Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | All names still in the book of life? | Rev 17:8 | camainc | 5461 | ||
I think the logic behind the question is this: Since (1) mankind is born in sin (Rom 3:10, 23) and (2) those that do not believe in and accept the free gift of salvation offered by the Father through the Son are destined to perish in the lake of fire, and (3) believers’ names are written in the Lamb's Book of Life from the foundation (I assume this means the creation) of the world, then one could presume that (4) unbelievers are destined for the Lake of Fire from the foundation of the world (Rev 20:15). There is no verse that I know of that *explicitly* says that, but there are also no verses that *explicitly* say that God is triune. If one accepts the doctrine of predestination (and I don't know how you couldn't, with all of the verses that are very clear-cut on that), then you have to accept predestination to hell as well as to heaven. How we reconcile predestination with John 3:16 is a mystery, and I don't think any of us will know how God in His infinite wisdom and grace works out the details of free-will vs. predestination (at least until we get into His Presence in our glorified state). Love in Yeshua |
||||||
2 | All names still in the book of life? | Rev 17:8 | reformedreader | 5618 | ||
camainc, While I’ve nothing against the right use of logic, I’ve found that all too often Christians do not rightly use logic when it comes to interpreting scripture. One example of this is when we take a verse that is clear, precise, distinct and directly to the point and then assume it says something not even found in the text or is blatantly contradictory to the text. Perhaps it is because a particular verse does not agree with one’s preconceived idea of what they believe. Nevertheless, if we ignore verses that leave no other conclusion than precisely what it states, then we can create our own truth and force scripture to mean whatever we want it to mean. To your statement: “(2) those that do not believe in and accept the free gift of salvation offered by the Father through the Son are destined to perish in the lake of fire”, I would disagree slightly but probably because of an insufficient explanation which could lead to a misunderstanding of scripture. It is true that one must believe, however, believing alone does not save anyone. The unclean spirits believe but also tremble in fear for they know their eternal fate. Many humans believe but never come to salvation. I never had any problem believing what the bible stated many years before I was saved but I was still an unbeliever. I would also disagree with salvation being a gift offered to the unbeliever and left to their own logic as to whether they want to be saved or not. The unbeliever is blinded by Satan so that he cannot see (understand) the glorious gospel. Therefore, logically speaking, the unbeliever is unable to understand the gospel and this is further supported by 2 Cor. 2:14. His logic is rendered useless and since John 1:12,13 clearly state that the unbeliever’s will has nothing to do with his salvation, we must rest on the clear passages of scripture that rule out salvation being an offer made to the unbeliever to exercise his will logically to decide if he wants to be saved. To your statement: “(3) believers’ names are written in the Lamb's Book of Life from the foundation (I assume this means the creation) of the world, then one could presume that (4) unbelievers are destined for the Lake of Fire from the foundation of the world (Rev 20:15)” In the light of clear and unambiguous scripture, one can come to no other conclusion and I agree with you. Rev. 20:15 is clear, distinct, direct and to the point. Adding anything or changing anything this verse says only destroys the truth of what it says. To your statement: There is no verse that I know of that *explicitly* says that, but there are also no verses that *explicitly* say that God is triune. Perhaps not “explicitly” in word for word detail, however, the bible is replete with the doctrine of the trinity. One does not need a verse that literally states in word for word detail the trinity to be actual when there are hundreds of verses that very clearly lead a logically minded believer to be convinced of the trinity. To your statement: If one accepts the doctrine of predestination (and I don't know how you couldn't, with all of the verses that are very clear-cut on that), then you have to accept predestination to hell as well as to heaven. I agree but many do not. Many do not believe in what is called “double-predestination”. However, I have found they have trouble understanding it because of a faulty understanding of scripture. To your statement: How we reconcile predestination with John 3:16 is a mystery, and I don't think any of us will know how God in His infinite wisdom and grace works out the details of free-will vs. predestination (at least until we get into His Presence in our glorified state). Reconciling the two is not a mystery. With all due respect, NOT reconciling the two is a mystery, meaning I cannot understand why any believer would want the two to be contradictory when they are not. The basic problem with free-will theism is when it is placed at the wrong time and to the wrong person. The unbeliever has no free-will to decide if he wants to be saved according to the numerous verses mentioned above. However, many will completely ignore those verses and insist on the unbeliever being able to do what God says he cannot do. It is when the Holy Spirit circumcizes the heart, gives life, renews the will to become responsive to God’s calling that the believer’s will repents and believes. The will must be enabled to respond, repent and believe. Sam Hughey |
||||||
3 | All names still in the book of life? | Rev 17:8 | camainc | 5621 | ||
Thanks for the thoughtful response. I'll take some time to read it more thoroughly, then respond. I think we are in general agreement on most points, however. Chuck |
||||||