Aaron37's Answer to Jason Pratt's challenge in Rev 21.

[Aaron37]

Aaron, I say this in love, but you are really embarrassing yourself. I’m pretty sure most ECTer’s would not want you representing them.

Really, thats funny… you PM this a couple of days ago:

Yes! This is exactly the kind of discourse I was hoping for from you. I’m sorry for being so rude before, I realize now it wasn’t such a great technique. I feel pretty bad now and not to mention dumb for it.

I thought that maybe you weren’t used to deeper intellectual discourse, but I think you’ve proved me wrong, you seemed to have snapped right into it like it’s natural for you. I’m sorry for thinking that about you. You’ve taught me a good lesson.

I’m also glad that someone like you is here to present an alternative and challenging view. Thank you!

Okay that’s all. I just felt really excited reading some of your recent posts and had to comment. Now I’ll try to find something to respond to.

I think your behavior is embarrassing, Justin. Most people would call you a hypocrite, but I’m not your judge.

[SLJ]

Were done. Go play with your kids. Have a blessed night.

I wish I were so free … but other things than play are needing my attention!

You have a blessed night, too,
Sonia

[stellar_renegade]

That would be more accurate if you hadn’t backtracked, Aaron, sadly enough. Now you’re just at your old tricks again.

[RanRan]

Again, this is the whole purpose of the final judgment of mankind in Rev 20:11-15. You are judged by your works and your checked to see if your name is found written in the book of life.

Where did the Gospel go? Islam says the exact same thing, Aaron.

Luther was right - there is no Gospel in TheRev - and the more one stays in it and wraps their mind around it, the further the Gospel recedes until it is gone. So as far as I can see from your argument, Aaron, Christ accomplished nothing.

God is not counting men’s sins against them because of the Cross. You want and need that nullified for your argument to have a chance. Christ saved mankind from death - if you helped advance His kingdom (while here) you will be rewarded, if you hindered that advance, you will not be rewarded but remain saved from death. Aware and self-aware in a salting by fire from which everyone exits confessing Christ. Everyone is salted and everyone confesses Christ. THAT you really need to nullify - not just ignore. Doubly universal - the double whammy, that for a rational person would, at least, cause them to pause and check their bearings.

All that is scriptural. But I don’t think you can understand a word of it - especially what salting means and does.

So you are left proving that God is more irrational and hateful than Allah. Ain’t that fun - but what a waste of time.

[stellar_renegade]

Again, this is the whole purpose of the final judgment of mankind in Rev 20:11-15. You are judged by your works and your checked to see if your name is found written in the book of life.

Actually, Aaron, the point of the judgment is to make God’s judgments clear and to allow righteousness/wickedness to have their immediate effects, thus enabling people to more easily make a choice between God and their personal pride. Hell and the lake of fire are just the natural consequences for affronting the love of God with our arrogant presumption in complete blindness - but people can’t see that now. That’s why it’s a mercy to them for God to show them what they’re made of. Thus making it that much easier for them to choose Him.

[SLJ]

Continuing my reply to Aaron’s responses … I know A doesn’t care for any more, but just in case any one else out there is interested in how I view these things…

Aaron37 wrote:
2) The Rev 21:5 verse is talking about no more pain, no more death, no more sorrow, etc as it was in the earth and the Millennial period prior to the NJ and NE. Rev 21:4 explains verse 5. In other words, All things are new compared how they were before…These things won’t happen in the NJ and NE. Therefore, I believe you are “reaching” for this verse to include the kings of the earth that are in the lake of fire… it does not flow in context with these verses.

You could make that argument, though if I was going to take that angle, I’d have chosen vss 7 and 8 to make my case, as it reads,“He who overcomes will inherit these things, and I will be his God and he will be My son. But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.” And I would make the argument that this indicates that the promises listed above refer only to the ones who had overcome previously.

But, I don’t agree with you that it doesn’t fit the context of the whole passage–and by that I mean everything after the judgment and lake of fire. There’s also vs 6: Then He said to me, "It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give to the one who thirsts from the spring of the water of life without cost. In the context of the whole passage: He says that he will be making all things new, that the Presence of God will now be with men, and He will be their healer and savior. The gates are open, the river flows, the light shines, and those who will wash their robes may enter and drink. But the indication is that it does not all happen at once for everyone. Those who are holding on to their sin are still outside having their part in the lake of fire.

Rev 21:8 “But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”
Rev 21:27 …and nothing unclean, and no one who practices abomination and lying, shall ever come into it, but only those whose names are written in the Lamb’s book of life.
Rev 22:15 …Outside are the dogs and the sorcerers and the immoral persons and the murderers and the idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices lying.

How can this be when all the people who were not found in the book of life were cast in the lake of fire in Rev 20:11-15? The people you claim to be literally outside the gates of the city are in the lake of fire. How did these people leave the lake of fire and be all the sudden “outside” the gates of the city? The evangelism theory is ridiculous because you have to explain how these people were set free from the lake of fire judgment to get outside the gates to be evangelized. Therefore, if they repented and were set free from the lake of fire…why are they still outside the gates of the city and need to be evangelized if they have already repented and been saved and set free from the lake of fire? Do you see the fallacy in this, Sonia? Where in the bible does it record all this happening if this were possible to happen?

Rev 22:15 places unredeemed people ‘outside’ of the City.

How do you interpret this verse?

But, to return to my answer: did I ever make the statement “literally outside the gates of the city”? I don’t think so. I obviously don’t read Rev as ‘literally’ as you do. I made the point, in my original post, that I do not see the “City” necessarily as a physical city, but as a representation of the Church herself–that is the saved people which make up the body of Christ.

There is no fallacy in my view. According to the verses I posted, people can be at the same time, “having their part in lake of fire” and “outside the City”.

Anyone outside the Church is unsaved, and to be granted permission to enter the City is equivalent to “becoming saved.”

Sonia

[Aaron37]

Continuing my reply to Aaron’s responses … I know A doesn’t care for any more, but just in case any one else out there is interested in how I view these things…

Aaron37 wrote:
2) The Rev 21:5 verse is talking about no more pain, no more death, no more sorrow, etc as it was in the earth and the Millennial period prior to the NJ and NE. Rev 21:4 explains verse 5. In other words, All things are new compared how they were before…These things won’t happen in the NJ and NE. Therefore, I believe you are “reaching” for this verse to include the kings of the earth that are in the lake of fire… it does not flow in context with these verses.

You could make that argument, though if I was going to take that angle, I’d have chosen vss 7 and 8 to make my case, as it reads,“He who overcomes will inherit these things, and I will be his God and he will be My son. But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.” And I would make the argument that this indicates that the promises listed above refer only to the ones who had overcome previously.

But, I don’t agree with you that it doesn’t fit the context of the whole passage–and by that I mean everything after the judgment and lake of fire. There’s also vs 6: Then He said to me, "It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give to the one who thirsts from the spring of the water of life without cost. In the context of the whole passage: He says that he will be making all things new, that the Presence of God will now be with men, and He will be their healer and savior. The gates are open, the river flows, the light shines, and those who will wash their robes may enter and drink. But the indication is that it does not all happen at once for everyone. Those who are holding on to their sin are still outside having their part in the lake of fire.

Rev 21:8 “But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”
Rev 21:27 …and nothing unclean, and no one who practices abomination and lying, shall ever come into it, but only those whose names are written in the Lamb’s book of life.
Rev 22:15 …Outside are the dogs and the sorcerers and the immoral persons and the murderers and the idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices lying.

How can this be when all the people who were not found in the book of life were cast in the lake of fire in Rev 20:11-15? The people you claim to be literally outside the gates of the city are in the lake of fire. How did these people leave the lake of fire and be all the sudden “outside” the gates of the city? The evangelism theory is ridiculous because you have to explain how these people were set free from the lake of fire judgment to get outside the gates to be evangelized. Therefore, if they repented and were set free from the lake of fire…why are they still outside the gates of the city and need to be evangelized if they have already repented and been saved and set free from the lake of fire? Do you see the fallacy in this, Sonia? Where in the bible does it record all this happening if this were possible to happen?

Rev 22:15 places unredeemed people ‘outside’ of the City.

How do you interpret this verse?

But, to return to my answer: did I ever make the statement “literally outside the gates of the city”? I don’t think so. I obviously don’t read Rev as ‘literally’ as you do. I made the point, in my original post, that I do not see the “City” necessarily as a physical city, but as a representation of the Church herself–that is the saved people which make up the body of Christ.

There is no fallacy in my view. According to the verses I posted, people can be at the same time, “having their part in lake of fire” and “outside the City”.

Anyone outside the Church is unsaved, and to be granted permission to enter the City is equivalent to “becoming saved.”

Sonia

Rev 22:15 is describing those who are without. Without what? Rev 22:14 answers this: 1) the right to the tree of life, 2)the right to enter the city. It has nothing to do with the unredeemed willing around outside of the city. Were not interested in your opinions…were interested in what has been established in God’s word. The bible has established those who were not found in the book of life are literally thrown into the lake of fire. Rev 20:11-15. So, the question you and your mentor have been avoiding is : Where in the bible does it record the people who were thrown literally into the lake of fire… getting out? Are you going to answer the question or continue to tapp dance around it?

[SLJ]

Rev 22:15 is describing those who are without. Without what? Rev 22:14 answers this: 1) the right to the tree of life, 2)the right to enter the city. It has nothing to do with the unredeemed willing around outside of the city. Were not interested in your opinions…were interested in what has been established in God’s word.

Aaron, “without” means “outside.” You’re reading an older form of English, and the word, as used then, means “outside.”

The bible has established those who were not found in the book of life are literally thrown into the lake of fire. Rev 20:11-15. So, the question you and your mentor have been avoiding is : Where in the bible does it record the people who were thrown literally into the lake of fire… getting out? Are you going to answer the question or continue to tapp dance around it?

Actually, as I said before, I don’t necessarily believe that people do come out of the lake of fire. I didn’t “tap dance” around the question at all–you just ignored my reply.

If anyone could be called my “mentor”, that would be George MacDonald (not to be confused with “Gregory”), not Jason–though I do enjoy many of his posts.

Sonia

[Aaron37]

Rev 22:15 is describing those who are without. Without what? Rev 22:14 answers this: 1) the right to the tree of life, 2)the right to enter the city. It has nothing to do with the unredeemed willing around outside of the city. Were not interested in your opinions…were interested in what has been established in God’s word.

Aaron, “without” means “outside.” You’re reading an older form of English, and the word, as used then, means “outside.”

The bible has established those who were not found in the book of life are literally thrown into the lake of fire. Rev 20:11-15. So, the question you and your mentor have been avoiding is : Where in the bible does it record the people who were thrown literally into the lake of fire… getting out? Are you going to answer the question or continue to tapp dance around it?

Actually, as I said before, I don’t necessarily believe that people do come out of the lake of fire. I didn’t “tap dance” around the question at all–you just ignored my reply.

If anyone could be called my “mentor”, that would be George MacDonald (not to be confused with “Gregory”), not Jason–though I do enjoy many of his posts.

Sonia

Again, WE DON’T CARE WHAT YOU THINK, WE CARE ABOUT WHAT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED IN GOD’S WORD! What do you mean that people don’t come out of the lake of fire? They were literally thrown in, How do they get out? If you want your view to be respected and taken seriously( or should I say Macdonald’s and Pratt’s view), ANSWER THE QUESTION, and take off the tapping shoes! What a joke!

[stellar_renegade]

Rev 22:15 is describing those who are without. Without what? Rev 22:14 answers this: 1) the right to the tree of life, 2)the right to enter the city. It has nothing to do with the unredeemed willing around outside of the city. Were not interested in your opinions…were interested in what has been established in God’s word.

Aaron, “without” means “outside.” You’re reading an older form of English, and the word, as used then, means “outside.”

The bible has established those who were not found in the book of life are literally thrown into the lake of fire. Rev 20:11-15. So, the question you and your mentor have been avoiding is : Where in the bible does it record the people who were thrown literally into the lake of fire… getting out? Are you going to answer the question or continue to tapp dance around it?

Actually, as I said before, I don’t necessarily believe that people do come out of the lake of fire. I didn’t “tap dance” around the question at all–you just ignored my reply.

If anyone could be called my “mentor”, that would be George MacDonald (not to be confused with “Gregory”), not Jason–though I do enjoy many of his posts.

Sonia

Again, WE DON’T CARE WHAT YOU THINK, WE CARE ABOUT WHAT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED IN GOD’S WORD! What do you mean that people don’t come out of the lake of fire? They were literally thrown in, How do they get out? If you want your view to be respected and taken seriously( or should I say Macdonald’s and Pratt’s view), ANSWER THE QUESTION, and take off the tapping shoes! What a joke!

Well. There’s some love and respect…

Sorry you have to endure that, Sonia.

[stellar_renegade]

As for people coming out of the fire, not to mention George MacDonald –

He will shake heaven and earth, that only the unshakable may remain: he is a consuming fire, that only that which cannot be consumed may stand forth eternal. It is the nature of God, so terribly pure that it destroys all that is not pure as fire, which demands like purity in our worship. He will have purity. It is not that the fire will burn us if we do not worship thus; yea, will go on burning within us after all that is foreign to it has yielded to its force, no longer with pain and consuming, but as the highest consciousness of life, the presence of God.

[Aaron37]

As for people coming out of the fire, not to mention George MacDonald –

He will shake heaven and earth, that only the unshakable may remain: he is a consuming fire, that only that which cannot be consumed may stand forth eternal. It is the nature of God, so terribly pure that it destroys all that is not pure as fire, which demands like purity in our worship. He will have purity. It is not that the fire will burn us if we do not worship thus;

yea, will go on burning within us after all that is foreign to it has yielded to its force, no longer with pain and consuming, but as the highest consciousness of life, the presence of God.

[stellar_renegade]

More love and respect. Your only response to thoughtful, heartfelt prose is to roll your eyes. That passage is full of wisdom, Aaron. I don’t see why you have to be so disrespectful.

[roofus]

Oh, you literalists!
I think you may have just taken me literally- IT WAS A JOKE! But maybe you were joking as well./…

Heading back to the matter of names being added/subtracted from the Book of Life, is it possible that the verses that say “from the foundation of the world” speaks of a foreknowledge of what occurs after all of the adding/subtracting occurs. That the other verses refer to what occurs from the human point of view. Don’t know how well I put that together, but…give it a ponder?

We’re way past that part now.

You are only “way past” it if you have successfully answered it.

[JeffA]

Aaron has the Holy Spirit told you that the word ‘without’ here means ‘lacking something’ rather than ‘outside’?

[SLJ]

Well. There’s some love and respect…

Sorry you have to endure that, Sonia.

No worries, Justin! I’m fine, and he’ll get there sometime…

Thanks!
Sonia

[SLJ]

Again, WE DON’T CARE WHAT YOU THINK, WE CARE ABOUT WHAT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED IN GOD’S WORD! What do you mean that people don’t come out of the lake of fire? They were literally thrown in, How do they get out? If you want your view to be respected and taken seriously( or should I say Macdonald’s and Pratt’s view), ANSWER THE QUESTION, and take off the tapping shoes! What a joke!

Maybe we need to back off a step and discuss the ‘literalness’ of Revelation. I remarked before that you are reading the text much more ‘literally’ than I am. If that’s the case, you will just laugh at any mention anyone makes of the symbolic meanings of the imagery. So we need to talk about that before the discussion can become productive.

I don’t think that you read the entire book literally, or do you?

Take this passage for instance:
Rev 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, [which is] new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and * my new name.

Do you believe that the reward of overcomers will be to be made into a literal support column for a literal Temple building?

Sonia*

[Aaron37]

Again, WE DON’T CARE WHAT YOU THINK, WE CARE ABOUT WHAT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED IN GOD’S WORD! What do you mean that people don’t come out of the lake of fire? They were literally thrown in, How do they get out? If you want your view to be respected and taken seriously( or should I say Macdonald’s and Pratt’s view), ANSWER THE QUESTION, and take off the tapping shoes! What a joke!

Maybe we need to back off a step and discuss the ‘literalness’ of Revelation. I remarked before that you are reading the text much more ‘literally’ than I am. If that’s the case, you will just laugh at any mention anyone makes of the symbolic meanings of the imagery. So we need to talk about that before the discussion can become productive.

I don’t think that you read the entire book literally, or do you?

Take this passage for instance:
Rev 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, [which is] new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and * my new name.

Do you believe that the reward of overcomers will be to be made into a literal support column for a literal Temple building?

Sonia*

Ahhh, the old its not literal… but figurative defense. Ok, Sonia…I will go down another rabbit trail with you…go ahead and explain to me how the lake of fire is not literal but figurative.

[RanRan]

Again, WE DON’T CARE WHAT YOU THINK, WE CARE ABOUT WHAT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED IN GOD’S WORD!

There’s a lot more to God’s word than a highly symbolic sentence or two. So start with the clear to help in understanding the not-so-clear. That’s a good standard rule.

Now this has been ESTABLISHED and is IRREVOCABLE (meaning, it can’t be nullified and certainly shouldn’t be ignored)…‘Every knee will bow and tongue confess that Christ is Lord.’

SO START THERE!..AND WORK DOWN. Your one sentence eschatology defining everything else is like holding a penny (if that!) up in a pile of gold.

[SLJ]

Ahhh, the old its not literal… but figurative defense. Ok, Sonia…I will go down another rabbit trail with you…go ahead and explain to me how the lake of fire is not literal but figurative.

You missed something, Aaron. In my post, I did not make any kind of defense at all. What I did was to ask you a question, and the question was not, “May I please tell you how the lake of fire is not literal but figurative?”

I declined to answer your question because I realized we needed to discuss more basic things first. The discussion is pointless until we come to some kind of understanding about how we each read the book. Otherwise we’re just talking past each other.

Sonia