Michael Colunga (25 April 2011)
"RE:  Barry Amundsen's kvetch with Donald Price"

 
Hello, John and Doves,
 
A careful reading of Revelation 20:15 reveals that the "Book of Life" must contain all the names of all persons saved from all ages and all dispensations.
 
Otherwise, those people whose names that were only in the Lamb's Book of Life (if that were possible) would have to be cast into the Lake of Fire.
 
Conclusion?  The Lamb's Book of Life is a subset of the Book of Life.  Please remember, from your Finite Math 101 studies in Intermediate School, what we learned about sets and subsets, etc.
 
As such, we allow, at least for the moment, that The Lamb's Book of Life may be identical to the Book of Life.  This is because the full, entire set is always a subset of itself.
 
To settle this question, we need to turn to Scripture.  It is clear that Jesus has two folds that shall become one:
    ""And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock [and] one shepherd."  John 10:16
 
So, at the very least, Jesus is talking about Israel [compare John 10:11-13 with Ezekiel 34:12, with Zechariah 11:16-17, and with Zechariah 13:7] and the Gentile saved of the Church era.  Now, the question becomes, "What about the Tribulation saints, and the Millennium saints?
 
Well, it is clear that the Tribulation saints are a part of Israel.  The Millennium is all about restored Israel.  Thus, we can conclude that the Lamb's Book of Life contains at least the saved from Israel (whose name was Jacob) and onward.
 
What about those saved on the sidelines during that time until time ends?  What about the gleanings?  After all, it is written,
    "Surely the arm of the LORD is not too short to save, nor his ear too dull to hear."  Isaiah 59:1
 
Moreover,
    "...He is also able to save to the uttermost those who come to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them."  Hebrews 7:25
 
It is a spiritual principle that those saved during a particular dispensation, by whatever means,
belong to that dispensation.  Thus, we have taken care of the gleanings.  Now, what about those between Adam and Abraham?  Do they fit in?
 
We turn to the book of Hebrews, written by the Spirit of God to unlock such mysteries.
    "Both the one who makes men holy and those who are made holy are of the same family. So Jesus is not ashamed to call them brothers."  Hebrews 2:11
 
Clearly, if someone is saved, they are made holy [see Hebrews 11, the faith chapter].  Thus, if they are in the same family, they must be on the same family tree, and therefore in the same book.
 
Conclusion?  The Lamb's Book of Life is, in fact, identical with the Book of Life.
 
In HaShem,
Mike C.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Barry Amundsen (21 Apr 2011)
"Donald Price Book of Life vs. Lamb's Book of Life"

Hi Donald Price,
 
from your post:
_______________________________
 
(We are inclined to believe
that only the believers who have lived since the cross have their names written in this book.)
The major difference between the two books is that the Book of Life seems to contain the
names of all living people, whereas the Lambs Book of Life includes only the names of those
who have called upon the Lamb for salvation.
_____________________________
 
Luke 2:
 10.  And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.
 
I do believe that there are certain levels of rewards in Heaven but I don't know that I believe in separate categories merely by being saved during Old Testament time and New Testament time.
I have heard this idea that only those alive at the time and after the cross can be in the special group of N.T. believers and that those before are just some other class. Just for the sake of discussion, I believe that there is no distinction by when one is born but that Adam and Eve got saved and just as saved as we do through the promise of a savior. God having to shed the innocent blood of animals to cover them but we have the sacrifice of Jesus and no longer need the animals but otherwise there is no difference and we all will be in the same book of life or of the Lamb. I could be wrong because there is the mystery of the church and all but maybe they are even included in the church in some way because God is outside of time. Although I believe that after the rapture there will be a different group from that point on maybe. I don't know, it does get tricky...
 
I have heard Chuck Missler and others use that scripture where Jesus says John the Baptist is the greatest of men born of women yet he who is least in the kingdom is greater than he... to suggest that there is a difference between those saved of the Old Testament and those of the New. But I don't think that was really Jesus point at all. Rather that Jesus was saying that judging purely by man's efforts (of men born of women not from above) apart from God's salvation by which we all must be saved, the highest report card was John's but Jesus goes on as if to say, So what! That alone is not enough to get him into the kingdom so therefore if he were to rely on his report card the least saint in the kingdom would still be in higher standing than John would be if he didn't get in through Jesus. It's like another way of saying except your righteousness exceed that of the Scribes and Pharisees... Except your righteousness exceed that of John the Baptist, who has the highest report card of all of you, judging by just human abilities, you still won't make it, was His point. To suggest that Jesus was trying to show that there was some mystical separation between how Old Testament saints get saved vs. New Testament or their category is different than New Testament saints, is I think to miss the whole point. The subject that Jesus was on was how your own righteousness is not enough not about there being different categories between Old Testament believers and New Testament believers. Because Jesus was saying that John was a very special man and not some wimp. But even so, he still needs Jesus to be saved.
 
Furthermore, we are all called sons of Abraham for our faith because he got saved the same way we do by his faith in what God had promised him. Right? Why should he end up in a different category then? Even the "heroes of faith" Hebrews 11, chapter mentions all the Old Testament saints and their faith that saved them as our examples of how to be saved likewise and not as though we are somehow in a different category now that Jesus has died and rose. I guess we'll all find out soon enough anyway. I can hardly wait till all these kinds of questions are finally answered once and for all!