I disagree strongly, because it depends what one is being asked to do. If Grandma is sitting in her rocking chair and says to little Johnny, "I have a present for you. Come and get it." Johnny gets up and takes it from her hand and opens it with joy. Has he earned it? "Earned his reward"? Of course not. That's not what "earning" means. Yes, he had to do something to get it, but his action doesn't detract in the least from the fact this it is a gift that he neither earned nor deserved. He is in no sense earning a reward.

> Choosing is not earning.

To be "given" grace, you must repent.

You must do something (repent) to get something (salvation).

Getting something in exchange for doing something is not receiving a gift, it's earning a reward.

> Are we just going to speak through Biblical sounding metaphors now?

Being born again is a biblical metaphor about salvation. If you want to talk about what the Bible says about salvation, then it's fair game to discuss the biblical metaphors of salvation.

> It is the second birth that is the true birth because it is only through the effort of our choosing that it is brought to pass!

Choosing is not earning. Mama offers to buy the children ice cream. I choose chocolate, you choose raspberry swirl.

> If a person dies without repenting are they saved from hell? If the answer is "no," then it is the case that the "effort" of repenting is part of what one has to do to "earn" being saved from hell.

Choosing is not earning. Repentance is turning around; it's a choice. As C.S. Lewis wrote, "Repentance is not something God arbitrarily demands of us. It is simply a description of what going back is like."

> If someone that follows Jesus gets something that those that do not follow Jesus do not, then, by definition, the "effort" that Jesus' followers put in is what "earns" them the thing they get (in this case salvation from hell).

No. Wrong again. If someone who follows Jesus gets something that those who do not follow jesus do not, it's because the former made a choice to accept the free gift.

> "Denying oneself" usually refers to resisting temptation of some kind and is not synonymous with mere passivity.

"Denying oneself" is to be selfless. It is to say "no" to oneself. It's a renunciation of one's will.

> You did nothing to earn your first birth. Neither do you earn your second (spiritual) birth.

Are we just going to speak through Biblical sounding metaphors now? Fine, I'll play along: Hear ye, although the first birth was done through no merit or will on our part; the second birth was made through seeking and clear intention! We enter into the first birth as babes in the wood, knowing of the world, but come to the second birth as bucks weathered by time and experience. It is the second birth that is the true birth because it is only through the effort of our choosing that it is brought to pass!

> Repent means to turn and go in the other direction. It has no relation to earning anything.

If a person dies without repenting are they saved from hell? If the answer is "no,"

then it is the case that the "effort" of repenting is part of what one has to do to "earn" being saved from hell.

> If you read my paragraph, "keeping the law" in the Gospels is not earning anything, but is explained as following Jesus. Of course there is effort involved, but no earning of anything.

If someone that follows Jesus gets something that those that do not follow Jesus do not, then, by definition, the "effort" that Jesus' followers put in is what "earns" them the thing they get (in this case salvation from hell).

> Deny oneself does take effort, but it's not earning. It's like saying, "I'm not going to use any of the money in my bank account." It's not earning, it's instead simply passivity.

"Denying oneself" usually refers to resisting temptation of some kind and is not synonymous with mere passivity. If someone is tempted to spend their money on various items, but they resist that temptation and refrain from doing so, then they have "earned" the fact that the money remains in their account and is not spent based on that psychological "effort."

> Good works and love of neighbor. Yep, but if you think "earning," as stated in your original post, captures the essence of salvation, you are way off the mark.

The definition of "earn" is "(of an activity) cause (someone) to obtain (something)." So, if the person that does good works etc... and this activity causes them to obtain (something) that the person that did not do good works does not, then, by definition, they have earned that (something).

> Wait. You think drinking a glass of cold water that was gifted to you shows that you earned it?

No, I don't. Because there is nothing in that description that ties the getting or keeping of the glass of water that was given to the getting or keeping of the glass of water.

> I think you're working far too hard to prove a case that can't hold water. Remember your original premise: "Salvation is not a gift because it must be earned." The premise is proved by my case to be false.

No, it isn't.

> Getting gifts is easy, by definition, because it requires no effort on the part of the recipient.

Oh my. You seem so intent on pressing your case that you've missed the whole point.

> I don't see how it's different at all.

Then please try to consider honestly all that I've said.

> The setup is very clearly that one is given the opportunity to earn salvation and must make the effort to actually get it.

This is not the setup at all, as I have clearly shown. Out of 19 points that Jesus made that I showed you, only 2 could possibly be interpreted as "earning your salvation," and yet you insist that salvation is a matter of earning. Suppose I offered to gift you a week-long, all-expense paid vacation for 2 to Jamaica, but you have to get on the plane. And you consider that a proof that you've earned the trip because you had to make the effort to actually get it? It's an absurd point to press.

> It's simple, if a person dies without making the effort to do certain things are they saved?

Yes, as long as they accept the gift. People have said on their deathbeds, minutes from expiration, "I take Jesus as my Savior." Done deal. No effort involved. Salvation is a gift.

> Nothing worthwhile is easy.

Getting gifts is easy, by definition, because it requires no effort on the part of the recipient. If salvation, as opposed to merely the opportunity to earn salvation where before there was none, was the gift, then it would be easy.

> But those are VERY different from having to make effort to BE saved.

I don't see how it's different at all. The setup is very clearly that one is given the opportunity to earn salvation and must make the effort to actually get it. It's simple, if a person dies without making the effort to do certain things are they saved? If the answer is "yes" then salvation was a gift. If the answer is "no" then salvation was not a gift because, by not putting in the effort and doing what was required, the person did not meet the criteria to be saved from hell (i.e. didn't "earn" it).

You did nothing to earn your first birth. Neither do you earn your second (spiritual) birth.

Repent means to turn and go in the other direction. It has no relation to earning anything.

If you read my paragraph, "keeping the law" in the Gospels is not earning anything, but is explained as following Jesus. Of course there is effort
involved, but no earning of anything.

Allegiance is not earning anything. It's a declaration of commitment.

Deny oneself does take effort, but it's not earning. It's like saying, "I'm not going to use any of the money in my bank account." It's not earning, it's instead simply passivity.

Good works and love of neighbor. Yep, but if you think "earning," as stated in your original post, captures the essence of salvation, you are way off the mark.

Wait. You think drinking a glass of cold water that was gifted to you shows that you earned it?

I think you're working far too hard to prove a case that can't hold water. Remember your original premise: "Salvation is not a gift because it must be earned." The premise is proved by my case to be false.

Also:

This is effort:

Be born again, which means born of the spirit (not just being a good person)

This is effort:

Repent and believe (not just do good works) (I'll stop writing this after every point, now, because I believe you get the idea.)

This is effort:

Those who keep the law and keep the commandments. But following the Law and commandments is often, if not always, explained as following Jesus. Righteousness in Judaism was connected to living in relationship with God as defined in the Torah. Jesus seems to be pushing the definition into relationship with Himself as God and following him in both allegiance and obedience.

Effort:

Acknowledge (presumably show allegiance to) Jesus to other people.

Huge effort:

Lose your life (deny self) for Jesus's sake.

Obviously effort:

Good works; love of neighbor.

Metaphor for some activity that I assume also takes effort:

Drink the "living water" that Jesus gives.

> That is a description of a lot of "effort" required on the part of the individual that wants to be saved.

Nothing worthwhile is easy. I would never claim that salvation is a life of ease. Philippians 2. counsels us to "Work out your salvation with fear and trembling." Sanctification is a combination of the Holy Spirit's work and ours in teamwork. But those are VERY different from having to make effort to BE saved. Being saved requires accepting the gift. After one has received the free gift, the work begins. It would be like having a person give you a business. The business was a gift; then the work begins. You didn't earn or deserve the gift, but that doesn't mean there's no work involved afterwards.

As far as salvation is concerned, there is no work or earning necessary at the beginning for the gift to be offered, accepted, and granted. But after that, of course there's work.

> This is just redefining "take the gift" to mean "earn the reward" because "committing himself to make changes appropriate to the relationship, meaning they will live in a certain way" is a description of effort associated with "earning" some benefit in a relationship.

The definition matters. In the definition I have shown you that your definition was false and that the Bible's definition includes no sense of earning the gift (Eph. 2.8). The work comes after accepting the gift. As I said, suppose I give you a drill driver and a set of ratchet wrenches. Ha, now you have work to do! You didn't earn the gift, but that doesn't mean there's no work involved in using it.

> is a description of effort associated with "earning" some benefit in a relationship.

No, this is incorrect. We don't earn any benefit in the relationship. The relationship is granted. Afterwards we live in such a way to honor the relationship, but I haven't earned anything.

> If I said I would save someone so long as they put in the effort to change their entire life around to live in a certain way that I specified, that would be me putting down criteria that they need to meet to earn salvation

No, this is incorrect. Think to "Les Miserables." The priest gave Jean Valjean the gift of the candlestick holders and encouraged him very strongly to change his life after receiving the gift. There was no guarantee that Valjean would change at all, and the candlesticks were no less a gift if he didn't. But there's no sense that Valjean earned the candlesticks.

> I would summarize it this way: Repent of your sins and align yourself with Jesus. Come to Jesus, believe in Jesus and follow him—put his words into practice, love him, allegiance. Follow him, identify with him, and learn from him.

That is a description of a lot of "effort" required on the part of the individual that wants to be saved. That is to say, the criteria to "earn" salvation under the paradigm of Christianity is to put in the effort to develop and maintain what I said at the very beginning of the OP (i.e. "have faith in a particular kind of way that translates to a change in one's outward behaviors"). I don't see how this contradicts anything I have argued.

> Therefore salvation itself is completely a gift, but that gift demands a response from the receiver (who must take the gift, which is not an act of earning).

This is just redefining "take the gift" to mean "earn the reward" because "committing himself to make changes appropriate to the relationship, meaning they will live in a certain way" is a description of effort associated with "earning" some benefit in a relationship. If I said I would save someone so long as they put in the effort to change their entire life around to live in a certain way that I specified, that would be me putting down criteria that they need to meet to earn salvation; no sensible person would say that I was giving them the "gift" of salvation because it is pretty clear that there are some pretty huge strings attached in that arrangement.