RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?

[Debbie Sawczak]

Thank you, Bill. I don't think I'll pursue the 'negative-option marketing' plan just now. It is not a good way of putting it. I am the slow one--I think slowly, and communicate slowly, and when I rush I get it wrong.   I am trying to work out all of what the Trinitarian position means. I love the account of how salvation is fully accomplished for the whole human race, nay, the whole cosmos, as opposed to a whole lot of little personal salvations, but I am stumbling over the question of the "mechanics" of our participation as individuals and where the wooing comes in. Interesting that you used that word in one of your posts. I don't see the wooing-people-one-at-a-time in the Trinitarian position so far. I am not comfortable, I haven't worked it all out yet. I introduced myself to this listserv as a person re-examining a lot of things all at once. The process is kind of overwhelming me.   Debbie  -----Original Message----- From: Bill Taylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 11:16 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life? Debbie, I am sorry I jumped to conclusions. I should have known better. Please forgive me. If it's alright with you, let's start over. Hi, my name is Bill Taylor. I am very glad to meet you and am equally happy that you are here with us :>)   I do have a couple questions for you: You said, "I agree with you there. But I'm not satisfied with the 'negative-option marketing' plan." I am a bit slow to catch on. What is this "'negative-option marketing' plan," and why the "But"?   I said, for the life of me, I don't get it. I am sorry. You caught the brunt of my frustration. I have posted numerous times on the sufficiency of Christ's finished work to save babies the same way he has saved everyone else, "believers" included. We do not need a second "gospel" to get those who cannot believe into heaven. Our problems arise from a deficient view concerning WHO Christ is and what he has accomplished in our stead and on our behalf. It frustrates me when what I have said in regards to this is overlooked when the discussion comes up again. No, it is not your theology, and certainly not all of your theology from just one post. It is me through and through. Thanks for being gracious and making light of my comment.   Bill       ----- Original Message ----- From: Debbie Sawczak To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 8:57 PM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life?   -----Original Message----- From: Bill Taylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 10:32 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life? If your logic holds, then we had better be teaching people their babies went to hell. That might keep them from killing the rest of them.   Exactly. I was trying to point out the absurdity of it.   Why are you so convinced that it rests in the mystery of God seeing the end from the beginning? Way too Arminian for me -- you are still waiting to get people saved. I've got news for you: they are saved. That is the Good News: He is Jesus Christ. If a person persistently rejects that news unto death, she SHOULD have been struck in the head as a baby! But rest assured the responsibility for her subsequent rejection rests squarely and totally upon her own shoulders. Our heart bleeds for her, but she heard the Good News of Jesus Christ, and this under the tutelage of none other than the greatest teacher in the universe, the Spirit of God himself, and still rejected that news. What a tragedy!    I am not an Arminian (not that there's anything wrong with that...). My position is actually the opposite of Arminianism. What I meant was not really all that different from what you said last time. When I said God sees the end from the beginning, I didn't mean foreknowledge. I meant that the person's whole life-direction is one. And by that I meant, if they reject the message after hearing, then they have already been saying no to whatever light/Spirit-preparation they have already received. If they accept it, they have already been saying yes. Which is pretty much what you said.       But it is as great a tragedy to limp along under the weight of a gospel of a Savior, who has not saved anyone until each one completes in the right order a specific rite of initiation I agree with you there. But I'm not satisfied with the "negative-option marketing" plan.   For the life of me, I don't get it. What? My entire theology, based on one post? That's OK. Actually, I don't get it either half the time.  --Debbie     Bill ----- Original Message ----- From: Debbie Sawczak To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 7:38 PM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life? Yes, there is that problem if you press it to the logical conclusion, isn't there? Same with the all-babies-go-to-heaven view. In that case, best kill your kid before s/he reaches the age of accountability, or at least ensure a good pervasive brain injury. But no; the Heard-Not can't lose by hearing, nor the child by understanding. I think it relates to your earlier post--God sees the end from the beginning. Also, everyone has some knowledge or experience to respond to. The response doesn't have to be propositional, nor intelligible to us--only intelligible to God. (Mind you, I don't think I've figured this out yet...)       Debbie   -----Original Message----- From: ShieldsFamily [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 8:55 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Whose Names are Written in the Lambs Book of Life? Don't you believe that all mankind is included in the incarnation which makes them all headed for heaven whether or not they overcome anything. I underlined the portion of your statement which is a true representation of things I've said. The second part is not accurate and cannot be linked to what I actually believe and have stated. I am confident (and this because I have had to defend and clarify myself so many times) that I have written more about the potential of humans to lose their salvation, than anyone on this list. I do not damn people to hell, like, say, you do, but I have written many substantive words expressing the possibility of people rejecting Christ and damning themselves to hell. You know this, so why do you continue to misrepresent my position? Bill    Bill it appears to me that your theological construct forces one to believe that the worst thing you could do is to tell someone about Jesus Christ.  If they never hear about Jesus they are guaranteed a ticket to heaven. If they do hear about Him and reject Him, that is the only possible way they can be destined for Hell.  So why go forth and spread the gospel? It sounds like a terrible thing to do.  Izzy