I think you have miss-understood my point. Until you act on your beliefs they mean nothing. It is the action that makes faith real.
So God, you and me do not know if someones faith is real, or the person themselves until they act upon it.
It is like saying is a person righteous or not. Righteousness is defined based on actions. If you have done nothing wrong you are righteous, or at least that appears the theory. I think the reality is we are only righteous in communion with God, trusting Him and having faith in Him.
The point I am making is a simple dilemma. Does something exist before it has happened? If it has not happened nothing is aware of it or can discover it unless you can see into the future and see it having. But does something actually exist until it happens, or without foreknowledge can it be predicted. I do not know. Does God say he can do this, is it inevitable?
If the whole of heaven was inevitable, the God could just fast forward and create it all without all the hassel in between.
Does the Lord know who are His, yes he does, but so what.
The point I am exploring is faith only exists in a real sense when actions are done as a result of the faith.
Interestingly grace7x77 wrote faith had no merit, yet Abraham believed God and it was merited to him as righteousness. Now this does not fit his model so silence.
Is Abraham in Hell, along with Moses, Elijah and all those who were under the old covenant?
If not how were they justified, counted as acceptable? Abraham had no law, he had only a promise and an approach to God. Paul is arguing this relationship justified him, just like faith in Jesus justifies us. The result of this faith was righteousness in his behaviour. But was he justified as ok or is this more difficult to define?
Enoch knew God, and was taken. The priest Melchizedek was a priest of God, yet again before the law was given.
The whole debate is about righteousness empowered by relationship. You cannot have the relationship without walking in righteousness or desiring to do so. Hyper-grace is full of people who believe this is impossible, failed believers who have given up, and only compromise is the way forward.
Does hyper-grace theology add up? No because it polarises ideas based on you are acceptable as you are, and you will just be able to walk in the right way without repentance, confession or obedience.
It is obvious we will never agree these steps, and hyper-grace is a new faith, outside of traditional christianity.
All they can do is condemn the expression of christian faith over the last 200 years and claim they now have the exclusive revelation. In reality if they cannot walk righteously, they will evaporate like movements before them. I will not hold my breath, but nothing has convinced me they have a clue about reality or life to actually have any real effect at all.