The Book of Life and Salvation

[FutureAndAHope]

This is intended to be an encouragement of the hopefulness, and goodness of God. The bible tells us that God has a book called the book of life, in it are written the names of all people who are saved. But what is special about this book is that our names are written in it before we are even born. Why is that special? God so hopes that we will choose salvation that he already classes us as saved. Look out at your neighbors, to God there goes a saved person.

Rev 3:5 He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.

Exo 32:32-33 Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin; and if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of thy book which thou hast written. And the LORD said unto Moses, Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book.

It is sad fact that many will so live their lives in rebellion, that God will be forced to blot them out from the Book of Life.

There is one verse that could throw doubt on this concept. And that is, the following taken from the King James Vesrion of the bible.

Rev 17:8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.

It seems to suggest that sinners were never in the book to begin with. But if you look at the Greek it does not have to say “whose names were not written”, in the interlinear it says “whose names are not written” οὐ (not) γέγραπται (are written)

Given the possible tense “are written”, I would like to think, it would be better translated.

Rev 17:8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names are not written in the book of life [created] from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

The Bible cannot be re-written in a way that we prefer.
I believe Revelation 13:8 and Revelation 17:8 at face value in the King James Bible. I believe it by faith because God requires that from us.

Anyways, I believe one aspect of these verses are saying that those who worship the beast in the future never had their names in the book of life ever. This shows the gravity of their sin. God knew what they were going to do (as a part of their free will choice) and God decided they never had a chance at salvation because of this horrible sin.

In addition, we also learn in Scripture that names can be blotted out of the book of life, too.

“He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.” (Revelation 3:5).

Is this yet another truth in Scripture that needs to be re-written because we do not like what it says?
I say thee nay.
One either accepts these words plainly in what they say or one does not.
The Bible is teaching we need to be faithful and overcome.
Don’t let your name be blotted out.
Be faithful to Jesus.

 

[FutureAndAHope]

The Bible cannot be re-written in a way that we prefer. I believe Revelation 13:8 and Revelation 17:8 at face value in the King James Bible. I believe it by faith because God requires that from us.

I did not rewrite anything I went to the Greek to investigate the ACTUAL words used. You do realize that translators, me included, often translate according to our beliefs about a verse, even the King James Bible has some verses that do not render the best meaning.

As an example, false doctrine is propagated by the Jehovahs' Witnesses, based upon a poor verse translation in Revelation in the KJV. I will put the example at the bottom after this discussion. But it shows that if there is a doctrinal issue that we see as sketchy we should investigate the Greek, not the English versions. My alternative translation fits with the original word used οὐ (not) γέγραπται (are written). The KJV says "were written", which is a way it "could be written", but I checked the Greek interlinear, there it was written, "ARE written". Not "were written". This shows it can be translated either way.

I would like to point out a difficulty in what you have written, why does God know some peoples sin's but not others? If He really knew things in the way you say, there is no need to blot people out, for He already knew what they would do.

Anyways, I believe one aspect of these verses are saying that those who worship the beast in the future never had their names in the book of life ever. This shows the gravity of their sin. God knew what they were going to do (as a part of their free will choice) and God decided they never had a chance at salvation because of this horrible sin.

In addition, we also learn in Scripture that names can be blotted out of the book of life, too.

“He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.” (Revelation 3:5).

The Jehovahs' Witnesses believe that Jesus is a created being with a separate personality to God, that his existence is separate to God. To support this idea they use various scriptures, one of their favorite verses is as follows. Where talking of Jesus the King James version says:

… the beginning of the creation of God Rev 3:14

This can be confusing because it sounds like Jesus was the first created being. But as we will see this is not the case. The Greek word translated beginning is as follows (from Strongs):

G746
archē
ar-khay'

From G756; (properly abstract) a commencement, or (concrete) chief (in various applications of order, time, place or rank): - beginning, corner, (at the, the) first (estate), magistrate, power, principality, principle, rule.

You will notice the word has various meanings and we will discus some of them. Take

“I was in the city of Joppa praying: and in a trance I saw a vision, A certain vessel descend, as it had been a great sheet, let down from heaven by four corners; and it came even to me” - Act 11:5
The word corner in the verse above also uses the word archē, an archē can be a corner. We will discuss why this is relevant latter. Also note

“For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him”: ,Col 1:16

The word archē is used above for ruler, or power. Why, well lets discuss some English words, arch and archangel are English words that have their root in archē. But what is an arch, it is similar to a triangular shape, as is a corner in Acts 11:5. Why is ruler a valid expression from the word, well a ruler is the top most piece under which you find others, rulership is like a triangle too, the top point is the King, or supreme ruler, the lower you go in the triangle are princes, governors, then at the bottom the common man. So you see the word in revelation does not need to mean the first creation, it can mean “the ruler of the creation of God”, or the “Origin of the creation of God”, both translations fit perfectly with the view that Jesus is God, he both rules, and is the originator of creation, as Col 1:16 says “For by him were all things created”, and note they were created “for him”, and we know the creation was created for God.

 

[FutureAndAHope]

Ok so we know that you can be in the Book of Life, then removed from it.

Exo 32:32-33 Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin; and if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of thy book which thou hast written. And the LORD said unto Moses, Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book.

Psa 69:28 Let them be blotted out of the book of the living, and not be written with the righteous.

Rev 3:5 He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.


Christians are in the book.

Php 4:3 And I intreat thee also, true yokefellow, help those women which laboured with me in the gospel, with Clement also, and with other my fellowlabourers, whose names are in the book of life.


We know the wicked are not in the book of life at the time of the judgment, they have been removed from it, or blotted out.


Rev 13:8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

Rev 20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

Rev 20:15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.


Now for the verse that is causing contention:


Rev 17:8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.


Taken at face value, the translation above seems to suggest that there were people that were never in the book. But the following scripture makes it clear they “could have been saved”, but “chose unrighteousness”.


2Th 2:8-12 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.


But if people were blotted out of the book, their names must have originally been in it.

I am wondering whether a better way to understand this one scripture would be to see it as follows:


Rev 17:8 The beast you saw is one that used to be and no longer is. It will come back from the deep pit, but only to be destroyed. Everyone on earth whose names are not written in the book of life [due to how they would live their lives*, a thing (set of rules) determined] before the time of creation will be amazed. They will see this beast that used to be and no longer is, but will be once more.


What do I mean by this, well, we know there are people who were in the book that are now not, so the book of life is not divided into two distinct groups at creation, saved and unsaved.


I would like to think that, as I said in my first post, everyone is in it initially, but they can be blotted out due to how they live. How a person is to live was determined before creation. As Revelation says they are judged “according to their works”.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I did not rewrite anything I went to the Greek to investigate the ACTUAL words used.

Not all Greek manuscripts are the same. Do you follow the Textus Receptus? Or do you follow the Critical Text? Do you follow other ones? How do you know which one is the right one? Also, how do you know biblical Greek, and Biblical Hebrew? It’s not like you grew up writing and speaking these languages to have any kind of real authority in them. You don’t have an apostle Paul around to give you the meaning behind the biblical Greek. You also do not have a Moses to understand the Biblical Hebrew. These are dead languages. Scholars today are only guessing as to what these words are saying and not even all scholars agree with each other. Also, a person who goes to the original languages can make the Bible say whatever they want it to say and others would be none the wiser to your preferred interpretation of what you like the Bible to say. They really cannot call you out if you got something wrong because there is no true way to know a dead language. But with the English, they can call you out by pointing to English dictionaries (Which is a language they are familiar with).

You do realize that translators, me included, often translate according to our beliefs about a verse, even the King James Bible has some verses that do not render the best meaning.

So you have no perfect Word of God and you are set out to create your own version of one. The problem is that you are in the seat of God determining what God said and did not say.

In the “OAO (i.e. Original Autograph Only) Belief”: No perfect Bible exists in any modern language today, and so a person has to create the perfect Bible in their own mind. But God’s Word should change us and we should not change the Word of God. You think English translations are wrong on these verses. The thing is… how do you really know beyond a shadow of a doubt you are correct? You don’t. You are only guessing. People have a hard time agreeing on the Bible in the English and you want them to agree on a language that nobody knows? Also, can we see in the Bible this kind of method being employed? Does God’s Word teach we have to look to a more ancient language to understand His words to us? Did God keep Scripture in the Biblical Hebrew? Did not God translate languages at Pentecost perfectly? Is it not odd that the KJB (King James Bible) in Psalms 12:6-7 correctly says His words would be preserved for all generations and yet, this passage is conveniently changed in Modern Translations to say something else? In fact, many doctrines and commands are changed in Modern Translations when you compare it to the King James Bible.

You can check that out here, and here.

Even the devil's name is placed in Modern Translations where they do not belong. You can check that out here.

Most of all your Modern Bibles comes from the Critical Text.

This constantly changing Critical Greek Text is under the direct supervision of the Vatican. They come right out and tell you this. They aren't even trying to hide it. Here is a photo of page 45 from right out of the Nestle-Aland 27th edition.

Source:
The KJB Only versus the Latin Vulgate Only Argument by: Another King James Bible Believer

But Guess which Bible the Roman Catholic Church does NOT want you to read -

Source:
Undeniable Proof the ESV, NIV, NASB, Holman Standard, NET, Jehovah Witness NWT etc. are the new "Vatican Versions" by: Another King James Bible Believer

Note: I am aware this forbidden book of the Catholic church is an older version, and they have updated it. But the point here is that at one time, they considered the KJB to be a forbidden book.

Very interesting.

Side Note:

Oh, and I know that I am about to mention (in reply to another one of your quotes) how guilt by association is not always true (and I mention the Catholic church), but that is in regard to doctrine (the Trinity) that the Bible actually teaches and this is not in regard to the source of the origin of God's Word that we have today. For I don't believe the Word we have today comes from any Catholic influence or supervision. Yes, I know about Erasmus, but he was not exactly in agreement with many Catholic doctrines, and he was later rejected by the Catholic church and he died among his Protestant friends.

To learn more about Erasmus, check out this article here.

As an example, false doctrine is propagated by the Jehovahs' Witnesses, based upon a poor verse translation in Revelation in the KJV. I will put the example at the bottom after this discussion. But it shows that if there is a doctrinal issue that we see as sketchy we should investigate the Greek, not the English versions. My alternative translation fits with the original word used οὐ (not) γέγραπται (are written). The KJV says "were written", which is a way it "could be written", but I checked the Greek interlinear, there it was written, "ARE written". Not "were written". This shows it can be translated either way.

I don’t know the JW’s interpretation on Revelation. I honestly don’t care to know it. My concern is learning God’s Word and not other religions. However, guilt by association is not always true. Catholics believe in the Trinity, but that does not mean that the Trinity is not true just because we both may believe Catholics partake of many things that are unbiblical. But we both believe in the Trinity. However, the difference between us is that I have authority in proving the Trinity is true with the Bible because I believe the King James Bible is the pure Word of God. For 1 John 5:7 is the only verse in the Bible that point blank teaches the Trinity and yet this precious beautiful verse is removed in Modern Translations. For if a guy was marooned on an island and all he had was a King James Bible, his chances of knowing about the Trinity are better if he never heard of the Trinity before. For no Modern Bible comes right out and teaches the Trinity like the KJB.

I would like to point out a difficulty in what you have written, why does God know some peoples sin's but not others? If He really knew things in the way you say, there is no need to blot people out, for He already knew what they would do.

You are thinking in terms of a human. God is faithful to His Word. If a person at one point in time is going to be faithful to God, the Lord our God must honor His Word and give them eternal life (even if it is for a temporary amount of time). For if they later turn out to not follow God, and they want to walk away from Him, or they want to later justify sin in their life, then that is their choice. God will let them go. This is what blotting a person's name out of the book of life means. But in your Theology, you have to re-write Scripture in English bibles because you don't like what it says. I just accept the Bible in what it says plainly and I am not out to create my own Word of God in my own likeness. God's Word should change us, and we should not change God's Word because there are warnings to adding or taking away from His word.

The Jehovahs' Witnesses believe that Jesus is a created being with a separate personality to God, that his existence is separate to God. To support this idea they use various scriptures, one of their favorite verses is as follows. Where talking of Jesus the King James version says:

… the beginning of the creation of God Rev 3:14

This can be confusing because it sounds like Jesus was the first created being. But as we will see this is not the case. The Greek word translated beginning is as follows (from Strongs):

G746
archē
ar-khay'

From G756; (properly abstract) a commencement, or (concrete) chief (in various applications of order, time, place or rank): - beginning, corner, (at the, the) first (estate), magistrate, power, principality, principle, rule.

You will notice the word has various meanings and we will discus some of them. Take

“I was in the city of Joppa praying: and in a trance I saw a vision, A certain vessel descend, as it had been a great sheet, let down from heaven by four corners; and it came even to me” - Act 11:5
The word corner in the verse above also uses the word archē, an archē can be a corner. We will discuss why this is relevant latter. Also note

“For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him”: ,Col 1:16

The word archē is used above for ruler, or power. Why, well lets discuss some English words, arch and archangel are English words that have their root in archē. But what is an arch, it is similar to a triangular shape, as is a corner in Acts 11:5. Why is ruler a valid expression from the word, well a ruler is the top most piece under which you find others, rulership is like a triangle too, the top point is the King, or supreme ruler, the lower you go in the triangle are princes, governors, then at the bottom the common man. So you see the word in revelation does not need to mean the first creation, it can mean “the ruler of the creation of God”, or the “Origin of the creation of God”, both translations fit perfectly with the view that Jesus is God, he both rules, and is the originator of creation, as Col 1:16 says “For by him were all things created”, and note they were created “for him”, and we know the creation was created for God.

I just looked up G746 and G756 at BlueLetterBible.org

What does this have to do with your denial of the English translations in Revelation 13:8, and Revelation 17:8?

Do you not know that God has chosen the poor of this world to be rich in faith?

“Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him?” (James 2:5).

The poor guy (who is rich in faith) is obviously not going to be a scholar or have access to concordances and other resources. The poor guy is simple and he just reads and believes his Bible in the English.

Jesus said, beware of the scribes (Matthew 12:38).

The scribes are those who “tran-scribe” the Scriptures.
This is the scholar of our day. They also transcribe the Scriptures.
Jesus said for us to beware of them, and not to implicitly trust them.

Another problem I have with the “OAO (i.e. Original Autograph Only) Belief” is that if we are out to create the perfect Bible, we can end up wasting our whole lives trying to figure out what God said when God actually wants us to get busy in living for Him by loving Him, and others.

 

[FutureAndAHope]

The bible is a very broad book, there are many scriptures, and they all must be in agreement. I am not attempting to twist scripture, I am looking for agreement within the text. Take:

Rev 17:8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.

At face value that says that sinners were not in the book of life from the beginning. But this contradicts ideas like:

Rev 22:17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

All I am doing is looking at the interlinear where it says οὐ (not) γέγραπται (are written) to try to reconcile this discrepancy, and see if an alternative meaning can be read from it.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

The bible is a very broad book, there are many scriptures, and they all must be in agreement. I am not attempting to twist scripture, I am looking for agreement within the text. Take:

Rev 17:8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.

At face value that says that sinners were not in the book of life from the beginning. But this contradicts ideas like:

Rev 22:17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

All I am doing is looking at the interlinear where it says οὐ (not) γέγραπται (are written) to try to reconcile this discrepancy, and see if an alternative meaning can be read from it.

The Bible uses the word “all” but it does not always mean, “all.” The same is true with Revelation 22:17 and John 3:16. For in Revelation 22:17: I don’t even think those who worship the beast will ever want to ever take the water of life because they are too far gone down the path of darkness.

 

[FutureAndAHope]

The Bible uses the word “all” but it does not always mean, “all.” The same is true with Revelation 22:17 and John 3:16.

If you believe in a just God it means "all". All who will follow God's way, not follow after the flesh.

For in Revelation 22:17: I don’t even think those who worship the beast will ever want to ever take the water of life because they are too far gone down the path of darkness.

This is true. As we see in:

2Th 2:9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

The very purpose of the beast is to deceive those who don't follow righteousness. You are right they are too far gone in their sins.

 

[jamiec]

The bible is a very broad book, there are many scriptures, and they all must be in agreement. I am not attempting to twist scripture, I am looking for agreement within the text. Take:

Rev 17:8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.

At face value that says that sinners were not in the book of life from the beginning. But this contradicts ideas like:

Rev 22:17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

All I am doing is looking at the interlinear where it says οὐ (not) γέγραπται (are written) to try to reconcile this discrepancy, and see if an alternative meaning can be read from it.

People show to which of those two groups they belong, by how they act, and keep acting.

The groups in Rev are described in static, hard-and-fast terms, because Rev is not a work of history or biography, that has to make room for the vagaries and uncertainties of real human psychology & action, (as Samuel, Kings, & even the Gospels & Acts, do); it is an apocalypse, and specifically an apocalypse that shows God judging human behaviour, not historically & psychologically, but in a static and fixed & black-and-white manner. The characters in apocalypses are not historical individuals, but personify & symbolise types of behaviour - and as Rev is largely a book of judgements made by God, most of the characters in Rev are either not historical in nature: because they are either:

Heavenly beings: angels, 24 elders, 4 Living Creatures, saints under the altar, satan & his angels;
or unearthly monsters: the Two Beasts;
or personifications: the 2 Women, of Rev 12 & 17;
or Divine Beings: the One Sitting One the Throne, the Glorified Lord, the 7 Spirits, the Lamb;
or groups of people: kings, great & small, slave & free, merchants, people & tribes & nations & tongues, etc.

The human characters are not individualised. To be individualised, is not their function in the book. The literary function of the human groups in the Book of Revelation, is, to be objects of God's judgements, to react to them, to show by their reactions that they are being judged.

The book contains only one human individual person, and that is John himself. His purpose is to see and to hear and (usually) to record, what he is shown, and seas, and hears. Literarily, he functions both as the prophetic seer of the versions he is shown, and as the Everyman figure who, by having the visionary experience, mediates that experience to the seven churches to which the letters are written, and to us who are the readers of his book.

Long story short: the passages that seem contradictory, are not in fact contradictory; each is valid in its own way, because each comes from a different literary genre: one from a speech in a Gospel, the other two from a Christian apocalypse. And because they belong to different literary genres, they are written with different purposes and functions.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

If you believe in a just God it means "all". All who will follow God's way, not follow after the flesh.

Here are some examples where ALL doesn’t mean “every single person”:

Mark 1:5 And there went out unto him ALL the land of Judaea, and they of Jerusalem, and were ALL baptized of him in the river of Jordan, confessing their sins.

John 8:2 And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and ALL the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.

Acts 22:15 For thou [Paul] shalt be his witness unto ALL MEN of what thou hast seen and heard.

Matthew 10:22 And ye shall be hated of ALL MENfor my name’s sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved.

John 3:26 And they came unto John, and said unto him, Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, behold, the same baptizeth, and ALL MEN come to him.

Matthew 21:26 But if we shall say, Of men; we fear the people; for ALL hold John as a prophet.

2 Corinthians 3:2 Ye are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of ALL MEN

Romans 12:17 Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of ALL MEN.18 If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with ALL MEN.

This is true. As we see in:

2Th 2:9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

The very purpose of the beast is to deceive those who don't follow righteousness. You are right they are too far gone in their sins.

I agree with the principle with you that those who take the mark are most likely sent a strong delusion to believe a lie, but those mentioned in 2 Thessalonians 2:9-10 are the kind of unbelievers or the wicked who have a chance at salvation. For it says in verse 10 that the reason why they perish is because they received not the love of the truth that they might be saved.

 

[FutureAndAHope]

I agree with the principle with you that those who take the mark are most likely sent a strong delusion to believe a lie, but those mentioned in 2 Thessalonians 2:9-10 are the kind of unbelievers or the wicked who have a chance at salvation. For it says in verse 10 that the reason why they perish is because they received not the love of the truth that they might be saved.

What you have to realize is all people "have a chance of salvation", the whole group of unsaved in this passage "had that chance". As "all" people have a chance of salvation.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

What you have to realize is all people "have a chance of salvation", the whole group of unsaved in this passage "had that chance". As "all" people have a chance of salvation.

I believe this is true EXCEPT for those who worship the beast in the future. God is sovereign over the events of what will happen in the future and HE has deemed this kind of sin to be so bad… that their names were never in the book of life to begin with. Jesus did not die for their sins on account that this kind of sin was unforgivable or not redeemable because it is a complete rejection of God during a time when men will be less without excuse about God’s existence (because of all the signs and miraculous things going on around them that lines up with what the Bible predicted).

 

[Bible Highlighter]

What you have to realize is all people "have a chance of salvation", the whole group of unsaved in this passage "had that chance". As "all" people have a chance of salvation.

Calvinists falsely believe in Limited Atonement in that Jesus died only for the Elect. However, I believe in Provisional Atonement in that Christ died for the majority of all of men’s sins (except for those in Revelation 13:8, and Revelation 17:8) so as to provide a provision or atonement for them if they so choose to accept it by faith (Whereby the atonement can be personally applied to their lives). We know this is true because 2 Peter 2:1 talks about false teachers who deny the Lord who bought them. Obviously these false teachers are not saved, but yet that does not mean Jesus did not provide a provision in paying for their sins at the cross. It’s just the atonement will not be applied to their lives because they are not abiding in the faith.