Salvation 1

We are saved by God's grace.
Period.
End of Discussion.

Except, let's by honest, the Bible and the history of faith response to God (Jewish or Christian) has been more complicated than that. There are related issues to ponder. For example,

Why is the Bible so long? Why so many laws and stories and etc.? IF all we need to know is "I am saved by God's grace and I need to trust in Jesus for salvation" then isn't it just muddying up the waters to say so much about behavior? If we need to be good out of gratitude and also claim no one can ever really be good or please God, why mention it? If salvation is totally independent of what we do, then why be worried about what we are doing? One principle of interpretation is to look not at the content (what is said) but at the method of communication (how it is said). If someone says only one thing matters than, usually, they should not say more than one thing. The Bible says many things matter and in some places it emphasizes one aspect and in other places it emphasizes others. There is a reason why there are so many different theories about salvation.

One problem is the theories we spin to explain all this. While I know we cannot earn God's love, we have to be careful how we express that. One theory which bothers many of us is election. It is certainly found in the Bible and it certainly is a straightforward theory. However, as others have noted, it leads to some worrisome corollaries.

If God is just choosing those He chooses for the reason that He is choosing.
and If we are called to be imitators of God. 
Then that means we are called to be arbitrary. (Arbitrary = godly.)
SO to be like God means that we are supposed to be gracious, just not with everyone.

Another example, remember OJ Simpson? Most White people were upset about the outcome of the trial. Black people (for reasons larger than OJ) were deliriously happy and celebrated. I understand the emotional reasons for that. But here is my question, were White Christians who believe in imputed righteousness as the sole cause of salvation offended by the OJ case? In other words, why would the fact that he is a killer be important when he was declared innocent? Why would this be called a miscarriage of justice (assuming he is guilty) if that is God's way of saving?

On the other hand (sorry, I have two hands and tend to use them), based on human behavior we know a few things:
Everyone does wrong.
Everyone is a sinner.
No one is innocent.
No one truly and completely loves selflessly and purely all the time.
So what human can come before God? And if no one is able to stand before God, if God does not commute our sentence (i.e., impute innocence) what hope is there for anyone?

And if our choices are determinative and none us chooses well, what hope is there? If salvation is merely a 'reward' then it is not salvation, it is an achievement. To be saved (passive voice) is to receive something. And how can we save ourselves when we need to be saved FROM ourselves (among a myriad of other things)? And based on the data, no human has been able to earn the reward!

I think Christians are at their best when they take seriously God's grace and the giftedness of salvation, while at the same time (perhaps paradoxically) recognizing the seriousness of our choices. Perhaps our language fails. Maybe the Mystery of God is too impenetrable to allow us to verbalize it. But the value of Lent is that human acitivity does matter in relationship with God. The value of religion is that our choices impact our forever. I understand this may sound semi-Pelagian, but we are, at some point in the process, inolved and what we do does matter.... If not, then what is the point of anything?