The Book of Life

[Ovedya]

(Rev 3:5 KJVA) He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.

(Rev 22:19 KJVA) And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

Do these scriptures mean a believer can lose salvation?

My first entry into this discussion.

The answer is simply: no.

The meaning of Rev. 22:19 is lot applied to the saved, but to those who would "take away" or change the words of the book of this prophesy, meaning Revelation. That would indicate an intentional alteration, hich believers truly following God's Word would never do.

[Guest man]

I am praying for you too, Angels4u

Once we are saved - truly saved the Holy Spirit seals. How then can we say that once we are saved we are truly saved ?

Jesus says that those the Father gave Him, of those He has lost none. How can it be any clearer ? Can someone or something snatch us from the Saviour's hands ? No, I do not believe there is a force able to do that.

I agree for 100 % what you said,no names will be blotted out,maybe some people think think they penciled themself in?

If the bible states that names will be blotted out, how can you say they won't?

Is this verse meaningless?

(Rev 3:5 KJVA) He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.

If the above verse does in fact have meaning, then this next verse has meaning also.

(Rev 22:19 KJVA) And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

[angels4u]

I studied this a little deeper and this is what Tim lahay has to say about it:

"Psalm 69:28 says, "let them be blotted out of the book of the living, and not be written with the righteous." The book of life is a book that contains the names of everyone who has ever lived. If an individual has accepted Christ and His forgiveness of sins, this person's name is indelibly recorded in the Lamb's book of life ("written with the righteous") and entrance into the Holy City is guaranteed. (Rev. 21:27) If an individual never calls upon the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation, this person's name will not be recorded in the Lamb's book and will be blotted out of the book of life (see Rev. 20:15)

[Ovedya]

Is this verse meaningless?

(Rev 3:5 KJVA) He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.

If the above verse does in fact have meaning, then this next verse has meaning also.

(Rev 22:19 KJVA) And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

Nice colors. "he that overcomes" is not a condition of "I will not." See, you are presuming that the texts says, "he that does not overcome I will..." That simply is not in the text, nor is it the intention of the author to impart to the reader.

As for Rev. 22:19, does "any man" include regenerated believers? Well, yes, because "any man" is any man. But again you have to presume that there is the inclusion of believers in the text, when really there isn't any such thing.

See, the problem with the OSNAS (Once Saved Not Always Saved) theory is that one must apply a philosophical or intellectual "opposite theorem" to certain passages of Scripture. So rather than taking the Scripture at face value when it uses the word "if" in certain passages, the OSNAS believer substitutes the phrase "unless you," turning the passage into a negative rather than its intended positive. So rather than serving a God full of grace based upon the blood of Jesus, who's blood was shed once for all upon the cross, OSNAS believers serve the same malevolent God of the Old Testament who judges believers for every slight misstep, and treats them in the same manner as a Jew who has suddenly choked upon the bone of an unclean animal.

[angels4u]

Is this verse meaningless?

(Rev 3:5 KJVA) He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.

If the above verse does in fact have meaning, then this next verse has meaning also.

(Rev 22:19 KJVA) And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

Nice colors. "he that overcomes" is not a condition of "I will not." See, you are presuming that the texts says, "he that does not overcome I will..." That simply is not in the text, nor is it the intention of the author to impart to the reader.

As for Rev. 22:19, does "any man" include regenerated believers? Well, yes, because "any man" is any man. But again you have to presume that there is the inclusion of believers in the text, when really there isn't any such thing.

See, the problem with the OSNAS (Once Saved Not Always Saved) theory is that one must apply a philosophical or intellectual "opposite theorem" to certain passages of Scripture. So rather than taking the Scripture at face value when it uses the word "if" in certain passages, the OSNAS believer substitutes the phrase "unless you," turning the passage into a negative rather than its intended positive. So rather than serving a God full of grace based upon the blood of Jesus, who's blood was shed once for all upon the cross, OSNAS believers serve the same malevolent God of the Old Testament who judges believers for every slight misstep, and treats them in the same manner as a Jew who has suddenly choked upon the bone of an unclean animal.

Cav you see it as Tim lahay wrote?

[Ovedya]

Is this verse meaningless?

(Rev 3:5 KJVA) He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.

If the above verse does in fact have meaning, then this next verse has meaning also.

(Rev 22:19 KJVA) And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

Nice colors. "he that overcomes" is not a condition of "I will not." See, you are presuming that the texts says, "he that does not overcome I will..." That simply is not in the text, nor is it the intention of the author to impart to the reader.

As for Rev. 22:19, does "any man" include regenerated believers? Well, yes, because "any man" is any man. But again you have to presume that there is the inclusion of believers in the text, when really there isn't any such thing.

See, the problem with the OSNAS (Once Saved Not Always Saved) theory is that one must apply a philosophical or intellectual "opposite theorem" to certain passages of Scripture. So rather than taking the Scripture at face value when it uses the word "if" in certain passages, the OSNAS believer substitutes the phrase "unless you," turning the passage into a negative rather than its intended positive. So rather than serving a God full of grace based upon the blood of Jesus, who's blood was shed once for all upon the cross, OSNAS believers serve the same malevolent God of the Old Testament who judges believers for every slight misstep, and treats them in the same manner as a Jew who has suddenly choked upon the bone of an unclean animal.

Cav you see it as Tim lahay wrote?

I can perhaps agree with it, but it appears that the problem in the argument lies with the language. The Greek term used is "zoe" rather than "bios" or any of the other Greek terms used for "human life." Zoe identifies specifically the =eternal life of God, which is also shared or partaken of, by the believers. So the book of life must necessarily be a book containing the names of all the believers who have received the life of God. This is honestly one thing that makes this particular discussion a sticky wicket.

[nebula]

See, the problem with the OSNAS (Once Saved Not Always Saved) theory is that one must apply a philosophical or intellectual "opposite theorem" to certain passages of Scripture. So rather than taking the Scripture at face value when it uses the word "if" in certain passages, the OSNAS believer substitutes the phrase "unless you," turning the passage into a negative rather than its intended positive. So rather than serving a God full of grace based upon the blood of Jesus, who's blood was shed once for all upon the cross, OSNAS believers serve the same malevolent God of the Old Testament who judges believers for every slight misstep, and treats them in the same manner as a Jew who has suddenly choked upon the bone of an unclean animal.

What I don't understand about your argument:

Why would Jesus say, "Your name will not be blotted out" if no names are ever blotted out?

[Ovedya]

See, the problem with the OSNAS (Once Saved Not Always Saved) theory is that one must apply a philosophical or intellectual "opposite theorem" to certain passages of Scripture. So rather than taking the Scripture at face value when it uses the word "if" in certain passages, the OSNAS believer substitutes the phrase "unless you," turning the passage into a negative rather than its intended positive. So rather than serving a God full of grace based upon the blood of Jesus, who's blood was shed once for all upon the cross, OSNAS believers serve the same malevolent God of the Old Testament who judges believers for every slight misstep, and treats them in the same manner as a Jew who has suddenly choked upon the bone of an unclean animal.

What I don't understand about your argument:

Why would Jesus say, "Your name will not be blotted out" if no names are ever blotted out?

Good question. Yet there is no Scripture which ever says that a name was blotted from that book either.

[angels4u]

See, the problem with the OSNAS (Once Saved Not Always Saved) theory is that one must apply a philosophical or intellectual "opposite theorem" to certain passages of Scripture. So rather than taking the Scripture at face value when it uses the word "if" in certain passages, the OSNAS believer substitutes the phrase "unless you," turning the passage into a negative rather than its intended positive. So rather than serving a God full of grace based upon the blood of Jesus, who's blood was shed once for all upon the cross, OSNAS believers serve the same malevolent God of the Old Testament who judges believers for every slight misstep, and treats them in the same manner as a Jew who has suddenly choked upon the bone of an unclean animal.

What I don't understand about your argument:

Why would Jesus say, "Your name will not be blotted out" if no names are ever blotted out?

Well, I think this is going to be a OSAS thing and that's opening a can of worms.

For me the Lord told me He's saved me and that means forever and ever

That's it ,I'm done with this converstation.......before it out turn out in a argument and that's probably going to happen

[nebula]

See, the problem with the OSNAS (Once Saved Not Always Saved) theory is that one must apply a philosophical or intellectual "opposite theorem" to certain passages of Scripture. So rather than taking the Scripture at face value when it uses the word "if" in certain passages, the OSNAS believer substitutes the phrase "unless you," turning the passage into a negative rather than its intended positive. So rather than serving a God full of grace based upon the blood of Jesus, who's blood was shed once for all upon the cross, OSNAS believers serve the same malevolent God of the Old Testament who judges believers for every slight misstep, and treats them in the same manner as a Jew who has suddenly choked upon the bone of an unclean animal.

What I don't understand about your argument:

Why would Jesus say, "Your name will not be blotted out" if no names are ever blotted out?

Good question. Yet there is no Scripture which ever says that a name was blotted from that book either.

So why say it?