Dear Joe,<br>I don't quite understand how I did not respond to your tree of life illustration. I simply said that the holy city was also mentioned as being taken away. This by itself makes my case. I fail to see how "take away his part" means "never had a part in the first place." This violates the simple denotation of this passage. You make bold assertations that I must take John 6 in its most literal sense (which I do), why can't you say the same here? Concerning Revelation 3:21, this does make a statement of security, but it does refers to when we will enter New Jerusalem, not the present time. Recall also that all overcomers will eat of the tree of life (Revelation 2:7), thus if one performed the act mentioned in 22:19, it would be an obvious indicator that he was no longer an overcomer.<br><br>And yes, I am well aware that Christ has full ownership of believers. We are also sealed by the Holy Spirit, which guarantees security from any power in the world that might try to drag us away from Christ (see Romans 8:38-39). This does not guarantee that a believer cannot walk away from God. If this did happen, that person would be cut off from by God the Father (John 15), for He is sovereign and has the right to do so with what is His.<br><br>And yes, Christ promises believers His new name. And? He also promises us eternal life, but the promises only apply to those who do not fall away. As I stated before, the fact that a person can have their part in the tree of life taken away proves that it is possible for a believer to fall away and not be classed as "he who overcomes." This promise would not apply to them.<br><br>In response to Dabney's:<br>"As to the last passage, to make sure our election, is most manifestly spoken only with reference to the believerís own apprehension of it, and comfort from it; not as to the reality of Godís secret purpose."<br><br>and<br><br>"Granting that God has a secret purpose infallibly to save a given soul, that purpose embraces means as fully as ends; and those means are such as suit a rational free agent, including all reasonable appeals to hope and fear, prospect of danger, and such like reasonable motives. Now, that an elect man may fall totally, is naturally possible, considering him in his own powers; hence, when God plies this soul with fears of falling it is by no means any proof that God intends to permit him to fall, in His secret purpose. Those fears may be the very means designed by God to keep him from it."<br><br>This is baloney. God does not make idle threats, false testimonies, or give warnings against things which cannot occur. Since this is a testimony from Jesus Christ Himself, rather than explain it away, I will take Him at His word. Dabney's error is also apparent in light of 1 John 4:16-18 "And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him. Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment: because as he is, so are we in this world. There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love." <br><br>How can a God of love that casts out fear promote fear in those He loves? Dalbey's reasoning is simple grasping at straws, but God's word stands firm: He means what He says.<br><br><br>In Christ,<br>Josh