Do you think God bluffs?

I believe that a true believer is preserved and cannot lose their salvation, but that the scriptures are full of warnings is clear. There are many who are self deceived.

Jam 1:22 But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.

So, it is clear that a person can be self deceived.

If we have true faith, it should move us to action. I heard the question once, "If your faith cannot get you to church on Sunday morning, can it get you to heaven?"

While that may not be entirely accurate, the point is true, if we are true believers it should be reflected in our actions. If we truly believe in God we should fear and not live in sin.

So, those warnings are for us to examine ourselves and make sure our profession is real.

 

You know exactly what I mean. The purpose of such questions is to demean basic Christian doctrine, not follow a path of warped logic.

 

I think the whole illustration is not sound. The idea behind the card game illustration is that God has part of the deck and there is chance. In God's plan and through His existence there is no chance, God isn't gambling with anything, God is sovereign and He not only has the all the cards...He is the dealer and the card maker.

 

The book of life passages are not clear. Both sides ought to be honest and admit this.

They can be interpreted several ways and all them be fair.

One of which is this. Everyone's name is written in the book of life on the day of their birth as was the case with all Roman citizens. One could disgrace their nation and have their name blotted out of this book and be exiled.

God could write all names of all men who ever live in the book of life. And he could blot out all names of those who apostatize or die without Christ.

That's a fair interpretation. I am aware of the problems it presents. The comments to Moses predate Rome. Jesus said to rejoice that your name is recorded in the book of life, etc, etc, etc...

Another fair interpretation is that God never threatened to blot out anyone's name from the book of life. Those passages promise that he will not.
Take Revelation 3:5 "Whosoever overcometh... I will not blot out his name from the book of life...." Here is a promise. Your name is secure because you are an overcomer.


A law of hermeneutics says that you must interpret the ambiguous passages in light of the unambiguous ones.

There are PLENTY of CLEAR passages that guarantee that all true believers will persevere and will be preserved.

All ambiguous passages that seem to imply otherwise must be interpreted in light of those clear passages.

 

We must take them one at a time.

Many, if not the vast majority of them, refer to people who are not yet saved but are being enlightened and beginning to taste of the heavenly gift and partaking of the power of the Holy Spirit- that power that regenerates.

These need to continue because once a person reaches a certain level of enlightenment by the Spirit of God, if they turn back, if they sin willfully, if they are again entangled in the pollutions of this world then they are doomed. These are apostates. They came to the very precipice of the new birth but were choked out and still born. These often become false teachers but all of them are doomed.

The church was jam packed with these people and the epistles often encourage them to go on with God. But there are those who are secure who do not draw back unto perdition.

Other passages do address those who have been born again warning them to continue lest they have their works burned up like wood hay and stubble, etc...

 

I'd like to inject something new in the discussion. Up to this point, the assumption has been evident among the posts that the Book of Life is a book containing the names of the saved.

What if the Book of Life was just that--A book containing the names of the Living? And that blotting out a name from the book of life is--they die. God takes them out.

In this case, God took them out because of sin. One example is in I Cor 11, where Paul was castigating some for their behavior at the Lord's Supper. He said, in v 30 "for many are weakly and sickly among you and some are asleep." Dead.

John refers to a "sin unto death" in I John 5:16.

I won't bet the farm on this interpretation, but at the very least it keeps us from having to tippy-toe around the issue of one's losing his salvation.

 

I have never seen it transcribed as the way you spell it. I'm not saying it isn't so, but α in Greek is usually transcribed as "a," not "e." But, that the name was taken does make sense.

It is interesting that "Skandalon" does not appear in Romans 9:32. The word translated "stumbling stone" is actually πρόσκομμα λίθος (lexical forms) and not σκάνδαλον.

Equating one's self with Christ is not understood to be, well, sane.

It is not a logical fallacy and it is not a non-sequitur. The questions you presented are "square-circle" type of questions in which you allow no appeal to the Biblical facts.

The Bible often presents two facts that appear to be contradictory, but are not contradictory--hence the word antinomy. For instance, in Genesis 50 we see that Joseph's brothers acted, of their own free will, in an evil way against Joseph. But, God intended the brothers' free and evil action for good--to serve His purposes.

These two things are complimentary, not at odds.

The questions you ask seek to apply human logic to solve these antinomies, all the while discounting the inherent tension that the Bible is all-too-happy to have coexisting.

So, to call into question one's belief that scripture is all-sufficient (even with the antinomies) is to say that scripture itself is not sufficient. And, in doing so, you are (perhaps) causing people to add human philosophy to explain away the intentional tension in the Bible, thereby moving them away from the proper view of scripture. So, in this way, you are causing people to stumble.

I should have expected such impetuous childishness from you. For the record, "Lucifer" is not the only "archangel." And, had you looked at my blog, you'd have seen that I used to be a professional trumpet player--hence "the archangel."

What is more, an Archangel does God's will (though I don't do it perfectly). A stumbling block--who is not himself Christ--has only one goal: To trip persons up.

Matthew 18:7:

“Woe to the world for temptations [σκάνκαλον] to sin! For it is necessary that temptations [σκάνκαλον] come, but woe to the one by whom the temptation [σκάνκαλον] comes!

The Archangel

 

The issue is that the 'book of life' is about the saved.. whether alive or dead.

Note this passage which speaks of those alive but not written in the book of life (these are followers of the anti-christ.

Even the end judgment and how they are judged is determined whether or not they are written in the books of life. (whether with mercy and grace or not).. thus they are judged on their works

 

No. It is not an idle threat. If-then's are not contrary to the DoG.

I can plan for my son who struggles with focus to have more work than he can do in 20 minutes when he gets home from school to practice focus- I can tell him "If you get this work done in 20 minutes then you can go out and play." If he would focus he could, but I know he will not focus. I actually intend for him to do another page for more practice at focusing.

But it is an absolutely true statement- If you will... then... Perfectly accurate.

This is no bluff, I am still orchestrating and bringing to pass the outcome I desire and my son is still fully responsible for not getting his work done in 20 minutes.

Now, that is true and I am only human.

If I can get THAT close as a human to this scenario- then what is it to God???

Nothing. He is more than able.

The Bible teaches us that that is the way it works. We don't have to fully understand it- we just have to trust Him and his Word.

 

Your whole agenda is to bring those who believe in God's sovereignty down to your level.

 

God is a God of bluffs, skandelon.
I don't take Him seriously, you shouldn't take Him seriously, either, you know.
He's a liar, right ?
I mean, somebody who bluffs, what else can you call Him ?
So, He tells Israel He's gonna punish them ? Did He ? I guess He bluffed.
Then He tells Israel He's gonna bless them if they continue in His ways, did He ? Nahh. I guess He bluffed.
Heck.
He said in many places of His word He's sovereign and some idiot, superstitious king somewhere even said He does what He will in the army of heaven and of earth. Whaaatt ?
He musta been still drunk from being a werewolf when he said that.
Naaaahhh.
Fergit et, man.
Ets up ta ya, though.
Ya kin take Him seriously, or ya kin jist say, yeah, yeah, and go on with life.

 

Thank you, sir.

 

You have missunderstood the passages. He is not suggesting He will blot them out He is saying He will not blot them out.

There is no bluff with God.