Law of Grace?
I suppose if this is what you want to call it you could... but I
think it hardly helps the English language nor rightfully describes
the revolution that it is.
I'm sure if I am using my laptop now I am adhering to a certain set
of a 'law of laptop using', but obviously the observation of this
law is not my main concern.
This is quite different when you say that you have to actually pay
a lot of attention to observing a particular set of laws to the
point which the observation of the law itself becomes the primary
point of the action itself. It would be more fitting to describe
such a condition as being 'under the Law'.
Grace is something, so obviously it is also not something else. The
consolidation of what Grace is can indeed be considered it's
character, it's law. For example there's only one way to receive
it, it comes free but not cheap, it entails certain changes in a
life once somebody is under it
these could be considered a 'law'
in the sense of a law. But I doubt this is a helpful observation at
all.
Obviously it has to be applied to any kind of concept for that
concept to make sense; otherwise all our ideas would be formless
and ungraspable.
Of course this is also not mentioning the fact that when Christians
say that they are not 'under the Law' and under grace, they are
obviously not saying that they are lawless. One can only draw such
a conclusion if they haven't applied sufficient thinking to that
issue or are just trying to be difficult or naughty
or perhaps
honestly confused.
In any way, making the statement to this context refers to the fact
that one can no longer rely on the system of legalistic law to earn
his reconciliation with God. He instead has to rely on the grace
that has been given that actually pays off all the debt that the
law entails, but I think you already know this.
Indeed, why may I ask you pointed it out? Was it to point out a
question or expose what you thought was an inconsistency on the
part of the Christians?
