- Apr 19, 2012
- 33,072
- 6,488
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
How do Calvinists deal with this verse?
Good question, let''s look at the text first...
Rev 3:16 "He causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads,"
Next, let's think about this verse from a non-Calvinist perspective. From an Arminian perspective consistently interpreting the word "all" as ALL, this seems to be a really problematic passage.
From a Calvinist perspective, this passage actually reinforces our explanation of the word "all", meaning not every human being, but subsets of people from all nations, all different kinds of people.
If we read the verse in context, we read the following in verse 8....
Rev 3:8 "All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world."
Here again the word "all" is limited, because those whose names HAVE been written in the "Book of Life" from the foundation of the world, will not worship the beast (so all doesn't always mean all). Verse 8 is also problematic to the Arminian "free will" defense. Don't those whose names are not written in the Book of Life have a choice? Can they choose not to worship the beast? Also probematic is that the names in the Book of Life were written from the "foundation of the world" or the beginning of the world, before the individuals were ever born!
Thank you for bringing this to attention, as these verses help reinforce how the word "all" is misused and abused by non-Calvinists.
yes that verseRev 3:16
So, because you are lukewarm-neither hot nor cold-I am about to spit you out of my mouth.
yes that verse
that was my point how can you say that you cannot leave the faith if that verse clearly was written to members of the church and clearly to those who HAVE accepted. There is another verse somewhere in the new testament that says if you truly reject Him (after accepting) you cannot be accepted back. Once you have tasted the gift if you leave you are putting Him to shame again,Rev 3:16
So, because you are lukewarm-neither hot nor cold-I am about to spit you out of my mouth.
Wasn't this verse written to the elect? Not a good sign for any predestined believer.
To understand the passage in that way is to deny all the promises of Christ to His church and people concerning His faithfulness to guard and keep them. It also denies the truth that our faithfulness doesnt depend on us but Him in us. If anything depends on us we are doomed. The Rev. passage must first be understood in the light of the truth fist set in the context of Christ walking among and guarding His churches. He does so as the Great Shepherd of His sheep. He gives these words of correction in love toHis churches not as mocking them. His warnings to His people are never intended to bring fear, that would be the result of your interpretation (see my sig), but as a loving correction to turn and trust Him. Christ could never disown His child any more than you could yours. Actually you might be able to disown yours but Christ never could. Isa. 49:15-16that was my point how can you say that you cannot leave the faith if that verse clearly was written to members of the church and clearly to those who HAVE accepted. There is another verse somewhere in the new testament that says if you truly reject Him (after accepting) you cannot be accepted back. Once you have tasted the gift if you leave you are putting Him to shame again,
To understand the passage in that way is to deny all the promises of Christ to His church and people concerning His faithfulness to guard and keep them. It also denies the truth that our faithfulness doesnt depend on us but Him in us. If anything depends on us we are doomed. The Rev. passage must first be understood in the light of the truth fist set in the context of Christ walking among and guarding His churches. He does so as the Great Shepherd of His sheep. He gives these words of correction in love toHis churches not as mocking them. His warnings to His people are never intended to bring fear, that would be the result of your interpretation (see my sig), but as a loving correction to turn and trust Him. Christ could never disown His child any more than you could yours. Actually you might be able to disown yours but Christ never could. Isa. 49:15-16
There is no logical reason to assume that these promises and warnings given to the church of Laodicea or any of the churches addressed in this context or any church that has ever existed is comprised of exclusively redeemed individuals. If the assertion is that a "saved" person can lose their salvation I have debated this subject and would invite anyone to view the debate. See esp. page 2 post 20.
http://www.christianforums.com/t7653524/