 |
| Vancouver: Sunday |
Listening to an online sermon, yesterday, a pastor opined (paraphrased as I do not have the sermon recorded or in text form) that a Christian cannot lose salvation, but can walk away from salvation.
The key texts of support that were used:
Matthew 7:21-23
New American Standard Bible (NASB)
21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. 22 Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many [a]miracles?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.’
Footnotes: Matthew 7:22 Or works of power
Another key text from Revelation that I have discussed in an archived post (below), was used by this pastor in his sermon:
September 2013: Book of Life
Revelation 3:5
English Standard Version (ESV)
5 The one who conquers will be clothed thus in white garments, and I will never blot his name out of the book of life. I will confess his name before my Father and before his angels.
While listening to this sermon a serious contradiction became apparent based on the pastor's use of Matthew 7 and Revelation 3 in support of his theology.
In Matthew 7, Jesus Christ is describing that at judgement there will be person's that did works in Jesus Christ's name, that he did not know. Reasonably, person's claiming to know Jesus Christ and the triune God, that did not.
Revelation 3, according to this pastor implies some Christians will have their names blotted out of the Book of Life.
But, if Jesus Christ never knew these people described by the pastor, based on Matthew 7, then reasonably their names were never written in the Book of Life in Revelation 3!
If the pastor's theology was correct, Matthew 7 should have had Jesus Christ stating, basically, that I used to know you. Then in Revelation 3, these persons could reasonably have their names blotted out.
The pastor missed the contradiction of his own proof texts, in context.
Better explanations of 'blot' theology were listed in my archived post, here edited...
Kane explains that medieval philosophers often referred to the book of life when discussing issues of predestination, divine omniscience, foreknowledge and freewill. Kane (1996: 82). There were philosophical and theological debates on whether Biblical texts rendered actually allowed for the concept of God adding or deleting names from the book. Kane (1996: 82). Some modern philosophers view it at as a record of the events in a person's life. Kane (1996: 82).
A.F. Johnson states that in the ancient world of the Hebrew Bible citizens names were kept in book until their deaths as a book of the living. Johnson (1996: 171). Implied is the connection between that book of the living and the book of life in the Scripture. Johnson writes that from Jesus Christ's words in Revelation 3:5 that he will not blot out the name of his followers, the overcomer's, from the book of life is the 'strongest affirmation that death can never separate us from Christ and his life.' Johnson (1996: 171).
Revelation scholar Mounce writes that Walvoord was troubled that some observers may take this meaning that some in Christ could lose their salvation. Mounce (1990: 113). It is not explicitly stated and Revelation elsewhere mentions the fate of those not in the book of life. Mounce (1990: 113). Those persons are not in Christ (Revelation 20: 15).
The point being I reason from Mounce that the distinction between those in the book of life and those not in the book has Biblically been made and there is not another Biblical sub-group. Mounce further states, and wisely so, that it is 'hermeneutically unsound to base theological doctrine solely on either parables or apocalyptic imagery. Better to allows the text, even when difficult. to present its own picture'. Mounce (1990: 114).
Johnson concludes that Revelation 3: 5 'implies that failure of appropriate human response may remove one's name from the book of life'. Johnson (1996: 171).
Mounce is more reasonable. From Revelation the concept that those in Christ remain in the book of life is prevalent. No more should theologically and philosophically be read into the text by theologians and philosophers as tempting as this may be...
Biblical concepts presented do not work against a compatibilist idea in favour of an incompatibilist concept. I reason the Revelation text is stating that those that remain obedient (as they are regenerated) shall not lose their salvation and will not have their name (s) blotted from the Book of Life.
JOHNSON A.F. (1996) 'Book of Life’, in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.
KANE, ROBERT HILLARY (1996) ‘Book of Life’, in Robert Audi (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
MOUNCE, ROBERT H. (1990) The Book of Revelation, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
No comments:
Post a Comment