•The premise of Comprehensive Grace http://www.presence.tv/cms/compgrace.php (archived version) is that God is unconditionally granting the entire world "grace" and thus "not counting their sins against them" (2 Cor. 5:19).
The need of each soul to personally place faith in Christ was a condition, that was temporary, until the "end of the age". (Acts 3:19-22, notice the personal addressing: "you"; and the time frame. It is spoken to them, the listeners in the Temple; not us, centuries later, and the sins would be blotted out at the return of Christ; not the moment they first believed!)
This is actually very similar to the soteriology of the Primitive Baptists, whose "orthodoxy" is not usually questioned. They too believe that God saves purely on Grace, and not on a person's choice (even if "enabled" by "election"). They point out that The "faith" that "grace" works through to save (Eph.2:8) is the "faith" OF Christ (Gal 2:16), not our faith "IN" Christ. (which is fallible as it is, as we see). So to them, God randomly saves independantly of "duty faith".
•The age that was ending was the Old Covenant, or age of "Law". Hence, man condemned by default, "under the Law".
The new covenant or age of grace, while having begun during the writing of the New Testament, was overlapping with the old covenant.
One was "perishing" while the other was set to eventually take completely over. (Matt.13:31-33)
Hence, there was spoken of a "travail" while waiting for the new age, and metaphorized conflicts such as "new wine in old wineskins".
•Each person therefore had to choose one or the other: either Christ, or their "old life" (which all defaulted to by birth), which corresponded with "the spirit" vs "the flesh". For Jews, this was the Law; for gentiles, it was paganism.
Since grace in this transitional period was conditional, each person also had to persevere in faith and obedience, and run the so-called "race" to "the end" (which was said to be in their lifetimes! 1 Cor. 15:51, 2, Matt. 16:28, 24:34), or they were in danger of falling back into "perdition".
This is the only way to reconcile "eternal security" with scriptures that speak of "drawing back unto perdition" or "falling away"; as well as Paul's teaching on "faith-alone" with James' and others' teaching on "works".
More evidence of this is the "deposit" or "downpayment" (KJV "earnest") mentioned in 2 Cor. 1:22, 5:5 and Eph.1:14. The "promise" in these passages is redemption itself. In 2 Pet.1:11, "entrance into the kingdom" itself, is said to be the result of a list of deeds or "growth" Christian teachers often cite as "steps to victory"! (And some groups use it to "disprove" Faith Alone altogether). An overlap of covenants from AD33-70, (with a "deposit" of salvation) is the only explanation of this.
•The path was "narrow", and the "few" would be saved as Christ's "little flock" because they were all turning away from the prevailing Old Covenant system they were living amongst.
This only lasted until "the end" of that age. Else, it would hardly be good news, since God already had a small "flock" with the rest of the world "lost" under that Old Covenant. (What really changed between then and now, in that case?)
•The period of Law was finally ended when the Temple was destroyed (AD70), and Jerusalem basically transformed into an antetypical "Gehenna" (the lake of fire and brimstone, fulfilling the prohpecies of Jer. 7:31-33 and 19:2-13). This was in their lifetimes, and the only event that could fulfill "the end" spoken about in the prophecies.
•"The world" (usually aeon; "age") referred to the Old Covenant. "New Heavens and New Earth" refers to the final fruition of the new covenant, when death [spiritual, that is, and the one that was our biggest enemy; much more so than physical death] was abolished. ("Heaven" in prophetic language represented the government of Israel; while "earth" represented the land of Israel).
•After the destruction in AD70 (which may have included some sort of visible appearance of Christ alluded to by Josephus, and the actual "rapture of the saints"), those "left-behind" then went on to comprise the new Church. Yet they did not understand what had just occurred, and thus continued to look for something in the future, and then began developing into what we now know as "historic Christianity".
•Romans 3:23 ("For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God"), one of the most familiar "verses" in scripture, is not even a whole sentence, let alone, "verse". The preceding verse says "Even the righteousness of God [which is] by faith OF Jesus Christ unto ALL and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference...". This then leads into "for all have sinned...".
Here we see again, the "faith OF Christ", rather than individual faith IN Jesus; and most importantly, that "ALL" and "all who believe" are distinguished; with "no difference" between them; both having "sinned and come short of the glory of God", and thus also, both being covered by the righteousness of God through the "faith of Christ".
•The first reaction is naturally to use 2Tim 2:18 "Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some"; but Paul wrote this to those for whom it was yet still future.
Another objection will be that it makes the New Testament writings "obsolete", and no longer "written for us". But this is no different from the Old Testament, which we still use; but clearly, nearly all of its commands are not for us.
Even parts of the New Testament we hold as applying then, but not now.
•There still could be some sort of future visible coming and Kingdom. But the main focus of the Plan; the abolition of spiritual death, has been long accomplished.
•When we say the world is lost, what we're actually saying is that it is still under the Law, and essentially, that the Old Covenant lives on to this day, until Christ returns.
Yet this view professedly sees the Old Covenant as completely ending at the Cross, so the "world that is perishing" mentioned in the rest of the NT is now assumed to be the "physical world", and people are presumed to still be condemned, for being "physical" ("natural" or "fleshy" in a literal sense) only, instead of "spiritual" ("reborn").
But what "flesh" really referred to was the physical inheritance of the Old Covenant (people thought they were saved because they were of Abraham's lineage), not the physical world.
•Scriptural statements such as "The soul that sins shall die" (Ezekiel 18:4, 20) and "do this and live" (Lev. 18:5, Ezekiel 18:5-9, 20:11, 13, Luke 10:28) are apart of the Law, evidenced by the fact that this is what leaves most of mankind still condemned, under conventional theology!
The "narrow path" that results is not apart of grace (as many think), but is really part and parcel of the Law!
"Orthodox theology": unresolved problems:
•Cannot explain Matthew 16:28 "Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom." . It also stretches the term "the Last Days", which actually referred to Israel, not the physical world.
•Faith becomes a duty, where man remains in "debt", and obligated to have to "give God something" (i.e., "your life") in return, basically, in order to have the debt removed. People do not realize this is a form of works: a "give and take" transaction of de-facto "merit" or "earning". (Rom. 4:4; ergazomai {"work"} meaning "to trade", which this clearly is! That was necessary in the transition period between covenants, as recorded in the New testament).
Either grace is free, or it is no more grace (Rom.11:6).
•The "Scandal of particularity" (where there is only one way, and people who never heard are simply unfortunate, yet held "accountable" by "general revelation" and "conscience") is anything but good news; it is the near ultimate triumph of the Law of sin and death! It's basically the bad news that the "good news" was designed to remedy in the first place!
(Romans 1, which is used to teach this "accountability of all", is referring to Israel, whom God "showed" Himself to through the Law and the Temple system, referred to as "the world". v.19 says "...that which may be known of God", which we cannot know just by looking at nature.
It is clearly describing special revelation, NOT general revelation! Romans 2 then moves onto Gentiles "without the Law").
•Even evangelicals are embarrassed by the doctrine, and end up softening it down in one way or another.
This is not "the offense of the Gospel" (or "offense of the Cross"); it's the offense of the Law.
Offense is connected to the Law, the good news is Grace; not the other way around.
People who were offended by the Gospel of grace were those trusting in Law for their justification. Hence, an offense "to those who are perishing" (the reign of the Law over man was also perishing then. This doesn't say that everyone is still actually "perishing" under the Law today).
•This now makes all of Paul's teachings on Law, sin and death make so much more sense; especially the way he sometimes seems to put down the Law and say that sin only exists because of it. (Romans, Galatians, Ephesians, etc).
The Law brings death or "wrath". (Romans 7:10, 4:15, 2 Cor. 3:7).
Paul says repeatedly that the Law was against us. The Gospel is not against us unless we insist on being bound to the Law.
Other Points
•1 Timothy 4:10 "we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of ALL MEN, and especially of those who believe." Most seem to read "especially" as "exclusively". All it's saying is that salvation begins with those who believes, and would later extend to everyone else.
•The application of blood (as in the original Passover, and the ensuing atonement system) was a physical TYPE of Christ's atonement that did translate to being "covered" by His blood through "personal faith in Him", in the transition period of the New Testament. But just like in the Passover, where the death angel came quickly, and then the mandate to apply blood on the doorposts was over (for good); the antetypical event they were waiting for in the NT also came relatively quickly, and those who believed were covered, and those who didn't, perished. That too would be over, for good, afterward. Afterward, salvation is 100% by Christ's actions; not man's efforts in being "covered" anymore.
•People often use "courtroom" analogies to try to show why the Law and its penalties should still be in effect today (to "rein in sin"); but in the Bible's own courtoom analogy, the worst thing you can do after receiving pardon is not to commit the offense again (as most assume), but to turn around and be hard on another offender, by trying to use the Law on him! (Matthew 18:21-35).
•Many seem to believe a little bit of a fear factor is necessary to rein in sin ("if there are no requirements, people will sin with impunity"), but this has never worked, as the most legalistic have fallen into the vilest sin. Love is to be our motivation now, anyway. (1 John 4:18, 19).
People ask "do you believe sin is OK?" and "why should anyone obey, then?"; incredulous that anyone would believe we should obey, if we believed that all were saved now! They don't see the clear-as-day implication of works-righteousness in this. That the fear of Hell was the ultimate motivation for doing good in the traditional belief system was patently denied, though what else does this infer?
Which is better; not committing adultery because I love my spouse (which is God's will, and I'm supposed to love Him too), and I don't kill because someone loves the person I'm killing, and it's not my place to remove them from the world...
OR
Not committing adultery or murder just because "the Law says not to", and it's thus it's only the Law and fear of punishment that keeps me from doing these things?
•Most believe Adam was "saved" with nothing more than passively receiving the skins God prepared for him; and that infants will be saved if they die before an "age of accountability". In either case, there is no sign of actual repentance or even "faith". So if God saves them like that, why do we think God can't save others that way? ("Accountability" is the language of "works").
•Pantelism explains why some things we take for granted as "natural" were considered sinful or evil ("defiled"-- leprosy, menstruation, many other sicknesses we have medical or psychological explanations for today, etc.). In terms of strict Law, the only thing that mattered was perfection, and these things are all apart of imperfection.
The sense of guilt comes from the Fall of man (which was the "knowledge of good and evil"), which colored the view of these things (this was especially marked for everything sexual related; such as menstruation; and it ran across all cultures and religions). Paul also shows this in his treatment of "meats offered to idols", where the "conscience" is what is really "defiled". So the sin was in man's mind, not the condition itself.
Comprehensive Grace does not deny sin, the Cross or the "cost" of Grace (like standard "universalism").
It does not teach that sin is "OK" now, because it will go "unpunished". (The motivation for obedience is love).
It does not teach man is saved because he is basically "good", or "a loving God wouldn't condemn man"
It is purely by GRACE, just like conventional theology teaches!
It in fact, more than the traditional doctrines, captures the full significance of sin, grace and the Cross!
We cannot save ourselves! Christ took the penalty of man's sin! Let's not add to this!