 |
| 
chiam
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2003
Total Posts : 41
| Posted 11/24/2003 9:46 AM (GMT -6) |   | How do those of the Open Theism view explain that names were written down in the book of life of the lamb before the foundation of the world?
Rev 13:8 All who dwell on the earth will worship him, {everyone} whose name has not been written from the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who has been slain.
Rev. 17:8 And those who dwell on the earth, whose name has not been written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, will wonder when they see the beast, that he was and is not and will come.
| | Back to Top | | |
 |
Laika
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 2433
| Posted 11/24/2003 1:38 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
How do those of the Open Theism view explain that names were written down in the book of life of the lamb before the foundation of the world?
This is my view ONLY of this issue. Do not take this as an Approved™©® Answer.
1. Rev.13:8: "And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world."
"from the foundation of the world" modifies "Lamb slain" in Rev. 13:8
This is the more common understanding of Rev. 13:8 (heck, do a google search on "Lamb slain from the foundation of the world" and they all point to Rev. 13:8 as most bible translations have it this way.
KJV, NIV, Youngs have it this way and NASB has a comment listing this as an alternative.
2.There's a number of verses about names being blotted out of this book:
Psalm 69:28 May they be blotted out of the book of life And may they not be recorded with the righteous.
Revelation 3:5 He who overcomes will thus be clothed in white garments; and I will not erase his name from the book of life, and I will confess his name before My Father and before His angels.
Exodus 32:33 The LORD said to Moses, "Whoever has sinned against Me, I will blot him out of My book."
3.We know God wants ALL to be saved:
2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.
John 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.
17 For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.
So with 2. and 3. let's work backwards: at the judgement day, only believers names will be in the book. Prior to that people's names were blotted out of the book. And since God is willing for ALL to be saved, that must mean the Book of Life started out with EVERYONE'S name in it. (Book of Life)
Everyone ------>some blotted out-------->believer's names only
This fits with all scriptures of the book of life of the lamb slain from the foundations of the earth.
We did have a prior discussion of this here:
http://www.christusvictorministries.org/gbfront/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=2238&SearchTerms=+book+of+life
inside you the time moves and she don't fade
the ghost in you she don't fade | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 11/25/2003 7:05 PM (GMT -6) | | It's true that in the verses from Rev. that "since" is meant. There are seven passages that use the phrase with "apo" ("from, or since, the foundation of the world"):
Matt. 13:35
Matt. 25:34
Lk. 11:50
Heb. 4:3
Heb. 9:26
Rev. 13:8
Rev. 17:8
But "before the foundations, or creation, of the world/universe" IS a biblical expression also. Here "pro" (before) and not "apo" is used.
Eph 1:4 (we were chosen in Christ "before the world was created")
Jn 17:24 and 1Pe 1:20 (discusses Christ's relationship with the Father before creation).
But in all fairness, just arguing that the names were written SINCE creation and not BEFORE creation doesn't entirely smooth things over. One can still ask, "Well, how is it that names of people who are alive today were written in the book 'after' creation but 'before' they existed?" That would be problematic too. My feeling is "since" permits a "process" of recording names that's concurrent to the existence and morally responsible actions of those same people. The point would then be somethikng like, "Since creation, God has been keeping constant track of peoples names, both adding and removing names as people determine themselves in relation to him."
This may seem to contradict Eph. 1.4, however, where "we were chosen in Christ" clearly happens BEFORE the world is created. If Paul had said our "names" were recorded "pro" (before) creation then we'd have a substantial problem for the open view. But Paul's words can (and have been) interpreted to mean only that humanity as a whole, as "the divine project" was chosen in Christ to be holy and blameless. This only 'sets' the goal, draws the line that defines what it is we are to be; it doesn't specify that certain individuals were foreknown to reach that goal while other were forknown to not reach it. For all who reach it (here the Ephesians) it remains true that THEY, whoever they are, were chosen by God to be HOLY and BLAMELESS.
Doc once gave the following example. Say I'm teaching a class and have overheads to show to the students. Let's say that I prepared THESE overheads for THIS on THIS particular meeting of the class BEFORE students had even signed up for the class, BEFORE I knew how many students there would be or what their names were. It remains the case that I can say on the day I show the overheads to my class, "It was decided before any you even signed up for this class that you'd watch these overheads." So long as I use "you" corporately, to designate the body of students "as a class" there's no problem.
Tom | | Back to Top | | |
|
Starkman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747
| Posted 11/26/2003 7:11 AM (GMT -6) | | TGB:
But in all fairness, just arguing that the names were written SINCE creation and not BEFORE creation doesn't entirely smooth things over. One can still ask, "Well, how is it that names of people who are alive today were written in the book 'after' creation but 'before' they existed?" That would be problematic too. My feeling is "since" permits a "process" of recording names that's concurrent to the existence and morally responsible actions of those same people. The point would then be somethikng like, "Since creation, God has been keeping constant track of peoples names, both adding and removing names as people determine themselves in relation to him." (Italicized Starkman's)
Starkman:
Hey Tom,
"And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world."
It would seem that in the case of the above reading of Revelation 13, "since" can be interpreted as you noted. However ...
"and all those who live on the earth will worship the beast, everyone whose name has not been written since the foundation of the world in the book of life belonging to the Lamb who was killed. (NET version)
I would say that your interpeting "since" in this case would not fit, because only those involved with this last-day's event are menioned. It is not people of all times. "Since" in this second reading would mean these specific people's names were not written in the book ... period (if I'm reading this correctly), not just from the foundation of the world!
Going further ...
From the NET on Revelation 13:8 www.bible.org/netbible/index.htm
The prepositional phrase “since the foundation of the world” is traditionally translated as a modifier of the immediately preceding phrase in the Greek text, “the Lamb who was killed” (so also G. B. Caird, Revelation [HNTC], 168), but it is more likely that the phrase “since the foundation of the world” modifies the verb “written” (as translated above). Confirmation of this can be found in Rev 17:8 where the phrase “written in the book of life since the foundation of the world” occurs with no ambiguity.
These translators take the position that "from the foundation of the world" is a modifier of "written," and not "the Lamb slain. Further, they state that Revelation 17:8 settles the theological matter regardless of the 13:8 reading. Now, two things ...
First (I think we've discussed here, but I forget the conversation now), I can't see any problem to the open view with having God know all the people He will ever create, if by "know" we mean He knows their personalities (since He creates them), their individualities and their over-all makeup. God can therefore ahove told Jeremiah that God knew him while he was yet in his mother's womb. To force this "knew" to be only at conception is really fantastic and out of reach with God's knowing. I mean, what more is there for God to know about Jeremiah when Jeremiah is in his mother's womb that God wouldn't have already known? I think God knew about all of us before we were born, before we were conceived, but that doesn't have to mean that God knows every choice we'll ever make or whether we will or will not come to faith. Thus, we are all entered in the Lamb's book of life since the foundation of the world, the "unbelievers" eventually being blotted out. One possible exception ...
Second, though I agree with Laika's concept of those being in the book first and blotted out later, what if this were not the case for a specific group of people living at a specific point in time where it truly has already been predestined that they will not believe; for they will believe the antichrist, they will believe "the lie." What if they are never entered into the Lamb's book of life because it is already known that they will not believe. What if God has been very clear about the danger of this time and has so much as stated this very danger. What if, because of the restrainer's finished work of restraining, evil will rule (for a season) to such an extent that only the "144,000," so to speak, an elect known to God, will believe. And what if the distinction is made at a certain time as to what generation born will fall into this delusion, said generation being the "point of no return"; and thus we are to endure to the end so as to see the end of our faith, to prove the salvation of our souls.
Considering the strong contrast between Laika's thoughts of those found in the Lamb's book first and blotted out later with those who, apparently, are never entered into the Lamb's book from the foundation of the world, it is something to think about.
Other thoughts, folks?
For escaping the judgement to come,
Starkman | | Back to Top | | |
|
Laika
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 2433
| Posted 11/26/2003 8:41 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by Starkman
Considering the strong contrast between Laika's thoughts of those found in the Lamb's book first and blotted out later with those who, apparently, are never entered into the Lamb's book from the foundation of the world, it is something to think about.
I just think that because it's the book of LIFE and because of God's general call to ALL and because of Revelation 3:5 "He who overcomes will thus be clothed in white garments; and I will not erase his name from the book of life", that when people are conceived they are entered into the book of Life. It's a conception/birth register.
I also think God knew you before you were born but NOT before you were conceived. I think He's given us the power to create people. This solves two problems for me:
1. Every child is a wanted child. God loves whoever shows up.
2. God is NOT responsible for how those children are conceived, He is NOT the author of sin.
God did not plan or condone how Solomon was conceived but once Solomon arrived, He used Solomon in His plans. While the effects of sin may be visited on succeeding generations, the responsibility for sin stops with the guilty generation.
So, conceive a child, child's name is entered in the book of Life.
The lone exception being Jesus, He was known before conception. Heck, He was ∞ years old at conception.
inside you the time moves and she don't fade
the ghost in you she don't fade | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 11/27/2003 9:26 PM (GMT -6) | | Though I realize truth is not decided by how popular an idea is, my thoughts on this are essentially in agreement with Laika's and Tom's.
For a somewhat different approach to this issue, the article linked at the bottom of this post examines the question of the proper translation of the phrase commonly rendered, "the foundation of the world." Essentially, it is the author's thesis that the word, "kataballo" and it's cognates are not usually meant as equivalent to "foundation," but rather to "casting/throwing down." Hence the phrase is more properly translated, "because of or in view of the disintegration/fall/casting down of the inhabitants."
In either case, Scripture says the names written in the book are able to be blotted out by God. Even if we go with the traditional translation of this phrase, "from" can refer to the fall of man as well. As in, "Since the foundation of the world" meaning the names were added (and in some cases subtracted) in the time subsequent to the world's founding.
http://www.biblical-theology.com/omniscience2/meaning.htm
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Starkman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747
| Posted 11/28/2003 3:14 AM (GMT -6) | | Hey there, John,
You said, In either case, Scripture says the names written in the book are able to be blotted out by God. Even if we go with the traditional translation of this phrase, "from" can refer to the fall of man as well. As in, "Since the foundation of the world" meaning the names were added (and in some cases subtracted) in the time subsequent to the world's founding.
But I'm still having a problem with the interpretation you've given in view of those mentioned in Revelation 17:8 (and 13:8 if we take "since" to be a modifier of "written"); these peoples names, if I'm reading this correctly, are not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world. Seems that no matter how you adjust the Greek, we are still looking at a people who have never been included within the contents of the book ... ever.
Tis a tough one, you know!
For the conversation,
Starkman | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 11/30/2003 8:10 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by victoryword
Here is a chapter from a book by Howard Elseth that deals somewhat with this subject:
http://twtministries.com/articles/9_openness/katabole.html
I enjoyed Helseth! Hey, that's interesting. Don't know if that's the way to go in understand "foundation of the world," but if it's right that's cool.
Tom | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 11/30/2003 8:15 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by Starkman
But I'm still having a problem with the interpretation you've given in view of those mentioned in Revelation 17:8 (and 13:8 if we take "since" to be a modifier of "written"); these peoples names, if I'm reading this correctly, are not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world. Seems that no matter how you adjust the Greek, we are still looking at a people who have never been included within the contents of the book ... ever.
Hi Starkman,
I may not be understanding you correctly. Please tell me if I misstate your view of this, but if I understand you correctly, you are saying that some people's names have never been written in the Lamb's Book of Life. I agree with this. I guess this minor point is one on which I disagree with our good friend Laika.
I see those who fulfill the conditions of beginning in eternal life (namely, repentance for sin and faith in God) as having their name written at the time of their regeneration/justification.
Those whose names are blotted out of the Book are obviously those who apostasize (do not persevere).
The reason should be obvious why some never have their names entered into the Book of Life - They never came to God in repentance and faith so that they might receive eternal life.
It does not seem to me that this idea presents a difficulty at all if we keep in mind that as people turn to God their names are written in the Book of Life, and conversely, as people turn away from God, their names are blotted out. All this has been ongoing "since the foundation of the world."
Do you see any logical or scriptural inconsistencies with what I have tried to describe?
Enjoying the dialogue.
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 11/30/2003 8:25 PM (GMT -6) | | P.S.: As Rev. 3:1-5 is a definite warning passage to a lukewarm, backslidden church, it seems to me that those who "overcome" are those who obey Christ's stern but loving call to repentance:
Rev 3:1 "To the angel of the church in Sardis write: ¶ He who has the seven Spirits of God and the seven stars, says this: 'I know your deeds, that you have a name that you are alive, but you are dead.
2 'Wake up, and strengthen the things that remain, which were about to die; for I have not found your deeds completed in the sight of My God.
3 'So remember what you have received and heard; and keep {it,} and repent. Therefore if you do not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what hour I will come to you.
4 'But you have a few people in Sardis who have not soiled their garments; and they will walk with Me in white, for they are worthy.
(My note - It would appear that, consistent with the universal testimony of Scripture, "without holiness no one shall see God").
5 'He who overcomes will thus be clothed in white garments; and I will not erase his name from the book of life, and I will confess his name before My Father and before His angels.
He who overcomes is he who walks with Christ in white. Those who repent and forsake their sin have their garments washed in the blood of the Lamb:
Rev 7:14 I said to him, "My lord, you know." And he said to me, "These are the ones who come out of the great tribulation, and they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.
Those who fail to overcome (through their own disobedience and rebellion), seem clearly to be that class of individuals who choose not to heed Christ's heartfelt call to repentance and holy living.
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
|
victoryword
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 12/1/2003 3:14 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by TGB
quote:
Originally posted by victoryword
Here is a chapter from a book by Howard Elseth that deals somewhat with this subject:
http://twtministries.com/articles/9_openness/katabole.html
I enjoyed Helseth! Hey, that's interesting. Don't know if that's the way to go in understand "foundation of the world," but if it's right that's cool.
Tom
I really enjoyed Elseth's whole book. I am not sure if it is still in print (I bought mine online at a used book store). Since I am not a scholar in the original languages, I am not sure how right or how wrong Elseth's translation of the texts are. However, the Contemporary English Version has some interesting translations of certain "foundation" texts:
So God's promise came true, just as the prophet had said, "I will use stories to speak my message and to explain things that have been hidden since the creation of the world." (Matt. 13:35)
You people living today will be punished for all the prophets who have been murdered since the beginning of the world. (Luke 11:50)
Only people who have faith will enter the place of rest. It is just as the Scriptures say, "God became angry and told the people,
`You will never enter my place of rest!' " God said this, even though everything has been ready from the time of creation. (Heb. 4:3)
If he had offered himself every year, he would have suffered many times since the creation of the world. But instead, near the end of time he offered himself once and for all, so that he could be a sacrifice that does away with sin. (Heb. 9:26)
Unfortunately, the CEV does not do as well with Rev. 13:8 and 17:8 (it uses the phrase "before the time of creation"). But it does challenge the common "blueprint" interpretation of the other foundation verses.
If your beliefs cannot be supported by Scripture, they ain't worth supporting
http://www.victoryword.100megspop2.com | | Back to Top | | |
|
Starkman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747
| Posted 12/1/2003 6:49 AM (GMT -6) | | Hey John,
Looking at Revelation 17:8 ...
The inhabitants of the earth—all those whose names have not been written in the book of life since the foundation of the world— (NET)
Taking a somewhat futuristic approach in interpretinng Revelation, can the people in this verse be people of all time? No; they must be the people at this specific event in a time yet to come. The phrase "since the foundation of the world" modifies "those whose names have not been written in the book of life (at least in English)," and these folks are the inhabitants of the earth at this appointed time, not of all time. Thus, these people's names will never be written in the book of life. This ommission must, therefore, be predestined; God knows that there are people who will never come to believe, because they will believe "the lie" (as Paul noted).
I can't say that I see any inconsistency in your logic. What I'm trying to work through, however, is proof that one's name is not written in the book (from the foundation of the world) until one comes to believe in God. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any passage supporting this view, and I'm not sure there's enough Scripture to induce the interpretation.
As far as Elseth's work on the subject, he seems to be a version unto himself. I've not found any recognized Bible version or translation that supports his view (for Revelation 17:8). Then again, I only searched Bible Gateway and similar types of resources for Bibles, but I figure that ONE of these translations ought to have given us something similar to Elseth's work, but that's not the case. All the versions, however, do agree with each other.
John, if you can prove that people's names are added when they believe, I think you have a great case! Otherwise, we have a time (yet to come) when people's names will be, predictively, never entered into the book of life--this issue being somewhat related to the first post of this thread: "How do those of the Open Theism view explain that names were written down in the book of life of the lamb before the foundation of the world?"
Ah, it's almost lunch time!!!
Starkman | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 12/1/2003 3:05 PM (GMT -6) | | Hi Starkman,
One more good reason for viewing Revelation as metaphorical for spiritual warfare!
A quick scan of my Bible software didn't turn up anything that specifically says that names are written as people turn to God. It seems self-evident to me that if they are not in right relationship with God, their name will obviously not be at the same time written, and the converse also must be true; i.e., when and if they do enter into a right relationship with God, their name will be written.
As to the word translated, "foundation," a simple concordance search reveals that in fact the term, "katabole" (and its cognate terms) is never used in the sense of foundation, but always as disintegration, destruction, or overthrow. A friend of mine, Scott Taylor, has an article that I linked above that brings this fact out as well.
As to the issue of names being written in the sense it seems you are trying to attach to the concept, I just think your view presupposes a deterministic understanding as to the timing of the writing. If all the names that would ever be written were written before creation even began, then yes, determinism seems to be the obvious conclusion. However, apart from a futuristic reading of Rev. 17:8 (which all scholars agree is a very symbolic book), it does not seem to me that a deterministic understanding of the concept in question is warranted.
I will try to see if I can find other scripture that might lend support to my idea that names are written down as individuals are regenerated.
Enjoying it.
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 12/1/2003 11:06 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Hey Tom,
"And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world."
It would seem that in the case of the above reading of Revelation 13, "since" can be interpreted as you noted. However ...
"and all those who live on the earth will worship the beast, everyone whose name has not been written since the foundation of the world in the book of life belonging to the Lamb who was killed.
I would say that your interpeting "since" in this case would not fit, because only those involved with this last-day's event are menioned. It is not people of all times. "Since" in this second reading would mean these specific people's names were not written in the book ... period (if I'm reading this correctly), not just from the foundation of the world!
I’m gonna go with the NLT on 13:8: “And all the people who belong to this world worshiped the beast. They are the ones whose names were not written in the Book of Life, which belongs to the Lamb who was killed before the world was made.” The grammar is ambiguous, yes. But in this case the word order (which doesn’t always mean much, granted, though sometimes it’s important) tips the scales for me. “The lamb who was slain” is the nearest candidate, while “written” is more remote.
quote:
…but it is more likely that the phrase “since the foundation of the world” modifies the verb “written.” Confirmation of this can be found in Rev 17:8 where the phrase “written in the book of life since the foundation of the world” occurs with no ambiguity.
I personally think there are a couple of reasons for not using 17.8 to interpret 13.8 as you’re argued. True, there’s no “lamb slain” in 17.8 to compete with “written” as the expression here qualified by “since….” But let’s consider two things. First, “since the foundation of the world” may qualify the “Book of Life” itself, it’s existence (or rather what it represents) being here spoken of as taking place since creation. The meaning would be something like: “And the people who belong to this world, whose names were not written in the Book of Life that’s been around since the world began, will be amazed.” The point would be not that the names of THESE people were recorded at the time of creation, but that they, at the end of the eschaton, are here identified with what God has always been doing to save humanity. They are the anchor generation. They cross the line last and bring in the paton so to speak.
Secondly, the problem of understanding “since the foundation of the world” as qualifying the verb “written” is understanding how these peoples’ choice to receive Christ and become his own, is foreknown. Remember, what’s recorded, or rather, what is represented in the recording of their names, is not that they’d be born, but that they’re Christ’s; they’re citizens of the Kingdom. And you agree that THIS choice can’t be foreknown at the time of creation. If you want to qualify “written” with “since the foundation…” then I’d think you would have to abandon open theism or attempt to interpret the recording of names in the Book of Life as representing something totally unrelated to libertarian free will.
quote:
These translators take the position that "from the foundation of the world" is a modifier of "written," and not "the Lamb slain. Further, they state that Revelation 17:8 settles the theological matter regardless of the 13:8 reading. Now, two things ...
Like I said, I don’t think agreeing with them is an option for an open theist.
quote:
First (I think we've discussed here, but I forget the conversation now), I can't see any problem to the open view with having God know all the people He will ever create, if by "know" we mean He knows their personalities (since He creates them), their individualities and their over-all makeup.
I see a big problem here for the open view. On what basis would knowledge of our certain births, our certain and developed personalities, and our certain individualities come to God? Because God creates them? God unilaterally brings about our births and personality development? You’re scaring me Starkman! Whole swaths of libertarian choices were just discarded. What of the libertarian choice of parents to get married? What of their libertarian choices to have children? What of the libertarian choices those in my invironment and I make that influence my personality developement?
quote:
God can therefore ahove told Jeremiah that God knew him while he was yet in his mother's womb. To force this "knew" to be only at conception is really fantastic and out of reach with God's knowing. I mean, what more is there for God to know about Jeremiah when Jeremiah is in his mother's womb that God wouldn't have already known? I think God knew about all of us before we were born, before we were conceived, but that doesn't have to mean that God knows every choice we'll ever make or whether we will or will not come to faith.
Three things quickly. One, I think God’s “knowing” Jeremiah in the womb is more than “knowledge of” his conception and progress in the womb, his DNA make-up, etc. I think here what’s meant is “I chose you” while you were in the womb. Secondly, if God knows eternally THAT we’d be born (as opposed to the possibility that we’d be born), along with our personalities, then he eternally knew every libertarian choice necessary to MY being born (my father’s choice to propose marriage to my Mom, their choice to have kids, etc. etc.) and MY developing the personality I have. Since I don’t think those choices are eternally foreknown as determinate, I don’t see how the consequences of those choices can be foreknown as determinate. Thirdly, if you want to argue that God doesn’t know AT THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD whether or not we’ll come to faith, you can’t argue that he records our names in the book of life AT THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD, for the recording of names in the book of life represents entrance or membership in God’s family, God’s kingdom.
quote:
Thus, we are all entered in the Lamb's book of life since the foundation of the world, the "unbelievers" eventually being blotted out. One possible exception...
Well, that helps. You resolve it by denying that having one’s name recorded in the book of life is limited to representing those who choose TO believe. God writes everybody in and removes them only when they don’t believe. I think this kinda washes out the significance of the metaphor of being written into membership in the Kingdom, but it’s one possible explanation. I prefer to reserve recording in the book for the real choices people make TO believe. Your way, God writes into membership people who, given the open view, only MAY be born. In what sense is a person whose existence is contingent a member of the household of faith? It would seem to me that such a person’s membership in the household of faith is as contingent as her existence.
quote:
Second, though I agree with Laika's concept of those being in the book first and blotted out later, what if this were not the case for a specific group of people living at a specific point in time where it truly has already been predestined that they will not believe; for they will believe the antichrist, they will believe "the lie." What if they are never entered into the Lamb's book of life because it is already known that they will not believe.
Stop it Starkman! You’re scaring me now.  God has “predestined” some to not believe and be damned?
Tom | | Back to Top | | |
|
Starkman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747
| Posted 12/2/2003 1:06 PM (GMT -6) | | Yo Tom!
Dude, I need to clarify that I am not using Revelation 17:8 to substantiate any reading in Revelation 13:8. Revelation 13:8 at this point (as far as my conversation is going) is neither here nor there. Revelation 17:8, however, seems to lend a pretty sold reading for an interpretation connecting those who are alive at the time of the beast--their names never having been written in the book of life. I stress again that I cannot see how one can interpret the people of Revelation 17:8 (taking a somewhat futuristic approach to the book as I do) as being everyone who has never believed since the foundation of the world. These people are specific to a time frame, and we are told that their names will never be been written in the book of life. Here's what I wrote in my post to John, the one just before this post:
quote:
Looking at Revelation 17:8 ...
The inhabitants of the earth—all those whose names have not been written in the book of life since the foundation of the world— (NET)
Taking a somewhat futuristic approach in interpretinng Revelation, can the people in this verse be people of all time? No; they must be the people at this specific event in a time yet to come. The phrase "since the foundation of the world" modifies "those whose names have not been written in the book of life (at least in English)," and these folks are the inhabitants of the earth at this appointed time, not of all time. Thus, these people's names will never be written in the book of life.
(Hey, that's the first time I've ever quoted myself ... I think! That's kind of a weird feeling!)
I immediately followed the above with this:
quote:
This ommission must, therefore, be predestined; God knows that there are people who will never come to believe, because they will believe "the lie" (as Paul noted).
It is not that God has predestined them to never believe, rather, it is that He simply knows a group of people coming in the future won't believe of their own choice. I'm not saying He knows there names, there existence as if it's already happened (Hey, I'm an Open Theist, for criminy sakes!). But just as God knows there are people today who will not believe, He knows, too, that there is a group of people coming who will not believe. The difference in scenarios is that according to Revelation 17:8, the climate of the times is one of almost complete sell-out to the beast. It doesn't take, therefore, a rocket scientist to figure that there's going to be tons of people not believing in God's salvation. This becomes, therefore, a type of predestination, similar to what Moses said to the Israelites at the end of Dueteronomy; he knew they would rebel.
Come the time of Revelation 17:8, things have gone rather ... cold, if you will on ol' planet earth. God and His Christ ain't gonna be the most popular names to utter, and worship is at an all-time high to Satan and his agents. This itself is predestined to happen, because God knows that left to fend for themselves, mankind will opt for Self rather than God and that which promotes Self: Satan and his agents. And if there's ever a time when men will be given over to worship the beast, that time is noted (predestined) in Scripture. Again, this isn't anything that is either new or a threat to Open Theism.
I am bothered, however, by the issue John and I are talking about: the names of ALL people being either written or not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world. It seems as if they are and then blotted out if they abandon faith in God or in the Christ. John, however, believes it seems to be a natural conclusion that no one is entered until they believe and will be blotted out if they do not maintain faith. While I concur that a name can be blotted out, I do not find it a Scriptural conclusion that no one starts out in the book. But our man John's working on that.
As to God knowing us before we are born ...
Tom, there ain't a problem in the world with God knowing US, not what we look like, what our exact personality will be, how we would differ if born to one set of parents than to whom we were born. None of that is an issue. I'm talking about God's intimate knowledge of the soul ... a specific soul that will soon come to be upon conception. Who conceives it is neither here nor there; that the essence of that person can be known is, I believe, known by God. (As if God did not see and know before the conception what the soul of that conception would be. I hardly believe God waits in anticipation to see what will emerge when Sally conceives!) God can very well (at least, I believe) know the core of the soul that will emerge from any conception. Matter of fact, He might know all of the "core" of souls that will ever be, if he's put a cap on how many humans will be born. Surely God is able to control events well enough to ensure that all those souls He knows will, in deed, exist. This isn't a big thing, really. I'm not saying I believe this whole-heartedly, but I have no problem with it. This has nothing to do with choices made of parents, color of hair of the newborn (well, I'm told I had hair, but boy, I've seen some bald kids. I'm pretty much bald now, so it all evens out!), personality traits, how one is shaped while being raised, etc. That's not involved in what I'm talking about. I hope that much, at least, is clear! (Do not fear, my good man! I am the Starkman. Solid Open Theist to the core!)
Further, that "names" are written in the foundation of the world ... well, there's going to be an awefull lot of Bob Smiths, or better yet, Mohommeds. I mean, what, is there going to be a geneology in the "Book" tracking the Bob Smiths and Mohommeds so as to not confuse them? "Oh, I'm sorry. Yes, you're name's here; it's the OTHER Bob Smith that isn't. Whew, sorry about that. Almost sent the wrong Bob Smith to hell!"
My point is that it isn't so clear cut what "names" is. It doesn't have to be that Keith R. Starkey will be written in some hardback or paperback book in heaven or I'm "outta there." I already know I'm in "the book," and I intend to prove it to the day I die! It might be, however, that the very distinguishing name that only I have as a soul whom no one else is will be noted. That eases, if you will, the issue of everyone's name being written down before they are even born, in which case--due to EVERYONE'S name being written--Open Theism takes a hit. (John's idea is ... second best!!!)
Oh, it's all fun, Tom. I'm gonna take my OT to the grave with me, I am! Fear not, brother, fear not!
For a lot of good fun and conversation here ...
Starkman
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 12/2/2003 6:48 PM (GMT -6) | | Starkman: Dude, I need to clarify that I am not using Revelation 17:8 to substantiate any reading in Revelation 13:8.
Tom: OK. But you quoted from a website on 17.8 in concluding that since it was clear that “written” was qualified by “since the foundation” in 17.8, we can have no real objection to “written” being qualified by “since the foundation” in 13.8. If 13.8 is not important now, cool.
Starkman: Revelation 13:8 at this point (as far as my conversation is going) is neither here nor there. Revelation 17:8, however, seems to lend a pretty sold reading for an interpretation connecting those who are alive at the time of the beast--their names never having been written in the book of life. I stress again that I cannot see how one can interpret the people of Revelation 17:8 (taking a somewhat futuristic approach to the book as I do) as being everyone who has never believed since the foundation of the world.
Tom: The people referred to in 17.8 obviously can’t be everybody that’s been recorded since the creation of the world. Nobody can argue that. But neither do we need to argue that “written” is qualified by “since…” in 17.8. It’s much simpler to argue that “book of life” is qualified. It’s the book, and what it represents, that’s been around since the creation. That THESE peoples’ names are not written in that book is, I would argue, the consequence of nothing else but their own contingent choices.
Starkman: These people are specific to a time frame, and we are told that their names will never be been written in the book of life.
Tom: No, we’re told that there names WERE NOT written in the book. Nothing is said about the future of these folks.
Starkman: It is not that God has predestined them to never believe, rather, it is that He simply knows a group of people coming in the future won't believe of their own choice. I'm not saying He knows there names, there existence as if it's already happened (Hey, I'm an Open Theist, for criminy sakes!).
Tom: Which is why some of what you’re arguing seems objectionable. If you don’t see a problem in it, cool. But I can’t fit it into the open view. I don't' have a problem with God saying, "Hey, before this is all over I'm gonna lose more souls. Not everybody will make it." But I would never conflate this with the book of life, which IS, it seems to me, a reality that embraces specific individuals who chose their way in or chose their way out. I don't wannt nick-pick bro, I just don't see that what you're driving at with 17.8 is at all necessary. Seems to me that since you find it necessary to qualify "written" with "since the foundation" you're caught up in now having to explain it. I'm suggesting that "written" is not qualified by "since the foundation" in 17.8 and that there's nothing to explain.
Starkman: But just as God knows there are people today who will not believe, He knows, too, that there is a group of people coming who will not believe. The difference in scenarios is that according to Revelation 17:8, the climate of the times is one of almost complete sell-out to the beast. It doesn't take, therefore, a rocket scientist to figure that there's going to be tons of people not believing in God's salvation. This becomes, therefore, a type of predestination, similar to what Moses said to the Israelites at the end of Dueteronomy; he knew they would rebel.
Tom: I’d dump “predestination” then. It doesn’t at all express what you’re trying to say. “Foreknowledge” yes. But not “predestination.” Not even a “type” of it (are they “types” of predetermining something?).
It’s my understanding of what the book of life represents, I suppose, that’s my problem with your take on 17.8. No biggie.
Starkman: I am bothered, however, by the issue John and I are talking about: the names of ALL people being either written or not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world. It seems as if they are and then blotted out if they abandon faith in God or in the Christ. John, however, believes it seems to be a natural conclusion that no one is entered until they believe and will be blotted out if they do not maintain faith. While I concur that a name can be blotted out, I do not find it a Scriptural conclusion that no one starts out in the book. But our man John's working on that.
Tom: I’d agree that the book represents citizenship in the Kingdom, God’s intimate knowledge and ownership (it’s God’s book) of his people. It’s the ledger of his covenant partners. Since I think we are each known individually to God as his own, I think the names (i.e., identities) are specific. So I’d agree with John here. One gets on the list, so to speak, by believing, and one gets erased, so to speak, by not believing. That’s it.
Starkman: Tom, there ain't a problem in the world with God knowing US, not what we look like, what our exact personality will be, how we would differ if born to one set of parents than to whom we were born.
Tom: There is no ME to know apart from the specifics of my situation (MY parents, MY conception, MY birth, etc.). There is no ME born to different parents. The "soul" that is mine could not have been born to other parents. There is no anonymous, impersonal, soul "core" to me that God could have droped into some other womb and been born as somebody else that's not ME. That's my feeling at least. Could be wrong.
Starkman: I'm talking about God's intimate knowledge of the soul ... a specific soul that will soon come to be upon conception. Who conceives it is neither here nor there; that the essence of that person can be known is, I believe, known by God.
Tom: Looks to me like you believe in the preexistence of our individual souls, that God created all the human souls that’ll ever exist and and has them on a shelf somewhere but that who they’re born to, when and where, is an open issue. I don’t think this is the case, so I couldn’t use it to help explain verses like Rv. 17.8.
Starkman: (As if God did not see and know before the conception what the soul of that conception would be. I hardly believe God waits in anticipation to see what will emerge when Sally conceives!)
Tom: How could God know the “soul” before conception unless the soul preexists conception? I don’t’ think the soul preexists conception, and I believe conception to be a contingent libertarian event, so I don’t see God eternally knowing exactly what “souls” will be born.
Starkman: God can very well (at least, I believe) know the core of the soul that will emerge from any conception. Matter of fact, He might know all of the "core" of souls that will ever be, if he's put a cap on how many humans will be born.
Tom: I don’t know what a soul “core” is or how God would foreknow before conception that it would eventuate into a particular human individual. I don’t think there is such a thing as a soul’s “core” apart from the specific “individual” person that is conceived and birthed. In other words, for me, “soul” and “personhood,” if they’re not synonymous, are inseparable.
Starkman: Surely God is able to control events well enough to ensure that all those souls He knows will, in deed, exist.
Tom: How’s God know they “will” exist without either a) predetermining THAT they exist (which seems to be what you’re arguing for), or b) foreknowing ala simple foreknowledge THAT they exist?
If Peter is right and the timetable of the eschaton is open for God, how could it also be the case that God either predetermined or simply foreknows exactly how many “souls” he’ll create? In other words, if God has already, as Peter said, “postponed” the end and if our lives impact the date (bringing if nearer or pushing it forward) and if date/timing of the end is in fact open, contingent upon libertarian choices, then how in the world can God guarantee that the specific number of souls, not one more, not one less, will in fact be born?
I think the bringing into existence of souls is as contingent and open a matter as are the choices, diseases, and other factors render it. Life is a continuum. When human parents conceive, they do what God sovereignly designed them to do: create a human soul.
Starkman: Further, that "names" are written in the foundation of the world ... well, there's going to be an awefull lot of Bob Smiths, or better yet, Mohommeds. I mean, what, is there going to be a geneology in the "Book" tracking the Bob Smiths and Mohommeds so as to not confuse them? "Oh, I'm sorry. Yes, you're name's here; it's the OTHER Bob Smith that isn't. Whew, sorry about that. Almost sent the wrong Bob Smith to hell!"
Tom: Too funny! As you seem to have pointed out also, there is no literal book and pen with names written in ink (or written in the lamb’s blood—I think I hear an organ playing!). The “book of life” is a metaphor. It draws a picture in words we can understand of a reality. The reality is: God knows those who are his, those who are in loving relationship with him, and God keeps intimate track of them. The book is the reality of membership in God’s kingdom club, participation in divine life, and it’s still open. One day it’ll close and accounts will be settled (whatever that means). So I’m not wondering if God or some angel will screw the names up and get it wrong. It’s not our names in the sense of the letters that compose them that are written in the reality of God’s kingdom, it’s our names in the biblical sense, our identities, who we really are, that has entered “life” (i.e., book of LIFE). Now, since I don’t differentiate between the “person” (with the specifics of its parentage and conception) and the “soul” (which you seem to think would be the same soul regardless of parentage), I don’t see God foreknowing from eternity exactly how many “souls” will be born.
Well, I’ve completely forgotten how to tie this back into Rev. 17.8!
Starkman: Oh, it's all fun, Tom. I'm gonna take my OT to the grave with me, I am! Fear not, brother, fear not!
Tom: | | Back to Top | | |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 11:20 AM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|