We run our website the way we wished the whole internet worked: we provide high quality original content with no ads. We are funded solely by your direct support. Please consider supporting this project.

Revelation 13:8 refers to “everyone whose names have not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life.” How does that square with open theism?

Three possibilities exist in terms of reconciling Revelation 13:8 with open theism.

1) First, the “from the foundation of the world” clause can attach to either “everyone whose names have not been written” or to “the lamb that was slain.” For example, the TNIV translates this passage “All inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast—all whose names have not been written in the Lamb’s book of life, the Lamb who was slain from the creation of the world. ” So it is with many translations of this passage. If this is correct, the passage suggests that the crucifixion of Christ was part of Gods’ plan from the beginning, but not that people’s names were or were not written in “the book of life” from the foundation of the world.

2) The phrase “from the foundation” (apo kataboleis) can mean “from before” or “from the time of” (=since). So even if we attach the phrase to “everyone whose name has not been written…” the passage need only refer to those who didn’t enter into eternal life from the beginning of the world – that is, throughout history. As history progresses, God (metaphorically of course) puts into his “book of life” all people who enter into a life-giving relationship with him.

3) Several times in Scripture God warns people that he may blot their names out of the book of life (Exod. 32:33; Rev. 3:5, cf. Rev. 22:18). In this light, it seems we should not think that having one’s name in or out of “the book of life” is a permanent thing. On a side note, if names were written (or not written?) in the book of life before the world began, and if one can’t add or detract from this book, one might legitimately wonder what these passages mean.

Applied to the foreknowledge debate, if God foreknew from all eternity that certain names would be “blotted out” of his book, one has to wonder why God bothered to put them there in the first place? If God may indeed “take away [a]… person’s share in the tree of life and in the holy city” (Rev. 22:19), and God knew this would happen, why did he give them a share in the first place? If names can be added and/or deleted from the book of life, it suggests that the eternal destiny of these people was not fixed in God’s mind (=in “the book”) from the start .

Related Reading

Naturalism and the Historical Jesus

The quest for a “merely human” Jesus The various radical views of Jesus now being advocated by certain scholars and propagated through the press are buttressed by a number of different historical arguments. Some argue, for example, that the evidence from the first century suggests that Jesus was not unique in his healing ministry. Or,…

What is the significance of Exodus 32:33 ?

The Lord says “I will blot out of my book” all those who persist in rebellion against him. If everything is eternally foreknown by God, one wonders why he would have recorded in his “book” the names of people who were to be blotted out eventually (cf. Rev. 3:5). Indeed, if God foreknew that certain…

Topics:

Are You a Church Misfit?

Romain Guy via Compfight Here’s a lovely reflection from Rachel Held Evans on the experience of finding that your questions are unwelcome in church. Evans is bumping up against this material as she reads Barbara Kingsolver’s Flight Behavior. I suspect this kind of experience is much more common that we’d like to admit. Can you…

Is There an Actual Satan?

Roger Olson wrote an excellent piece on how contemporary Christianity has tended to ignore or altogether extract Satan from the Biblical text. He explores some of the possible reasons for it and also discusses his own journey as he wrestled with the belief in the demonic realm. Really interesting. Here’s a personal experience of the…

What do you think of the “Penal Substitution” view of the atonement?

If asked what Jesus came to do and how he did it, most contemporary western Christians would automatically say something like, “Jesus took the punishment from God that I deserved.” This is what’s usually called “Penal Substitution” view of the atonement, for it emphasizes that Jesus was punished by God in our place. His sacrifice…

How do you respond to Romans 8:29?

“For whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn within a large family.” One of the greatest treasures given to believers when they open their hearts to the Lord is the promise that they shall certainly be “conformed to the…