The Book of Life & Calvinism

[Lon]

Since you surmised AMR answered "no", and he said he has nothing more to say, can you elaborate for him, since it appears you want to take up the cudgels for him? Again, the question you said he answered with a "no" is:

Spoiler

Are you saying that among the elect there may be some who could possibly be blotted out from the book of life if they choose to be overcome of evil instead of overcoming it?

I request that you tell me whether I am understanding him correctly:

1. AMR is NOT saying that among the elect there may be some who could possibly be blotted out from the book of life if they choose to be overcome of evil instead of overcoming it.

2. If #1 is a correct understanding of AMR's response, then, please tell me which of the following do you think correctly reflects AMR's position:

a. None among the elect will choose to be overcome of evil, therefore no one will be blotted out.
b. There are among the elect who will choose to be overcome of evil instead of overcoming it, yet their names will not be blotted out from the book of life.

3. If #1 is NOT a correct understanding of AMR's response, then what do you think is the correct one?

A bit long, but I hope meaningful. I try to address your question head-on in the second to last paragraph (last paragraph a summary and support) if you wish to skip but I hope you peruse or read a bit more if hurrying to the end.
Simply that the elect will overcome. Hebrews 12 says God disciplines those He loves and goes on to says "if you aren't, you'd have to think you weren't God's.' Only legitimate children are disciplined. For the most part, we agree with MidActs Dispensationalists, that the Christ's work is complete. The difference, is that we view our lives here as part of the process of being Christ's and hence see the actuals played out 'as' part of what it means to be saved. Another way: The MADist sees everything in Christ positionally done and deem the here and now as of no particular consequence. The Calvinist, as a Covenant Theologian marries this salvation to the believer's whole life, practical and positional and it is the whole that we see Christ saving.
Yet one more contrast: The MADist sees only Pauline scriptures and gospel as applying to them. The Calvinist sees all 66 as applying to us.

I know this doesn't cover your question in detail, but it provides, I think a meaningful contrast in which to appreciate a Calvinist mindset. I appreciate that MAD relies as completely on the Grace Love and Mercy of God and dwells completely, as a doctrine in them. We Calvinists do too, but believe it not Just something done to us, but practically experienced. MAD may too, but this is not the emphasis, where it is with Calvinism. Last contrast: Calvinists are Covenant Theologians emphasizing the unity of all scripture. Dispensationalists all emphasize the difference in ways God works with different people throughout scripture.


As directly as I can answer your question, I'd have to change the scenarios to fit more of these contrasts to reflect more accurately our position. I am yet a hybred Calvinist working at unlearning years of Dispensationalism. I think I can do a good job of it, yet there are times I find my mind is still somewhat caught. I actually appreciate a lot of what MAD brings to the table regarding the completed work of Christ and find I agree with them more than disagree on a good many points regarding saving Grace. My Calvinism tends to be a further embrace of Salvation working itself out in me, in a practical way and it seems to me, the Apostle Paul emphasizes this too.

So, as best as I can answer your question, the Calvinist, in the doctrine of Perseverance, believes that practically, the believer will persevere in following Christ both dwelling in grace and that all directives to this effect, even by Paul, are designed to have us walking in Christ even though His work for us is complete. That means none of your scenarios are quite right. In a sense, we agree with all OSAS proponents, that when we are in grace, we stay there. Romans 8 summarizes this view for us. See Romans 8:9-17 as it regards us being saved both positionally and practically. Then Romans 8:24-25 talks to us about our unseen hope and Romans 8:31-39 is our assurance, that both positionally, and practically, we are Christs. So a Calvinist, himself, can know he/she is saved but we cannot guarantee that another's faith is genuine and even Paul here questions the same Romans 8:9-11

I may not have sufficiently covered your query, but I think it has to go this way because I first have to address why your question comes from a different doctrinal position, thus doesn't quite ask meaningfully what we believe. For us, the believer is positionally in Christ, but verses like Romans 8:9-11 are given so that one not assume he/she is a believer without the confirming practical indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Dispensationalists tend to agree but some are Arminian and some are OSAS. We are more OSAS but...

 

[Samie]

Thank you, Lon. You sure spent quite a good time in trying to address my query. Your response, for me, is summarized in this one statement of yours: "Simply that the elect will overcome."

Which leads me to ask: Is the admonition to overcome evil with good addressed to the elect only? If Yes, then why admonish to overcome those you know are sure to overcome?

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Well, firstly, that there is blotting out of names is not simply my claim. God the Father told Moses about it. Here again:

Exodus 32:33 33 And the LORD said unto Moses, Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book.

Isn't it simply logical that that which to be blotted had to be written down first? Otherwise, there is nothing to blot.

Secondly, you disagreed. And I respect that. You are entitled to it. But it looks like it's not just me you're disagreeing with but also the plain words of God Himself. And I won't press you to explain having decided not to say anything more.

And finally, you are correct that I remain immovable in this issue. Please understand that it is natural for me, and perhaps you too, to stand firm in what I believe is truth. But that is until someone clearly shows me from Scriptures that I am in error. And I'm sorry to say you have tried and seemed to have failed.

I have explained that Rev 3:5 is a promise to not remove those in the Book, as is in keeping with the perseverance of the saints. Rev. 13:8 confirms this peseverance as it plainly states those in the book will be in allegiance with God and not the beast. Those in the book do not apostatize. Rev. 17:8 confirms this perseverance in that those in the book never marvel at the beast. It is appropriate to state if you conquer, God will not erase your name (Rev. 3:5); and to state the assurance: if your name is written, you will conquer (Rev 13:8; 17:8). God’s “written-down-ones” really must conquer, and really will conquer. One side highlights our responsibility; the other highlights God’s sovereignty.

If a professing Christian fails to persevere (overcome), he will not attain to eternal life (Rev 3:5). Viewed objectively, this means that one’s name was never in fact written in the book of life. Viewed subjectively, it means that one’s name will be blotted out of the book of life. In other words, we know that we’re the elect of God and that our names have been written down in heaven if we believe in Christ and demonstrate the fruits of a converted life. If we were to view Revelation 3:5 in this sense, then it would be similar to a promise made by the Apostle Peter in his 2 Peter 1:10-11. As I stated, responsibility and sovereignty are behind these verses in Revelation. The one stirs us up to faithfulness, the other assures us such that the fears of being "blotted" are unwarranted.

Matthew Henry is helpful here:

III. We now come to the conclusion of this epistle, in which, as before, we have,​

1. A great reward promised to the conquering Christian (Rev_3:5), and it is very much the same with what has been already mentioned: He that overcometh shall be clothed in white raiment. The purity of grace shall be rewarded with the perfect purity of glory. Holiness, when perfected, shall be its own reward; glory is the perfection of grace, differing not in kind, but in degree. Now to this is added another promise very suitable to the case: I will not blot his name out of the book of life, but will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.
Observe,
(1.) Christ has his book of life, a register and roll of all who shall inherit eternal life.
---[1.] The book of eternal election.
---[2.] The book of remembrance of all those who have lived to God, and have kept up the life and power of godliness in evil times.
(2.) Christ will not blot the names of his chosen and faithful ones out of this book of life; men may be enrolled in the registers of the church, as baptized, as making a profession, as having a name to live, and that name may come to be blotted out of the roll, when it appears that it was but a name, a name to live, without spiritual life; such often lose the very name before they die, they are left of God to blot out their own names by their gross and open wickedness. But the names of those that overcome shall never be blotted out.
(3.) Christ will produce this book of life, and confess the names of the faithful who stand there, before God, and all the angels; he will do this as their Judge, when the books shall be opened; he will do this as their captain and head, leading them with him triumphantly to heaven, presenting them to the Father: Behold me, and the children that thou hast given me. How great will this honour and reward be!​

Let's remember that God is spirit. Do we really think He has a library of books? The Greek for blot means as if it were never there. How does this apply to God blotting someone out of a book? Considering Revelation, is it a book to interpret as literally? I mean, after all, if it is literal, then can we expect big red dragons?

Some would like to use this blotting bit to overthrow election and perseverance of the saints. As I have explained above, these illustrative connotations of blotting do not overthrow election or perseverance.

When a papyrus paper was written upon and a mistake made, there is the "attempted" ability of blotting out the ink very quickly before the ink sets in order to save the document from mistakes. The Jews did not go that route. When mistakes occurred, they burned the scroll and started over again, doing so even if there were mistakes located but three words from the end of the scroll. So when the Psalmist says "blot" out my transgressions or Revelation says "blotted" out of the book of life, one need think about the grand scheme of what God actually does in these matters. Only God can take away sin, that is, blot out sin that would regularly be humanly impossible, even as blotting out an ink stain from a papyrus roll. God blots out of the book of life, as if someone was never written therein for perhaps these are false professors in the covenant with God. Or they are those who think they are saved and think they are written in the book. Try not to be too literalistic in an Apocalypic book of Scripture. Else we should be looking for big bugs that sting us, and dragons coming up out of the sea with seven heads and ten horns.

AMR

 

[Lon]

Thank you, Lon. You sure spent quite a good time in trying to address my query. Your response, for me, is summarized in this one statement of yours: "Simply that the elect will overcome."

You are welcome. Is it Samie as in "Same" "Me" or "Sam" "Me" or something a bit different? (curiosity off-topic)

Which leads me to ask: Is the admonition to overcome evil with good addressed to the elect only? If Yes, then why admonish to overcome those you know are sure to overcome?

"Be sure to bring your raincoat." I'm not sure if my kids will always remember but perhaps my intervention is part of the process of them having the good habit. I believe we are not whisked away to heaven upon belief, because we have something to learn here as well as grabbing another's hand along the way, in sharing the gospel. So I think we are here for a two-fold reason: to learn how to be in Christ in a world that isn't in Him, and to reach as many as He is calling for His glory. There may be a few other reasons to consider along with that, but I think scripture portrays this. 1 Peter 1:3-9 All OSAS would have to handle your query in one way or another. The Calvinist says that it is yet another way God ensures we are kept. I had, interestingly, started a thread with similarity to your concern last week. It may be worth a quick perusal. AMR just above me has also addressed your question a bit further.


In Him -Lon

P.S. The verse given from Romans 12:21, isn't a warning in context btw. It is rather an encouragement to us as lights on a hill. It is a great verse for all of us on TOL where debate is the pinnacle of why this particular site is up on the world wide web. We can all try and remember to overcome a slight with good. Your use of 'bro' helped me latch onto this verse in response. I think it best if we continue to try to put our best foot forward, even and especially with adversity. I 'think' that's what this particular verse and passage is about rather than it being an admonishment to persevere in grace and faith for salvation. I think you have other verses in mind for that.

 

[Samie]

Thank you, AMR, for your response. I really appreciate the time and effort you spent on it. I will address what you have discussed in it next post.

Reading and re-reading your response post reveals that you did not discuss in your post what God told Moses that He will blot from His book those who sinned against Him (Exo 32:33). That verse, for me, explicitly tells us that indeed there will be blotting of names, and to which you disagree. I presume that since you have somehow addressed that verse in an earlier post you see no need of addressing it again.

But since the bigger issue is whether there is blotting of names or not, I think there is a need for you to tackle it a bit more, because in that earlier post you simply said the book referred to in Exo 32:33 is a civil register which unlike the book of life which is in heaven, the civil register book is on earth. I countered that it is a book God Himself has written and that I don't think God is involved in writing civil registers. You have yet to show from Scriptures where God is involved in writing a civil register book being kept on earth.

For me, there is only one book mentioned in Scriptures where names are written: the book of life in heaven.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Thank you, AMR, for your response. I really appreciate the time and effort you spent on it. I will address what you have discussed in it next post.

Reading and re-reading your response post reveals that you did not discuss in your post what God told Moses that He will blot from His book those who sinned against Him (Exo 32:33). That verse, for me, explicitly tells us that indeed there will be blotting of names, and to which you disagree. I presume that since you have somehow addressed that verse in an earlier post you see no need of addressing it again.

As I noted previously, the book in Exodus is an allusion to the registering of the living, and erasing the names of those who die. See also the previous verse, Ex. 32:32 wherein Moses foolishly offers up his own life for the sake of the people. Doing a background study of the era will yield that such registers were kept. There is no literal book in heaven that God is keeping. Calvin on the passage accurately captures the meaning:

In these words God adapts Himself to the comprehension of the human mind, when He says, “Him will I blot out;” for hypocrites make such false profession of His name, that they are not accounted aliens, until God openly renounces them: and hence their manifest rejection is called erasure. Moreover, God reproves the preposterous request of Moses, inasmuch as it does not consist with His justice to reject the innocent; whence it follows, that Moses had prayed inconsiderately. The sum is, that God, whenever he punishes the ungodly and iniquitous, pays them the wages which they have earned; whereas He never punishes the just. Yet it is to be observed, that when God declares that He will be the avenger of sins, His mercy is not excluded, whereby He buries the transgressions of His people, so that they come not into mind. Thus, when Paul says, “Neither fornicators, nor adulterers, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor murderers, nor revilers, shall possess the kingdom of God,” (1 Cor. 6:9,10) it would be incorrect to conclude that they were all shut out from the hope of salvation; since he only speaks of the reprobate, who never repent, so that being converted they may obtain grace.​

AMR

 

[Samie]

Hi AMR;

In the first two paragraphs of your response, you mentioned two IF clauses which you based on Rev 3:5:

1. "if you conquer, God will not erase your name"
2. "If a professing Christian fails to persevere (overcome), he will not attain to eternal life"

We are in agreement on this.

What I cannot agree with you is your position which I think is summarized in the 2nd to the last statement of the first paragraph: "God’s “written-down-ones” really must conquer, and really will conquer". This to me is not in accord with other parts of Scriptures, where the call to chose life over death / good over evil is made (e.g. Deut 30:15-20).

You appeal to view Rev 3:5 in the same sense as 2 Pet 1:10-11 since you think those verses jibe with your position. I agree those verses speak in a similar vein, BUT both imply or rather require that a choice is to be made. The initial verses before v10 of 2 Pet 1 attest to this.

For me, Adam & Eve and all their descendants down to the last one yet to be born, WERE all written down in the book of life from the foundation of the world, and only overcomers will not be blotted out from it.

Again, those not written (Rev 17:8) in the book of life are demons. There is no plan of redemption for Satan and his host. They are all destined for the lake of fire (Matt 25:41).

 

[Jamie Gigliotti]

I have explained that Rev 3:5 is a promise to not remove those in the Book, as is in keeping with the perseverance of the saints. Rev. 13:8 confirms this peseverance as it plainly states those in the book will be in allegiance with God and not the beast. Those in the book do not apostatize. Rev. 17:8 confirms this perseverance in that those in the book never marvel at the beast. It is appropriate to state if you conquer, God will not erase your name (Rev. 3:5); and to state the assurance: if your name is written, you will conquer (Rev 13:8; 17:8). God’s “written-down-ones” really must conquer, and really will conquer. One side highlights our responsibility; the other highlights God’s sovereignty.

If a professing Christian fails to persevere (overcome), he will not attain to eternal life (Rev 3:5). Viewed objectively, this means that one’s name was never in fact written in the book of life. Viewed subjectively, it means that one’s name will be blotted out of the book of life. In other words, we know that we’re the elect of God and that our names have been written down in heaven if we believe in Christ and demonstrate the fruits of a converted life. If we were to view Revelation 3:5 in this sense, then it would be similar to a promise made by the Apostle Peter in his 2 Peter 1:10-11. As I stated, responsibility and sovereignty are behind these verses in Revelation. The one stirs us up to faithfulness, the other assures us such that the fears of being "blotted" are unwarranted.

Matthew Henry is helpful here:

III. We now come to the conclusion of this epistle, in which, as before, we have,​

1. A great reward promised to the conquering Christian (Rev_3:5), and it is very much the same with what has been already mentioned: He that overcometh shall be clothed in white raiment. The purity of grace shall be rewarded with the perfect purity of glory. Holiness, when perfected, shall be its own reward; glory is the perfection of grace, differing not in kind, but in degree. Now to this is added another promise very suitable to the case: I will not blot his name out of the book of life, but will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.
Observe,
(1.) Christ has his book of life, a register and roll of all who shall inherit eternal life.
---[1.] The book of eternal election.
---[2.] The book of remembrance of all those who have lived to God, and have kept up the life and power of godliness in evil times.
(2.) Christ will not blot the names of his chosen and faithful ones out of this book of life; men may be enrolled in the registers of the church, as baptized, as making a profession, as having a name to live, and that name may come to be blotted out of the roll, when it appears that it was but a name, a name to live, without spiritual life; such often lose the very name before they die, they are left of God to blot out their own names by their gross and open wickedness. But the names of those that overcome shall never be blotted out.
(3.) Christ will produce this book of life, and confess the names of the faithful who stand there, before God, and all the angels; he will do this as their Judge, when the books shall be opened; he will do this as their captain and head, leading them with him triumphantly to heaven, presenting them to the Father: Behold me, and the children that thou hast given me. How great will this honour and reward be!​

Let's remember that God is spirit. Do we really think He has a library of books? The Greek for blot means as if it were never there. How does this apply to God blotting someone out of a book? Considering Revelation, is it a book to interpret as literally? I mean, after all, if it is literal, then can we expect big red dragons?

Some would like to use this blotting bit to overthrow election and perseverance of the saints. As I have explained above, these illustrative connotations of blotting do not overthrow election or perseverance.

When a papyrus paper was written upon and a mistake made, there is the "attempted" ability of blotting out the ink very quickly before the ink sets in order to save the document from mistakes. The Jews did not go that route. When mistakes occurred, they burned the scroll and started over again, doing so even if there were mistakes located but three words from the end of the scroll. So when the Psalmist says "blot" out my transgressions or Revelation says "blotted" out of the book of life, one need think about the grand scheme of what God actually does in these matters. Only God can take away sin, that is, blot out sin that would regularly be humanly impossible, even as blotting out an ink stain from a papyrus roll. God blots out of the book of life, as if someone was never written therein for perhaps these are false professors in the covenant with God. Or they are those who think they are saved and think they are written in the book. Try not to be too literalistic in an Apocalypic book of Scripture. Else we should be looking for big bugs that sting us, and dragons coming up out of the sea with seven heads and ten horns.

AMR

You mentioned soverienty of God and responsibility of Man.

He sovereignly gives grace, gives us free will, gives us himself. We have a responsibility to embrace Him. To sow to His Spirit. He will judge if we have done this. If we don't overcome evil by His grace and Spirit and surrender to Him, we will be blotted out. You can't say someone who has been given His Spirit hasn't been chosen. Or that they undoubtedly will perservere and not be carried off by concerns of the world.

"For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life. And let us not grow weary in doing good, for in due season we will reap, if we do not give up." Galatians 6:8-9

From what I gather you are saying those who do not give up are the ones who were really chosen, and the ones who names are written in the book of life.

Now if the war is as real as God has made me to believe, that the Devil really is working to destroy those who have been given the Spirit, to get them to follow the world instead of the Spirit, wouldn't it behoove the Devil to introduce theology that convinces that the war is not so real?

 

[Samie]

. . . There is no literal book in heaven that God is keeping. . . .
AMR

If you mean there is no book of life in heaven, I beg to disagree. Why?

1. Jesus mentioned the book of life and said He will not blot out overcomwers of evil from it (Rev 3:5). If Him Who did not and cannot sin and Who is One with Him Who cannot lie, mentioned the existence of the book of life, who am I to doubt its existence? I think you likewise seem to believe it really exists because in an earlier response you admitted that the book of life is in heaven ( as I highlighted in the quote below):

. . .

The wording “book of life” is significant because it differs from that of “civil register”; the book of life is in heaven, the other on earth. In Revelation, the book of life is where the names of those who have received the gift of eternal life are written (Rev. 3:5;13:8;17:8;20:12, 15;21:27; and see also Luke 10:20; Phil. 4:3; Heb. 12:23).

AMR

2. If one's name is in the book of life, he is allowed access to the heavenly portals (Rev 21:27).
3. If one's name is not found written in it, he is thrown into the lake of fire (Rev 20:15).

With such importance placed by Scriptures on the book of life, it is really beyond me to doubt its existence. Add considering that the existence of the book of life is mentioned in Revelation where adding to or taking away from what are in it brings one into a perilous situation (Rev 22:18, 19).

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Now if the war is as real as God has made me to believe, that the Devil really is working to destroy those who have been given the Spirit, to get them to follow the world instead of the Spirit, wouldn't it behoove the Devil to introduce theology that convinces that the war is not so real?

No one doubts that the accuser of the brethren works earnestly, knowing his time is near, against the saints. That said, there is no warrant in Scripture that would support a view that those regenerated by the Holy Spirit can be un-regenerated. Their perseverance is the work of Our Lord for we are his workmanship.

For more, see:
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...RUST-IN-OSAS&p=4581989&viewfull=1#post4581989

AMR

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Again, those not written (Rev 17:8) in the book of life are demons. There is no plan of redemption for Satan and his host. They are all destined for the lake of fire (Matt 25:41).

Thus endeth the conversation.

You are allegorizing without support. Such a methodology can make Scripture mean just about anything. Soon we will be reading Angel literally took a chain, and bound satan, and literally threw him into a bottomless pit. Given what little we know of gravity and taking the 1000 years literally, satan would have effectively fallen 309,368,160,000 metres in the bottomless pit. Sigh.

I have little patience for odd and fringe views.

AMR

 

[Lon]

With such importance placed by Scriptures on the book of life, it is really beyond me to doubt its existence. Add considering that the existence of the book of life is mentioned in Revelation where adding to or taking away from what are in it brings one into a perilous situation (Rev 22:18, 19).

opcorn:

Peanut gallery question: Who or what is the Word/Book of Life? 1 John 1:1 Philippians 2:16? :think:

Btw, GotQuestions, from what I can tell, is owned by a Calvinist, but is a unified website of Calvinists and Arminians seeking to meaningfully bridge gaps by answering these sort of questions.

Here are the two I found discussing this in more detail:

Book of Life

What is the Lamb's book of Life? (note that I believe 'who' might or should be part of that question and address ala John 3:18 and etc. )

 

[Samie]

Thus endeth the conversation.

You are allegorizing without support. Such a methodology can make Scripture mean just about anything. Soon we will be reading Angel literally took a chain, and bound satan, and literally threw him into a bottomless pit. Given what little we know of gravity and taking the 1000 years literally, satan would have effectively fallen 309,368,160,000 metres in the bottomless pit. Sigh.

I have little patience for odd and fringe views.

AMR

Not allegorizing without support, AMR.

Earth-dwellers are not limited to us, the Adamic race. There is a pseudo-Adamic race that inhabits this world - offspring of evil angels intermarrying with humans as described in Gen 6:2-4. In the OT, the Hebrew phrase בְנֵי־ הָֽאֱלֹהִים֙ ḇə-nê- hā-’ĕ-lō-hîm occurs 5 times and translated into "sons of God" (Gen 6:2, 4; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7).

In Job, these "sons of God" seem to have an appointment day with God. Among them was Satan. In Job 38:7 these "sons of God" shouted for joy when this earth's foundation was being laid and hence BEFORE the creation of Adam. This simply tells us that these "sons of God" pre-existed Adam's race. In the Bible, I think there are only 3 types of intelligentsia: God, angels, humans. When God was laying down the foundation of the earth, the Adamic race was YET to exist. Hence, we are left with two intelligentsia: God and angels, bringing us to the inevitable conclusion that the "sons of God" who shouted for joy were the angels.

Angels are not supposed to marry as alluded to by Jesus, and so angels in heaven do not marry (Matt 22:30; Mark 12:25). Hence those that intermarried with humans are evil angels and their offspring are demons. These were the ones not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world (Rev 17:8).

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Not allegorizing without support, AMR.

Earth-dwellers are not limited to us, the Adamic race. There is a pseudo-Adamic race that inhabits this world - offspring of evil angels intermarrying with humans as described in Gen 6:2-4. In the OT, the Hebrew phrase בְנֵי־ הָֽאֱלֹהִים֙ ḇə-nê- hā-’ĕ-lō-hîm occurs 5 times and translated into "sons of God" (Gen 6:2, 4; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7).

In Job, these "sons of God" seem to have an appointment day with God. Among them was Satan. In Job 38:7 these "sons of God" shouted for joy when this earth's foundation was being laid and hence BEFORE the creation of Adam. This simply tells us that these "sons of God" pre-existed Adam's race. In the Bible, I think there are only 3 types of intelligentsia: God, angels, humans. When God was laying down the foundation of the earth, the Adamic race was YET to exist. Hence, we are left with two intelligentsia: God and angels, bringing us to the inevitable conclusion that the "sons of God" who shouted for joy were the angels.

Angels are not supposed to marry as alluded to by Jesus, and so angels in heaven do not marry (Matt 22:30; Mark 12:25). Hence those that intermarried with humans are evil angels and their offspring are demons. These were the ones not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world (Rev 17:8).

You only make my previous point of your full-blown allegorization moreso with this bizarre view.

It's antecedently unlikely that the narrator (Moses) would suddenly endorse pagan mythology, given his polemical theology–which often skewers pagan mythology.

Perhaps you also prefer to use something like the Epic of Gilgamesh or Hesiod's Theogony as your frame of reference, then, of course, Gen 6:1-4 is mythological. But that's a reference frame you are bringing to the text, not reference frame you're getting from the text.

Notice the implicit premises in your argument:

i) The bene ha elohim are low gods.
ii) The Nephilim are demigods sired by low gods.

But the syllogism is dubious:

First of all, there's the identity of the bene ha elohim.

This is the only occurrence of that phrase in the Pentateuch. So, frankly, we're at a loss to know for certain what the narrator meant by that. Some, like you, turn to Job (and the Psalms) for linguistic parallels. But is that reliable? Job's Hebrew is idiosyncratic. And the Psalms are poetic. In the OT, "son" can be used abstractly or figuratively, as in "sons of Belial" (Deut. 13:13), "sons of valor" (Judgese 18:2), "sons of fire" (Job 5:7), "son of the dawn" (Isaiah 14:12).

Conversely, elohim can sometimes be used as an adjective as well as a noun. Indeed, it's striking that those who render bene ha elohim in Gen 6:2 as "divine beings" are also inclined to render ruach elohim in Gen 1:2 as "awesome wind," or el gibbor in Isaiah 9:6 as "great hero." Ahem. They translate the terminology down when they wish to demote orthodox interpretations, and translate the terminology up when they wish to promote heterodox interpretations. Sigh.

It's unclear from the syntax if the Nephilim are offspring of these unions. They could be contemporaries of the "sons of God(s)." Moreover, even others with this odd view use Numbers 13:33 to gloss the Nephilim in Gen 6:4. But that identification is dubious. For one thing, the Nephilim in Genesis 6:4 would perish in the flood. Since the Pentateuch is a literary unit, with the same narrator, their post-diluvian survival would be inconsistent with Mose's storyline. Furthermore, the description of the Nephilim in Numbers 13:33 comes from the spies who are looking for an excuse to retreat. So their description is hyperbolic.

There's also the question of whether this pericope goes with the preceding genealogy or the succeeding flood account. If it goes with the genealogy, then there's even less reason to think anything extraordinary is in view.

Unfortunately, for some, even scholars, "mythical" is a synonym for whatever they deem to be impossible or unbelievable. "Mythical" is the measure of their secular education and experience. If nothing out of the ordinary has ever happened to them, then anything miraculous or paranormal is "mythical." There's nothing prima facie mythical about "heroes of old" or "men of renown." That hardly leads one to opt for demigods.

Accordingly, this all suggests someone like Nimrod (Gen 10:8-12). Indeed, both passages employ the same designation (gibbor [Genesis 10:8-9]; gibborim [Genesis 6:4]). Of course he's post-diluvial, but he's the type of individual that Genesis 6:4 is referring to. Explorers. Conquerors. Warrior-kings. Founders of ancient empires.

Historical figures can morph into legendary figures, then mythical figures. Ambitious, ruthless, adventurous young men who are bent on conquering the world. Making a deathless name for themselves. A modern counterpart would be the Conquistadors. In relation to the New World (i.e. Latin America), they were the "heroes of old." Don't let the positive connotations of the English word "hero" throw you. It doesn't mean the good guy. It means heroic. Rapacious men can do heroic deeds.

This, in turn, might throw light on the "sons of God(s)." Let's assume (ex hypothesi) that the "sons of God(s)" fathered the "heroes of old." If a son has a famous father, the son is known in association with his well-known father. Likewise, if your father is a king, that makes you a prince. You are born into a socially high status. But it can also work in reverse. A famous son will retroactively elevate the social status of his father. No one would remember who Jesse was if his son hadn't been a great king of Israel.

Assuming that the "sons of God(s)" in Genesis 6:2 are fathers of the "heroes of old" in Genesis 6:4, they might come by that honorific title after the fact. They could be ordinary men who fathered extraordinary sons. Sons whose fame confers status on their fathers.

The prediluvian world was waiting to be explored and colonized. An opportunity for prediluvian counterparts to Napoleon, Alexander, Tamerlane, Cortés, Pizarro, and Genghis Khan to make their mark on a wide-open world. And for their insolence, God either reduces their lifespan or expedites the flood (depending on how we construe Genesis 6:3: the preceding genealogy or the succeeding flood account).

AMR

 

[Jamie Gigliotti]

No one doubts that the accuser of the brethren works earnestly, knowing his time is near, against the saints. That said, there is no warrant in Scripture that would support a view that those regenerated by the Holy Spirit can be un-regenerated. Their perseverance is the work of Our Lord for we are his workmanship.

For more, see:
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...RUST-IN-OSAS&p=4581989&viewfull=1#post4581989

AMR

We are His workmanship, He works as we willingly yeild to Him. That is our role, our responsibility. The lies of the enemy are attempting to remove our part from equation and either diminish the threat the darkness and world is, or outright declaring it as no threat. This is opposed to scripture and the truth.

"Finally, be strong in the Lord and the strength of His might. Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the schemes of the Devil. For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places. Therefore take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand firm." Ephesians 6:10-13

The audience is believers. The exhortation is to stand, because obviously it is possible to fall. The threat is the darkness. The victory is ours through Jesus and His strength taken hold of by us with our trust/faith in Him.

 

[Samie]

. . .

First of all, there's the identity of the bene ha elohim.

This is the only occurrence of that phrase in the Pentateuch. So, frankly, we're at a loss to know for certain what the narrator meant by that. Some, like you, turn to Job (and the Psalms) for linguistic parallels. But is that reliable? Job's Hebrew is idiosyncratic.
. . .

AMR

Thanks for the time and effort, AMR.

Reading your post, I couldn't find you addressing the identity of the "sons of God" (Hebrew בְּנֵ֥י אֱלֹהִֽים) who shouted for joy when the foundation of this world was being laid. It was those words that taught me who the "sons of God" in Gen 6:2, 4 are. Because In Job, those words are spoken by God Himself.

Is there anything wrong to let Scriptures interpret itself? And in the book of Job, Scriptures clearly show us who these "sons of God" are!

I don't think I am in a position to brush aside what I consider truth in Job and get into your side of the fence simply because you said Job's Hebrew is idiosyncratic.

Just for the record, and not meant to cast any aspersion against you, I have twiced noticed you seemed to dismiss the words of God Himself when they appear to go against your theology. One is the words of God Himself to Moses relative to the blotting out of names, and now His words in Job.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Just for the record, and not meant to cast any aspersion against you, I have twiced noticed you seemed to dismiss the words of God Himself when they appear to go against your theology. One is the words of God Himself to Moses relative to the blotting out of names, and now His words in Job.

I have given you a proper explanation for what you have allegorically morphed into a set of odd views. Your stated views on the matter of the book of life and the sons of God are noted and denied. I am considering the topic at an end now. I recommend you take up the matter with your Pastor or one the elders in your church.

AMR

 

[Samie]

I have given you a proper explanation for what you have allegorically morphed into a set of odd views. Your stated views on the matter of the book of life and the sons of God are noted and denied. I am considering the topic at an end now. I recommend you take up the matter with your Pastor or one the elders in your church.

AMR

I understand you, AMR, and thank you for your time, brother.

I can't however exchange what I think is truth from Scriptures with what you call your "proper explanation" devoid of Scriptural basis.

Blotting of names is in the Bible. God Himself told Moses about it. Yet you said the book God referred to is a civil register book on earth. Your biblical basis? I'm afraid none.

At your convenience, I am not pursuing this discussion with you to its logical end, which should be obvious to some readers of this thread.

 

[Samie]

Since AMR has bowed out, my next posts do not expect any response from him. But that does not include anyone who wants to discuss with me.

Here is my observation on AMR's objection made against my position that there is blotting out of names from the book of life. It looks like he doubts the existence of the book of life in heaven leading him to espouse two scenarios: one, the book of life exists but those written there will NEVER be blotted out, and; two, there is no literal book of life in heaven, therefore there could be no literal blotting out of names.

AMR appears to have not yet decided what to believe and teach in this issue relative to the book of life. If he is still wavering between two opinions in this issue, that simply shows he is not yet sure where he stands. And the issue relative to the book of life is, to me, of paramount importance. Why? Because Scriptures say EXPLICITLY that only those whose names are found written in it will be allowed entry into the heavenly portals (Rev 21:27); while those whose names are not found written there will have their portion in the lake of fire(Rev 20:15)!

The book of life therefore is a book on the final destiny of man.

And AMR, at least in this thread, doubts its existence. And that DESPITE the explicit pronouncement of Scriptures to the contrary. Who is one to say there exists no book of life in heaven when Paul said of his co-workers as being written in the book of life (Phil 4:3) and Jesus telling His disciples their names are written in heaven (Luke 10:20)?

More next post . . .

 

[God's Truth]

Since AMR has bowed out, my next posts do not expect any response from him. But that does not include anyone who wants to discuss with me.

Here is my observation on AMR's objection made against my position that there is blotting out of names from the book of life. It looks like he doubts the existence of the book of life in heaven leading him to espouse two scenarios: one, the book of life exists but those written there will NEVER be blotted out, and; two, there is no literal book of life in heaven, therefore there could be no literal blotting out of names.

AMR appears to have not yet decided what to believe and teach in this issue relative to the book of life. If he is still wavering between two opinions in this issue, that simply shows he is not yet sure where he stands. And the issue relative to the book of life is, to me, of paramount importance. Why? Because Scriptures say EXPLICITLY that only those whose names are found written in it will be allowed entry into the heavenly portals (Rev 21:27); while those whose names are not found written there will have their portion in the lake of fire(Rev 20:15)!

The book of life therefore is a book on the final destiny of man.

And AMR, at least in this thread, doubts its existence. And that DESPITE the explicit pronouncement of Scriptures to the contrary. Who is one to say there exists no book of life in heaven when Paul said of his co-workers as being written in the book of life (Phil 4:3) and Jesus telling His disciples their names are written in heaven (Luke 10:20)?

More next post . . .

AMR likes to pretend victory. I have had a one on one debate with him, and he has 'won' the debate by merely saying he won.

AMR is a Calvinist, and someone we are warned not to be as...proud, relying on an earthly education, ensnared, follows a false teacher.