For Christians: Grace vs. Forgiveness

by AuldSoul 70 Replies latest jw friends

  • AuldSoul
    AuldSoul

    I have been trying to sort this out Scripturally, and would like to get input from Christians on how these two concepts differ and/or overlap. Please be liberal with Scriptures to support statements. I think there may be others who are trying to figure this out for themselves, too. I think thoroughly understanding this is going to keep me from "getting my back up" as much, both on the forum and in my personal life, leading to more peace.

    The way I have it sorted so far is:

    You can ask for and receive forgiveness, but it is not necessarily required. Forgiveness need not be asked for by those who wrong us, but must be freely given in order to be freely received. (Matthew 6:9-15; 9:1-8; 18:23-35; 26:26-30; Mark 3:28-29; 11:25)

    There seems to be a limit when it comes to Holy Spirit. (Matthew 12:31-32; Mark 3:28-29)

    Forgiveness is tied to love, as though the degree of forgiveness indicates the degree of love. (Luke 7:47-50)

    The initial gifting of the Holy Spirit was for forgiveness of the sins of others. (John 20:22-23)

    Everyone who puts faith in Jesus gets forgiveness of their sins, but there seems to be a number of other ways forgiveness can come, as well. (Acts 10:43)

    Grace is what insists that all offenses be forgiven, the degree of grace determining degree of forgiveness. (Ephesians 1:7)

    God has once for all times forgiven us through the blood of Jesus, so that there is no longer a need for anyone to sacrifice for sins. (Hebrews 10:18 and context)

    Holding our sins against ourselves prevents the operation of grace and prevents forgiveness, we hold it to our own account. We have the power to choose whether we will let sin rule. (John 20:22-23; Romans 3:21-31; 6:12-14)

    Grace is essential to forgiveness, like love is essential to forgiveness, but grace seems to exceed even love in its power to forgive sins. (Romans 5:18-21)

    Letting sin master us prevents grace, love, and forgiveness but it is entirely our choice. Grace, love, and forgiveness wait for us to throw of sin's mastery. (Romans 6:16)

    Grace and the truth replaced the Law of Moses. (John 1:14-18)

    Receiving grace is required for salvation. (Acts 15:11)

    Grace motivates the free gift of declaration of righteousness, an additional complement to release from sins through the ransom. (Romans 3:23-24)

    Outward works are not required to be declared righteous by grace, in fact, grace cannot be earned. (Romans 4:4-5; 11:5-6)

    Faith is the means by which we enter into a state of grace. (Romans 5:1-2)

    Grace far surpasses the sin of the one man, Adam. The price was not paid for the sins of only one man, but for the sins of all mankind, past, present, and future. (Romans 5:15-21)

    While sin results in death, sinlessness does not result in life. Declaration of righteousness results in life. This only happens by grace. (Romans 5:1-2; Romans 6:21-23)

    I think that last one is the one that screws up the thinking of so many JWs on this point. JWs teach that if you don't sin you get life, but the Bible does not teach that. The Bible does not teach that Adam and Eve would have lived forever if they did not eat the fruit. It teaches that they would die if they did eat the fruit. They were never declared righteous for life.

    To me, this is good news. I have enjoyed researching the subject out, but I would like the input of others on the point.

    Respectfully,
    AuldSoul

  • Terry
    Terry

    I know you are asking believers for their opinion. I'm not a believer, however, I have a view.

    Ignore me if you like.

    1.Man's condition is entirely that of GOD'S view of man. (Man is what God views him to be.)

    2.Man either creates/alters his own condition or he does not (Man is empowered to change his nature or not)

    3.God can dispose as He so chooses and it will automatically be Justice. (God cannot be unjust.)

    4.Man's choices historically are viewed by God as unfavorable: i.e. SIN (Man falls short of God's perfect standard)

    5.Man is required to choose service to God ANYWAY (even though his human will is sinful) i.e. bootstrap

    6.God imputes life and a condition of blamelessness under one of two conditional states:

    A.Despite man's own particular will

    B.According to man's choice of will

    7.Theology sorts this out

    In other words we have a problem.

    Man is what God made him.

    If God made Man less than perfect God cannot blame man for imperfect actions.

    If God made Man perfect then Perfect is as Perfect does. Man did not make Perfect choices.

    Blaming man's will (Perfect Man=Perfect Will) (Imperfect Man=Imperfect Will) is ridiculous and illogical.

    (What fruit does a particular tree produce?)

    Either man has FREE choice (free of what? A life or death choice is a forced choice in a rational mind) or he follows his own natural thoughts to whatever conclusions he is able to make.

    God's forgiveness is either based on man's MERITS (actions, thoughts, dispostion, will, attitude)

    or

    God's forgiveness is based on God's own decision to impute MERIT (regardless of man's disposition).

    To grant amnesty to a criminal is only mercy when there is an extenuating circumstance.

    Man's imperfect condition is the only extenuating circumstance and God either willed it orallowed it in the first place.

    JUSTICE is getting what you deserve. INJUSTICE is not getting what you deserve.

    Does man DESERVE forgiveness?

    If man does not DESERVE forgiveness, then, God's forgiveness cannot be JUSTICE.

    A God who does not practice JUSTICE is a deuces wild, ad hoc, willy nilly creature of whim and arbitrary disposition; i.e. NOT Godlike.

    So, there is your problem.

    The premise of scripture is flawed and all your conclusions from scripture will themselves be flawed.

  • AuldSoul
    AuldSoul

    Terry,

    Thank you for bumping the thread to the top.

    I know you are asking believers for their opinion.

    No, I asked Christians for their opinions. There are many believers who do not consider themselves Christians. I wasn't restricting the thread for the sake of meanness. I specifically want Scriptural reasonings, as I stated.

    All of your clutter, as honestly and earnestly as it may be presented, is USELESS when talking with someone who requires Scriptures. I forgive your rudeness, though. Despite the fact that you don't deserve it and didn't ask for it. Isn't that terribly unjust of me?

    I think your premise is terribly flawed, BTW, in your assessment of the ONLY bases for forgiving. It uses a kind of logic but leaves out several other bases. Your conclusions are always going to be limited by the constraints you place on your rationale. You try to create an "either, or" condition to force things into, when the Scriptures don't create that construct at all. The Scriptures create more of an "If either, or, or (and), or (not(and)), or, or then, else if ..." logical construct; admittedly still Boolean in nature, with only a decision of yes/no as the output, but considerably more factor filled than the one you simplified.

    Respectfully,
    AuldSoul

  • AuldSoul
    AuldSoul
    Terry: God cannot be unjust

    I think you applied your own determination of what justice is and tried to hold God accountable to it. I don't think your determination of what justice is agrees with justice as described in the Bible.

  • Terry
    Terry
    Terry: God cannot be unjust
    I think you applied your own determination of what justice is and tried to hold God accountable to it. I don't think your determination of what justice is agrees with justice as described in the Bible.

    Am I to assume you have reasons for your view?

  • AuldSoul
    AuldSoul
    Terry: Am I to assume you have reasons for your view?

    Sure. Since this topic isn't about the nature of justice according to the Bible, I won't share them here. But, yes, I have them. It would be perfectly safe for you to assume that I do.

  • Terry
    Terry
    Terry: Am I to assume you have reasons for your view?
    Sure. Since this topic isn't about the nature of justice according to the Bible, I won't share them here. But, yes, I have them. It would be perfectly safe for you to assume that I do.

    Am I to understand that, in your view, neither Grace nor Forgiveness have anything at all to do with God's JUSTICE?

  • RAF
    RAF

    Sorry OldSoul I'm on Short mode today :

    (copy and past from an other one of my post) the goal : why this have been written - it shouldn't lead to be slaves for salvation but free as salvation by wisdom = Christ to resume ...
    that's conceptually talking (also to complete wisdome is supported by pure love = Charity).

    it is actually what I would call : the messianic principle.

  • AuldSoul
    AuldSoul
    Terry: Am I to understand that, in your view, neither Grace nor Forgiveness have anything at all to do with God's JUSTICE?

    Certainly not. You are to understand that grace and forgiveness do not have EVERYTHING to do with God's justice. That is the fulcrum upon which your whole argument balanced. According to the Bible you picked the wrong balancing point.

    But, to your credit, even avid students of the Scriptures like the Pharisees made the same mistake, so it is an understandable error.

  • nvrgnbk
    nvrgnbk
    I'm not a believer, however, I have a view.

    No. Really? LOL!

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit