? our lives.

When I read that from K, I immediately thought of the fact that Christians can have their doctrine exactly correct (grace alone...) and yet behave still int he old nature of expecting people to adhere to certain "lists" they have to do in order to be Chrstians (dress a certain way, be a memeber of church, never do anything on a Sunday).

I know I step into that trap sometimes and sometimes I catch myself quicker than other times....sorry, I had others at first and that came off as terribly arrogant!! I meant, I can catch myself better some time rather than other times.