Interface

Between Heaven and Earth

Seeing God’s Glory Through Grace Upon Grace

Today’s class is mostly taken from previous classes. In it, I would first like to answer a question Carloyn asked about the glory of God. Second, I will attempt to answer the question, what is this grace upon grace that we’ve been given according to Jesus.

Jesus encourages obedience, which we’ve defined as “doing things God’s way,” which in turn leads to a more centered and focused life. It provides a foundation for our existence and it also honors God.

Even poorly observed, obedience can bring glory to God in the right setting.

We have stated that grace is a foundational characteristic of God— it is his recreative power, and is equivalent, in the story of God’s creation of the universe, to the formation of light.

Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light. (Genesis 1:3)

Arise, shine; for your light has come,

And the glory of the Lord has risen upon you. For behold, darkness will cover the earth

And deep darkness the peoples; But the Lord will rise upon you

And His glory will appear upon you. Nations will come to your light,

And kings to the brightness of your rising. (Isaiah 60:1-3).

No longer will you have the sun for light by day, Nor will the moon give you light for brightness; But you will have the Lord as an everlasting light, And your God as your glory. (Isaiah 60:19)

God demonstrates His grace in His light. The characteristics of light and grace are similar: Both dispel darkness—physical and spiritual; neither can be seen but both reveal everything in their presence; they cannot be grasped or held; they fill all the space available to them; they can be everywhere at once; they are never consumed or exhausted by anything in their presence; each is a form of illumination, enabling us to find our way and revealing incredible beauty all around us; each is warming and comforting; they are forms of energy producing power; they are essential for good health and growth; and their source is fundamental and Infinite.

There is a connection—an equation—between God’s glory and His brightness, and His glory is His grace. This light is not the sun, the moon, and the stars: It is God’s essence, His glory, and His grace.

Independence is the antithesis of grace. It is the result of eating from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, which we might call the Tree of Independence, rather than from the Tree of Life— the Tree of Dependence and Grace.

We are dependent upon light, upon God’s creative power. We’re also dependent upon God’s recreative power: Paul drew the connection between grace and glory:

For God, who said, “Light shall shine out of darkness,” is the One who has shone in our hearts to give the Light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ. (2 Corinthians 4:)

He also tied God’s glory to his grace in an immutable way. We see the product of that grace in God’s redemptive power:

…to the praise of the glory of His grace, with which He favored us in the Beloved. In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our wrongdoings, according to the riches of His grace… (Ephesians 1:6-7)

And Revelation puts together God’s glory with his light, which links God’s glory with his grace:

And the city [the new Jerusalem] has no need of the sun or of the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God has illuminated it, and its lamp is the Lamb. The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their glory into it. In the daytime (for there will be no night there) its gates will never be closed; and they will bring the glory and the honor of the nations into it;… (Revelation 21:23-26)

Which brings us back to the issue of responsibility. If grace is linked to God’s glory and is manifest as God’s brilliant light, what responsibility do we have for grace? In many Scriptural passages that contrast light and darkness, grace and independence can be substituted for light and darkness.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. … And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us; and we saw His glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. John testified about Him and called out, saying, “This was He of whom I said, ‘He who is coming after me has proved to be my superior, because He existed before me.’” For of His fullness we have all received, and grace upon grace. For the Law was given through Moses; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ. (John 1:1, 14-18)

Another translation says: “Out of the fullness, we have already received grace in place of grace already given.” What is “grace in place of grace already given”? It is double grace, grace squared. Why do we need grace upon grace? Why do we need this double grace or grace squared?

I would like to attempt to answer this question and today I’m offering the following answer for discussion.

In a previous class, we equated the phrase “the kingdom of heaven” with grace. This substitution provided interesting insights into the teachings of Jesus. Viewing the kingdom of heaven as grace brought a surprising cohesion to His message and highlighted grace as a central theme in His teachings.

Let’s reconsider the parable of the sower: 

Matthew 13 : That same day Jesus went out of the house and sat by the lake. Such large crowds gathered around him that he got into a boat and sat in it, while all the people stood on the shore. Then he told them many things in parables, saying: “A farmer went out to sow his seed. As he was scattering the seed, some fell along the path, and the birds came and ate it up. Some fell on rocky places, where it did not have much soil. It sprang up quickly, because the soil was shallow. But when the sun came up, the plants were scorched, and they withered because they had no root. Other seed fell among thorns, which grew up and choked the plants. Still other seed fell on good soil, where it produced a crop—a hundred, sixty or thirty times what was sown. Whoever has ears, let them hear.”

10 The disciples came to him and asked, “Why do you speak to the people in parables?”

11 He replied, “Because the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven/grace has been given to you, but not to them. 12 Whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them. 13 This is why I speak to them in parables:

“Though seeing, they do not see;
    though hearing, they do not hear or understand.

14 In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah:

“‘You will be ever hearing but never understanding;
    you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.
15 For this people’s heart has become calloused;
    they hardly hear with their ears,
    and they have closed their eyes.
Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
    hear with their ears,
    understand with their hearts
and turn, and I would heal them.’[a]

16 But blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear. 17 For truly I tell you, many prophets and righteous people longed to see what you see but did not see it, and to hear what you hear but did not hear it.

Jesus then goes on to explain the parable to his disciples. I’m going to substitute the kingdom of heaven for grace. 

18 “Listen then to what the parable of the sower means: 19 When anyone hears the message about grace and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what was sown in their heart. This is the seed sown along the path. 20 The seed falling on rocky ground refers to someone who hears the word and at once receives it with joy. 21 But since they have no root, they last only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, they quickly fall away. 22 The seed falling among the thorns refers to someone who hears the word, but the worries of this life and the deceitfulness of wealth choke the word, making it unfruitful. 23 But the seed falling on good soil refers to someone who hears the word and understands it. This is the one who produces a crop, yielding a hundred, sixty or thirty times what was sown.”

The first thing I want you to notice here is the seed. The seed here is equated with the word. The word about God. I think the word in this parable is equivalent to the word that was there from the beginning. This is the Word with a capital W. This is the Word of God, this is God Himself. Which is nothing but grace. 

As we discussed many times before, God extends his grace to everyone. He does not discriminate with his grace. His grace is lavish, prodigal, and extravagant. Dr. Weaver equated it to oxygen, it is all around us that you would have to suffocate yourself in order to avoid it. But to be able to see this grace, to hear the message about the word and understand it, is something else. Grace is such a foreign concept to us that we need more grace in order to understand it. I think the phrase grace upon grace means that it takes extra grace; it takes grace upon grace, in order to see and hear and understand the message about Grace. But doing so is a powerful thing indeed, because as the parable suggests, understanding grace always leads to multiplication of the crop, by thirty, sixty, or even a hundred times. It is a special blessing to be able to see grace. 

We are very fortunate that this class makes grace its central message. And because of this, we have a unique opportunity to see God’s glory and grace in ways that many before us could only long for. With this in mind, I would like to extend the blessing that Jesus gave to His disciples to you as well: ‘But blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear. For truly I tell you, many prophets and righteous people longed to see what you see but did not see it, and to hear what you hear but did not hear it.’

What do you think of the equation of God’s glory to his light, and his light to his grace? What do you think of interpreting the phrase grace upon grace as the ability to see and understand grace? Since we have been fortunate in this class to hear and understand more about God’s grace than most people do, what responsibility do we have towards others who do not see and have not heard this message about God’s grace and glory?

Carolyn: I have been focusing on the word glory, and you brought a new face to it and made me feel so good when you coupled it with grace, because I am trying to not look at the cracks in the sidewalk or the dirt around us, but I’m trying to see the glory of God. And in so doing, I am also trying to include others in my observation. I become easily overwhelmed with something so little. But I see the glory in what I’m looking at. And it can be the smallest little turtle, or a bird, or some everyday thing around in the house. Instead of seeing the negative side, I see the joy that God has given us through His grace and His glory.

Don: I’m wondering what the impediment is for us to see grace so easily. Why is it that people who are believers, who value things of the Spirit and want to do God’s will and represent Him aright, would have such a difficult time embracing or even understanding—whether they embrace it or not—the element of God’s grace? It seems we’re awfully hard-headed if we need grace upon grace in order to understand grace.

Donald: Don’t you think that it comes from “We get what we deserve”? That’s basically the way we operate in life. Sometimes things come at us that we don’t deserve, certainly, or don’t think we deserve, but it’s—“I didn’t! That’s not fair!” Grace and fairness don’t equate. Grace covers fairness, and it’s not for us to make that judgment. But the difficult thing is, that’s just not how we are programmed. It’s not in our DNA.

Carolyn: When we look for the glory of God, I think we can see grace upon grace. It’s more tangible than just to theorize it and wonder at how marvelous His grace is. I guess it has to do with whether we’re right-brain or left-brain too.

Reinhard: As believers, we are blessed. I think we appreciate blessings. But God gives blessings to believers and non-believers. To me, blessing is something good given to people. If people don’t receive blessings, maybe nothing happened. But more than that, if there’s punishment, you know, versus blessing, punishment is even more severe to those who are punished, I believe.

We all saw the LA fires and the Golden Globes last week. God was mentioned. As a believer, I think God wanted to show His glory. We have to respect God in our life, but not put Him on the level of humans, I think that’s not proper. It’s a mistake God is the Creator of the universe.

So to me, grace is more appreciated by believers. Maybe non-believers get something good in their life. I think God gives grace and blessings to them again, just like rain and sun are given to believers and non-believers alike. So I think that’s in His power. Of course, in all things, I think God works for those who love Him. I think God always shows His goodness to those who believe in Him.

Donald: That’s an interesting concept to describe—the difference between grace in regards to a believer and a non-believer.

Reinhard: Believers look to their current lives but are also looking forward to the life after death, when the grace of God is really going to be manifested. Some celebrity recently said that they don’t care about eternal life; they just worry about life now on this earth. It’s sad. We have to live our life on this earth as God gave it to us. It is a blessing, it’s a grace, and we have to respond to this life that God gave us in a proper way.

As Christians, we have coverage of both life on this earth and life hereafter. No matter what we are facing on this earth—pain, suffering, even death—we must always glorify God. What happens is in God’s hands.

Kiran: I have one struggle with the parable of the seeds, because we can easily take it as if it’s the responsibility of the soil or it’s the responsibility of the seed. But I look at it as the responsibility of the sower, because grace is not about what we do, it’s about what God does. So if you think about it that way, why would a farmer, knowing it’s a rocky path, throw seed into the path, unless he has an intention where he wants to slowly break the rocky soil, even though it’s at the expense of some seed being wasted, and then keep doing it every season to the point where that rocky path becomes fertile again?

So even the thorny bush—who picks the thorns out? It’s the farmer’s job. It’s not the soil’s job. So, you know, it’s just a struggle for me, because I want to look at this parable in such a way that, you know, it’s the farmer that is looking after the field. He’s looking after the fence and the path, and he’s responsible for somehow putting the Word, which is the transformative thing, into the soil, to change the soil. If you look at it that way, it becomes so much easier. Otherwise, it’s as if, like, I have something to do to make sure that grace germinates in me, which I have struggled with.

Don: I think the key is that in the good soil, the return from the good soil was quite variable. It was 30, 60, or 100%. You would expect, if the soil is the responsible agent, that the soil would produce the same amount for each aliquot of seed that was used. So the notion that even in the good soil there’s a variation seems to me to underwrite what you’re saying, and that is that the farmer is indiscriminately sowing to let whatever the effects of the seed can be germinate and become fruitful.

Carolyn: I kind of have taken the idea of the poor soil and the good soil to mean that it gives me a place—I may only have sown, maybe in the poor soil, but I’ve made it. There’s a beginning, there’s a desire that the seed—that someone will come after me and they will plant the better seed, because I’m not as gifted as some people. And they can take it from there and bring it to fruition, because we’re not all gifted in the same way. Therefore, I feel like there has to be a place where it says we can help prepare the soil.

Michael: I do think it’s the problem of the farmer who’s being indiscriminate. But that might have its reason. And I think, because I know pastors and churches use this to say, “We need to be the good soil,” or whatever. But I think we rotate sometimes—we’re this type of soil, and sometimes we’re that type. We’re not always the good soil. Again, the primary responsibility does seem to be on God, actually, not on us. But it does seem that if the conditions are right and we’re a bit like soil, then—I don’t know if responsibility is the right word—but what will happen is there will be fruit. I don’t know if I can say it will become our responsibility, or if, in the end, it’s God’s responsibility.

Sharon: I think that grace begets grace. When we think about our marriages, do we have to have perfect marriages to have love? Do we have to work at loving, or is it just grace—the natural outpouring of our intimate relationship, of the gift of freedom that we’re given in Jesus Christ? I think we can become too academic about something that is extremely spiritual and extremely personal.

For each of us, you can think of it as our responsibility, or we can just think of it as a natural byproduct of receiving grace—that we live and give grace because we have received grace. Some things are just too difficult and too complex, I think, to humanize with the word responsibility, because it’s just a natural outpouring of our walk with our Lord and Savior. With the grace we’ve been given, we in turn—members of this Sabbath School class and others—live grace in our lives, in our values, in the soil that we have to till, in our work, in our daily experience. So for me, it’s just a natural phenomenon that grace begets grace, and therefore we give grace because we have been given so much that we did not deserve.

Donald: I think we recognize that our relationship with Christ is a personal thing and not a corporate thing, but we quickly connect our personal faith into a corporate faith. And I’m wondering what the relationship is between those two concepts. You know, corporate faith then becomes something that is very intellectual and organized and buttoned up. So does that interfere, or does it enhance? I think of the wonderful church community that we have here in this area, but in terms of the corporate church, that sounds quite structured and organized, and it seems to not be as central to the conversation that we’re involved in.

Sharon: There’s definitely a tension between our personal faith—at least for me—and the issues of corporate religion. I don’t even know that I like the term. I kind of squirm a little bit when we talk about corporate faith, because faith, to me, again, seems extremely personal. What we get out of our church depends on the type of community that we’ve chosen to fellowship with. There are toxic, corporate church environments that would be very detrimental to our grace for ourselves because they’re a critical environment, they’re a non-tolerant environment, they’re not an inclusive environment.

I think the social dynamics of corporate faith really determine a lot. Obviously, in corporate religion, we need sociology to define who is our group, who we are, and the corporate identity. I’m very indebted to my corporate identity as a Seventh-day Adventist. I would not have had the global opportunities that I’ve had without the corporate religious identity that I have, from a sociological perspective, with the Adventist community of faith. But for me, that stuff is what creates the fence. That’s what creates the boundaries around defining what our community is.

When it comes down to the personal interpretation of my own walk with Jesus Christ, I find the corporate to often have dissonance with me. It’s critical that we’re sitting in church, hearing people not give grace, or being with people who are very intolerant of diverse worldviews and diverse perspectives. It is a dilemma, but I think that the Lord encourages us to have healthy, non-toxic corporate relationships in which we can actually be nurtured and grow, instead of having chemicals put on us with ideology and closed-mindedness.

If we can have a safe environment that’s nurturing, that fertilizes young, new ideas and broader perspectives, I think it’s up to us to not only impact our corporate environments, but also to make sure that the environments we choose to live out our Christian corporate identity in are healthy environments—environments that are open. We need to be part of that, and not part of the toxicity that is so often attached to some corporate egos.

Don: I think where we go off the rails is that we mistake the corporate input into our personal life as a way of salvation. What we’ve learned, I think, in our discussions here—and from even Michael’s essay today—is that we have a sense that it’s God’s responsibility to save me, and it’s my responsibility in my community to help others. Not to save them, but to help them in whatever way they need help.

It’s when we get them mixed up, and we believe that it’s the corporate church’s responsibility to save us, and that what we believe and how we practice our faith is dependent upon our salvation, that we go off the rails. If we would let God do the saving and let us take care of each other, I think we’d be in a better spot.

Donald: I want to make it very clear that the Seventh-day Adventist Church has defined who I am and what I’m about. There is no question about that. However, Adventism has built a community of faith, a Christian community around me, around us, that is of ultimate value, and for that, I am very grateful. But when it comes down to putting it in a book and saying, “Okay, this is what Seventh-day Adventism is,” then you kind of feel like, “Okay, am I a part of that? Or am I not a part of that?” And that seems to be somewhat destructive to me.

My wife and I worked 40 years for the Seventh-day Adventist Church. We are grateful for those times—there’s no question about it. But it’s the community of faith that I’m so grateful for, which brings us together, really, this morning.

Reinhard: I would say there are three main topics in the parable of the seeds: the sower, the seed, and the soil. The soil is humanity. The receptivity of the human heart plays a big role here in accepting the grace of God. God gives all this grace through His work, but unfortunately, only one group of people—the land that produced 30 times, 60 times, and 100 times—receives it.

Now, that’s probably, in our Christian life, in our influence on others, I think, dependent on our talents, on our strength to do good in our surroundings. Some people like to visit others, some like to encourage other people, and some like to help in terms of money and other things. I think maybe that’s the difference between 30, 60, and 100 times. I think it depends on who we are associated with.

Some people may be placed in certain positions where the Adventist community is a big help, and you can see the results of their work. Some of us may just stay in our place and do as much as we can to evangelize the people around us and do things like that. I think it depends on where we are, where we’re at, and how much we can do according to our talent. God knows our capacity and our limits. Some people are not going to take chances outside their comfort zone, things like that.

So it’s hard to judge our own strength to do this kind of job. But I think God knows our limits, and to place ourselves in God’s hands is the best thing we can do.

David: Maybe we are not only being too academic but even too worldly in our assumptions about grace. We’re bringing corporations—religious organizations, churches—which are things of this world, into the discussion. They are very much things of this world. There was no church in the Garden of Eden. The people lining up at the gates of the New Jerusalem in the book of Revelation are not organized in columns led by people carrying banners saying “Seventh-day Adventists,” “The Catholic Church,” “Islam,” etc. They’re all the same. There is no organization represented whatsoever.

Is the church represented in the parable of the soil and seeds? Is the church supposed to be soil that nurtures the seed? Whence does a religion get its authority? In the beginning was the Word, and in the end will be the Word. In the meantime, the Word is still the Word.

People were burned to death in their homes in the LA fires last week, an indiscriminate “act of God,” as many would call it. There must have been some good people who died along with some bad people. This is just the nature of the world, and I question whether grace is a thing of this world. I’ve argued before that grace comes only at the very end of life. I have to believe that someone in the terrible agony of burning to death is not feeling the effects of grace, but I do believe that at the point of death, the agony will be gone, and they will feel grace. To me, grace is not of this world; it is spiritual.

Don: I’d say it’s spiritual because it comes from God. It is synonymous with God. And in the parable, I see grace as the seed, not the soil. Even the seed that’s eaten up by the birds is passed through the bird’s alimentary tract, is fertilized, and becomes something that sprouts and grows, even if it’s not productive growth. The same is true of the seed among the thorns—it’s not completely eliminated, but it’s not hugely productive. But then again, even in the good soil, it’s not uniformly productive. It’s intermittently productive.

We don’t have the obligation of turning ourselves into good soil. It’s the sower’s discretion—or, in this case, indiscretion—that spreads the seed everywhere. And I think if there’s something to be learned about grace, which is of this world, it’s that we have an obligation to extend the grace that we’ve been given to everyone and anyone we come in contact with.

David: I would agree with that, but I would put it simply as a matter of the greatest commandment / the Golden Rule—to love others and to do unto them as you would have them do unto you. Are we being too academic in trying to tease this apart when it all boils down, in the end, simply to being good to one another?

Kiran: I have a slightly different approach to this. For me, grace is most important in this life. I mean, I understand it has an implication for the afterlife. But for me, if you look at the seed, the seed has a germinating principle. You don’t teach the seed to grow on its own—it just germinates on its own when the conditions are right. So the job of grace is like that. It’s transformative. Whether it is on rocky soil, on top of a rock, or in good soil, its job is to germinate and then transform the soil that it is placed in.

So, you know, how does grace transform a person? We have seen this several times in many people’s lives, including my own life. Grace changes a person from being inward-looking to outward-looking. As simple as that. Without grace, I wouldn’t know how to treat others the way I want them to treat me. I’d be so consumed in myself, I wouldn’t even think about it. But grace makes me blind to myself and opens my eyes to see others. I think the most important aspect of grace for me is its transformative power—the power it has on every individual who accepts grace.

Anonymous: Grace upon grace means not one grace, not two, not 1,000, not a million. But He keeps giving and giving and giving one grace over the other, over the other, all over our lifetime. While that is my understanding of grace, a verse came to mind, and I got distracted a little bit because I looked for it and compared it in different versions. I found at least three versions.

Let me read you the verse first. It’s from Jeremiah 16:13, and it says—I’m going to read one of the translations that uses the same word in Arabic, which is grace. Other versions or translations render it as favor or mercy, but only three of the English ones I have—older versions of the Bible—use the word grace. For instance, this one is from the Geneva Bible. It reads like this, and it’s the very end of this verse that I’m referring to:

“Therefore, will I drive you out of this land into a land that you know not, neither you nor your fathers; and there shall you serve other gods day and night, for I will show you no grace.”

When I read it a couple of days ago, I had a question mark beside it. I couldn’t understand why God wouldn’t give grace. Well, of course, if you read the Bible, you’re familiar with how rebellious and how unrighteous the people of Israel were in those days. God sent Jeremiah, Isaiah, Ezekiel, and all the other prophets to show them the wrong ways and to plead with them to come back. But they insisted on turning their backs to God. They left God, pursued other gods, and followed their own stubborn, disobedient hearts.

My understanding of this situation is that God is so long-suffering, so patient, and He gives grace upon grace for years and years and years. But when He sees that the people are not responding—even after all that—He draws back His grace. I can’t find it right now, but there’s a part where Jeremiah speaks to the people of Israel, and they ask him, “What is our sin? What have we done that you brought this destruction upon us?” Jeremiah responds, “Because you left me, you turned your backs on me, you didn’t keep my commandments,” and so on.

The fire of God’s anger was blazing forever. So, if God finally decided not to give them grace, as I read in the verse, what does that mean? What does that tell us? Does grace always work? Is it always appreciated? Maybe there is a time when God withdraws His grace, as we saw in this verse.

C-J: I believe that grace is always available. It’s when we humble ourselves. Reflecting back on what you said about stubborn and stiff-necked people—when we refuse to be yielded or give consideration—I believe grace is always available, both in this realm and in the afterlife, whatever that may look like.

Anonymous: Do you think if God’s grace is always, always, always there, that anyone would perish? Why did He tell the Israelites about the five or six nations—however many—in the beginning that the Israelites were supposed to take their land because their sin was overflowing? Why didn’t God continue to be gracious to those people, even though they worshiped idols? If God’s grace is always continual, at the end, nobody would perish, and there would be no eternal destruction for anyone.

C-J: I believe that narrative was seen through their own eyes and their own history. But my experience with God has always been one of grace, even though I didn’t recognize it until maybe a long time after the fact. I think God does a work in us daily.

The Israelite people, when they were tribal and didn’t have a written text, saw things through their own eyes, the history around them, and their living experience of war and other struggles. But God is a God of grace and peace, and I choose to believe that. I could be wrong, but my experience with God is filled with grace.

Michael: I think the idea describes how our discussion is not something we can talk about materially, of this world. I think that’s why Jesus used parables to describe this and left the interpretation to us. He didn’t get into the weeds of whose responsibility is what and how these things work. He just gave the parables. But I wonder if there is a way to understand the parables on a spiritual plane.

* * * 

Leave a Reply