On a facebook page, this thread on the Mormon Dialogue page was cited. Here are some insights into the phrase, “after all we can do” in 2 Nephi 25:23.
Maklelan:
First, what is "it"? Do you mean 'does he get our understanding of grace?' I don't think so, but I don't think he's trying to 'get it.' The point of his paper is to conjure up a conflict within the LDS community, not interpret the scriptures. He doesn't provide any argument of his own or try to interpret anything. He simply says there's an official position and a "neo-orthodox revisionist" position (note the well-poisoning). He then does nothing but quote representative statements from each position. The piece is pure rhetoric. The "orthodox" position is the one that Mormons have to believe, and the other one is a rogue position that Mormons only follow if they are disobedient. This is just a way for him to try to avoid having to directly confront the argument that we're not all that different (he either believes that salvation is utterly arbitrary or dependent on our earning it, but try to get him to respond to that). "You're not a good Mormon if you don't believe position X, and I'm only interested in talking to good Mormons." He also doesn't bother to address the rhetorical nature of the writings he's quoting from church leadership (nor do most Mormons). This is simple rabble-rousing, not a serious investigation.
Volgadon:
If grace had a meaning completely different to that used in the world of the NT, then the NT authors would have been at great pains to point out said difference. The NT authors were not shy of polemic!
Some thoughts on love.
Mishneh Torah, considered to be among Maimonides' greatest works, is divided into various books. One of these books is entitled the book of love. Mishneh Torah is a codification of Jewish law, as found in the Mishnah, talmuds, and Tosefta. In the book of love, Maimonides sets forth the regulations governing prayer, blessings, phylacteries, mezuzot, Torah scrolls, fringes on garments, and circumcision. Prayer is seen as a substitute for temple service, and consists of praising God, making any requests, and concluding by expressing gratitude to God. The blessings are the priestly blessing (the priests offer Israel blessings in YHWH's name), and the blessing after a meal, which is an expression of gratitude for what God has given. Phylacteries, mezuzot, Torah scrolls, and fringes all are physical reminders of one's allegiance to God. Circumcision is the means by which one enters into the covenant. There is one more chapter I did not mention, leaving it for last. The saying of the Shema. Hear oh Israel. This was a declaration of allegiance and loyalty to God. all these are classified by Maimonides under love. The reason I saved the Shema for last is because it brings us to Rabbi Akiva. His matyrdom is said to have occured at the time when the shema should have been said, and that he went to his death saying the Shema, loyal to God to the end. His entire philosophy was based on love of God. He wanted to fulfil all of the commandments, on the basis of what is said in the Shema.
Love was always bound up with doing somthing. Like you mentioned, children had a debt to their parents. There is a talmudic anecdote about a man who let his mother walk on his hands because her sandal broke. the sages said that this (and I am paraphrasing) isn't even half of the honour due parents.
Look at Christ's parable of the two sons. Which loved his father, the one that said yes but then did nothing, or the one that said no but then repented, went and did what the father asked of him?
It should also be noted that individuals who would be labelled as “old-fashioned” in their “Mormonism” did not hold to the “Pelagian” reading that Evangelicals claim this passage means:
We Are Saved by Grace, After All We Can Do
2 Nephi 25:23
23. For we labor diligently to write, to persuade our children, and also our brethren, to believe in Christ, and to be reconciled to God; for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do.
Salvation—which is exaltation or eternal life—comes through the merits and mercy and condescensions of God: it comes by grace. It is a divine gift made available through the love of the Father and the selfless sacrifice of the Son. There are many things which are simply beyond the power of man to bring to pass. Man can neither create nor redeem himself; such activities require the intervention of beings greater than he.
Satan would have Christians err on this doctrine in one of two directions. First of all, there are those who contend that man is saved by grace alone, and that no works of any kind are of value. Such persons might reconstruct Nephi's language as follows: "We are saved by grace; after all, what can we do?" "Salvation by grace alone and without works," Elder McConkie observed, "as it is taught in large segments of Christendom today, is akin to what Lucifer proposed in preexistence—that he would save all mankind and one soul should not be lost. He would save them without agency, without works, without any act on their part.
"As with the proposal of Lucifer in the preexistence to save all mankind, so with the doctrine of salvation by grace alone, without works, as it is taught in modern Christendom—both concepts are false. There is no salvation in either of them. They both come from the same source; they are not of God." ("What Think Ye of Salvation by Grace?" BYU address, 10 January 1984, p. 49.)
On the other hand, there are those who become so obsessed with their own "works-righteousness," with their own goodness, that they do not look to Christ as the true fountain of all righteousness. Men and women must rely "wholly upon the merits of him who is mighty to save" (see 2 Nephi 31:19). In the purest sense, the works of righteousness which a person performs—ordinances of salvation and deeds of Christian service—are necessary but are insufficient to lead to salvation. No matter what a man may do in this life, his works will not save him: he will always fall short and thus be "an unprofitable servant" (Mosiah 2:21) without the grace or divine assistance of God. Indeed, it is only after a person has so performed a lifetime of works and faithfulness—only after he has come to deny himself of all ungodliness and every worldly lust—that the grace of God, that spiritual increment of power, is efficacious. In the language of Moroni: "Yea, come unto Christ, and be perfected in him, and deny yourselves of all ungodliness; and if ye shall deny yourselves of all ungodliness, and love God with all your might, mind and strength, then is his grace sufficient for you, that by his grace ye may be perfect in Christ" (Moroni 10:32; italics added).
"Salvation is free." (2 Nephi 2:4.) Justification is free," wrote Elder Bruce R. McConkie. "Neither of them can be purchased; neither can be earned; neither comes by the law of Moses, or by good works, or by any power or ability that man has.... Salvation is free, freely available, freely to be found. It comes because of his goodness and grace, because of his love, mercy, and condescension toward the children of men." Continuing, Elder McConkie explained, "Free salvation is salvation by grace. The questions then are: What salvation is free? What salvation comes by the grace of God? With all the emphasis of the rolling thunders of Sinai, we answer: All salvation is free; all comes by the merits and mercy and grace of the Holy Messiah; there is no salvation of any kind, nature, or degree that is not bound to Christ and his atonement." (Promised Messiah, pp. 346-47) (Robert L. Millet and Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrinal Commentary on the Book of Mormon, vol. 1)
LDS scholar, Brant Gardner, discussed the Old Testament background to 2 Nephi 25:23:
2 Nephi 25:23
23 For we labour diligently to write, to persuade our children, and also our brethren to believe in Christ, and to be reconciled to God; for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do.
Narrative: The theological debate of grace versus works influences modern readers to concentrate on the last part of verse 23 that provide an apparent response to that issue. While it is nice that we can find in the text an answer to a question that concerns us, the narrative question is: What it is doing at this point in the text? What is it about Nephi’s introduction that causes him to give us that one sentence “response” to a complex theological issue?
The statement is created by the context of the preceding part of the verse and verse 24. In the first part of verse 23, Nephi discusses the importance of teaching about the Atoning Messiah in his city-nation. In verse 24 he tells us that even though he (and presumably Jacob and Joseph) teach the doctrine of the Atoning Messiah and look forward to his mortal ministry that he ix expected to create great changes, they nevertheless follow the law of Moses. It is the juxtaposition of their type of Messianism and their inherited Mosiah traditions that creates a tension in the way they see religion. The nature of that conflict is reconciled through that one statement, that they understand that it is “by grace that we are saved, after all we can do.”
This statement is couched in modern Christian terms that represent the way Joseph Smith understood what was on the plates. We do not know what word on the plates led to the English “grace”; however, there is no reason to suppose anything special, for the concept of grace is found in the Old Testament. In the Old Testament, “grace” is the translation of the Hebrew chen and means a benefit or favour given to an individual, either by God or by another individual:
Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord. (Gen. 6:8)
And Shechem said unher her father and unto her brethren, Let me find grace in your eyes, and what ye shall say unto me I will give. (Gen. 34:11)
And Joseph found grace in his [master’s] sight, and he served him: and he made him overseer over his house, and all that he had he put into his hand. (Gen. 39:4) (In the KJV Old Testament, “grace” appears as the translation in all thrity-seven cases where chen is the underlying word that does not appear as the translation for any other word. Robert Young, Young’s Analytical Concordance to the Bible, 22en ed. (Grand Rapids, Mich.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1970), 431)
In these three examples, a person finds “grace” with someone who wields, or could wield, power over the individual. In the first example, the Lord bestows grace; in the next two, a mortal does. Thus, “grace” is a gift, regardless of who bestows it. This fact creates an important distinction between a concept that is representational and one that is operative.
What would the Nephites have understood as grace in the context of their belief in the Messiah? That belief centred on the atoning aspect of the Messiah rather than the eschatological triumphant entry of the Messiah. This created a conflict with the law of Moses, for there was already a prescribed method of atonement through animal sacrifice. Thus, to accept the Atoning Messiah, Nephi’s people had a theological conflict that had to be reconciled. It was not the New Testament grace versus works as a means of obtaining salvation, but rather a question of how they would achieve a remission of sins--through the grace of the Atoning Messiah or through the sacrifices of the Law of Moses? Nephi’s reconciliation was to indicate that both were required. They should understand that their ultimate freedom from sin would come through the mission of the future Atoning Messiah. In the meantime, however, the sacrifices were required. These were “all they could do.” (Brant A. Gardner, Second Witness: Analytical and Contextual Commentary on the Book of Mormon [6 vol.; Salt Lake City: Greg Kofford Books, 2007], 2:343-44)
For more, see James Stutz, “After All We Can Do” as a reference to the Law of Moses