What I am saying is I BELIEVE Gods love so far exceeds mankinds view of love, that unless we have experienced in in grace we can not comprehend what it is..
There is a simple problem here. Your group has defined grace in a new way, that is not biblical.
You have used the word grace to mean Jesus being sent, and everything to do with salvation is summed up by grace.
Now it is fine to invent new ways of using language, but that is not from scripture, it is your groups invention.
So by definition if grace means salvation, if I have not experienced salvation I have not experienced Gods grace.
But using language like this is meaningless. It does not add insight into the Lord it just complicates things more.
Grace in english is manners, the way you allow things to wait until you decide to act. So you can be late for a meeting and the good grace of the person is not to react.
So by your definition of grace I know grace completely, but still I do not agree with the ideas.
The problem with this way of thinking is it is self justifying, it gives the illusion of being co-herent but it is not.
By your way of thinking is you are saved you will accept eternal security but if not you are not saved. You then go on to claim you do not know who is saved, which by your own definition it is based on who believes in eternal security.
Going deep, salvation is dependent not on the cross or faith in Jesus but faith in eternal security.
Your whole construct is just wrong. By walking with Jesus we have the deposite of the Holy Spirit in our hearts that conveys the reality of the new relationship. This is an experiential reality not a theological one.
A follower of Jesus rests on the promises and knowledge of the love of Jesus through the cross.
Now the word grace is not here because it does not feature in the bible except as a minor reference.
So it is little wonder to me we are talking a different faith, because you have invented a whole new theology and explanation of salvation. But I am happy to document your construction.