Whoever Has Sinned Against Me I Will Blot Out of My Book

Daniel.

Member
I offered a possible solution. You ignored it.
That objection was pre-empted in the OP : Jesus is "the same yesterday today and forever", and the OT teaches us about the NT (Scriptures provided in the OP), and we see many dynamics persisting through to the NT, and this is yet another that persists (in that Jesus speaks of names being blotted out of the Book of Life).

Can names be blotted out of the Book of Life?

Psalm 69
28Let them be blotted out of the book of the living; let them not be enrolled among the righteous.

So, as I've been saying, only the righteous are going to be enrolled in the Book of Life; those who go on sinning willfully are blotted out of the Book of Life.
 

Simpletruther

Well-known member
That objection was pre-empted in the OP : Jesus is "the same yesterday today and forever", and the OT teaches us about the NT (Scriptures provided in the OP), and we see many dynamics persisting through to the NT, and this is yet another that persists (in that Jesus speaks of names being blotted out of the Book of Life).

Can names be blotted out of the Book of Life?

Psalm 69
28Let them be blotted out of the book of the living; let them not be enrolled among the righteous.

So, as I've been saying, only the righteous are going to be enrolled in the Book of Life; those who go on sinning willfully are blotted out of the Book of Life.
Well it has a different name. It certainly may be a different book. It may have to do with life on earth.

It also could be simply that the book of life isn’t a list of the righteous, but a list of everyone. And all the non elect get blotted out over time.
 

Daniel.

Member
Well it has a different name. It certainly may be a different book. It may have to do with life on earth.

It also could be simply that the book of life isn’t a list of the righteous, but a list of everyone. And all the non elect get blotted out over time.
LOL Yes, unrighteous people immediately physically die, only righteous people live at all.

That's precisely the context of the passage from Deuteronomy and Revelation... NOT!
The context is "children of God" (Dt 14:1) are being blotted out for turning away from righteousness.
Same with Revelation 3, where Sardis has those who've "soiled their garments", sinned, who'll be blotted out.
As Ezekiel says, if you're righteous and turn away from righteousness your righteousness will not be remembered.
 

Howie

Well-known member
You're right : I have not provided an absence of exegetical support.
"I laugh in the general direction" of your "total absence of [English skills] you have not provided."

So you have no response. Not surprised.
Thanks for failing in front of everyone.
I have responded to your OP, Daniel: you have failed to provide exegetical support for your position, as usual.
 

Daniel.

Member
you responded to it.
Sorry, I didn't seen any substantive responses to the OP made by you--where others have made substantive responses to the OP, I have interacted with them, and if you show me where you made one I will interact with it.

Thanks
 

Howie

Well-known member
Sorry, I didn't seen any substantive responses to the OP made by you--where others have made substantive responses to the OP, I have interacted with them, and if you show me where you made one I will interact with it.

Thanks
Daniel, you said I didn't respond to your post, but I did.
 

Daniel.

Member
Daniel, you said I didn't respond to your post, but I did.
I don't deny that you typed words and hit the "Post Reply" button... but you didn't interact with the OP as far as I saw. Everyone can see that I interact with people who do that. You haven't.
 

Howie

Well-known member
I don't deny that you typed words and hit the "Post Reply" button... but you didn't interact with the OP as far as I saw. Everyone can see that I interact with people who do that. You haven't.
I did interact your with OP, Daniel. I criticized it.
 

Daniel.

Member
I did interact your with OP, Daniel. I criticized it.
You emptily complained that you thought it lacked exegesis.
All right, and?
Does that mean you can't tell the point I'm trying to make?
If you can tell the point I'm trying to make, were you going to attempt to address/debunk it?
 
Top