Foreknowledge

[guest1]

Decisional regeneration?

I'm think so but we can let him clarify his position.

 

[Carbon]

I'm think so but we can let him clarify his position.

Fair enough

 

[SovereignGrace]

Fair enough

Foreknowledge means to know beforehand just as a butterfly means a dairy product with wings. Thanks Dr. William Mounce.

 

[preacher4truth]

The choir seems to be having a good time congratulating each other!

Hey, we're good singers, and we know it, plus we're very proud of our humility!

 

[SovereignGrace]

Hey, we're good singers, and we know it, plus we're very proud of our humility!

And we have the pats on our backs to prove it.

 

[preacher4truth]

And we have the pats on our backs to prove it.

That's right!!!

 

[Theo1689]

How rude and unchristian-like.

So when I respond the same way you did, you consider it "rude and unchristian-like".
I think that speaks volumes.

The fact that you feel the need to write pages of response to a simple illustration betrays the lady doth protest too much.

The bulk of my post was simply the entries from four Greek lexicons showing the definition of "foreknowledge", the term YOU wanted to talk about. I hardly understand how that is "write pages of response".

It seems that you simply don't like what the word ACTUALLY means.

Foreknew means know about beforehand,

Again, that's like saying "butterfly" means a dairy product with wings". (Thanks for the example)

it's not a euphemism like Adam knew Eve.

So you're a Greek scholar now?
How many years did you study Greek?
Who were your professors?
Which grammars did you use?

And why should we trust your alleged "expertise" more than the scholars behind BDAG, Mounce, UBS, and Louw & Nida?

You keep explaining that away, I feel no need to join you.

So you're not interested in the BIBLICAL meaning of the term.
Good to know.

 

[TibiasDad]

You now believe foreknowledge in the biblical (reformed) way?

No I believe you have presented a circular argument!

Doug

 

[Carbon]

Your claims are inconsistent. Above you make a logic argument/rationalization for faith being the effect of predestination. At other times, Calvinist declare that faith is the "fruit/gift of the Spirit".

Why the inconsistency?

How do you see that as inconsistent?

 

[Carbon]

They are not the same. Which is it?

Read again. Faith is the effect of predestination, and yes, faith is the fruit of the Spirit.

So, what’s your issue?

 

[Carbon]

Most Calvinists that I have ever meet will not rationalize faith. They will just simply declare that is a fruit of the Spirit. As such, it is not predicated upon predestination. When you rationalize faith in the manner you have, you're getting into dangerous area of "rationalism".

Who has known the mind of Christ that he might instruct Him?

Not saying I believe that. Just saying these two position are generally not considered compatible.

I think your reading and thinking to much into it. And drifting off in your thoughts.

just sayin

 

[Slyzr]

Ummmm, your point?

Not really my point.

However, it seems to me scripture is saying what it is saying.

More to the point have you seen the "Lord".

That he should appear to you a second time?

IMO ......it is alot of Jewish mysticism.

 

[Slyzr]

That isn't anything but ridiculous "mumbo jumbo". Molinism is the most ridiculous double talk that has ever existed in the history of theology. You say you don't know and then proceed to talk about "possibilities" and "middle knowledge".......... Nothing more than mud. Just absolute counterfactual mud.

If you can't explain even the simplest of things concerning "how" God knows, then you really shouldn't say you have a position at all. I usually avoid arguing with Arminianists because of their empty theology. You just can't explain much of anything. You talk of Omniscience without any rational explanation to deal with determinism.



God knew me in Christ Jesus. That is all that matters. Arminianism gives no glory to Jesus Christ. All it does is ramble in the muck and mire of the unknown.

Maybe he did not know you before.

Not saying He did not.

But your presupposition to that is rather tenuous.

 

[Ken Hamrick]

But of course, the only faith He sees is the faith that He Himself creates.

Amen!

 

[Our Lord's God]

It's pretty clear and obvious in scripture that foreknowledge in Romans 8:29 cannot have reference to foreseen faith, good works or a sinners response to the gospel call.
Arminianism is really off the mark on this one.


Faith cannot be the cause of foreknowledge because foreknowledge is before predestination, and faith is the effect of predestination.
48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed. Acts 13.

It cannot even be meant as foreknowledge of good works, because good works are the effect of predestination as well.
10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them. Eph 2.

It cannot be about our concurrence with the external call, but upon God's purpose and grace, given to us in Christ before the world began.
9 who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began, 2 Tim 1.

So, foreknowledge is meant as I have shown, the love of God towards those whom He predestinates to be saved through Jesus Christ. All those who are called by God are foreknown to Him, that is, they are the objects of His eternal love.
the Lord appeared to him from far away.
I have loved you with an everlasting love;
therefore I have continued my faithfulness to you. Jer 31:3.

I'm not saying that God does not foresee faith, of course He does, He see all things.
But of course, the only faith He sees in the faith that He Himself creates.

3 Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” 4 Nicodemus said to him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born?” 5 Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. 7 Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ 8 The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.” John 3.
8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, Eph 2.

To believe differently, that's your choice. To prove it in your Arminian view, use scripture, and good luck.

29 For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. 30 And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified. Romans 8.

"Foreknew" at Romans 8:29-30 refers to the Jews God had known in the past, Jews God had known beforehand.

The context makes that painfully clear.

 

[Our Lord's God]

Rom 8:29 For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.
Rom 8:30 And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.

You're leaving out the context...

Um, the context tells us WHO Paul had in mind.

Rom 8:31 What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us?
Rom 8:32 He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things?

Paul was writing to a mostly Gentile assembly @ Rome.

So you are ignoring the context and going with your imagination and pretending others are forgetting the context?

Ok, got it.

The context are all those of faith throughout all generations of humanity

No it isn't.

 

[Our Lord's God]

There is no difference between who Paul had in mind and who is the context. You find them in the following verses.

Rom 8:31 What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us?
Rom 8:32 He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things?

So it is whoever you would like to imagine eh?

Try some basic reading comprehension skills:

2:17 But if you bear the name “Jew” and rely upon the Law and boast in God, 18 and know His will and approve the things that are essential, being instructed out of the Law....

3:9 What then? Are we better than them? Not at all; for we have already charged that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin

4:1 What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, has found?

7:1 Or do you not know, brethren (for I am speaking to those who know the Law), that the law has jurisdiction over a person as long as he lives?

I'm afraid you have shown that you have no idea what Paul is even talking about in Romans. Paul is justifying his ministry to the Gentiles (1:5; 16:26). He singles out the Jewish segment of the Roman church to demonstrate to them that Gentiles can be a part of the people of God apart from the Law. That's what Romans 2 through 10 is all about and Paul doesn't return to including the Gentiles in his address until midway through chapter 11.

11:1-2 I say then, God has not rejected His people, has He? May it never be! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. 2 God has not rejected His people whom He foreknew.

8:29 For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren

At Romans 8:29, Paul is referring to the Jews God foreknew, those God had known beforehand in the past. He made it abundantly clear what he had in mind at 11:1-2.

 

[Our Lord's God]

I can read just fine. Why are you ignoring

Rom 8:31 What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us?
Rom 8:32 He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?
Rom 8:33 Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth.

1. Is this only talking about Jews?

Yes, Paul is talking about the Jews God had foreknown.

2. There is huge difference between knowing something before it happens and.......................knowing something that had already happened and telling someone later about it

Yes there is. This verse refers to God predestining his people, the Jewish remnant, to be conformed to the image of His son.

Are you seriously making the case that God is talking about knowing something that had already happened and just referencing it later?

NO. Paul is talking about God knowing SOMEONE beforehand - the Jewish remnant.

 

[Our Lord's God]

That is utter ridiculous. You're ignore the immediate context of his comments. The references you provided earlier are all over the map.

You keep saying this but you have not demonstrated, and cannot demonstrate this.

I'm am of the Seed of Jesus Christ. I am a Jew who is one inwardly who praise is of God and not of man

That's quite the fanatasy you are having.

There is neither Jew nor Greek in Christ Jesus.

Eph 1:4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
Eph 1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

Eph 1:11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:
Eph 1:12 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.
Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,

You seem to think you have some kind of point.