The “Scandal” Of Grace

You may have come across a book by Philip Yancey, that’s sold over a million copies, called What’s So Amazing About Grace? Apparently, he originally wanted to call it What's So Amazing About Grace; and Why Don't Christians Show More of It? You can probably understand why the publishers were a bit worried about that—after all, Christians were the target audience to buy it! The publishers said, “Why do you want to call it that?” Yancey responded, “Because, as Christians, grace is the greatest thing we have to offer the world. But it isn’t what we’re known for.”

In a way, it's a shame that the original title didn’t win out, because the first part and the second part should be a matching pair: as Jesus said, “Freely you have received; freely give.” Matthew 10:8.

When Yancey was researching the book, he did a survey to ask people who weren’t Christians what they associated with Christianity. None of them said grace. Most of them came up with a list of things that Christians were against. How sad that we’re best known for what we’re against, rather than what we’re for. No-one he surveyed connected Christianity with grace.

Grace is unmerited, undeserved, unearned love, kindness, and compassion. Grace is an attribute of God—part of who he is and what he is like—and it characterizes his approach toward humanity. It’s not a begrudging tolerance to a certain degree, it’s active favor without reservation. Grace is completely unreasonable, because it undermines a principle of natural justice that people should get what they deserve.

It can be challenging for preachers and writers to talk about grace, because once we really understand its lack of boundaries there’s a tendency to feel that we ought to be qualifying it in some way: to add some pre-conditions or some provisos, so that people don’t “misunderstand” it—in other words, so they don’t think they can “take advantage” of it. But the problem is, once we start to think like that, we’re no longer talking about God’s grace; we’re redefining it in ways that seem to us to be more reasonable.

That’s the thing about grace—it is by its very nature unreasonable. If you are an evangelical Christian reading this article, I will be surprised if some of the things I say here don’t feel just a tad uncomfortable: a feeling that surely I’m exaggerating and should be qualifying things a bit more. Dare I say, if we are “Yes, but …” Christians concerning the grace of God, then we haven’t fully understood it.

Biblical grace starts with being a characteristic of God. Something that God is like; an intrinsic part of who he is. God is love (1 John 4:8; 16; etc.) and receiving grace is part of how we experience that love. Grace is an expression of his love; part of what his love looks like in practice. It’s something he extends to us because of his love. It’s no stretch to say not only is God love personified but he is also grace personified. Hence, Yancey is completely right to expect it to be personified in Christians as well.

Let’s unpack a little more what grace looks like.

First off, it’s completely free. It’s a gift—a free gift. We can’t earn it, or pay for it ourselves. Nor can we qualify for it, because that would mean having to do something to get it. We haven’t—no one has—we’re the object of God’s affection by his sovereign decision to make us that.

The second thing about grace is that just as we can’t qualify for it, so too we can’t disqualify ourselves from it. We can’t lose it. There are no ongoing conditions, no small print, and no catches. God’s grace is not a “bait-and-switch” tactic to draw people into the church before they find out that God’s unconditional love and welcome to “come as you are” apparently does come with some conditions (that no one was upfront about at the outset).

The third thing about grace is that it’s unlimited in time and unlimited in amount. It never ends and it never runs out. It’s a river that never runs dry. As a result, the clock is not ticking on God’s grace, pending people changing in the ways that we think they should change. The church’s job is not to be behavioral police on God’s behalf (except insofar as safeguarding others is concerned).

And the fourth thing about grace is that it’s given to people who “don’t deserve” it. I don’t mean people who technically don’t deserve it, theologically, as it were—nice people, fundamentally decent people (like us). I mean people who many Christians would say most definitely don’t deserve it.

(This might remind us of the distinguishing between the “deserving poor” and the “undeserving poor” in the 1834 Poor Law in Victorian England—an attitude that in some circles still prevails.)

Even more disturbingly, perhaps, grace is also freely given to people who don’t repent, and change; who don’t stop doing things we think they shouldn’t be.

You can probably see why teaching about grace is hard. Why it feels like there needs to be some exceptions and some pre-conditions. Some “Yes, buts …”

We may find it hard, but we absolutely do not have God’s permission to dilute his grace, to ration his grace, or to divide people into those who in our eyes are worthy of grace and those who are not. As soon as we do that, it’s no longer the grace of God. As soon as we do that, we’re no longer imitating our heavenly Father.

No wonder Philip Yancey talks about “the scandal of grace”—because it is scandalous. It should be scandalous. Grace goes against every intuition that we have. No wonder Christians struggle.

In the dictionary, scandalous means shocking, outrageous, appalling, shameful, and even, immoral. These are all negative words and critical words. Even, judgmental words. If we’re minded to think about grace in these terms, then we need to be careful, because by implication that means being critical and judgemental of God himself as the author and initiator of grace.

In some streams of Christianity, one of the worst things someone can be accused of is being “a liberal”—someone who is insufficiently conservative for conservative tastes. But when it comes to grace, God himself is a liberal, so we need to either get used to it or re-think our categories.

(If anyone ever asks me whether I am theologically liberal or conservative, I always respond that I’m trying to be liberal in the ways that Jesus was liberal and conservative in the ways that Jesus was conservative.)

And let’s be clear: “believing in” grace is not the point. Grace is there to be received. To be experienced. To be enjoyed. And to be passed on.

Christians should be people who receive grace, live in grace, and live out grace. Because if that’s what God is like, then it’s what we should be like, too. We should copy him, be like him, and be giving away the same kind of grace in the same, unlimited amounts.

Yes, of course, one of the “risks” if we teach grace this way is that some people will take advantage and think they can therefore do what they please and ignore everything Scripture says about how to live and be as God’s people. Unsurprisingly, some were thinking that in the early church—see, for example, in Romans 5 and 6, and Jude.

Our response to that risk should not be to stop teaching grace. Or to dilute it, or qualify it, or restrict it. If we do, we’re letting down the people who desperately need to understand and experience God’s grace—undiluted and unconditioned.

Of course, grace is “risky.” Of course, some may take advantage. But that’s not our responsibility. The risk that a few will treat it as “cheap grace” is a risk worth taking for the benefit of the many—God accepts that risk all the time.

So are we living in grace? Are we conscious of God extending grace to us each day? Are we listening to voices that multiply grace to us, or that take grace away?

And are we extending grace to others? Are we giving grace away? Is it lavish, unlimited and unconditional—God’s kind of grace, delivered in God’s kind of way? Are we “doing” grace?

Just as love is a “doing word,” so too is grace. If we’re believing in love and grace, but we’re not doing love and grace, we’ve missed the point. As children of God, we are to “do what we see the Father doing,” as Jesus did (John 5:19).

• Grace is given to undeserving people (otherwise, it’s not grace).

• Grace is unlimited in amount and unlimited in time (otherwise, it’s become a tactic to get people to change).

• And grace is never conditioned—it’s never followed by the words “but,” or “provided that”—however tempting that may be.

And if we are concerned about appearing to be tolerant of sin in people’s lives—feeling a need to let people know “where we stand”—perhaps we need to reflect on whether that’s really something God is asking us to do. After all, it’s the role of the Holy Spirit to convict of sin, righteousness, and judgment (John 16:8). Why not focus on grace and let him do the rest?

No wonder grace is so scandalous.