The redundancy is the invention of the KJV. A gift is only a gift if it is free, even Dr. E agrees with me on that one (miracle!). :)
There is no NEED to specify it as 'free' as it would imply that there is such a thing as non-free gift. Verbosity comes to mind.
But either way, the word used in Greek is "charisma." If that's what God inspired the Apostles to use, then we should not change them, should we?
This entire question came about because you mislabeled "free gift" an oxymoron HERE, which it clearly is not.
Frankly, since you haven't retracted this incorrect statement, I don't know what point you're trying to make.
Oh come on Kosta, just admit it you can't acknowledge that Grace is given by God alone and nothing we do warrants it. If you were to acknowledge that your house of cards falls down.
I will always use the phrase "free gift" because it clearly relays what's happening. I am saved by Grace alone thru Faith alone and nothing else. It is a gift with no strings attached. Thus a free gift.
The redundancy is the invention of the KJV. A gift is only a gift if it is free, even Dr. E agrees with me on that one (miracle!). :) There is no NEED to specify it as 'free' as it would imply that there is such a thing as non-free gift. Verbosity comes to mind.
No, no oxymoron and no redundancy. :) I already gave you a modern day example of a conditional gift (man giving an engagement ring), but the concept was well known to the people of the time. For example, anyone knowing his scriptures was aware of the Mosaic Covenant. It was a conditional covenant. God promised to give the GIFT of His blessings in exchange for the obedience of the people. This was not an exchange of anything remotely resembling equal value so it has to be considered a conditional (non-free) gift.
God's saving grace was nothing like this at all. There were no strings attached, and no promise was required by men to receive saving grace. This makes "free" a useful adjective here.