Dear Joe,

I don't see how Revelation 13:8 and 17:8 prove me wrong. It is my guess that you are trying to prove that those whose names are not in the Lamb's book of life were never there to begin with. While it is true, as the scriptures you cited prove, that some people were never written in the book of life, I believe that it is easily understandable from Revelation 22:19 that other people were written in, but will have their names blotted out.

"Then I submit that you do not understand Reformed Doctrine. Man does have a will, it is not just a free as the Arminian thinks it is. Man makes decisions! They make decisions based on the knowledge they possess. Thus they can turn down a genuine offer. They reason they turn it down though is because they have not been changed by the Holy Spirit to see it (John 3:1-8). This man until he is changed by the Holy Spirit will not seek after God (Rom 3). He can not seek after God because he is dead in trespasses and sin (Eph 2). Thus as John 1:5 says 5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not."

Correct me if I am wrong, but the word 'opportunity' by itself indicates a possibility. Since no man can come to Christ unless God draws him, a person who is not drawn would have no opportunity to be saved at all. So how can you believe that an unsaved person can have a missed 'opportunity' to be saved and still believe in unconditional election?

I wrote:
"Additionally, the author's whole argument:

"People can go to church for years and hear the gospel over and over again, even be faithful church members, and never really make a commitment to Jesus Christ. That kind of person is addressed here."....Is clearly contradicted by vs 9, which says,
'But beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation (literally: 'that you are holding fast salvation'), though we thus speak.'"

And you wrote:
"The word "But" refers to a different audience!

This term shows a change of audience and a move towards a change from a message of warning to a message of encouragement. That the address is to believers is further confirmed by the expression of confidence that “better things” [not the same things] could be said of them (as compared to those who were being warned in the preceding verses)."

You misunderstood my statement. The author of the article you sent me was trying to prove that the 'different audience' you speak of (the same ones he addressed in vs 1-5) were not saved. I was trying to show the errors in his logic. The reason why it is significant that they were saved is because the warnings in vs 4-8 were given to them, thereby clearly showing that falling from the faith is possible.

In Christ,