Replies

In context or out of context, the point remains that future tense is used in all these verses : "I will blot", "I will not blot", "they be blotted". That which has not been written, can not be blotted out. If only the names of the elect were written, nothing would or could ever be blotted out as the Book would pre-exist in a perfectly accurate condition. It is clear that God has the ability to alter the content of the Book of Life by His will. If only the elect are written in the Book to begin with, these passages become misleading, if not deceptive -- two qualities I shudder to attribute to God.

You are correct.

Lose of salvation for an Old Testament saint goes against Unconditional election.

We who hold to eternal security, believe that the issue is not unconditional election, but election in Christ that makes one secure.

The Old Testament saint could have his name blotted out of the book of life, since he was not in union with Christ.

The Church Age believer is however, the body of Christ and His bride, and that is the basis of his eternal security.

I'm not sure I follow you. It's sounds like you are saying that God is able and willing to blot the name of an Old Covenant saint out of the Book, but that He is not able or is unwilling to blot the name of a New Covenant saint out of the Book. Have I misunderstood?

The Old Testament saint could have his name blotted out of the book of life, since he was not in union with Christ.

The first thing that popped into my mind was the Passover in Exodus chapter 12. The children of Israel are commanded to mark their door posts with the blood of a perfect lamb, male and first born, and to consume its flesh in order that they be spared from the wrath of God visited upon Egypt.

While true, that the Christ had not yet visited the Earth in flesh, I would still say He was very much in union with these children of Israel. The lamb slaughtered was akin to the Christ and His flesh and blood saved them, just as it does a New Covenant saint today.