When is our name written in the book of life?

[TangledWeb]

It is possible that the Book of Life has no names in it at this time in human history and that the names are written near or during the last day when the judgement of the living and the dead is made.

I was under the impression there were names in the book now.

 

[RichWh1]

It is possible that the Book of Life has no names in it at this time in human history and that the names are written near or during the last day when the judgement of the living and the dead is made.

If that was true, then how would it be possible for one to have their names blotted out of the Book of Life?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MoreCoffee]

If that was true, then how would it be possible for one to have their names blotted out of the Book of Life?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

When does holy scripture indicate that names are blotted out? Revelation 20:12-15 mentions the book, also Revelation 21:27, Revelation 22:19 a psalm also Psalms 69:28. I imagine that the "book" is metaphorical but if it is not then perhaps it is very ancient and gets added to as time unfolds. It is hard to say one way or the other.

 

[atpollard]

The names were written in the book from the same moment that God ‘foreknew’ those He predestined ... the foundation of the world:

When does God say the names were written in the book of life:

[Rev 13:8 NASB] 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 NASB] 8 "The beast that you saw was, and is not, and is about to come up out of the abyss and go to destruction. 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.

 

[MoreCoffee]

The names were written in the book from the same moment that God ‘foreknew’ those He predestined ... the foundation of the world:

Interesting verses but why is blotting out names included in Revelation too? It's a strange book, the Apocalypse I mean.

 

[psalms 91]

Because unlike some people who say once saved always saved this is another verse that disputes that, it is possible to fall away and lose salvation

 

[MoreCoffee]

Because unlike some people who say once saved always saved this is another verse that disputes that, it is possible to fall away and lose salvation

Yes, that is one of those troubling passages for some types of theology. I know one such passage, there are others too, but the one you may be thinking of is in Hebrews chapter six.

Hebrews 6:1 Therefore, let us leave the elementary teaching about Christ, and move forward, to a more advanced knowledge, without laying, again, the foundation, that is: turning away from dead works, faith in God, 2 the teaching about baptisms and laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead and the final judgement. 3 This is what we shall do, God permitting. 4 In any case, it would be impossible to renew, again, through penance, those who have once been enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and received the Holy Spirit, 5 tasted the beauty of the word of God, and the wonders of the supernatural world. 6 If, in spite of this, they have ceased to believe, and have fallen away, it is impossible to move them a second time to repentance, when they are crucifying, on their own ac count, the Son of God, and spurning him publicly. 7 Soil that drinks the rain falling continually on it and produces profitable grass for those who till it, receives the blessings of God, 8 but the soil that produces thorns and bushes is poor soil, and in danger of being cursed. In the end, it will be burned.​

 

[psalms 91]

Yes, that is one of those troubling passages for some types of theology. I know one such passage, there are others too, but the one you may be thinking of is in Hebrews chapter six.

Hebrews 6:1 Therefore, let us leave the elementary teaching about Christ, and move forward, to a more advanced knowledge, without laying, again, the foundation, that is: turning away from dead works, faith in God, 2 the teaching about baptisms and laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead and the final judgement. 3 This is what we shall do, God permitting. 4 In any case, it would be impossible to renew, again, through penance, those who have once been enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and received the Holy Spirit, 5 tasted the beauty of the word of God, and the wonders of the supernatural world. 6 If, in spite of this, they have ceased to believe, and have fallen away, it is impossible to move them a second time to repentance, when they are crucifying, on their own ac count, the Son of God, and spurning him publicly. 7 Soil that drinks the rain falling continually on it and produces profitable grass for those who till it, receives the blessings of God, 8 but the soil that produces thorns and bushes is poor soil, and in danger of being cursed. In the end, it will be burned.​

Yup, I have seen that explained away as well but it seems they do backflips to make it fit the theology

 

[MennoSota]

Yup, I have seen that explained away as well but it seems they do backflips to make it fit the theology

The context of the letter to the Hebrews makes it more clear. The vast number of passages from Jesus own words to those of Luke, Peter and Paul help define the meaning in Hebrews 6. The only way to get loss of salvation is to read a few verses in complete isolation of the rest of scripture.
So the flip-side argument is that a person arguing for loss of salvation must ignore and argue away vast passages that tell us God will keep those whom he adopts.

 

[MoreCoffee]

The context of the letter to the Hebrews makes it more clear. The vast number of passages from Jesus own words to those of Luke, Peter and Paul help define the meaning in Hebrews 6. The only way to get loss of salvation is to read a few verses in complete isolation of the rest of scripture.
So the flip-side argument is that a person arguing for loss of salvation must ignore and argue away vast passages that tell us God will keep those whom he adopts.

You invoke context like a harry potter expeliamus spell

Context doesn't make those verses fly out of the bible's covers.

 

[MennoSota]

You invoke context like a harry potter expeliamus spell

Context doesn't make those verses fly out of the bible's covers.

No one says they should fly out of the Bible. I welcome them. But, we have to try understand how the original reader was going to understand these verses.
How would a Jewish person, who was being pressured to conform to Jewish tradition and law rather than grace, understand the letter?
Why does the writer continually compare various things against Jesus and declare that Jesus is greater? What value would take place if a person goes back to the old traditions and turns away from Jesus? This is practical, real-life writing to those who are being torn by connection to culture or connection to Jesus.
What we don't read about is whether the readers are adopted children of God or whether they think adoption is their choice (which it isn't). We all know people who are attempting to work their way into the Kingdom and give up because it's too hard. (It is too hard. It is impossible to work your way into the Kingdom.) We know those folks who imagined that all their troubles would vanish and then get disappointed when the perfect life does not happen. They are still attempting to control their life and God was never their Sovereign Lord. They just wanted Jesus as their genie. They leave and chase another self-controlled path with no intention to ever let Jesus be their King. This is who the writer of Hebrews is talking to. This is why the writer emphasizes why "Jesus is greater than..."
So...I love the letter to the Hebrews. It is the letter that God used to set me free from the legalism of free-will theology. I love this book.
Carry on.

 

[psalms 91]

Yup backflips, we will agree to disagree

 

[MennoSota]

Yup backflips, we will agree to disagree

Oh my goodness. With the flip of the hand, you dismiss. Please don't be so flippant with the word of God. Try to understand it rather than take the lazy route.

 

[psalms 91]

No lazy route to it you interpret how you wish and say that there are verses to back it up and I believe a different way and there are many verses to back up my belief. You already dismissed one in Revelation that supports it so I could say the same thing but I believe that we have a disagreement about belief that neither of us will change.

 

[MennoSota]

No lazy route to it you interpret how you wish and say that there are verses to back it up and I believe a different way and there are many verses to back up my belief. You already dismissed one in Revelation that supports it so I could say the same thing but I believe that we have a disagreement about belief that neither of us will change.

I once believed your pov. Change can happen as you read the Bible and let it speak holistically.

 

[davedajobauk]

I once believed your pov. Change can happen as you read the Bible and let it speak holistically.

~as 'translated' by the Holy Spirit


rayer:

 

[MennoSota]

~as 'translated' by the Holy Spirit


rayer:

The Holy Spirit created rules of grammar and guided humans to translate.
There is one interpretation that is God's interpretation. As humans we sometimes have to wrestle with the text to recognize what God means. Often this is because we drag our culture with us and we let culture interpret without actually making any effort to understand the culture that was present for the original audience.
dave, it seems you may just be lazy.

 

[MoreCoffee]

No one says they should fly out of the Bible. I welcome them. But, we have to try understand how the original reader was going to understand these verses.

I do not think that is right. The object that we try to reach is to understand what the author intends to communicate by what he's written.

How would a Jewish person, who was being pressured to conform to Jewish tradition and law rather than grace, understand the letter?

I do not think that is the right question. We're not trying to become Jewish in our thinking so we can understand what a first century Jew might have thought about as he/she read the passage. What we're trying to do is understand what the author intended by what he wrote. The author is a Christian. He wrote under inspiration. That is where we start.

Why does the writer continually compare various things against Jesus and declare that Jesus is greater?

The writer compares temple ritual and old testament passages to the life of Jesus Christ because the old testament passages and the temple ritual were types and symbols illustrating the life of Jesus Christ and Jesus Christ's actions. The writer says so himself. He says

For whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, that through endurance and through the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope. (Romans 15:4)

For The Written Law had a shadow in it of good things that were coming. It was not the essence of those matters (Hebrews 10:1)

Hebrews 7:26 It was fitting that we should have such a high priest: 18 holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners, higher than the heavens. 19 27 He has no need, as did the high priests, to offer sacrifice day after day, 20 first for his own sins and then for those of the people; he did that once for all when he offered himself. 28 For the law appoints men subject to weakness to be high priests, but the word of the oath, which was taken after the law, appoints a son, who has been made perfect forever. 8:1 1 The main point of what has been said is this: we have such a high priest, who has taken his seat at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, 2 a minister of the sanctuary 2 and of the true tabernacle that the Lord, not man, set up. 3 Now every high priest is appointed to offer gifts and sacrifices; thus the necessity for this one also to have something to offer. 4 If then he were on earth, he would not be a priest, since there are those who offer gifts according to the law. 5 They worship in a copy and shadow of the heavenly sanctuary, as Moses was warned when he was about to erect the tabernacle. For he says, "See that you make everything according to the pattern shown you on the mountain." 6 Now he has obtained so much more excellent a ministry as he is mediator of a better covenant, enacted on better promises. 7 3 For if that first covenant had been faultless, no place would have been sought for a second one. 8 But he finds fault with them and says: 4 "Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will conclude a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. 9 It will not be like the covenant I made with their fathers the day I took them by the hand to lead them forth from the land of Egypt; for they did not stand by my covenant and I ignored them, says the Lord. 10 But this is the covenant I will establish with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put my laws in their minds and I will write them upon their hearts. I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 11 And they shall not teach, each one his fellow citizen and kinsman, saying, 'Know the Lord,' for all shall know me, from least to greatest. 12 For I will forgive their evildoing and remember their sins no more." 13 5 When he speaks of a "new" covenant, he declares the first one obsolete. And what has become obsolete and has grown old is close to disappearing. (Hebrews 7:26-8:5)​

What value would take place if a person goes back to the old traditions and turns away from Jesus? This is practical, real-life writing to those who are being torn by connection to culture or connection to Jesus.
What we don't read about is whether the readers are adopted children of God or whether they think adoption is their choice (which it isn't). We all know people who are attempting to work their way into the Kingdom and give up because it's too hard. (It is too hard. It is impossible to work your way into the Kingdom.) We know those folks who imagined that all their troubles would vanish and then get disappointed when the perfect life does not happen. They are still attempting to control their life and God was never their Sovereign Lord. They just wanted Jesus as their genie. They leave and chase another self-controlled path with no intention to ever let Jesus be their King. This is who the writer of Hebrews is talking to. This is why the writer emphasizes why "Jesus is greater than..."
So...I love the letter to the Hebrews. It is the letter that God used to set me free from the legalism of free-will theology. I love this book.
Carry on.

Thus we cannot make Hebrews 6:1-8 disappear in the smoke of alleged context that eviscerates it and pretends that it means something different from what it says.

Hebrews 6:1 Therefore, let us leave the elementary teaching about Christ, and move forward, to a more advanced knowledge, without laying, again, the foundation, that is: turning away from dead works, faith in God, 2 the teaching about baptisms and laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead and the final judgement. 3 This is what we shall do, God permitting. 4 In any case, it would be impossible to renew, again, through penance, those who have once been enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and received the Holy Spirit, 5 tasted the beauty of the word of God, and the wonders of the supernatural world. 6 If, in spite of this, they have ceased to believe, and have fallen away, it is impossible to move them a second time to repentance, when they are crucifying, on their own ac count, the Son of God, and spurning him publicly. 7 Soil that drinks the rain falling continually on it and produces profitable grass for those who till it, receives the blessings of God, 8 but the soil that produces thorns and bushes is poor soil, and in danger of being cursed. In the end, it will be burned.​

 

[MennoSota]

I do not think that is right. The object that we try to reach is to understand what the author intends to communicate by what he's written.



I do not think that is the right question. We're not trying to become Jewish in our thinking so we can understand what a first century Jew might have thought about as he/she read the passage. What we're trying to do is understand what the author intended by what he wrote. The author is a Christian. He wrote under inspiration. That is where we start.



The writer compares temple ritual and old testament passages to the life of Jesus Christ because the old testament passages and the temple ritual were types and symbols illustrating the life of Jesus Christ and Jesus Christ's actions. The writer says so himself. He says

For whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, that through endurance and through the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope. (Romans 15:4)

For The Written Law had a shadow in it of good things that were coming. It was not the essence of those matters (Hebrews 10:1)

Hebrews 7:26 It was fitting that we should have such a high priest: 18 holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners, higher than the heavens. 19 27 He has no need, as did the high priests, to offer sacrifice day after day, 20 first for his own sins and then for those of the people; he did that once for all when he offered himself. 28 For the law appoints men subject to weakness to be high priests, but the word of the oath, which was taken after the law, appoints a son, who has been made perfect forever. 8:1 1 The main point of what has been said is this: we have such a high priest, who has taken his seat at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, 2 a minister of the sanctuary 2 and of the true tabernacle that the Lord, not man, set up. 3 Now every high priest is appointed to offer gifts and sacrifices; thus the necessity for this one also to have something to offer. 4 If then he were on earth, he would not be a priest, since there are those who offer gifts according to the law. 5 They worship in a copy and shadow of the heavenly sanctuary, as Moses was warned when he was about to erect the tabernacle. For he says, "See that you make everything according to the pattern shown you on the mountain." 6 Now he has obtained so much more excellent a ministry as he is mediator of a better covenant, enacted on better promises. 7 3 For if that first covenant had been faultless, no place would have been sought for a second one. 8 But he finds fault with them and says: 4 "Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will conclude a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. 9 It will not be like the covenant I made with their fathers the day I took them by the hand to lead them forth from the land of Egypt; for they did not stand by my covenant and I ignored them, says the Lord. 10 But this is the covenant I will establish with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put my laws in their minds and I will write them upon their hearts. I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 11 And they shall not teach, each one his fellow citizen and kinsman, saying, 'Know the Lord,' for all shall know me, from least to greatest. 12 For I will forgive their evildoing and remember their sins no more." 13 5 When he speaks of a "new" covenant, he declares the first one obsolete. And what has become obsolete and has grown old is close to disappearing. (Hebrews 7:26-8:5)​

Thus we cannot make Hebrews 6:1-8 disappear in the smoke of alleged context that eviscerates it and pretends that it means something different from what it says.

Hebrews 6:1 Therefore, let us leave the elementary teaching about Christ, and move forward, to a more advanced knowledge, without laying, again, the foundation, that is: turning away from dead works, faith in God, 2 the teaching about baptisms and laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead and the final judgement. 3 This is what we shall do, God permitting. 4 In any case, it would be impossible to renew, again, through penance, those who have once been enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and received the Holy Spirit, 5 tasted the beauty of the word of God, and the wonders of the supernatural world. 6 If, in spite of this, they have ceased to believe, and have fallen away, it is impossible to move them a second time to repentance, when they are crucifying, on their own ac count, the Son of God, and spurning him publicly. 7 Soil that drinks the rain falling continually on it and produces profitable grass for those who till it, receives the blessings of God, 8 but the soil that produces thorns and bushes is poor soil, and in danger of being cursed. In the end, it will be burned.​

To whom was the author writing? What was the recipient of the writing struggling with?
We make our observation of the passage with these questions in mind. Once we have observed and questioned, then and only then can we attempt to interpret the passage and finally make application to our own lives.
Rarely, however, do people take time to observe and question. They mostly go directly to interpretation and then look for others who agree with their own particular interpretation. Thus they take a lazy approach and hope the other commentators are correct. We all do this when we are in a hurry and pressed for an answer.
It seems to me that in regard to the Bible people rarely look at the whole book, but instead take a few sentences and build their prooftext. Often their prooftext is wrong.

 

[MoreCoffee]

To whom was the author writing? What was the recipient of the writing struggling with?

Read Hebrews 1 and see.

Hebrews 1:1 In times past, God spoke in partial and various ways to our ancestors through the prophets; 2 in these last days, he spoke to us through a son, whom he made heir of all things and through whom he created the universe, ​

The books does not say it is addressed "To the Hebrews" or "To the Hebrew Christians". Maybe it was preached in Corinth by Apollos.

Tradition says it was "To the Hebrews" are you relying on Tradition for context?

We make our observation of the passage with these questions in mind. Once we have observed and questioned, then and only then can we attempt to interpret the passage and finally make application to our own lives.
Rarely, however, do people take time to observe and question. They mostly go directly to interpretation and then look for others who agree with their own particular interpretation. Thus they take a lazy approach and hope the other commentators are correct. We all do this when we are in a hurry and pressed for an answer.
It seems to me that in regard to the Bible people rarely look at the whole book, but instead take a few sentences and build their prooftext. Often their prooftext is wrong.