I didn't that Paul said everyone is chosen. I said, "Ephesians 1 indicates that we are chosen to be in Him before the foundation of the world", which is a paraphrase of, "He hath chosen us in Him before the foundation of the world."
You said that "all names are in the book of life until they are blotted out." I took that to mean you were suggesting all are chosen, but whether our predestined status is "actualized" is conditioned on our response. I apologize if that's a misrepresentation.
But help me understand the difference. You said: "Ephesians 1 indicates that
we are chosen to be in Him before the foundation of the world. Predestined.
Whether we choose to or not is of our own free will." (My emphasis)
So,
"we" are chosen,
but, you say, whether or not that predestination is actualized(?) is
conditioned on our own choosing.
Am I understanding that right?
Who, then, is
"we"?
If
X is chosen, but only a
subset of X exercises their free will in accepting that predestination, then presumably you're suggesting that
those who are initially "chosen" is a larger group than
those who actually come, correct?
"...that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love..."
How is a person without blame? Repentance, forgiveness, obedience, which requires voluntary action on our part. And with God's help we are able to be holy and without blame, before Him in love.
It sounds like you're conflating means with cause. It's certainly true that believers act, repent, obey, and walk in holiness. The question isn't
whether human response occurs; it's
why it occurs.
In Eph. 1, the purpose clause ἵνα ἦμεν ἅγιοι καὶ ἄμωμοι ("in order that we should be holy and blameless") describes the intended
result of God's choosing, not its
precondition. "He chose us" (ἐξελέξατο ἡμᾶς)
for this purpose: "
in order that we should be holy..." (ἵνα ἦμεν ἅγιοι...).
Holiness, repentance, and obedience are therefore the fruits of divine election, not its grounds
. Paul doesn't say "He chose us
because we were holy," but "He chose us
in order that we would become holy."
I may have worded that poorly. Either you're in the book of life or you're not. If you're not, you're blotted out.
Revelation 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.
Action on our part. "He that overcometh..."
Righteousness. "...the same shall be clothed in white raiment..."
"I will not blot out his name out of the book of life" is hinged on, "He that overcometh."
Again, Rev. 3:5 is a litotes. A litotes is a figure of speech that affirms something strongly by denying its opposite. In English, we use it all the time: "He's no fool" means "He's very wise." "That's not bad" means "That's quite good." The denial of the negative functions to underscore the certainty of the positive.
Rev. 3:5 figures that category precisely. The structure is conditional:
"He who overcomes... I will never blot out his name from the Book of Life, but I will confess his name before my Father."
The second clause ("I will not blot out / wipe away") is paired positively with "I will confess," forming a rhetorical reinforcement. It's not describing two possible outcomes (kept or erased), but one assured outcome (secure and confessed). The "not blot out" phrase functions as
litotes; a denial of the negative to strengthen the assurance of the positive.
If John intended to warn believers about potential erasure, he would have written something like ἐάν τις μὴ νικᾷ, ἐξαλείψω τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ ("if anyone does not overcome, I will blot out his name"). But that's not what we have. The conditional structure of what he wrote focuses entirely on the overcomer, and the promise is one of reward and certainty, not risk.
According to
Revelation 20:12, the book of life is one of the books opened at judgment. Why open the book if a person's status never changes? Notice, "...
according to their works."
The fact that the Book of Life is
opened at the final judgment does not imply that names are added or removed at that time. Opening the book is a literary and judicial device. It allows God to
reveal the eternal status of each person publicly, in accordance with their works. John's point is about
manifestation, not the origination or alteration of the list.
"According to their works" refers to the public display of God's judgment, not to the grounds of election itself. The works demonstrate the fruit of God's prior choice or rejection. Human self-determination does not alter the divine decree.
So the opening of the book is analogous to a courtroom unveiling of a verdict. It shows what has already been true. The "never written" status of the wicked and the "blessing of the overcomers" reflect God's eternal appointment, not a mutable ledger.