A few weeks ago, I gave a sermon to the youth at a local church. My message centered on the concept of God’s grace, and I chose to illustrate it using the parable of the wedding feast. Let me summarize my sermon. 

In the parable of the wedding feast, a king invites both good and evil people to attend a grand wedding feast in honor of his son. Remarkably, there are no preconditions for acceptance, and everyone is welcome.  

Then he said to his servants, ‘The wedding is ready, but those who were invited were not worthy. 9 Therefore go into the highways, and as many as you find, invite to the wedding.’ 10 So those servants went out into the highways and gathered together all whom they found, both bad and good. And the wedding hall was filled with guests. (Matthew 22:8-10)

The act of accepting the invitation by a guest represents justification. It’s a beautiful picture of how God’s grace extends to all, regardless of our past or present circumstances. We can see this in John 1 also:  

He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him. But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. (John 1:10-13)

Now, let’s focus on the guests who arrive at the feast.  

“But when the king came in to see the guests, he saw a man there who did not have on a wedding garment. So he said to him, ‘Friend, how did you come in here without a wedding garment?’ And he was speechless.” (Matthew 22: 11-12) 

This parable emphasizes that after receiving an invitation, guests are expected to put on a wedding garment. The fact that nearly everyone complied, except for one individual, indicates that putting on the wedding garment is a simple task. When the King questioned the guest about not wearing the wedding garment, the guest was rendered speechless and offered no defense for his actions. It appears he had introspected and found himself guilty. 

What does this wedding garment represent?  

For He has clothed me with the garments of salvation, 
He has covered me with the robe of righteousness, 
As a bridegroom decks himself with ornaments, 
And as a bride adorns herself with her jewels. (Isaiah 61:10)

According to Isaiah garments represent salvation.  

Now there are two schools of thought on how you get the wedding garment or what it is actually. The first school says these garments are clean clothes that were washed and prepared in advance. A second school argues that given the nature of the last-minute invitation, it would be impossible for everyone to wash their clothes. Therefore, they must have been provided by the King.  

If you like the first school of thought that these are washed clothes, then question becomes how can one wash the stains of sins on their garment of righteousness?  

So he said to me, “These are the ones who come out of the great tribulation and washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. (Revelation 7:14)

This passage suggests that this robe is nothing but our sinful character, and it needs cleaning. But no matter how much we clean it with whatever soap we can find, stains of sin won’t go away. To remove stains of sin, we need the blood of Christ which cleanses every sinful blemish. The blood of Christ is provided free to us at the great cost to Heaven. All we must do is wash our character in the blood of Christ. Refusing to do so ends us up in outer darkness.  

Coming to the second school of thought that suggests that the wedding garments were provided by the King to every guest, the question becomes what is our part then?  

Now Joshua was clothed with filthy garments, and was standing before the Angel. Then He answered and spoke to those who stood before Him, saying, “Take away the filthy garments from him.” And to him He said, “See, I have removed your iniquity from you, and I will clothe you with rich robes.” And I said, “Let them put a clean turban on his head.” So they put a clean turban on his head, and they put the clothes on him. And the Angel of the Lord stood by. (Zechariah 3:3-5)

Here the filthy garment represents our iniquity. God took away our iniquity and provided His Son’s righteousness. Refusing to remove our filthy garment and refusing to put on the new garment requires active resistance in the face of God and angels.  

Coming back to the parable, it appears that this guest believed his own garment to be superior to the one provided by the King. Therefore, he must have actively resisted wearing the King’s garment.  

Washing our sinful nature in the blood of Christ or removing our righteousness and putting on Christ’s righteousness is the process of Sanctification. In this process, we are transformed into the likeness of Christ from glory to glory. The important thing to note here is that no matter which school of thought we ascribe to, in either case, the thing we need to make ourselves righteous is given by God freely to us. We are transformed by grace through faith in Jesus Christ. This is not our doing.  

After I preached this sermon, during a potluck lunch, a couple of people whom I have known for years approached me with a thought-provoking question: “How does your understanding of grace manifest in your daily life?” Essentially, they were asking how you cannot play a role in your own salvation.  

Interestingly, their inquiry mirrors the one posed by Nicodemus in John 3. Nicodemus, a respected Pharisee, and member of the Sanhedrin, approached Jesus secretly, seeking answers. Their conversation revolved around the concept of being “born again.” Jesus explained that this spiritual rebirth involves both water and the Spirit. Nicodemus, perplexed, asked, “How can this be?” 

Jesus responded by referring to an event from Israel’s history.  

As the Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up that everyone who believes in Him may have eternal life. (John 3:14)

In Numbers 21, the Israelites grumbled against God, and as a consequence, venomous serpents plagued the camp. When the people repented and sought God’s mercy, Moses interceded. God instructed Moses to fashion a bronze serpent and raise it on a pole. Anyone bitten by a snake could look at the bronze serpent and live.  

This thing perplexes me. The normal thing to do would be to remove the snakes. Instead, God kept the snakes but asked anyone bitten to look at the brazen serpent and live. How could a mere gaze at this brazen serpent heal them? It defies logic. Yet, it worked. Sometimes, God’s ways transcend our understanding. 

Similarly, when we face life’s “snake bites or sinful failures,” our natural response is panic and frantic attempts to fix things. We look at ourselves, others, different things, or the snake itself. But Jesus invites us to look to Him and live. It’s not about our efforts; it’s about fixing our gaze on the One who brings healing and transformation. 

Consider this powerful verse from Paul: 

“But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as from the Lord, the Spirit.” (2 Corinthians 3:18)

I appreciate the Message Bible’s rendition of this passage: 

“Whenever, though, they turn to face God as Moses did, God removes the veil and there they are—face-to-face! They suddenly recognize that God is a living, personal presence, not a piece of chiseled stone. And when God is personally present, a living Spirit, that old, constricting legislation is recognized as obsolete. We’re free of it! All of us! Nothing between us and God, our faces shining with the brightness of His face. And so we are transfigured much like the Messiah, our lives gradually becoming brighter and more beautiful as God enters our lives and we become like Him.” 

This verse is self-explanatory. With this verse in mind, I want to ask you:

• Does this explanation satisfy your Nicodemus question?  
• Do you still have reservations about how we are transformed into His likeliness? 
• Are you afraid when you hear this type of message? If so, why? Help me understand.  

Sharon: Kiran’s talk was important because I don’t think we can live—especially those of us in the Seventh-Day Adventist culture—without being constantly reminded that we’re “not good enough” or “not doing enough.” It’s deeply ingrained in us that the idea of freedom in the grace of Christ, being in the process of sanctification, is a lifelong struggle. The messages we received as kids in the Academy were that our skirts weren’t long enough, we weren’t vegetarian enough, we shouldn’t drink coffee, and so on. It’s a lifelong battle to release ourselves to the freedom that we have in resting in the grace of Christ, letting His work be done in us instead of trying to navigate the whitewater of life on our own.

David: I can’t resist saying it makes one wonder about religion as a whole and the extent to which it is a stumbling block. Jesus said, “My burden is light.” I don’t think life is supposed to be so hard that one must live in constant fear, spiritually. That’s not what Jesus meant by saying His burden is light. I think all religions need to look very seriously at the restrictions they place on people and ask whether they need revision.

Donald: By the very nature of personalities, some are more prone to reject organized religion than others. I know people who are incredibly attentive to their neighbors with great needs. I’ve come to understand that this is just the way they live their lives. I’ve spent a fair amount of time with them, and they never bring up the topic of organized religion. 

So, they have taken on the wedding garment, but I’m not sure they go to church. I think for us Adventists, it’s hard not to feel that “pinch”, which Sharon described, of going through the day worrying we’re doing something wrong. I don’t know if my neighborly friends feel guilty or burdened. They seem to be just acting upon their faith and doing good.

C-J: I envy you in that what I’m hearing is that you’ve landed in really good fellowship. Every church I’ve been in feels like a political landscape. I have never been in a church where they truly live the Word of God. For me, my walk with God has been very solitary. I choose to follow what the Word of God says, to try to put on that mantle and not just give lip service to it. 

I can’t even imagine what you describe; I’ve never seen it. It’s like, I’m always waiting for the curtain to be pulled back. And like what you told me, now you’re doing this, it’s a very hard thing. And maybe that’s partly what we’ve all been hearing this morning. I didn’t walk away from God; I considered other avenues to experience God. But in the end, without a doubt, I say I landed on the Christian faith because it’s the only faith or practice that really transformed me. It was the only one that restored what was so broken. The others were just rules, traditions, and history. 

Without the Holy Spirit, the promises, and the provisions of the Christian God, I would never have survived, never thrived, never known how to love others. I would just isolate myself out of protection. But the Christian God says to go out and be the witness. No matter how many times you fall, get up and keep giving. 

I feel very blessed for this group, very blessed for the faithfulness of God, the Creator, the divine.

Don: I’m struck by how the king addresses the man without the robe and calls him “friend.” Jesus addressed three people as “friend” in his ministry, at least that I can remember. One is the vineyard worker who complained about receiving the same pay as those who worked only the last hour; another is Judas, whom Jesus addresses as “friend” when he is betrayed in the garden. 

So, if Jesus identifies these people as friends, it certainly should reassure us that you and I, too, are friends of God. But for some reason, it’s almost impossible for us to leave our salvation to God alone. We just have to help Him, as if He’s inadequate. Somehow, pushing Him in the right direction is our responsibility. It’s remarkable when you think of it in those terms. But as those of us who have been lifelong religiously affiliated people find, it’s the reality we live in, as Sharon said. 

The question that keeps resounding in my head is, why is it so difficult to accept grace? It seems like it should be the easiest and most natural, wonderful expression of relationship with God. But for some reason, we just have to help God. He just can’t quite do it himself. It’s a necessity we can’t seem to get over. I wonder why that is?

Donald: Actually, it’s going beyond the call of duty. I think we’re surprised by the response of someone when we go in expecting them to behave a certain way. So, I go into a bank, expecting the person there to talk to me and know the information I need. But when they do the second and third and fourth thing, like calling someone for me, that’s going beyond the call of duty. That’s grace. We don’t see it very often. Well, I shouldn’t really say that. I think, as I explained earlier, people reciprocate the behavior they’re shown—if you show grace, they’ll give grace; if you’re unpleasant, they’ll reciprocate that too.

Don: But that’s not what’s at stake here. What’s at stake is that you might act unpleasantly, but God still gives you grace.

Donald: That’s God. What does grace look like? It’s like prayer. Okay, let’s have this conversation. Well, it’s a one-way conversation, so that gets a little tricky after a while. But what does grace look like on a day-to-day basis? I understand that God overlooks all of that. And here I am, being unpleasant, and He’s being gracious. But in everyday life, what does grace look like? So that we can have an idea of what grace is.

C-J: I think it’s in Corinthians 13. The difference between hospitality, which is the law of the Bedouin, and the Abrahamic brand. It’s about being patient, kind, loving, long-suffering—all of that. And it’s effortless, not even a choice. It’s not about just doing this because God commands me, but because the Holy Spirit has completely enveloped us, mind, body, and soul. It’s not work; it is a joy unto the Lord. 

I’m not there yet, but I recognize it when it happens. When I step outside of my concerns like, “This is going to hurt” or “Why should I?” I’m never disappointed with how God is always present. I’m never like, “Now you show up?” God is always there, because God is always working. Everyone in the room is blessed.

Don: Donald, does your question imply that one of the reasons we have difficulty accepting grace is because we don’t know it when we see it? Or because we don’t see it very often, or at all?

Donald: I think part of the challenge is that in organized religion, when we go to a church and see people proclaiming they’re Christians, it ramps up our expectations of those we share faith with. I no longer have the same expectations for them as I would for someone down the street working in a shop. But when you go to church, then you start thinking, “This is how I expect you to behave.” 

So it ramps up our expectations of how we should behave towards each other. That’s unfortunate, because usually when you meet someone, you have fairly low expectations, maybe just expecting a smile. But beyond that, you don’t know what you’re entering into regarding their day, their background, or how long they’ve worked there. My point is that I have higher expectations, unfortunately, of organized religious people than I would have of others who don’t profess that faith. 

God certainly understands that. It’s beyond belief that we are flawed, but God accepts us. But for me to see what grace looks like, I guess I have to look at the literal and then try to apply that to something that’s beyond.

Don: I think you’ve put your finger on it now. You say it’s beyond belief. Yes, it is.

Donald: It’s beyond belief. But we don’t live in a world of beyond. We live in a world where the only time we do “beyond belief” is when we pray, when we talk about these kinds of things together. We’re doing “beyond belief” a bit by trying to understand it. But “beyond belief” is by its very definition something I can’t believe. So, it’s intangible.

David: Why do we need to see grace in our lives now? I don’t understand why. I mean, there’s a difference between seeing God’s grace, receiving God’s grace, and seeing that you’re receiving God’s grace. I would dispute that we need to see it at all.

Donald: Maybe, David. Understanding it would be about it. Well, I can’t understand what grace says.

David: The same objection applies: You don’t need to understand grace and you don’t need to see it. What we need is God’s grace. That’s all. We get it even if we don’t know it. Maybe if we don’t have faith that grace exists, then we’re like the guest at the wedding feast who wouldn’t put on the garment. He could not accept that he was at the party by the grace of God—if he did, he’d be wearing the garment. So he’s there by his own efforts, but he doesn’t get to stay, he doesn’t receive the lasting grace. 

I don’t believe we need to see grace. We don’t need to know that grace is Christ-centered. All the people who’ve never heard of Christ still receive grace. Some faiths never even talk about grace. It’s not a concept within their culture. Yet, we must believe, as Christians, that they receive God’s grace. But they don’t understand it, they don’t see it, they don’t know it. And it doesn’t matter.

Don: There are two more things about this parable that I think weigh in on this conversation. One is that of the many people who came, only one apparently refused the wedding garment. This belies the idea that it’s difficult to be saved. I’ve always been taught and grew up thinking that it was going to be really difficult to be saved, and if we were just lucky enough to get invited by the skin of our teeth, that would be our good fortune. But this parable suggests that it’s pretty hard to be lost. 

The second thing that accentuates this point is that here you have a man who is confronted with: “Why didn’t you take the wedding garment?” and he has nothing to say—he’s completely speechless. He recognizes that he’s defenseless in this endeavor. 

It’s just so opposite of what we’ve been taught and what religion teaches us that it’s remarkable to see how far we’ve come off the rails when it comes to understanding God’s grace.

C-J: I think when this man shows up at a wedding knowing he’s not appropriately attired, it’s like saying, “Don’t you know where you are?” I myself have done that. You know, “Accept me as I am. If you don’t want me here, I can leave. I don’t belong with your group. I don’t have XYZ, but somebody invited me, but I’m not going to change. I’m not going to turn myself inside out because I don’t want to be fake with you.” 

The other piece is the narrative of who I am that was given to me, and not the narrative that God gave me. Which is that I am worthy to be loved, I am worthy to be accepted, as I am worthy to expect God to restore and make provision, not by a list of rules. But understanding that love and grace is what transforms me. It’s not about what I’m wearing to church, or the words that I use. It’s often not about being out in public a lot, or with many different people. 

But when I used to teach, I’d walk into a building and be talking with someone, and I’d think, “Right, I’m a Christian,” because the spirit was just God’s Spirit. That grace, it just knew intuitively, this is different. This person trusts God in every walk of his or her life. And they’re just genuinely loving, generous people.

I wanted to add the importance Donald was speaking of regarding the people who help take care of their needy neighbors. It’s much easier to lift the log when there are four or five people who, even if they say, “I’m tired, I’m done with this. It’s not making a difference.” But when you’re together, it’s like, “Yeah, this is good. This is really good. I’m glad we did this.” But when you’re doing it alone, it’s a heavy lift. 

It’s not about somebody else seeing; it’s just that in community, you can do anything. It’s like marching the walls of Jericho, as Carolyn often speaks about. In community, there’s not just power and authority, but a multiplication of the good. It’s just, you stand back and you go for it.

Donald: I don’t want to waste your time, but I always have to tie something to my experience. Maybe that’s part of the thing. I recently rented a car from an airport kiosk. It asked for my license and my credit card. I go through the whole thing and it says, “Okay, this is the car you’ve ordered, would you like an upgrade?” Ah, somebody started to offer me more than I would expect. “Oh, wait a minute. If you do that, we’ll cut you a deal. Right now, before you see the cars. This one will be $10 a day more,” etc., etc. I’m like, “No, I’m gonna stay with what I got.” But the machine doesn’t know whether it’s giving me a good car or not. So I get out to the lot where a guy tells me to “Pick any car you want in the lot.” I mean, now there’s grace! It felt like I hit the lottery. The machine wanted to wring more money out of me but the guy simply says, “The keys are in all of them. Take anything you want.”

C-J: I never mind anybody sharing real-life experiences because we live in this dimension, and we all filter through our experiences and our value system. We don’t live in the clouds; we have to deal with people we don’t like and do things we don’t want to do because we’ve made commitments. Those caring neighbors did not sit back and say “Don’t you have family?” to those in need. 

It’s really important that we show up in desperate times, and it’s better if proximity allows us to do it. Like what a nice surprise, “Come on in, you were in the neighborhood,” when actually, you made an effort to ask, “Is this a good time for you?”

Donald: It’s very important that we show up. So, do I have to even show up? Do I have to be present?

C-J: I think in this dimension, in our reality, we measure things—it’s binary, the way our brain works. In the spiritual world, I think we’ve all experienced the unfathomable grace and love of God, something that nobody but God could have done. “Something is different with me now, and I can’t explain it.” We just go forward, and we try to allow God to do the work He’s intended for us, to be in the purpose of our life. 

But in the real world where we are, and until we are transformed to a different place, I have to tell myself, “Be anxious for nothing. God’s timing is perfect, God will reveal it when it’s needed.” Do the right thing, not because you’re supposed to, but because you are allowing yourself to be a vessel of God.” And that’s hard. It is not an easy gig. 

Sometimes, after it’s all done, because there isn’t joy when I’m getting in my car, picking up my stuff, thinking, “Boy, this is gonna be a real pain. I just know this isn’t gonna go well, I don’t want to do it. They tell me it’s a couple of hours, it’s gonna be all day. I have other things planned.” I have to really make an attitude adjustment. “If you’re gonna go, go with the right attitude. Get yourself together here.” And just leave it alone. Don’t put parameters on it. But it’s hard. It’s really hard. I think that’s the grace. 

I mean, when people have gone through what many of us here have gone through—such as been sick for prolonged periods of time—it’s God’s grace that carries us every day. When we pray for someone that we know is hurting, it’s God’s grace every day. God cycles that thought back, “Lord, keep your hand on this person.” Instead of just throwing it up, sometimes I just tell myself, “Stop, count, and drop to your knees.” This isn’t a time to just say, “Lord, again, keep your hand on that person.” Because I feel heavy in my spirit. It doesn’t happen very often, but when I hear it, I do it because even if it’s pulling the car over, because God is so faithful, God is doing that work and that transformation in everybody on the stage.

Anonymous: I think what we need to see is that we should be thankful and recognize God’s grace in everyday life. We don’t have to understand that it’s there. And when we realize that it’s there all the time, no matter what we do, the only thing we can do—and that’s what we call adding to salvation—is not in addition to anything God does to save us, but just a thankful heart as a response to His grace. The only way we can react to grace is by being thankful and conscious about everything we go through during our lives. 

It’s all put in a way for our good because of God’s grace, and all we have to do is be thankful. We don’t need to understand grace, we don’t need to see grace, because as soon as you recognize that you’re living in this grace, that’s enough. We’ll be thankful all the time.

Reinhard: I think the love of God that we experience in everyday life, or in our actions and the responses from those around us… If we walk with God, I think we can feel the love of God. Then we always have to introspect. When we walk with God, He helps with every decision we make, day in and day out. We can see the love of God in our life, no matter what the situation. 

Of course, we always have challenges in life. But when we walk closer with God, everything is okay. I think the Grace of God, we can always feel in our life. Sometimes it’s hard to accept grace. In my thinking, the problem with salvation is it makes us always worry. “Am I going to be saved?” I think that’s the challenge. 

If grace is cheap, how can it secure our salvation? To me, salvation is for people who believe in God, that’s what distinguishes between those to be redeemed and those who are not going to be saved. I think there has to be something to differentiate people because God is going to choose who’s going to be saved or not. 

And even though grace is free for everybody, there’s always some kind of responsibility for us. So to me, the distinction between salvation and outer darkness depends on how we respond, how we follow God’s commands. We have to obey God’s will in order for us to be saved. 

I think that’s the ultimate challenge for us, to make sure that we will receive this salvation, and God makes a distinction between the saved and not saved according to whether they followed His command. God will separate, and that’s the key. Yes, grace is free for everybody, but I think it is key that God will separate. 

If salvation is the work of God, we cannot do anything; no matter how good we are, we cannot guarantee ourselves salvation, but we cannot afford to not work no matter how good we are. We cannot save ourselves, but our righteousness, our obedience to Him is the distinction God is going to use to choose who’s going to be saved and not be saved.

David: I wonder, is it really a matter of it all boiling down to obeying rules? I’m not sure that’s the case. We’ve got to remember that there were good and bad people at the wedding feast and they were all saved, except for one guy. What was different about him, besides not wearing the wedding garment? 

He didn’t answer when God spoke to him. Why not? We don’t know. We can come up with all sorts of theories as to why he didn’t answer but to me, the answer is that he could not see or hear God, he didn’t realize that he was being spoken to. He did not believe in God, so could not see him nor hear him.

That’s what leaves you outside, in the dark. That’s why you can’t be “saved.” If you cannot see or hear God speaking to you, you can’t respond, so you can’t be saved. I don’t think it has anything to do with obedience.

Don: We will discuss this further. The issue of obedience and grace is still on the table for more thought.

* * *

Last week, we looked at the different views of the doctrine of salvation among Protestants and the various sects within Adventism. Today, we are going to explore the practical implications of these differences and how they shape our understanding of moral law.

Despite the differences, all major Adventist views, as well as mainstream Protestant beliefs, agree that true salvation should lead to moral transformation or Christian perfection. However, there is a debate over whether this perfection is primarily the responsibility of human striving and achievement, or if it is accomplished through resting in God’s grace and the finished work of Christ being applied to the believer. This disagreement fundamentally arises from different interpretations of the complex relationship between grace and human effort in the process of sanctification and glorification.

In my 24-year Adventist journey, for a good 15 years, I held the view that I must strive to achieve Christian perfection. My efforts were sincere, and my desire was genuine. But I consistently failed which led me to depression and led me to doubt my faith. Thanks to the work of Dr. Weaver, I began a new journey that made me look at the 10 commandments in a new light. To better understand that let’s first understand the difference between first and second covenants. 

God gave the Ten Commandments to the Israelites through Moses and established the first covenant. In Exodus 19:3-8, God promised that if the Israelites obeyed Him fully and kept His covenant, they would be His treasured possession, a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation. The people agreed, saying, “We will do everything the Lord has said.”

We know the story. Israelites repeatedly failed to keep the covenant. God acknowledged this failure of the people in Jeremiah 31 and foretold a new covenant that He would make with His people. Paul talked about it in Hebrews 8. 

Hebrews 8:6 But in fact the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, since the new covenant is established on better promises. 7 For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another. 8 But God found fault with the people and said: “The days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant. with the people of Israel and with the people of Judah. 9 It will not be like the covenant I made with their ancestors. when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they did not remain faithful to my covenant, and I turned away from them, declares the Lord. 10 This is the covenant I will establish with the people of Israel after that time, declares the Lord. I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. 11 No longer will they teach their neighbor, or say to one another, ‘Know the Lord,’ because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest. 12 For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more.” 13 By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.

The old covenant depended on the people’s promises to God, but the new covenant is based on God’s promises to us. The old covenant was built on the feeble human effort, but the new covenant was built on the Christ the Solid Rock. Our salvation rests not on our ability to keep promises to God, but on believing His promises to us. Embracing this new covenant frees us from the “yoke of bondage”. The old covenant mindset consists of constant striving to be more perfect followed by constant failures to live up to the mark set by God. The new covenant releases us from being “under the law” and brings us “under the Spirit.” The new covenant mindset consists of resting in the Grace of God. 

Under the old covenant, even the best efforts of Israel’s prophets, judges, and kings could not produce lasting revival and reformation. Their repeated cycles of backsliding demonstrated the weakness inherent in a covenant based on human promises. 

Unlike the old covenant, the covenant based on God’s promises results in success. Many of us think that this covenant based on God’s promises is new, but it was present even before the old covenant. The Abrahamic covenant precedes the Mosaic covenant, and it was made entirely on the promises of God. Abraham understood his helplessness in front of the God of the universe and didn’t dare to make a return promise. Instead, he simply believed in the promise of God. Therefore, his belief became righteousness unto Him. 

The idea is that Justification is by Grace alone, but sanctification requires Grace, and Human effort is like mixing the new covenant with a little bit of the old covenant. The problem with this mixing is that a little bit of the old covenant paralyzes the entire spiritual experience producing lukewarmness. 

The new covenant message of righteousness by faith alone makes us realize that just like Abraham, by believing in Christ’s promises, we become righteous, and the Ten Commandments become Ten precious promises. By resting in God’s grace, we become righteous. This is hard for us to understand because in this world nothing comes to us by resting. But that is exactly what we need to do in Christ and His Grace. 

Based on this understanding, I reimagined the Ten Commandments as the Ten Promises of God. By simply believing in His promises, and resting in His grace, they will be fulfilled in our lives. 

Just a word of caution. This is my interpretation based on the books that I read. I spent almost a month writing these ten promises. More than the finished product, the act of writing them was more rewarding for me. I don’t have a good way to explain how wonderful my experience was. You may not like what I have written but I encourage you to write the 10 commands as 10 promises on your own and experience the joy that I experienced. You will not be disappointed. 

First Commandment: 

I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. “You shall have no other gods before Me.

I am your Creator and Redeemer. Despite any hostility you may harbor toward Me, I claim you as My own. I have completely freed you from the bondage of sin, self-centeredness, and eternal condemnation. Only in Me will you find true freedom, joy, and fulfillment. Nothing false will ever deceive you again. 

Second Commandment: 

You shall not make for yourself a carved image any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me, but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments.

Understand that nothing in this world can fully grasp My essence. My goodness, grace, and love transcend anything earthly. I am the sole source of true goodness and love, capable of fulfilling all your needs. My presence is constant and enduring. I will guide you to seek Me with sincerity and authenticity, ensuring fulfillment for countless generations. However, if you turn to false sources for fulfillment, I, in My grace, will restrict the repercussions to only three or four generations. 

Third Commandment: 

You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, for the Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes His name in vain.

I will refine your hypocritical character into an authentic one that endures the flames of trial. You will never misrepresent Me again but embody genuineness through and through.

Fourth Commandment: 

Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. 11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore, the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.

After completing creation in six days, I gave you the gift of the Sabbath, a day of rest intricately woven into the very fabric of time. It’s more than just a respite from the week’s toils; it’s a precious gift, a gentle beckoning to seek solace in My embrace. When you embrace this sacred day, dear child, and enter the tranquil sanctuary of My love, you unlock a wellspring of peace and a deeper communion with your Creator. In that serene stillness, I assure you of My presence and infuse your heart with the peaceful joy of My company. Come, rest in this assurance, and affirm your belonging as My chosen people. As you find solace in My presence, I pledge to sanctify and shower blessings upon you.

Fifth Commandment: 

Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long upon the land which the Lord your God is giving you.

I will empower you to honor your father and mother, regardless of their imperfections, ensuring your days on this earth are prolonged and filled with joy.

Sixth Commandment: 

You shall not murder.

I will transform your heart to cherish and safeguard life.

Seventh Commandment: 

You shall not commit adultery. 

I will cleanse your heart, nurturing faithfulness, and integrity in your marriage. Moreover, I will mend your mind, instilling a profound reverence for the inherent dignity bestowed by Me upon both you and your spouse.

Eighth commandment: 

You shall not steal.

I will cultivate contentment in your heart, guiding you to cherish what you have and to respect the possessions of others.

Ninth commandment: 

You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

I will cultivate truthfulness in your speech and integrity in your interactions, ensuring you uphold honesty and fairness in your relationships with others.

Tenth commandment: 

You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor’s. 

I will uproot covetous desires hidden deep within your heart, replacing them with a rich harvest of contentment. From the depths of your being, I will cultivate a profound sense of peace and satisfaction, banishing envy and discontent. Trust in Me, for in My embrace, you will find true fulfillment and lasting joy.

(A key reference I used in assembling my thoughts on this topic was Wieland, R. J. (2000). A New Look at God’s Law. CFI Publishing.)

How do you feel about the 10 Commandments as 10 promises?

Reinhard: The coming of Jesus is the fulfillment of what the Old Testament talks about, the New Covenant. This shows us how to relate, how to receive, how to worship God. In the Old Testament, people tried to be sanctified by work, but with Jesus, we have grace. So, the New Covenant is very compatible with the idea of grace. People can understand more in the Old Testament if grace is introduced to them. Before, they didn’t know how to have faith in God, how to worship God with this idea because Jesus’ sacrifice is complete. By believing in Him, justification by faith can happen; He will accept us. 

What I get from this is the old versus the new. The New Covenant, after Jesus came and showed us how to worship God, means we don’t have to rely on our work to be with God or to earn our salvation. Just by faith, we will automatically do His work. Jesus summed up all 10 Commandments with: “Love God and love man.” I think it will become easy for us to do what God wants from us when we understand more about the mission of Jesus and how He showed us during His ministry how we can come to God and worship the right way—by faith and to love Him. 

C-J: What I liked about the way that God revealed His love, grace, and intention for His creation is that it’s all about loving provision. I don’t think that I have enough faith, goodness, or capability of being made in the image of God. I have to completely trust in the promises you spoke of, that when I experience struggle and come through it, the humility and appreciation for that is what transforms me. It takes me out of my confusion, my sense of loss, my sense of “I must do it too,” to completely surrender. And as I allow that root to grow, it gets easier for me to just surrender. Let God do the work. It’s not your battle. It’s beautiful. Kiran, I am so blessed by your testimony and that experience. It is work to grow in God, to not have all that junk in our head saying “I am unworthy.” But when we just surrender, God does it in such a beautiful way. I’m so blessed to hear what you shared.

Donald: It’s interesting how you interpret the 10 Commandments, transitioning from the old to what is not as concisely described in the New Testament. It’s more of a statement than a direct translation. This reflection, piece by piece, contrasts with something short and concise. Although it’s refreshing in its brevity, it’s certainly different. It’s wonderful to compare the old with the new, step by step, walking right through it, as you just did.

Don: It seems, Kiran, that what you’ve offered, which is beautiful and much appreciated, really boils down to something quite simple. The Old Covenant was based on our effort, and the New Covenant is based on God’s effort. Looking at the Old Testament stories, the motif of the New Covenant plays out in various narratives. For instance, Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord through the ark, a vessel of refuge engineered entirely by God, including its dimensions and construction materials. 

In Abraham, we repeatedly see the assurance that God will provide, symbolizing that Isaac represented all of Abraham’s efforts and future. Yet, when Abraham placed Isaac on the altar, it highlighted that our efforts are not sufficient; only God’s provision is. This illustrates the Old Covenant’s reliance on human effort, which is ultimately futile and fatal, versus the New Covenant’s foundation on God’s work, which is sanctifying and salvific.

Anonymous: Where does faith fit into this picture? Looking back, Abraham’s faith allowed God to work through him, offering a new understanding of salvation. Isn’t part of salvation for us to believe? If we don’t have faith, then nothing can work. What do you think?

Kiran: The distinction is important. Abraham is often regarded as the epitome of faith. Yet, it’s crucial to recognize there are two types of faith mentioned in the Bible: general faith, considered saving faith, and specific faith, known as wonder-working faith. In Romans 12:3, Paul emphasizes that through grace, each individual is endowed with a measure of faith sufficient for salvation. Additionally, in Corinthians, faith is depicted as a spiritual gift, capable of performing miracles, granted to those with a committed relationship with Christ. Thus, the requisite faith for salvation is innate, enabling us to embrace Christ. This faith, bestowed by God, grows through our experiences with Him. 

We celebrate Abraham’s faith despite his failures and lapses in truthfulness. This suggests that the essential faith is provided by God, who also nurtures its growth within us. It’s a dynamic of relationship rather than self-generated faith.

Michael: Despite our recognition of Abraham as a paragon of faith, his narrative is not predominantly marked by faithfulness. It may seem that his faith only becomes evident towards the end of his journey. I concur that faith is crucial and it also underpins how we interpret the 10 Commandments as promises rather than mere directives. This perspective is a testament to the power of faith.

Carolyn: I’m curious about the interrelation of faith versus belief. Is one contingent upon the other? Do they coexist within us, and is the act of believing or acting upon our beliefs the sole requirement? I’m interested in exploring this further.

Donald: Don’t you think belief precedes faith? If you don’t believe, then what’s the point of faith? It seems to me that belief is a prerequisite for faith, not the other way around. It’s a sequential process, yet they are intricately linked. In my prayers, I often reflect on how God, who created us, understands our struggles, our hearts, and our minds. He’s aware of the challenges His requests pose to us and how easily life can overshadow our faith or belief. It’s not that we don’t believe; sometimes, we just fail to take the time to believe. God knows us completely, and this knowledge reassures me that He understands our journey and struggles.

C-J: I compare faith and belief to drilling a well for water, inspired by my grandfather’s profession as a well driller. When drilling, you don’t always know how deep you need to go to find water, nor whether it will be of good quality and sufficient quantity. Similarly, when Kiran chose to delve into the 10 Commandments, it was like drilling into the foundation of our belief system. Despite the historical depth and potential obstacles, he continued, hoping to discover something valuable. In the end, he struck a gusher. This metaphor illustrates that our faith deepens and strengthens as we continue our journey, understanding our past and embracing our relationship with God. It’s a process where the longer we walk with God, the more we produce good fruit, shifting from self to God. Certain individuals, like Samuel and Daniel, were recognized early for their closeness to God and their potential to do great things. However, even they had to learn surrender, ensuring that it’s not about their achievements but what God accomplishes through them. This perspective significantly alters how we view our relationship with God.

Kiran: I read a book titled “Justified” by an Adventist professor from Andrews University, which discusses the difference between belief and faith. In the original languages of the Bible, Greek and Hebrew, the same words denote both faith and belief, with their verb forms also being interchangeable. The distinction in English between faith and belief, each drawing from different linguistic sources, is primarily to enrich meaning. However, in common usage, there might be a nuanced difference: belief acts as a roadmap, indicating God’s will, while faith goes beyond mere acknowledgment, embodying trust, obedience, and action in alignment with belief.

Carolyn: Now, considering faith and beliefs as implanted in our hearts, the question arises: How do we acquire belief? Is it something innate, or do we reach out, accept, and practice it?

Don: Reflecting on previous discussions about love, charity, and grace, it’s essential to delve deeper into Carolyn’s inquiry. The Book of Hebrews identifies Jesus as both the author and finisher of our faith, highlighting faith as a divine initiative rather than a human effort. This perspective suggests a synergistic relationship between faith, grace, and even the concept of Agape love, necessitating further exploration to delineate our contributions versus God’s interventions in cultivating faith.

David: I agree that faith and belief are largely synonymous, and I caution against overly analytical or reductionist approaches to biblical interpretation. The Hebrews passage Kiran quoted emphasizes that God’s laws are inherently within us, inscribed in our minds and hearts, signifying that faith/belief is a pre-existing condition within our essence. This beautiful simplicity eliminates the need for existential angst or theological quandaries over “developing a relationship” with God, because it’s already there.

Carolyn: While I acknowledge the simplicity of John 3:16 and the promise of salvation through belief in Jesus, I’ve recited this since childhood without fully grasping that the New Covenant was within my heart. Despite my desire to believe, I find myself wavering and questioning whether belief alone is sufficient. I struggle with self-judgment and doubts, even though I cherish the New Covenant and my love for Christ deeply.

C-J: I view belief as a conscious decision, a choice to have faith, whereas faith itself is transformative and marks a transition. It’s akin to Einstein’s theory of relativity—initially, he had no equation to prove his insights into the universe, just a theoretical understanding. As Christians, we choose to believe based on the evidence presented through biblical stories and human history, recognizing our consistent failures. Faith, as Kiran articulated through his new perspective, clears the slate and illuminates our understanding in a profound, simple way that leaves little else to be said.

Michael: While I theoretically concur with David on the simplicity of faith and belief, my reality contrasts sharply, highlighting the difficulty and rarity of such discussions in religious contexts. For me, understanding began with knowledge, particularly about grace, and evolved through experiencing grace, which often contradicted everything I was taught and believed. Recognizing grace’s omnipresence and pivotal role, despite initial teachings, suggests that knowledge is crucial, paving the way for faith to manifest and transform our experiences.

Reinhard: Looking at the Old Covenant, we recall the 10 Commandments given to Moses, alongside the civil and ceremonial laws. In the New Testament, those laws were essentially abolished, except for the 10 Commandments. This highlights a fundamental difference in how people worship God. In the Old Testament, individuals came to the temple, adhered to the regulations, and while they believed in God, their experience and adherence often remained superficial, limited to mental acknowledgment rather than heartfelt conviction. The key difference introduced by the New Covenant is the embedding of these principles within the heart, making them a part of one’s very essence and spirit, unlike the external adherence observed in the Old Testament. 

The New Testament teachings emphasize a deep, internalized faith that enables us to live in accordance with God’s covenant, especially the moral law. Through grace, our shortcomings are covered, and by placing everything in God’s hands, we avoid the mistakes of the past, such as idol worship and rebellion against God. With faith in Jesus, our relationship with God is strengthened, and the Holy Spirit aids our faith. This encapsulates the essence of the New Covenant—living by what God desires for us, knowing His grace is always sufficient in times of struggle or failure.

* * *

Disclaimer:

My understanding of these concepts and my attempt to articulate them may not fully explain all the nuances in the broader Protestant and Adventist theology. So, I encourage you to check them on your own and feel free to disagree with me. 

Introduction:

The doctrine of salvation is defined by many protestant denominations as salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ alone. Seventh-day Adventists just like many protestants profess their belief in this doctrine. Even though this doctrine is so simple, there are several interpretations of this doctrine among the protestants. I am going to discuss three major ones. 

1. Lutheranism: was developed by German monk, Martin Luther. According to Lutheranism, salvation is by Sola Fide (faith alone), Sola Gratia (Grace alone), Solus Christus (Christ alone), and Sola Scriptura (Scripture alone). Lutheranism opposes reliance on human works or traditions. 
2. Calvinism: was developed by a French Church reformer, John Calvin. According to Calvinism, humans are depraved and cannot contribute in any way to their salvation. Therefore, salvation is entirely by God’s grace and God predestines who would be saved and lost. Reformed Churches, the Presbyterian Church, the United Reformed Church, and Particular Baptists believe in this view.
3. Arminianism: was developed by a Dutch reformed theologian named Jacobus Arminius. Arminianism rejects predestination. Therefore, salvation is made possible by God’s grace, but humans have free will to accept or reject it. The denominations that believe in view are the Methodist Church, Seventh Day Adventists, Wesleyan Church, and General Baptists.

One thing to note here is that even though all these views especially Calvinism and Arminianism are different, they all have their foundation in the scriptures. You can easily convince one using scriptures for Calvinism or Arminianism. That is why even today people strongly believe in these opposing views. 

The Seventh Day Adventist Church adopted Arminianism, and it evolved its view of salvation much further from Arminianism and made it uniquely Adventist. Today in the Adventist community, there are at least four different interpretations of the doctrine of salvation by Grace. They are different in their views based on differences in their understanding of the roles of God’s grace, human effort, and moral perfection. Today, we will dive into these different viewpoints briefly.

Traditional View:

The traditional SDA view on salvation emphasizes the importance of reaching moral perfection in our character and overcoming sin with the help of Christ’s grace. This view argues that justification comes only by grace, but sanctification requires both human effort and God’s Grace. This view insists that by co-laboring with the Holy Spirit, we must resist sin, develop moral perfection, and be obedient. This view doesn’t believe that we will attain the perfect moral character of Christ in this life fully before the second coming but if we fail to put in our effort, we will hinder our spiritual growth and potentially lose our salvation. 

Last Generation Theology:

Another perspective within Adventism is the Last Generation Theology, which builds upon the traditional view but takes it a step further. This perspective believes that before Christ’s Second Coming, there will be a final generation of believers who will reach a state of sinless perfection. This perfection serves as proof of God’s nature and shows that it is possible to obey the law with the help of Christ’s strength. The lack of human effort is seen as a shortfall in meeting the expected level of excellence and the potential loss of salvation. 

The 1888 Message: 

The 1888 Minneapolis General Conference was a significant moment in Adventist theology. Because of Wagner and Jones’s message, the focus of salvation by the SDA Church since shifted to faith-based justification and the credited righteousness of Christ. This “1888 Message” emphasized the impact of Christ’s completed work and the believer’s connection with Him and downplayed the importance of moral perfection and obedience in the ultimate salvation process. The lack of human effort was not considered a danger to salvation, but it could hinder one’s sense of certainty and spiritual progress.

Dr. Jack Sequeira’s View:

More recently, Adventists have become more interested in the perspective of Dr. Jack Sequeira. Dr. Sequeira stresses the complete substitutionary atonement of Christ, where believers are considered completely righteous in the eyes of God due to Christ’s credited righteousness rather than their own achieved perfection. The growth of character is seen as an outcome of salvation, not a requirement for it. The believer’s position in Christ is not impacted by their own actions, as righteousness is given solely through faith. Lack of human effort does not affect the believer’s standing in Christ, as righteousness is entirely credited by faith.

Comparison and Contrast of SDA views:

These four perspectives cover a range of beliefs in Adventist theology. 

• The traditional view and last-generation theology give greater importance to the believer’s responsibility to achieve moral perfection. On the other hand, the 1888 message and Dr. Sequeira’s perspective downplay the believer’s responsibility and highlight the completed actions of Christ and credited righteousness. 
• These four views differ in how they relate to the doctrines of the Sabbath, the investigative judgment, and the heavenly sanctuary. The traditional view and last-generation theology place a stronger emphasis on the observance of the Sabbath, the importance of investigative judgment, and the ongoing work of Christ in saving humanity in the heavenly sanctuary. The 1888 message and Dr. Jack Seguerra’s view place less importance on these doctrines and focus more importance on the completed work of Christ on the cross. 

Comparison with Other Christian Traditions:

Some other Protestant views of salvation share similarities with certain Seventh-day Adventist perspectives.

• The traditional SDA view regarding achieving moral perfection and overcoming sin with the help of Christ closely aligns with the Wesleyan and Arminian concepts of Christian perfection. This view is not widely accepted among the protestant denominations which typically do not believe in attaining sinless perfection in this lifetime.
• Dr. Jack Sequeira’s focus on Christ’s completed work and the believer’s connection with Him aligns with Reformed teachings on justification and imputed righteousness. This aspect of Dr. Sequeira’s perspective is popular within Presbyterian, Reformed, and certain Baptist congregations.
• The 1888 message, with its strong emphasis on justification by faith and the imputed righteousness of Christ, shares some similarities with the Free Grace perspective found in certain Protestant circles. Both views downplay the role of character perfection and obedience in the final salvation process, focusing more on the finished work of Christ and the believer’s resting in His righteousness.

Conclusion:

The evolution of the doctrine of salvation by grace among Seventh-day Adventists reflects an ongoing dialogue and diversity of perspectives. Despite their agreement that salvation is by grace through faith in Christ, Adventist scholars and members grapple with the complicated balance between God’s grace, human effort, and moral perfection.

In my opinion, the temptation of many Adventists is to somehow change salvation from a gift of God to a human effort-based process. We constantly argue over how much of our effort is needed in securing an already secured salvation. This tendency stems from a cognitive dissonance within our minds, where we struggle to fully accept the radical nature of grace and the sufficiency of Christ’s work on our behalf. We wrestle with the idea that our efforts do not contribute to our salvation, as it goes against our natural inclination towards works-based righteousness.

The greatest temptation for me is to believe that my righteousness, which was likened to filthy rags by Isaiah, somehow matters in securing my salvation. The moment, we give in to this temptation, we minimize the sacrifice of Christ and become legalistic. 

The parable of the wedding feast reminds us that both good and evil people were invited to the feast suggesting the importance of the King’s desire but not the individual behavior that qualified each one to the feast. One who refused to put on the wedding garment but thought that his garment was good enough was thrown away into the outer darkness. Such is the judgment for those who give into the temptation of reliance on human effort. 

In John 14:6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.

The beauty of the gospel is found in its simplicity. Salvation is a gift given to those who believe in Christ’s sacrifice for their sins. Although character development and obedience are significant outcomes of salvation, they are not the path to achieving it. 

In the end, the different perspectives within Adventism regarding salvation, along with their nuanced distinctions, should not weaken the central message of being saved by grace through faith in Christ but rather deepen our gratitude for God’s love and the sufficiency of Christ’s sacrifice.

Next week, I want to discuss how one must view moral law based on this new understanding of Grace. But for today:

• What do you think of the diversity of thought among the protestant denominations and even among the Adventists regarding the view of Salvation by Grace through faith in Jesus Christ alone? 
• How do you feel that even within the remnant Church that prides itself in the oracles of God, we have four different interpretations of salvation? 
• How can we overcome the cognitive dissonance and accept Grace? 
• Does the notion that our behavior, piety, and observance of unique SDA doctrines like Sabbath, health reform, etc. do not matter for salvation make you feel unsettled? 

C-J: I have to say, God always makes me smile. In this last month, I’ve visited three different churches. Before this, I hadn’t been to church in years. I was invited to these churches, and one of them was the church I attended 50 years ago, this month. It has changed so much—rooms repurposed, walls knocked out, colors changed, and a much younger congregation, though I was young back then too, at 23. Interestingly, the church has moved away from a defined religious identity.

While watching a documentary on Moses, featuring historians, anthropologists, and archaeologists, a phrase caught my attention: “cultural Christianity.” This ties into what Kiran discussed. Cultural Christianity comes in many flavors. I visited two Black churches; one was my student’s church involved in street ministry. I could clearly see the Nigerian culture’s pagan influences in the church’s customs and music. Then, I visited another church, invited by a veteran, which was very Pentecostal, complete with a bishop and pastor, and also mixed traditional praise and worship with very rhythmic music.

With regard to “cultural Christianity,” I realized it’s not about the culture of the Christian faith but about what God is doing in the body of Christ. Considering the street ministry of the first church, they focused on outreach to the most vulnerable. The second, my childhood church, emphasized praise, worship, and community outreach, living as ambassadors of Christ rather than preaching directly. The third church was deeply involved in mission work abroad, spreading God’s word in predominantly non-Christian regions.

At the last church, I was a hot mess. Being the only white person there, I introduced myself and showed respect, especially to the elders. Lonnie, who had invited me, was late because he was picking up people without transportation. When the bishop approached me, I was overwhelmed by the loud environment, as I’ve always been sensitive to sound. I stepped out of the sanctuary, crying and shaking, until the bishop prayed over me, bringing a sense of release. Despite my emotional turmoil, Lonnie’s presence and support were comforting.

Reflecting on my experience, especially after living through riots and dealing with constant fireworks, I realized how much impact those events had on me. The ministry of that church helped me address those buried feelings. What we do as cultural Christians aligns with the church we identify with, but God meets us in unexpected and extraordinary ways. This journey has reignited a joy in me, prompting me to question my place and the reasons I walked away from churches in the past. God’s message to me was clear: it’s not about what I need, but what He is preparing me for. Everything in my life, including this healing, is part of His plan, promising peace, wholeness, joy, and life. That’s the essence of the body of Christ; the rest is cultural Christianity. Thank you for your time and for listening to my testimony.

Donald: Thank you, C-J, for sharing such a broad perspective. Your journey across different churches provided much food for thought, contrasting significantly with the more narrow story I’m about to share. Kiran touched on the Adventist church this morning, and my experiences have been somewhat aligned, though focused through a narrower lens. Living for two years in an Adventist community has perhaps given me a unique perspective on the visibility and perception of Adventism.

Last Sabbath, we visited one of the approximately eight to ten Adventist churches in our area. It was a shock to see how it had changed since our last visit years ago. I’ve often told people I’m proud of our corporate church for its tolerance, a word suggesting acceptance of a spectrum of thought, which was echoed in C-J’s reflections about the diversity within a context.

This church, with around 1,500 attendees at the second service, has made a name for itself, especially since COVID, for its stance on vaccination and its vibrant community engagement in mission and health work. The children wearing shawls reminded me of Shipshewana—almost Amish, highlighting a divergence of perspectives within our community.

I had breakfast this week with a lifelong friend and member of that church who holds a narrow interpretation of faith, emphasizing behavior as critical to salvation. This conversation reinforced the diversity of thought within our church community, from the conservative to the more broad-minded.

I dislike labeling these perspectives as ‘liberal’ or ‘conservative’ because it simplifies complex beliefs. It’s more about the breadth of view, with the village church having a narrower focus compared to the university church’s broader perspective. Yet, all congregations believe they’re following the right path, which underscores the diversity within our Adventist community.

It’s crucial to recognize that everyone thinks they’re correct in their beliefs, which fosters a diversity of thought and practice within our faith. My contribution, albeit narrower than C-J’s, reflects on the varied perspectives within Adventism and the importance of acknowledging and understanding these differences. I hope this adds value to our discussion.

C-J: It all comes down to the body of Christ. It’s not about adhering strictly to rules or staying within a prescribed lane. It’s about recognizing God’s presence and movement, like the unseen currents beneath the waves. The size of a church or a list of detailed rules isn’t the core of our faith. Yes, we agree on the importance of having moral guardrails, and there’s undeniable beauty in the Ten Commandments. But our faith isn’t about being excluded for making a mistake, then struggling to work our way back to acceptance. This understanding embodies the essence of grace.

There are those who believe in predestination, who see faith as black or white—you’re either right or wrong. However, when I shifted my perspective, I understood that it’s not about the cultural practices of a particular church but about the body of Christ as a whole. That’s where true tolerance begins to flourish. I see God in you, I see God moving among us, I recognize the grace and heart within you, and I accept you just as Christ accepts all of us. This realization removes the burden of shame, guilt, and cognitive dissonance. Viewing our faith as God working within His collective body, rather than through isolated individuals, enriches us all.

David: I appreciated Donald’s metaphor about being in a lane. It led me to think that, in a way, all lanes—like all roads leading to Rome—eventually guide us to the same destination. The various perspectives that Kiran discussed, each distinct and valid in its own right, essentially converge towards the same goal. There’s no inherently “right” or “wrong” lane; rather, it’s about understanding that each lane, whether denominational or individual, represents a unique pathway towards the same end—towards God, or towards what some might call salvation.

The concept of “salvation” doesn’t quite resonate with me. Imagine if Jesus had not yet come and wasn’t expected for another 200 years. How, then, would salvation be understood? Was someone like Isaiah saved? The idea of salvation through Christ complicates things further. As Kiran suggested, while doctrine—or as I would frame it, scripture—appears straightforward, it is, in fact, layered with complexity. This plethora of perspectives, however, might just be scripture’s beauty. It unveils various lanes or pathways, all of which hold validity because they lead us to God.

Reinhard: I find a lot of truth in the emphasis on tolerance and diversity within the Christian faith, especially from my perspective within Seventh-day Adventism. When I’m in Indonesia, for instance, and visit churches, I’m struck by the similarities in worship patterns to those in the West, from the liturgy to the preaching. There’s a frequent mention of Ellen G. White in sermons there, which might not be as common elsewhere, but I believe that’s beside the point. The core of our faith, what the Bible teaches, remains constant across cultures.

Looking at the history of Christianity, from its inception after Jesus’ departure up to the present day, significant developments seem sparse until the explosion of Christian denominations in the 18th and 19th centuries, including the rise of Seventh-day Adventism. Key moments like the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and Martin Luther’s Reformation in the 16th century stand out. Yet, it’s arguably not until about 200 years ago that the doctrines of the Second Coming and salvation by faith and grace began to be emphasized more prominently.

Today, we find ourselves in an era enriched by knowledge and understanding, and this dialogue among different Christian denominations, particularly within the Seventh-day Adventist community, underscores the importance of tolerance. While we may not always agree with or accept the customs and practices of other denominations, especially those that differ from our own Western traditions, the capacity for acceptance is crucial. The essence of our gatherings, the preaching that directs us to God, is the fundamental point.

The key takeaway is that despite our differences, as long as we center Jesus in our beliefs and live out those beliefs, we are aligning with what God desires for us. This pursuit of salvation, underscored by a faith deeply rooted in grace, is what we all strive for. I believe that embracing this understanding and practicing tolerance is essential for our collective journey towards salvation.

Michael: I don’t see the value in discussing doctrine because I don’t believe that adherence to any specific doctrine is what will save us.

David: You might argue that any doctrine could save us as long as it’s accompanied by faith. The common thread across doctrines is the belief in God, which might be all that’s necessary. Jesus emphasized the commandments to love God and your neighbor. If you believe in God (a term I associate with Goodness), it’s difficult to imagine not loving God, or hating Him. Thus, all doctrines could be seen as simultaneously nonsensical and true. It doesn’t matter if you’ll tak’ the high road and I’ll tak’ the low road; we’ll both reach Scotland eventually.

C-J: Based on my experiences with people whose faith blends elements of ancient paganism, I believe the outcomes of faith—the fruits—are important. Forgive my broad generalization, but consider individuals practicing voodoo for personal gain, utilizing rituals, herbs, chanting, and sacrifices. I view their actions through the lens of their limited revelation, hesitating to judge the morality of their practices based on their cultural context and intentions.

For those who intend harm, there are consequences, yet it’s not for me to decree eternal damnation. As a self-identifying Christian, my role is to demonstrate grace, trusting God to bring justice and healing where harm has been done.

In my neighborhood, there are practitioners of Santería. While some engage in rituals that seem dark to me, they do so not out of malice but in a plea for evil to leave them. It’s a complex cultural tradition beyond my place to judge. Who am I to consider someone evil for practices they were born into? Yes, I believe in dark spiritual forces, having witnessed their reality. Yet, engaging such forces requires divine commission and protection. It’s a realm fraught with danger, not to be entered lightly.

Don: I believe the context of today’s discussion might become clearer with next week’s topic on the role of the Ten Commandments and obedience in salvation. The notion that salvation depends on having the ‘right’ beliefs is peculiar. What beliefs are we talking about? Which ideas do we deem worth living or dying for? The idea that we must formulate a correct understanding of God or any concept seems at odds with the notion of grace. Grace suggests that salvation isn’t about what we think but rather what God does, liberating us from the burden of ensuring our beliefs align perfectly with divine truth.

David: Consider the Garden of Eden as an example of grace. Imagine Adam and Eve as children in a garden, cared for and protected by their father, enjoying freedom to play and having minimal responsibilities aside from a few chores and one rule. This scenario underscores a state of grace where they could essentially live without worry. Did they need to develop doctrines about their father, or was it enough to simply live in his grace?

Michael: The story of Adam and Eve often misses the point that they represent psychological children. Viewing their expulsion from Eden as a necessary developmental step from childhood suggests that longing to return to Eden is akin to desiring a return to childhood—a concept Freud explored. The challenge is understanding how to embrace the essence of Eden as adults, maintaining innocence or a childlike perspective while achieving spiritual maturity.

Don: Jesus’s call to become like children introduces a paradox: spiritual maturity involves embracing a form of childlike innocence or simplicity. This suggests a profound truth about our spiritual journey, underscoring the importance of maintaining a pure, trusting approach to faith as we grow and mature.

C-J: The essence of childlike faith, I believe, lies in trust and obedience. When we are told something isn’t good for us, we accept it without needing exhaustive explanations, trusting in the wisdom of those who guide us. This simplicity is often lost as we grow, especially among well-educated adults, who might scrutinize and analyze based on their personal truths, experiences, or interpretations of texts.

God’s principle of “to whom much is given, much is required” is a recurring theme in the Bible. Take Moses, for example. Despite his vast knowledge and experience, educated among the elite and familiar with complex matters like warfare and multiple languages, his time in the desert stripped him of all but humility. He learned to tend to sheep, dealing with their less appealing aspects, which contrasts sharply with commanding obedience from people.

Moses’s journey from leadership to humble shepherding, living amongst a community regarded as lowly, eating the same food daily, and braving the elements, emphasizes a powerful transformation. This story illustrates that often, the most difficult individuals to bring to their knees in humility are the highly educated or those with extensive religious access. They might question the rationality of faith, yet, I firmly believe in these divine mysteries.

I’m continually astonished by God’s wisdom in orchestrating encounters, delivering messages, and utilizing humble vessels for His purpose. Jesus’s ministry among the uneducated highlighted this, as He walked with those open to receiving His teachings, contrasting with the educated Jews of His time, who, despite being God’s chosen people, were often too entrenched in their knowledge to accept His message.

Anonymous: In the beginning, God gave a single command during creation week: observe the Sabbath. From that point to the issuance of the Ten Commandments at Mount Horeb, it seems God’s primary expectation was for people to recognize Him as the Creator through this one command, largely overlooking their ways of living—even when sin, like Cain killing Abel, was rampant.

As sin flourished, God felt compelled to clarify the path of righteousness, hence the Ten Commandments. I imagine there was resistance from the people, accustomed to their ways of life, questioning the sudden imposition of rules against adultery, lying, idolatry, etc., with the dire consequence of death for disobedience. In this narrative, Jesus’s arrival marks a pivotal moment: He reassures that past sins are forgiven and urges adherence to a new way of life. Yet, despite this new covenant, human failure persists.

Jesus introduces a revolutionary solution: He will bear the consequences of our sins. All that’s asked of us is to believe in His sacrifice, signifying a new covenant focused not on our actions but on faith. This doesn’t mean we cease to sin, but it highlights God’s ongoing work in sanctification, individually tailoring His guidance, wisdom, and experiences to each person in ways beyond our comprehension.

Belief in Jesus initiates a transformation process, the mechanics of which remain a mystery. How God will restore us to Edenic purity or perfect us for eternal life is unknown, but faith in His grace is paramount.

Jesus perceives us as children—limited, naïve, and incapable of grasping the entirety of His plan. This doesn’t diminish our value but emphasizes our reliance on His grace and the futility of trying to earn salvation through our understanding or deeds. Our role is simply to believe, to trust in Jesus’s sacrifice as the cornerstone of our covenant with God, acknowledging our limited perspective in the vastness of His work.

In essence, our journey is not about attaining perfection through knowledge or deeds but about submitting to the transformative power of faith and grace, embracing our role in God’s grand design.

* * *

Don: I’d like to read from the book of Romans before I turn things over to Kiran. This is the central theme of what we’ve been discussing:

Who will bring a charge against God’s elect?… (Romans 8:33) 

This is a rhetorical question, of course. Paul then goes on to say:

…God is the one who justifies; who is the one who condemns? Christ Jesus is He who died, but rather, was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us.Who will separate us from the love of Christ? Will tribulation, or trouble, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword?Just as it is written:

“For Your sake we are killed all day long;
We were regarded as sheep to be slaughtered.”

But in all these things we overwhelmingly conquer through Him who loved us.For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers,nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Roman 8:33-39)

And that’s what grace is all about. 

Kiran: Today I am attempting to address the question: What are the great objections to Grace that exist among Christians today?  

I am going to discuss three objections to Grace and why one might have such objections.  

One of the hardest bible verses to understand can be found in Matthew 5:48 in which Jesus said, “You, therefore, must be perfect, as your Father in Heaven is perfect”. Many interpret the word “perfect” to be “Holy” or “sinless”. Therefore, the command of Jesus is “You, therefore, must be sinless as your Father in Heaven is sinless”. Most Christians believe this is what Jesus was asking His followers. But others argue perfect here refers to the agape love that the Father is. Some argue perfect here refers to being spiritually mature in our sphere as Father in Heaven is spiritually mature in His sphere.  

The reason I am talking about this verse is that for us to understand the objections to grace, it is important to understand the mindset of a nominal Christian. Nominal here refers to Christians without the understanding of Grace. When the goal of a nominal Christian is to be sinless as the Father in Heaven is, then their life becomes a constant struggle to measure up to God’s ideal and repeated failures to live up to that ideal. This constant cycle of trying and failing is very painful. For such nominal Christians, grace-believing real Christians are offensive.  

Cheap Grace:  

The first objection to Grace is Cheap Grace or a low view of Grace. In this view, one believes that the people who seek Grace are looking for a license to sin. Meaning they are seeking a way to continue living their sinful lives without facing consequences. Their argument goes this way. Since God’s grace covers all our sins, why not indulge in what we desire and occasionally invoke grace to escape consequences? It’s grace without true discipleship, grace without the cross, and grace without Jesus Christ. Essentially, it’s seeking Jesus as a savior but not as our Lord.  

The Bible discredits this concept.  

Paul in Romans 5 and 6 said:

“God’s law was given so that all people could see how sinful they were. But as people sinned more and more, God’s wonderful grace became more abundant. So just as sin ruled over all people and brought them to death, now God’s wonderful grace rules instead, giving us right standing with God and resulting in eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. Well then, should we keep on sinning so that God can show us more and more of his wonderful grace? Of course not! Since we have died to sin, how can we continue to live in it? Do not let any part of your body become an instrument of evil to serve sin. Instead, give yourselves completely to God, for you were dead, but now you have new life. So, use your whole body as an instrument to do what is right for the glory of God.” 

Paul here gave us an accurate view of God’s Grace. Accepting Grace means instead of using our body as an instrument of evil, we now use it as an instrument to do what is right for the glory of God. Be put it plainly, living a self-centered life brings glory to Satan who first conceived the idea of self-centeredness. Once we accept Grace, we are now committed to living a self-sacrificing life that brings glory to God.  

The reason nominal Christians have this objection is that they fear their capacity to do evil or to live extremely self-centered lives. They view their efforts to gain salvation through their works as a safeguard that prevents them from exploding with self-centeredness. In essence, they are in stage 2 of the stages of faith. If they leave their fortress of self-righteousness, surely there is nothing that would stop them from going to the ends of their self-centeredness.  

If we understand this fear of nominal Christians, we will not judge them. We would understand where they are and would do our best to help them feel secure.  

Another reason these nominal Christians have this view is because they have a wrong understanding of the Gospel. We will discuss that in our next class.  

Cheap Law:  

The second objection to Grace is having a low view of God’s moral law.  Nominal Christians would think that people seeking Grace are lowering the standard set by Jesus from “be perfect” to “do your best”.  Instead of wholeheartedly loving God, they think that grace-seeking people settled for merely loving God more than money or sports.   

Cheap law weakens God’s demand for perfection. This is a popular misconception and many think that God simply lowered the bar so that we all get in.  

Jesus discredited this view. In Matthew 5:17, Jesus said,

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.”  

Jesus took it further in His sermon on the Mount saying, 

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. (Matthew 5: 27-28)

Here Jesus made it clear that the law demands obedience even in our desires.  

Cheap Sin:  

The third objection to grace is cheap sin or having a low view of sin. When we think of sin, we often think of deliberate violation of God’s law either in deeds or in thoughts as Jesus expanded. Turns out this is only 1/3^rd of the SIN problem.  

When we look at Psalm 51 authored by David, we see a much fuller picture of sin.  

1 Have mercy on me, O God, according to your unfailing love; according to your great compassion blot out my transgressions. 
2 Wash away all my iniquity and cleanse me from my sin. 
3 For I know my transgressions and my sin is always before me. 
4 Against you, you only, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight; so you are right in your verdict and justified when you judge. 
5 Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me. 
6 Yet you desired faithfulness even in the womb; you taught me wisdom in that secret place. 
7 Cleanse me with hyssop, and I will be clean; wash me, and I will be whiter than snow. 
8 Let me hear joy and gladness; let the bones you have crushed rejoice. 
9 Hide your face from my sins and blot out all my iniquity. 
10 Create in me a pure heart, O God, and renew a steadfast spirit within me. 
11 Do not cast me from your presence or take your Holy Spirit from me. 
12 Restore to me the joy of your salvation and grant me a willing spirit, to sustain me. 

There is a reason David used sin, transgression, and iniquity to describe SIN. Turns out the Bible used several words to describe sin. The Old Testament defined sin with 12 different Hebrew words whereas the New Testament defined sin with 5 different Greek words. These words explain three aspects of SIN. 

1. Iniquity. This does not primarily refer to an act of sin, but to a condition of sinfulness; by nature, we are spiritually “bent”  

• Psalm 51:5  Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me. 
• Isaiah 53:6 We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to our own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all. 
• Isaiah 64:6  All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags; we all shrivel up like a leaf, and like the wind our sins sweep us away. 

2. Sin. Literally, “to miss the mark.” This refers to our failures to measure up to God’s ideal.  

• Romans 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 
• Romans 7:15-24 I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For I do not do the good I want to do, but the evil I do not want to do this I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it. So I find this law at work: Although I want to do good, evil is right there with me. For in my inner being I delight in God’s law; but I see another law at work in me, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within me. What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body that is subject to death? 
• Isaiah 1:4-6 

3. Transgression. This is a deliberate violation of God’s law, a willful act of disobedience.  

• 1 John 3:4 Everyone who sins breaks the law; in fact, sin is lawlessness. 
• Romans 7:7-13  

If we focus only on the deliberate violation of the law, we will have a low view of the law.  

What happens when we have such a view? Such a view tempts us to think that we can with our willpower avoid transgression. Somehow with discipline and dedication, we can overcome transgression in deeds and thoughts and thus be qualified to be in heaven. Such a view turns a person so self-centered that they miss the point of God’s kingdom that operates on the self-sacrificing love principle.  

But this is only 1/3^rd of the problem. How are we going to change our crooked spiritual state? If we accurately understand Sin in its three forms, we will never say I am going to work for my salvation. We understand deep within our hearts that there is nothing in this world that can save us from all forms of sin. Only through the merits of Jesus Christ alone, will we be saved.  

Jay: The objections to grace are intriguing. It appears they are primarily associated with Christians, though I’m not entirely sure of that. There’s a general suspicion towards it, making us hesitant to discuss it openly. This suspicion itself is fascinating to consider. What specifically troubles us so much about grace? 

One issue, as you mentioned, is the notion of a “free pass” — the idea that one can act as one pleases and still receive forgiveness in the end. This challenges our human concept of fairness, which is deeply ingrained. This leads to another discussion: the distinction between fairness and equity. Despite often being used interchangeably, I’m not convinced they are synonymous. The idea of grace as a “free pass” doesn’t align with our sense of justice, yet grace is often described as a free gift, underscoring our complex relationship with the concept. 

Another point of contention is how grace interacts with the Christian concept of judgment. This difficulty in reconciling grace with judgment adds to our reluctance to fully embrace the idea of grace. Personally, I’ve reached a point where ambiguity is acceptable, but I recognize that many find comfort in clear distinctions between right and wrong, good and evil.

David: Judgment is closely linked to salvation. Kiran talked about his transition from being “lost” to being “saved.” It seems to me there’s a fundamental contradiction in believing in both grace and the possibility of not being saved.

Jay: The cognitive dissonance surrounding grace and salvation is significant. In my theological background, grace and the concept of being lost or saved coexist, yet they are rarely discussed together. This separation creates confusion; how can grace and judgment coexist logically? The dissonance is substantial, leading to the rejection of one concept or the other, or to the acceptance of an overlap that either escapes our understanding or is entirely overlooked.

David: Alternatively, one might argue that grace supersedes judgment, suggesting that while judgment and grace co-exist, grace ultimately prevails.

C-J: Across all cultures and societies, including small nomadic tribes from thousands of years ago, there’s been an idea of separating the governing rules of a community (state) and spiritual or divine mandates (church). This separation addresses our human limitations, such as controlling our desires or understanding complex concepts, through a metaphorical ‘mandate of heaven.’ 

My father taught me a valuable lesson by having me reflect on my actions, not just to understand why I was disciplined but to grasp the broader impact of my choices on others and the importance of established rules. Similarly, my relationship with God is about seeking understanding when I’m stuck or need patience, not about passing or failing a test. I believe God meets us where we are, acknowledging our dynamic lives and societies. 

Religion often seeks to control, but divine rules give authority to our societal norms, attributing their origin to something beyond human creation. This doesn’t mean we escape the consequences of our actions; instead, it’s about understanding our place within a larger, divinely ordered system. I see God as interested in our growth and understanding, much like a parent encourages a child to ask questions and learn.

Carolyn: The Bible mentions, “Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved,” which embodies both grace and judgment. However, considering we are inherently sinful and will continue to sin until we reach heaven, where does judgment fit in?

C-J: When a child lies to protect themselves, I don’t see it as a sin but as a survival tactic. It’s crucial to look beyond the action to the child’s intent and circumstances. Similarly, if a child steals a loaf of bread to feed their family, I don’t consider it a sin. It’s about understanding the deeper context and recognizing the humanity and needs behind actions, rather than strictly categorizing them as sin.

Kiran: Judgment seems inherent to our existence; from conception, we are judged to face death, owing to our inherently flawed nature, as highlighted by David. This is not about earthly justice but a spiritual condition. In the Book of Judges, the Israelites viewed judges not as punishers but as liberators. Similarly, Jesus’s role as a judge offers liberation through faith. 

Another layer of judgment discussed by Jesus pertains to how those who have received grace utilize it. Ultimately, our actions alone cannot exempt us from this fundamental judgment; redemption is through Christ alone.

C-J: Considering life through the lens of quantum physics, our existence barely registers on a universal scale. I believe the divine essence is more about energy and organic, intuitive connection than we can fully grasp. Society’s rules are designed to protect the collective, ensuring survival. Focusing too much on defining our lives through judgment or grace is like being stuck in quicksand. Our understanding is limited by our human capacities. 

My relationship with God transcends these concerns. It’s not about punishment for physical ailments or accidents but about a deeper connection beyond our worldly existence. God’s interest lies in our personal relationship with the divine, guiding us through life’s questions and anxieties. We’re encouraged to seek understanding and purpose in our circumstances, not to get lost in the quest for control or fear of judgment. True peace comes from focusing on God, realizing our limited control, and trusting in God’s plan for us, rather than worrying about our worthiness or judgment. 

Reinhard: I believe we each have our unique approach to aligning with God’s word, striving to live by biblical principles because ultimately, we seek eligibility for the kingdom of heaven. This quest enhances our understanding of God’s love. I view grace as God’s love manifested within us, a continuous blessing enriching our lives as we grow closer to God. With God’s word as our guide, concerns about judgment diminish. 

The fact of David’s sin with Bathsheba highlights that even the faithful can err, impacting others significantly. Yet, David, like Moses and Abraham, remained beloved by God, illustrating grace extends to all, believers and non-believers alike. Despite inevitable mistakes, our pursuit of goodness, guided by the Holy Spirit, propels us forward. 

This class serves as a reminder and tune-up of our faith, helping us draw nearer to God as we contemplate our salvation and strive to align with His will.

Don: The story of the woman caught in adultery, as recounted in John 8, mirrors our spiritual transgressions. Jesus’s directive to “go and sin no more,” following his refusal to condemn her, symbolizes not a command but a promise of being viewed sinless through divine grace. This narrative extends to us all, emphasizing that sinlessness is not about our actions but how God perceives us, justified rather than condemned. This challenges the notion that we must meet a specific standard to be accepted by God, highlighting Jesus’s mission to correct such spiritual misconceptions.

Anonymous: I’ve appreciated the discussions on struggle and grace. Struggling is not unusual for those seeking to walk with God; it’s the starting point. Growing into an understanding and experience of grace is essential. Without this process, we can’t fully grasp what grace means, as our efforts alone lead to self-condemnation. 

This reminds me of two passages from Romans. One speaks about having faith privately before God and the blessing of not condemning oneself. Initially, in our spiritual journey, we often judge ourselves harshly as we strive for righteousness on our own. 

Another passage highlights Jesus’s role not just as a judge but as an intercessor, advocating on our behalf, which eliminates judgment against us. Jesus mentioned that non-believers are already condemned, suggesting that acceptance of grace and faith in God shields us from judgment. 

Thus, walking in grace frees us from self-judgment, whereas reliance on our deeds for righteousness leads to self-condemnation.

Michael: The weekly reminders of grace are appreciated, yet there’s an underlying current of judgment, which seems easier to accept. The question is, where does this sense of judgment, which we may not fully recognize, originate?

Don: I believe it originates from the church.

Michael: It feels deeper than that, more intuitive.

Don: Absolutely, it’s more complex. Our natural inclination towards cause and effect leads us to expect that every action has a consequence. Grace challenges this notion, embodying the ultimate rejection of cause and effect. Jesus used parables, stories, and teachings to convey that He represents grace, not cause and effect, emphasizing the transformative power of grace over judgment.

Don: I want to note that class will break for two weeks. Perhaps the break might intensify our yearning for more understanding of grace. Kiran will continue discussing grace when class resumes in two weeks. I am thankful for everyone’s contributions during this time. Hearing diverse perspectives has been enlightening for me and reinforces our shared devotion to a gracious God.

* * *

Note: I used the following sources for my text today:

https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/science.308.5728.1574

https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/religion-spirituality-and-mental-health

Last week, Sharon talked about how people in various cultures respond to suffering. Today, I want to explore how different genders respond to pain and suffering, specifically how that response is based on their biology, culture, and spirituality. 

First: Is there a difference between man and women according to the Bible? To answer this question, we must first look at the creation of Adam and Eve. 

The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. (Genesis 2:15)

The Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.” (Genesis 2:18)

In these two verses, we see that God’s purpose for creation of man and women is different. Adam was created to work and take care of the garden and Eve was created to be a suitable helper. But “suitable helper” is a bad translation. The Hebrew words used for suitable helper were ezer kenegdow (עֵזֶר כְּנֶגְדּוֹ).. Kenegdow literally means “according to the opposite of him” or “complementary” and ezer means “ally”. Interestingly ezer was also used for God in reference to how He rescued Israel from enemies. So ezer is not a subservient helper to a primary but a rescuer or an ally. Thus, Eve’s primary purpose is to be an ally or a rescuer to help Adam accomplish things he could not accomplish himself. 

Next, if we observe how God cursed both Adam and Eve after the fall, we can see these differences in how men and women suffer. When God cursed Adam, He cursed the land. Tending the land is the purpose of Adam. That is his professional identity. Because of curse, success in profession doesn’t come easily and this became a major cause for Man’s suffering. When God cursed Eve, besides increasing labor pains, He cursed her relationship with man. Today, with the advancement of pain medications, most women choose to lesson labor pains. But the pain of relationships specifically with their husbands, fathers, brothers, and sons is ever more complicated and painful. Psychological studies show that major cause of stress among women is relationships with their family, friends, and co-workers whereas men stress more about professional success. 

Now, let’s look at how men and women deal with pain. In a study, researchers asked both men and women to put their hands in ice bucket for certain amount of time and asked them to rate their pain. Women reported feeling more pain compared to men. Men had higher pain threshold and were able to keep their hands in ice bucket for longer periods. In general, in one’s lifetime, biologically women experience more episodes of physical pain resulting from menstrual cycles and childbirth. Based on this many falsely think that women have higher pain tolerance, but the evidence is contrary. Why is it that for same physical stressor such as ice bucket, women report more pain? 

From a biological standpoint, 

• Women have greater nerve density which allows them to feel pain more intensely. 
• The fluctuating nature of sex hormone, estrogen also amplifies the body’s perception of pain. When estrogen levels are low for instance during menstrual cycle or after menopause, pain perception is high due to increase in pain receptor activity. But during pregnancy and childbirth, elevated levels of estrogen reduce pain perception and increase pain thresholds. 
• Another interesting finding lies in how both men and women process pain. Men typically focus on pain sensation itself whereas women focus on the emotional aspects of pain. Focusing on emotional aspects of pain enhances pain perception. 

Psychologically both men and women suffer with stress differently. 

• Women are more likely then men to report having great deal of stress.
• Women are often more stressed about money and economy whereas men are more stressed about work. 
• When it comes to relationships, having right relationships with family, friends and co-workers is of utmost importance for women. But for men more than relationships, success in their profession is of utmost importance. 
• When dealing with stress women report experiencing physical symptoms such as headache, feeling irritable and angry and experiencing fatigue and feeling as though they could cry. For men such experiences are low, but they do manifest such as chest pain, back pain etc. 

When it comes to mental health, scientists are now beginning to understand and focus on how men and women deal with suffering of the brain (Holden, 2005). 

• Women feel more anxious compared to men when dealing with diseases like cancer. 
• Women are more likely to get depressed than men whereas men are more severely afflicted by schizophrenia which is one of the most devastating mental illnesses. 
• In general, females exhibit more anxiety, whereas males exhibit antisocial behavior. 
• Females have more eating disorders, and most alcoholics and drug addicts are male. 
• Females make more attempts to commit suicide whereas males are more successful in committing suicide (Suicide rate is 5 times higher in men).
• Women exhibit more intense fear response whereas, men express more aggressive or risky physical behavior. 
• Women have strong negative reactions for social rejection whereas men have strong negative reactions for lack of achievement. 

There is a biological reason for these differences. They are based on three broad areas: sex hormones, brain physiology and genetic factors. For example, abnormal levels of estrogen in women causes depression and abnormal levels of testosterone in men causes aggressive behavior. Next, due to more cross connections between left and right hemispheres, women cope better with suffering whereas men become isolated and withdrawn due to fewer cross-connections. Scientists are also looking at the genetic variations at various chromosomes and how they are making women more prone to bipolar disorder whereas men to schizophrenia. 

Culture also plays an important role in how men and women respond to suffering. This is mainly due to diverse norms, expectations and roles assigned to men and women in different societies. 

• In Western cultures, men are traditionally expected to maintain a stoic demeanor and suppress emotional expression, including sadness, vulnerability in response to suffering. In contrast, women in western cultures are encouraged or express their emotions more openly and seek emotional support from others. This is one of the leading causes of mental illness and suicide among men (Men are 5 times more likely to die from suicide than women)
• Women often have stronger social support networks in some cultures. They may turn to friends and family for emotional support and share their struggles more openly. Men, on the other hand, may rely less on social support networks and may be more self-reliant when dealing with suffering.
• When it comes to coping mechanisms, women seek solace in religious or spiritual practices, while men turn to activities that distract them from pain such as addition. In US overdose deaths are in rise since the 2002 and the overdose death rate among males is 2.5 times higher than females
• In some cultures, both men and women are discouraged from seeking help due to stigma whereas in Western cultures men are particularly resistant to seeking mental health support due to concerns about perceived weakness or shame. 
• In some cultures, gender roles are traditionally well defined. In such societies, typically, women are often responsible for caregiving and carry the burden of caring for family, elderly and sick which sometimes affects their mental well-being. Men are primarily expected to provide financially, and financial struggles impact their self-esteem and mental well-being. 
• In western society where traditional gender roles changed significantly, women struggle considerably in traditional male roles such as sales, entrepreneurship, politics etc. where they must deal with rejection regularly. 

Moving onto existential suffering, very little was known. However, there is some evidence to suggest that men and women may deal with existential suffering differently. 

• For example, one study found that women were more likely to endorse communal values, such as valuing close relationships and helping others, while men were more likely to endorse agentic values, such as valuing achievement and independence. What it means that women were more likely to seek social support in response to existential suffering, while men were more likely to cope with existential suffering alone. For this reason, men are more likely to experience existential isolation (EI). EI is the subjective sense that people are alone in their experience and that others are unable to understand their perspective. 

Moving on to how spirituality and religiosity affects men and women’s response to suffering and pain, there is mixed evidence. 

In some cases, religion and spirituality aided in remission of depression, anxiety, and fears whereas in some cases, it fostered depression, anxiety, and guilt among subjects. 

Prior to the 19th century, psychiatry and religion were closely linked. But in the 19th and 20th centuries, psychiatry dismissed religion and considered it to be the source of psychosis. Since the 1990s, this trend somewhat reversed. Now psychiatrists have started noticing the benefits of religion and spirituality in coping with depression and anxiety. 

• Around 724 quantitative studies showed that on balance, religious involvement is generally conducive to better mental health. 
• Around 93 observational studies reported that among individuals that are more religious, depressive disorders and symptoms are two-thirds lower in comparison to non-religious individuals. 
• Smith et al. performed a meta-analysis of 147 studies that observed 100,000 subjects. They found that there is a 20.1 times negative correlation between religious observance and depression. 
• Several studies also showed that among individuals that are more religious, substance abuse is 90% lower, anxiety is lower and self esteem is higher. 
• Vast majority of these studies were based on Christianity and there is lack of research in other groups. But Levav et al. study in 1997 indicated that there is an increased prevalence of depression among Jews. 

Most recent studies indicate that the relationship between religion and depression is more complex than previously shown. All religious beliefs and variables are not necessarily related to better mental health. 

• Petts and Jolliff in their 2008 study observed that even though in general religious observance is negatively correlated with depression, this is not true for all races and genders. Among Asian adolescents, and Latino females, religious participation is associated with increased depression. 
• Ano and Vasconcelles in 2005 performed a meta-analysis and found a difference in how people use religion to cope with their suffering. For instance, positive religious coping involves focusing on forgiveness, conversion, helping, supporting, collaboration, surrender, benevolence, connection, and boundaries. Negative religious coping involves focusing on discontent, demonic reappraisal, passivity, interpersonal discontent, reappraisal of God’s powers, punishing God reappraisal, and pleading for direct intercession from God. What they found is that.
  • Individuals who used positive religious coping strategies typically experienced more spiritual growth, positive affect, and had higher self-esteem, etc. They also experienced less depression, anxiety, distress, etc.
  • Individuals who used negative religious coping strategies did not necessarily report lower self-esteem, less purpose in life, lower spiritual growth, but experienced more depression, anxiety, distress, etc.
• Among the cancer patients, women reported higher levels of anxiety and they also overwhelmingly reported that they used religious practices for coping with suffering with illness, anxiety, and pain. Men suffering with cancer reported to be less anxious and used isolation and self-reliance as cooping mechanism. 

Even after reporting all these studies, I feel that we haven’t scratched the surface when it comes to gender differences in response to suffering. I want to ask all of you have you observed how men and women differ in response to suffering? If so, what they are? What strategies would work best for helping men and women in suffering? 

David: The Hebrew definitions you gave reminded me of the Chinese yīn 陰 (literally: dark side; philosophically: female/passive) and yáng 陽 (literally: light side; philosophically: male/active), which are two equal and complementary parts of a whole. I’d like to think that that is what the Bible means to say with regard to the relationship between men and women. 

With regard to spiritual suffering: Some monastic orders appeal to people suffering spiritually and impose physical suffering (e.g. horsehair habits) and mental suffering (e.g. silence) to assuage spiritual suffering, as I see it. There are both male and female versions of Trappists, Discalced Carmelites (who don’t wear shoes) and others, although in  the Orthodox Christian, Buddhist, and Hindu traditions there are few (though still some) female monastics. 

A strict monastic tradition imposes a life of penury and discomfort for spiritual gain. I would imagine that the proportion of the global population living in monasteries, nunneries, and similar religious institutions is significantly smaller today than it was in the Middle Ages. One reason for this shift could be the Enlightenment and evolving ideas about God and spirituality. 

In earlier times, when the fear of eternal darkness was a recurring theme and excommunication represented the most existential threat one could face, the psychological toll must have been immense. Excommunication was perceived as not just the end of one’s earthly life, but also of one’s eternal life. 

Today, however, such beliefs have waned. Most people no longer fear divine disenfranchisement, which I consider a positive development. In this sense, there may be less spiritual suffering today than in the past. I guess I’ll stop there.

Don: I wonder how much of the differences in suffering and tolerance between men and women are due to genetics or hormones. Could these differences also be circumstantial or socially derived? Additionally, how feasible is it to change one’s view of God and the nature and meaning of spiritual suffering?

Kiran: Increasingly, research is exploring the biological and genetic factors involved, often through fMRI studies. These studies examine regions of the brain that are disproportionately larger in men and women who are suffering from various mental illnesses. Researchers are also investigating chromosomal changes and mutations that could be responsible for mental illnesses. However, I haven’t found any studies that extend beyond the realm of mental health to explore views on suffering or beliefs about God; the focus is overwhelmingly on mental illness.

Don: If this is the case, it suggests that determinism plays a more significant role than volition or decision-making in shaping our responses to suffering. This perspective could diminish the sense of personal responsibility for how one copes with suffering.

Reinhard: I believe that men and women are genetically different, and this extends to their experience of suffering and pain. Research indicates that women are generally more sensitive to pain than men, possibly because testosterone acts as a natural painkiller, giving men greater endurance and a higher tolerance for pain. In various cultures, men are often encouraged to be tough, especially in situations involving pain or even torture. This cultural conditioning may contribute to differences in endurance and pain tolerance.  

For Christians, Ephesians 6:13 advises putting on the “full armor of God” to withstand challenges and suffering. This spiritual armor, which includes faith, can provide additional resilience against life’s difficulties, depending on their severity.  

Humans also employ psychological defense mechanisms like denial, projection, and displacement to cope with pain. When combined with spiritual beliefs and a connection to a higher power, these mechanisms can offer a more comprehensive approach to managing suffering. In essence, life requires us to use all available means—both psychological and spiritual—to navigate the challenges we face. The belief in a loving God can further ease the pain and suffering we encounter.

Carolyn: Women have traditionally been seen as nurturers, often more inclined to seek spiritual guidance in challenging situations. Men, on the other hand, are often prepared for different kinds of challenges, much like the rites of passage in some Native American cultures where boys spend a night alone in the woods. Both roles are valuable. Women generally tend to have closer personal and emotional relationships compared to men.

Sharon: Kiran’s analysis underscores the complexity of social science. For every study that claims one thing, there’s often conflicting data suggesting something else. While I’m excited about the distinct, complementary characteristics identified across genders, I think it’s crucial to remember that these are not absolutes. There are always individuals who defy gender stereotypes. For example, some families have fathers who are the primary nurturers, or churches have male pastors who excel in nurturing roles. God created this diversity intentionally, perhaps to keep our stereotypes in check.

Even though statistical variances exist, we should be cautious not to make assumptions about what men or women can or cannot do. Kiran’s research raises important questions about how the church can address the diverse needs of its community without projecting our own biases.

David: The projection of biases is indeed a significant issue and a source of much suffering. While there’s supposed to be a yin-yang balance, a complementary whole, the reality often skews towards male dominance, especially in leadership roles. It’s noteworthy that countries led by women, like Finland and New Zealand and Taiwan, have generally handled crises like the COVID pandemic more effectively than others.

On the global stage, the problems we see are often exacerbated by male leaders, whether it’s Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping, or Donald Trump. This imbalance in complementarity contributes to a great deal of unnecessary suffering.

Kiran: A few years ago, I facilitated a men-only group at my apartment for nearly two years. It took several months before the members began to open up and be vulnerable, but once they did, it was incredibly beneficial for many of them. Research often suggests that women find it easier to be vulnerable and connect with others, but my experience shows that men can also open up in a safe, confidential environment. It was one of the most challenging yet rewarding experiences I’ve had.

Don: This leads me to ask: Should men only minister to men and women to women? Could we misinterpret or misguide each other if we try to cross genders? Kiran’s finding that religion seems to be a better aid to suffering than spirituality seems counterintuitive to me.

Carolyn: We need to define the difference between religion and spirituality.

Don: In my view, religion involves organized church attendance and adherence to doctrine, while spirituality is a more direct connection with God, without as much structure.

Carolyn: Is it ideal to be both religious and spiritual? Could the organized church encompass spirituality, allowing for a more holistic experience?

Don: Ideally, the structure of the church should serve as a stepping stone toward a deeper spirituality.

Reinhard: I agree. Spirituality and religion can coexist, as we’ve discussed in past group meetings. Social support from a community of fellow believers is crucial. It’s not just within the church; external social groups also play a significant role in human life. 

On another note, the role of women in religious settings has evolved. In biblical times, women were not allowed to speak in meetings and had to ask their husbands questions at home. Nowadays, with advancements in human and women’s rights, some churches even allow women to become priests or pastors. This is an interesting shift we’re witnessing. 

Kiran: These questions touch on the complexities of men’s and women’s ministries. Men often find it difficult to open up due to fears of rejection or being perceived as weak. This is especially true among single men, who feel that women may blacklist them for showing vulnerability. Therefore, there’s a need for men-only ministries. 

Regarding the paper on spirituality leading to more cases of depression, the abstract suggests that religion offers a structured community and set beliefs, which may be less anxiety-inducing than the nebulous nature of spirituality.

Jay: When discussing the difference between religion and spirituality, especially in the context of suffering, it’s important to consider the concrete versus abstract nature of these experiences. Religion often provides a more tangible, concrete experience, which may be why it’s more effective in alleviating suffering compared to the abstract concept of spirituality.

David: Caroline’s idea of merging spirituality and religion is intriguing. In free societies, one has the luxury of choosing a religion that aligns with one’s spirituality. Historically, however, this choice has often been limited by culture and geography. If your culture’s dominant religion exercises a monopoly and doesn’t support your spiritual needs, you’re out of luck. It’s a fascinating thesis that warrants further thought.

* * *

Note: Sharon recommends the article at this link in connection with our current topic of discussion: How Americans Make Sense of Suffering | Pew Research Center  

Michael and Kiran continue their series on suffering and grace. I appreciate their effort and their work.

Kiran: In the good world that God created, there was no shame, fear, judgement, and suffering or at least they are not aware of it. Adam and Eve enjoyed a loving relationship with God, with each other and with the nature. All that harmony was disrupted when they ate the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. The act of eating forbidden fruit symbolizes an act of defiance to God’s explicit command and the pursuit of knowledge outside of His boundaries which are the basis for morality and ethics. When God pronounced curses on serpent, women, and land, suffering entered the world. The main point from this story is that disobedience to God’s commands and the pursuit of knowledge without regard for moral or ethical boundaries can and will lead to negative consequences, including suffering. So, even if God explicitly didn’t curse specific elements of the world, Adam and Eve’s disobedience and moral transgression can result in suffering and a fallen state for humanity.

Since the fall, suffering became a part of human experience despite one’s belief or disbelief in God. None of us can resist suffering and experiencing suffering once doesn’t prevent us from experiencing it again. This perpetual cycle of suffering can only end when God dwells with us in new heaven and earth. 

Revelation 21:3,4 And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Look! God’s dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. ‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’ or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.”

Revelation 22:1-3 Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb down the middle of the great street of the city. On each side of the river stood the tree of life, bearing twelve crops of fruit, yielding its fruit every month. And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations. No longer will there be any curse…

Today in our Christian society, the prevailing notion is that the stronger one’s faith in God, the closer one is to God, the farther he/she is from the suffering. This notion makes some loving Christians behave insensitively towards those that are in suffering with sickness, addiction, or poverty. Such reasoning makes one think that there is a causality between their deeds and their suffering. There is no doubt that unwise decisions result in predictable negative consequences. But my focus is on those that suffer sickness, loss, and heartache for no explainable reason.  

In the New Testament, Jesus advocated an opposite notion. Jesus didn’t promise that his followers will be free from suffering, in fact he said they may be persecuted. 

Jesus said,

“If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you. Remember what I told you: ‘A servant is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will persecute you also. (John 15: 18-20)

Peter said,

Dear friends, do not be surprised at the fiery ordeal that has come on you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you. But rejoice inasmuch as you participate in the sufferings of Christ, so that you may be overjoyed when his glory is revealed. (1 Peter 4:12-13 )

Most of us wonder why a loving and omnipotent God would allow suffering even when we believe in Him? Some of the horrendous evil that was characterized by the intensity and the duration of suffering such as the Holocaust, Hiroshima, make it extremely difficult to defend the argument that God is omnipotent, loving, and benevolent. 

Theologically we grapple with this issue in two ways namely “the concept of free will” and “the great controversy theme”. The concept of “free will” argues that if God created a world with free creatures, then it is possible that those creatures would choose to do evil. Therefore, to have free will, evil must be permitted, but God is not responsible for it. Even though this theory partly explains why God permitted evil and suffering, it doesn’t explain how God can be good to individuals and the why God values freedom so greatly even in the face of extreme suffering. 

The second explanation which is very Adventist is the Great Controversy theme. According to Ellen White, if God destroyed Satan as soon as he rebelled, the rest of the heavenly beings would not have a chance to comprehend the true nature of such rebellion and would obey God out of fear. Such obedience is not acceptable to God and thus He had to permit evil and allow it to come to its maturity so that every heavenly being would have undeniable evidence for consequences of sin. Thus, the human suffering caused by the permittance of evil is for the eternal good of the universe. Even though this theme gives meaning for human suffering, it does it at the expense of introducing a form of dualism into Christian theology, suggesting that God and Satan are engaged in an ongoing battle of equal power. This dualistic view contradicts the traditional Christian understanding of God’s omnipotence and sovereignty. 

Has anyone told you these two theories when you were going through your suffering? Does it help at all? The hard truth is that these explanations do very little to unburden our suffering. The reality is that there is no coherent explanation for why the good suffer and why the wicked prosper. If this is the case, one would argue what is the advantage for us to follow God? Is there any meaning for human suffering? To understand these questions, I want to explore today the relationship between suffering and Grace. But first, I want you to remember a time in your life that you went through the worst of suffering. “Pause for a few seconds”. Now silently answer these questions. 

What was your response to this suffering? Were you stoic? Were you fixated on the problem? Did you try to avoid suffering? Did you try to lessen its burden with addiction of choice? Did you feel lonely? Did you feel hopeless? Did feel that God was silent? Now, what was the response of those that were around you? 

For those of us that went through suffering of any sort, we understand that just because we prayed and we accepted God’s grace, suffering doesn’t go away, or its intensity doesn’t lessen. The loss we experienced in the form of death of a loved one or disability due to a disease or depression doesn’t reverse itself. Accepting God’s grace doesn’t make us hurt less or doesn’t justify the suffering. So, what role does Grace play in suffering? 

In the book of Job, one important thing to note is that in his suffering, along with the loss, sickness, and shame, he also experienced extreme loneliness and hopelessness. 

What strength do I have, that I should still hope?
What prospects, that I should be patient?
Do I have the strength of stone? Is my flesh bronze?
Do I have any power to help myself, now that success has been driven from me? (Job 6:11-13)

Like Job, in suffering, we experience hopelessness and loneliness. We often feel that we are at the end of our rope and there isn’t anything left in us to fight the fight. Like Job, our loved ones, our spouses, our best friends don’t understand our loneliness and hopelessness. No matter that they say or don’t say it is not sufficient. Suffering exposes our delusions of strength and false sense of security. It makes us realize how fragile and dispensable our lives are. It shows us that we are no stronger than the weakest of the weak in this world. It’s brutal and it’s honest. 

Jesus in His sermon on the mount said, “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 5:3). Being poor means having nothing; no resources, no retirement account, no marketable skills, no resume, no education, nothing that we can do for ourselves. We need somebody outside of us to provide for us, protect us and care for us. “Blessed are the poor in spirit” means that our fundamental sense, our spirit, our inner self, who we really are, is aware of an utter poverty that we need another. We are refugees with nothing. 

Why is the kingdom of heaven for the poor in spirit? Suffering exposes the brutal honesty of our human condition, as Paul declared “wretched man I am”! To receive God’s grace, we must first realize our helplessness. Even though God doesn’t want anyone to suffer, He uses suffering to help us understand our weakness. That is when we can receive God’s grace. God’s grace doesn’t mean that suffering goes away, and we suddenly become strong. Instead, we realize our dependence in God. 

Next, God’s grace grants us God’s presence. This idea of God’s grace and God’s presence together was first introduced in Zechariah

“This is the word of the Lord to Zerubbabel:
‘Not by might nor by power, but by My Spirit,’ Says the Lord of hosts.
‘Who are you, O great mountain? Before Zerubbabel you shall become a plain!
And he shall bring forth the capstone With shouts of “Grace, grace to it!” (Zechariah 4:6-7)

This verse encourages Zerubbabel and the people of Judah to rely on the power of God’s Spirit and His grace to overcome seemingly insurmountable obstacles and to accomplish their mission of rebuilding the Temple. 

We can further see this connection in the New Testament as well. 

“But he said to me, My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness. Therefore, I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ’s power may rest on me”. (2 Corinthians 12:9 )

This verse highlights the connection between God’s grace and His presence. God’s grace is sufficient, and in our weakness, His power is made perfect. When we rely on His grace, we experience His presence and power in our lives.

Finally, Paul when talking about “Spiritual gifts” used two terms, charismata (Rom. 12:6) meaning grace and pneumatika (1 Cor. 12:1) meaning Spirit interchangeably suggesting that with God’s grace there is God’s presence. 

Coming back to the question, what is the relationship between suffering and Grace, in our suffering when we accept God’s grace, along with His Grace, we receive His presence as well. 

In the case of Job, God came during his suffering and didn’t passively sympathize but actively transformed Job. In the case of Jacob, God came during his suffering and actively wrestled with him, disabled him and changed his name. So, what does God’s presence do to us in our suffering? Paradoxically, instead of easing the suffering, God actively participates with us through  our suffering. Most importantly while God is actively suffering with us, He transforms us. Paul best described this transformation in this verse. 

I like Eugene Peterson’s version of this passage.

We’ve been surrounded and battered by troubles, but we’re not demoralized;
we’re not sure what to do, but we know that God knows what to do;
we’ve been spiritually terrorized, but God hasn’t left our side;
we’ve been thrown down, but we haven’t broken.
What they did to Jesus, they do to us—trial and torture, mockery and murder;
what Jesus did among them, he does in us—he lives!
Our lives are at constant risk for Jesus’ sake, which makes Jesus’ life all the more evident in us. While we’re going through the worst, you’re getting in on the best! (2 Corinthians 4:8-12 [The Message])

Paul went through troubles that we can’t imagine anyone going through in their lifetime. Yet in all his suffering, he never felt lonely or hopeless. Why? Because he realized God’s active, transforming presence in his life. 

There is another benefit from God’s active presence in our life. God’s presence after transforming us, through us transforms others. Again, Paul described this best here. 

All praise to the God and Father of our Master, Jesus the Messiah! Father of all mercy! God of all healing counsel! He comes alongside us when we go through hard times, and before you know it, he brings us alongside someone else who is going through hard times so that we can be there for that person just as God was there for us. We have plenty of hard times that come from following the Messiah, but no more so than the good times of his healing comfort—we get a full measure of that, too. (2 Corinthians 1:3-5 [The Message])

Suffering heals us from our delusions of strength and false sense of security. Suffering enlightens us to God’s graceful fingerprints in unexpected places. Suffering allows us to appreciate even the smallest measures of relief, pleasure, beauty and acts of love that come our way. Suffering makes us more sensitive and attentive to the suffering of others, compelling us to share the grace that we received. Suffering can give us the capacity to see all of these as expressions of grace the goodness and presence of God.

Timothy Kellers said, “don’t let your suffering be wasted”. When we accept God’s grace in suffering, it does not always reduce or eliminate suffering, but it conquers and transforms suffering. This makes us free, free to respond, free to learn, free to grow, free to change, free to trust God without having to inspect and approve the balance sheet. After that we become God’s vessels of Grace and bring comfort to others that are in suffering.

Think of the suffering you went through. 

• Did your suffering bring you closer to God or made it difficult to trust Him? 
• Is God causing suffering, or does He use suffering to show His Grace? 
• Does the existence of evil, pain and suffering make you doubt the omnipotence of God? 
• Are pain and suffering evil, or do they serve an important purpose? 
• Where is grace in suffering? How can we recognize it and accept it?
• Should we embrace or reject suffering?

Resources used:

Suffering as the Texture of Grace

https://www.ministrymagazine.org/archive/2008/12/why-do-you-permit-this-oh-lord.html

https://www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/hoekstra_bob/grace/grace04.cfm

https://www.crossway.org/articles/entering-into-the-loneliness-of-job/

https://www.desiringgod.org/messages/christs-grace-and-your-sufferings

Suffering By Grace

Suffering Is a Vessel of God’s Grace to All

________________________

C-J  : Your questions seem to focus on the notion of expectations, a concept not exclusive to Christians but inherent to human nature. It often feels unfair to wonder, “Why me? When will it be my turn?” But research in social sciences shows that children who have experienced significant trauma from a young age eventually have diminished expectations. They accept their circumstances and begin to develop resilience. These children make the best of what they have; they self-educate, become resourceful, and are quick to rebound after setbacks. This resilience is also seen in professions that demand a high tolerance for pain and chaos, such as police officers and emergency response teams. These individuals have a knack for compartmentalizing their own discomfort. They don’t perceive challenges as “me against the world,” but rather see themselves as part of a team. This isn’t about individual struggles; it’s about collective achievement.

In a Christian context, our ‘training’ starts with learning the Word of God and observing more spiritually mature individuals practice their faith. To me, grace is about embracing the unknown, about trusting your training and understanding that God is ever-present. It’s not about personal suffering; it’s about the bigger process. When we hit obstacles, it’s crucial to pause and consider what we might be missing. This mindfulness helps reduce frustration and enables us to find the solutions we need. The act of surrender and building relationships can transform us, and grace serves as the underlying, unseen factor.

Take the examples of Job and Paul. Job didn’t decide to love God based on what he would get in return, and Paul didn’t weigh the worth of his pain. Paul’s focus was always on his love for God—first as a Jew obedient to the law, then as a servant of the Roman Empire. For Paul, getting back up after a fall was part of the journey. If you can’t stand, someone will take your place until you’re ready. This idea extends beyond individual experiences; I see it in the omnipresence of trauma in our lives. Transformation is ultimately about surrender, relationships, and the unseen grace that guides us.

David: Humans, and humanists specifically, aim to alleviate suffering. Kiran’s presentation, as I understood it, suggested that suffering brings us closer to God and strengthens our faith. If that’s the case, are we obstructing God’s plan by trying to relieve suffering?

Sharon: We could be serving as instruments of God, helping and supporting people during their times of suffering.

David: Michael emailed me about a 1970s philosopher, Neil Postman, who argued that modern media, through entertainment, can relieve suffering, albeit temporarily. Advanced technologies can further help us escape suffering in virtual worlds. If suffering is important for our relationship with God, then isn’t our intervention preventing people from getting closer to God?

Donald: In hospitals, the primary focus is on reducing physical suffering, often viewed through a scientific lens. But there’s also emotional or psychological suffering, like the loss of a child. I think we’re discussing two different types of suffering here: one where something is medically wrong and needs fixing, and another where the suffering is simply part of life’s tragedies. We all want control over our lives to avoid suffering. I cared for a 90-year-old man who had a stroke after a fulfilling life. He kept asking what he did wrong. But it’s not about him or what he could have controlled; it’s just life. Are we in pain, suffering, or both? In the end, our desire for control can be traced back to the Garden of Eden. Just like the devil wanted power equal to God, we seek control to understand and navigate our world.

C-J: I don’t think Adam and Eve aimed for equal power or to supersede God. Our curiosity, which reflects God’s creative spirit, drives us. Bad teachings often make people leave traditional faith systems. When we surrender to God, our relationship transcends time and circumstances. I believe that a strong spiritual foundation will make one automatically responsible to humanity and the planet.

Don: I wonder if pain and suffering are the same. Medical professionals see pain as an indicator of internal issues. Conditions where pain sensation is lost, like leprosy, are dangerous. I don’t think pain and suffering are necessarily synonymous.

David: Don is well-qualified to talk about this since he treats cancer patients. With terminal patients, there’s physical and spiritual suffering. Can doctors draw a line between the two?

Don: The line blurs. Mental or spiritual suffering can exacerbate physical suffering, and vice versa.

Donald: Hospitals mostly operate on scientific data, but they don’t necessarily address emotional or spiritual suffering. It seems like we’re trying to discuss both scientific and emotional perspectives here.

C-J: In my experience, patients do better when they have a good relationship with their caregivers. Emotional well-being helps with physical healing. I think this is a universal human experience.

Sharon: I found a statement saying, “pain is inevitable, but suffering is optional.” Suffering adds emotional resistance to pain, making it worse. Pain seems objective, while suffering is more subjective.

Kiran: In some cases, we have the option to avoid suffering, like choosing whether to give birth to a child with a debilitating condition.

Michael: Previously, Kiran and I were trying to find value in discussing suffering. But if we don’t focus on suffering itself, how can we move to acceptance?

C-J: I believe that acceptance and transformation come when we allow God to intervene.

Michael: But we can’t move into acceptance without discussing the nature of suffering itself.

C-J: I believe everyone here has experienced various forms of suffering. Whether personal or observed, suffering is inescapable. But we must remember our role as ambassadors of God’s transformative power through grace. We can’t avoid suffering; it’s an instrument God uses for a purpose. Both Christian and Jewish traditions address this, although their perspectives differ. While Jewish teachings often focus on earthly suffering, Christianity emphasizes transformation and grace, extending beyond our temporal existence.

Donald: When we say someone is in our prayers, what does that mean? Lately, the number of people in need of prayers has grown significantly. Are we praying for their suffering to end, or are we praying for something else? When we announce in church that someone is ill and needs prayers, what exactly are we praying for? Are we asking God to intervene or to help us understand that perhaps the suffering has a purpose?

Don: It seems we’re all grappling with the meaning and purpose of suffering. We have yet to fully understand why suffering is necessary, let alone why Jesus had to suffer specifically. This is a topic worthy of ongoing discussion, as it forces us to confront difficult questions.

David: If we can alleviate suffering, whether it’s through a cure for cancer or more humane methods of execution, the line between physical and spiritual suffering shifts. Advances in technology, such as virtual worlds, are even making it possible to relieve emotional suffering. Virtual avatars might soon offer relationships free from the risk of emotional pain. What happens then? What becomes of us if we eradicate all forms of suffering?

Donald: The question then arises: what does it mean to be human? Unlike AI, humans have the capacity to suffer. If the suffering is removed, how does that alter our human experience? And what would replace that suffering?

Don: I’m eager to hear Michael’s presentation next week on this topic. Sharon will follow, discussing the role of suffering across different cultures, based on her extensive experience in the Middle East, Africa, and Central America.

* * *