Can two things be true at the same time?
Can grace save us completely and Scripture still warn about wrath?
If someone receives grace but does not visibly change, are they cursed like the fig tree that bore no fruit?
And how do we know we are interpreting Scripture correctly instead of defending a tradition we were handed?
These are not small questions. They matter because how we answer them shapes how people see God, how they see themselves, and whether they run toward Him or hide from Him.
A pastor recently pressed this concern to me, and instead of dismissing it, I want to slow down and respond honestly in a Q and A format, grounded in Scripture and context, not fear or assumptions.
Q: If we do not change after receiving grace, there is wrath. Can’t grace and wrath both be true? Isn’t that clear in passages like the fig tree that bears no fruit?
A:
I understand why this feels clear. On the surface, it sounds logical. Grace comes in, fruit should show up, and if it does not, judgment follows. But the first thing we must ask is not, Does this sound right? The first question is, Is this what the text is actually saying in context?
Scripture does warn about hardness of heart. Scripture does warn about unbelief. Scripture does warn about rejecting God. What Scripture does not do is equate visible moral progress with proof of salvation.
The danger is not in holding Scripture seriously. The danger is in collapsing different passages, written to different audiences, into a single rule that Scripture itself never makes.
Q: But Romans 2:4–6 says stubbornness leads to wrath. Doesn’t that mean grace must produce change or else?
A:
Romans 2 is serious, but it is also specific.
The word Paul uses for stubbornness, sklērotēs, means hardness. It describes a refusal to be persuaded. This is not someone who sins and hates it. This is not someone whose life still looks messy. This is not someone who keeps coming back to God saying, Help me.
It is someone who resists grace itself.
Paul is not talking about moral weakness. He is talking about unbelief that disguises itself as moral confidence.
That is why Romans 2 is aimed at people who judge others while trusting their own righteousness. Paul is dismantling self assurance, not threatening struggling believers.
And Paul does this intentionally. Romans 2 presents a picture of perfect justice. Romans 3 destroys the illusion that anyone meets that standard. “There is none righteous, not even one.”
So Romans 2 is not a measuring stick for spiritual growth. It is a mirror that shows us why grace is necessary in the first place.
Q: But scholars like F. F. Bruce and N. T. Wright say grace should put to death the deeds of the flesh unless stubbornness intervenes.
A:
I respect both scholars deeply. And yes, they both affirm that grace is transformative. I agree with that completely.
Where I think the misunderstanding happens is in how stubbornness is defined.
Stubbornness is not slow growth.
Stubbornness is not ongoing struggle.
Stubbornness is not visible weakness.
Stubbornness is a closed heart.
F. F. Bruce himself describes Romans 2 as a theoretical picture of justice meant to drive all people to mercy. It shows what would be true if righteousness came by works, which Paul later says it does not.
So when Bruce and Wright talk about stubbornness, they are not describing believers who are dependent on grace while still imperfect. They are describing people who refuse grace while clinging to self righteousness.
Those are not the same category of people.
Q: What about the fig tree that does not bear fruit and is cursed?
A:
The fig tree is often used as a blunt weapon, but it is a prophetic sign, not a personal sanctification test.
Jesus is speaking to Israel as a covenant nation, full of religious activity but void of faith. The tree had leaves, meaning appearance, but no fruit, meaning no faith response to God.
It is not about timeline. It is not about progress. It is not about visibility.
It is about profession without dependence.
Using the fig tree to say God curses believers who struggle is reading fear into a text that is aimed at hypocrisy, not brokenness.
Q: So are you saying people can receive grace and never change?
A:
No. Grace always changes. But grace changes from the inside out, and not on our schedule.
The question is not whether fruit will come. The question is what we define as fruit and how quickly we demand it.
Fruit is not perfection.
Fruit is not instant behavioral compliance.
Fruit is not comparison to others.
Fruit is dependence, humility, returning, repenting, trusting, and staying open to God.
Paul himself admitted in Romans 7 that he kept doing what he hated. He did not interpret that as proof of damnation. He interpreted it as proof of his need for Christ.
“Who will deliver me?” was his cry. And his answer was not try harder. His answer was Jesus.
Q: So how do we know someone is stubborn and not just struggling?
A:
Stubbornness runs from grace.
Struggle runs toward it.
Stubbornness defends itself.
Struggle confesses need.
Stubbornness says, I am fine.
Struggle says, I need mercy.
If someone keeps coming back to God, even messy, even slow, even publicly imperfect, that is not a hardened heart. That is a dependent one.
Grace does not harden people. It softens them.
Q: What is your personal answer to this tension?
A:
Grace is not something I use to justify what I do. It is the only thing keeping my heart open to God while I am still learning who I am in Him.
Yes, I still sin.
Yes, my sins may be more visible than others.
But visibility does not equal rebellion.
I am not stubborn toward God. I am dependent on Him.
If grace were removed until I improved, I would be lost. Instead, grace keeps me coming back, keeps me honest, keeps me soft, and keeps me trusting Christ instead of myself.
That is not defiance. That is faith.
The kindness of God does not make me careless. It keeps me close.
If you have any questions or want to go deeper email me at info@funnychristy.com.
Whether you love me or love to hate me you are still my lover.
Jesus loves you and so do I!