Sonia
Jason plays games and answers my questions with his own questions…again show me where he answers my questions with specific scripture references:
Aaron37 wrote:
- Where in scripture does it record the Rev 19:21 kings and nations repenting and being escorted out of the ‘lake of fire’ judgment?-- Answer: strictly speaking, no one specific scripture mentions all this at once. As I myself have already made abundantly clear.
In return, I challenge you to answer this simple question: where in scripture does it record the Rev 19:21 kings of the earth being thrown into the lake of fire? Scripture only, please. If your scripture reference does not explicitly reference “the kings of the earth”, you fail. If it explicitly references them but does not explicitly reference them being put “into the lake of fire”, you fail. Substitute meanings are not allowed. Adding up contexts is not allowed. This ought to be as simply easy as possible, in order to clear up what happened to the kings of the earth of Rev 19:21; and if you cannot show this with a simple pure and explicit reference to chapter and verse, you are required to disbelieve that they will ever be put (or were ever put, in terms of narrative revelation) in the lake of fire.
Since this would strictly mean you may only reference Rev 19:21 in regard to “the kings of the earth” mentioned in Rev 19:21, if that one verse does not explicitly say they are thrown into the lake of fire, you will fail, and should therefore give up your unbiblical belief (by this standard).
However, just in case Rev 19:21 doesn’t mention them being cast into the lake of fire, I will allow you to expand your restriction to any mention of “the kings of the earth”. You are thus restricted, in the New Testament, to citing one of the following verses: Matt 17:25; Rev 1:5; Rev 6:15; Rev 17:2; Rev 17:18; Rev 18:3; Rev 18:9; Rev 19:19; Rev 21:24. Which of these show “kings of the earth” being put (or thrown, I’ll allow you to have some variance in the verbiage) into “the lake of fire”? You may add any other New Testament reference to “the kings of the earth”, if you can find one, but only a reference to that phrase. Substitutes for that phrase are not allowed. If your translation turns out to be faulty as to the Greek, you will also fail (although I will allow variable grammatic suffixes for the phrase in Greek.)
You may consult the Old Testament as well, under the same restrictions.
For example: if Isiaiah 24:21 reads “And it shall come to pass in that day, [that] the LORD shall punish the host of the high ones [that are] on high, and the kings of the earth upon the earth”, it doesn’t matter if verse 22 reads, “And He shall throw all those whom He punishes into the lake of fire, from which they shall never be saved.” That would be appealing to contextual meaning, beyond what verse 21 itself explicitly says or doesn’t say. If you are allowed to do that, then I am also allowed to appeal to contextual meaning beyond what any verse does or does not explicitly say in itself–which means you will have to deal with the many details I have already provided.
(Incidentally, before you look: Isaiah 24:22 doesn’t read that, even in the KJV. It does read something pretty important, though. Also, for what it’s worth, the verses immediately subsequent to Rev 19:21 do NOT mention the kings of the earth being thrown into the lake of fire, even by context. But even if it did, by the criteria you are insisting on for me to meet, you still would fail.)
Aaron37 wrote:
2) Where in scripture does it record these kings and nations being added to the book of life? Where in scripture does it say they were found written in the book of life?
Answer: under the strict terms you are requiring, nowhere of course.
In return, I challenge you to show me where it says that the “kings of the earth” of Rev 21:24 are written into (or added into, I will allow some variance in the verbiage) “the book of life”. Substitutions of meaning are not allowed. Contextual references beyond what any verse explicitly and simply says or doesn’t say, are not allowed.
Strictly speaking, this means you cannot appeal to other verses than Rev 21:24, since that would involve drawing a contextual connection to the kings in that verse. If you do so, you fail. Just stick with Rev 21:24 and quote where it says this, please. Keep it as simple as possible.
If, for some reason, you are unable to do this, I will allow you to extend the reference set to anywhere in the Bible, under the same restrictions. No substitute meanings allowed, or you fail. No contextual appeals allowed, beyond what the verse in itself simply and purely says, or you fail. If you cannot find such a reference, you will be obligated to give up a belief that any “king of the earth” shall ever be written or otherwise added to “the book of life”.
So for example, if it happens that Rev 21:24 reads, “and the kings of the earth shall bring their glory into it”, and verse 25 reads, “and those who bring their glory into it shall be (or have been) written into the Lamb’s book of life”, that won’t matter–because that would be a contextual reference. If you can appeal to contextual meaning beyond what a verse simply and purely says in itself, then so can I, and you will have no excuse not to deal with what I have already discussed in detail (with chapter and verse references even!) on the topic.
(Incidentally, before you look: Rev 21:25 doesn’t read that. Verse 27 reads something pretty close, but it doesn’t even continue the sentence grammatically from verse 25. Any appeal to verse 27 would be even more of a contextual attempt than my imaginary verse 25 example. And in effect you are disavowing contextual appeals altogether, in order to avoid having to deal with my argument’s merits.)
Aaron37 wrote:
3) Where in scripture between Rev 19:21 and Rev 21:24 does it record these kings and nations repenting and getting saved and entering into the NJ and NE? Just provide scripture references only please.
See answer, and counterchallenge, to Question 1. (And to Question 2, for that matter. )
Aaron37 wrote:
4) Where in Rev 21 & 22 do you see evangelism going on? Just provide scripture references only.
Already provided with discussion of details long before (including in something you yourself quoted from me). I would answer by simply citing Rev 22:17, but since it doesn’t contain the word “evangelism” (much less verse 14), I suppose you will deny any evangelism is being talked about there. You have already refused (multiple times) to discuss the contexts of verses in chapter 22 (and barely any contexts from chapter 21), so even if you (somehow!) admit this counts as evangelism, I won’t be surprised if you continue to refuse to accept or consider any contextual discussion there. After all, that one verse certainly doesn’t spell out the whole position, does it? Therefore it cannot possibly count in favor of the whole position in any way! There, that was “simple”.
Aaron37 wrote:
5) Where in scripture does it record anyone being added to the book of life after the final judgment in Rev 20:11-15?
I will answer this question when you answer where it shows anyone being written into “the book of life” in Rev 22:14 or 17. Or Romans 11. Or anywhere in the Gospels of John or Mark or Matthew. Or anywhere in GosLuke for that matter. Or anywhere in Acts. Or anywhere in any of the epistles other than Philippians. Or anywhere in Philippians other than chapter 4. Or anywhere in RevJohn itself! (21:27 talks about people’s names having been written into the book of life, but not about people’s names being added to it as an action. The same is true for the Philippians reference, by the way, which doesn’t even reference a verb at all.)
If the reference does not feature the phrase “book of life”, you fail. Substitutions of meaning are not allowed. Implications beyond what the verse itself simply and purely says, are not allowed. Contextual appeals are not allowed. Only references to persons’ names being actively added to (or some similar active verb, I’ll allow that) “the book of life” will be acknowledged. If you cannot find such references, you will have to admit that the New Testament doesn’t ever testify to anyone being written into the book of life; and so also that the New Testament doesn’t acknowledge whatever it would mean for someone’s name to be written into the book of life–such as permission to enter the New Jerusalem. Other references to salvation are not allowed to count, only names being actively added to the book of life. If RevJohn 22:14 says that those who rinse their robes thus obtain permission to enter the city gates and eat of the log of life (which, by the way, it does), this cannot possibly count as actually having permission to enter into the New Jerusalem if it does not explicitly say that in gaining such permission their names are also added to the book of life.
If you allow other images to count as being equivalent to having names added to the book of life, then so can I. If you allow appeals to context for any reason, or even logical implications beyond what the text purely and simply says (such as Luke 10:20), then I am allowed the same prerogatives in principle. And you will have no excuse not to deal with what I have already written on that topic.
Relatedly, I challenge you on the same criteria to quote any verse of scripture saying that anything at all happens “after the lake of fire judgment”, or even “after the lake of fire”. Verses which do not include the phrase “after the lake of fire” are not allowed. Substitutions of meaning are not allowed. Contextual appeals are not allowed. Trying to draw any implications beyond what a verse simply and purely says of itself, is not allowed. If you cannot find any such reference in the Old or New Testament, you are obligated to give up any belief you may have that anything at all happens to anyone after the lake of fire judgment.
Relatedly, I challenge you on the same criteria to prove simply from a pure and simple scriptural reference that there is a “lake of fire judgment”. Only cite scripture, please. No commentary from you is allowed. If the scripture does not contain that phrase in Greek, you fail. Implications which supposedly arrive at the content of that phrase are not allowed. Contextual appeals are not allowed. Substitutions of meaning are not allowed. If you cannot show a simple scriptural affirmation that there is a “lake of fire judgment” (remember, creative translations into English will add words to RevJohn and so are not allowed), you are obligated to give up your unbiblical belief in a “lake of fire judgment” (assuming you believe such a thing and were not only hypothetically asking questions about it, which I suppose is possible.)
When you are ready to live by such simple and easy biblical belief, instead of only conveniently holding other people to such standards when they happen to believe something differently than you do (including from the scriptures), let me know. I’m sure I can come up with many (many, many) more such “challenges” that will impress you!
When, on the other hand, you are ready to discuss contexts and any other implications beyond extremely strict and simple prooftext affirmations, let me know that, too. I recommend starting with the detailed work I have already provided for consideration.
If it comes to accurate data and logical validity in putting together the data, for our respective beliefs, you admit you can’t beat me. You can only beat me by trying to come up with a way to ask questions and restrict answers to avoid having to deal with an intelligent result. 
(But you’ll have to be patient, I need plenty of time to consult Jason. 
)
