Featured Foreknowledge

Now....just follow through consistently with the golden chain of rom8
28And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.
29For whom he did foreknow,......the elect {God knows them in the covenant of redemption} while God in His omniscience knows about every person everywhere.......here we are told that He knows these elect intimately in a covenant relationship.....
adam...knew eve,,,and she conceived......adam knew eve again.....
you only have I known....of all nations of the earth amos3:2

he also did predestinate......[these foreknown in a covenant relationship}


to be conformed to the image of his Son, ...[the unsaved are not conformed to the image of the Son]


that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. ...elect brethren Heb2:9-16


9and him who was made some little less than messengers we see -- Jesus -- because of the suffering of the death, with glory and honour having been crowned, that by the grace of God for every one he might taste of death. 10For it was becoming to Him, because of whom [are] the all things, and through whom [are] the all things, many sons to glory bringing, the author of their salvation through sufferings to make perfect,
11for both he who is sanctifying and those sanctified [are] all of one, for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren,

12saying, `I will declare Thy name to my brethren, in the midst of an assembly I will sing praise to Thee;' and again, `I will be trusting on Him;'

13and again, `Behold I and the children that God did give to me.' 14Seeing, then, the children have partaken of flesh and blood, he himself also in like manner did take part of the same, that through death he might destroy him having the power of death -- that is, the devil --

15and might deliver those, whoever, with fear of death, throughout all their life, were subjects of bondage,

16for, doubtless, of messengers it doth not lay hold, but of seed of Abraham it layeth hold,
17wherefore it did behove him in all things to be made like to the brethren, that he might become a kind and stedfast chief-priest in the things with God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people, 18for in that he suffered, himself being tempted, he is able to help those who are tem


30Moreover whom he did predestinate, ..............elect



them he also called: ...........elect




and whom he called, them he also justified: ..............elect





and whom he justified, them he also glorified. .........elect

 

You are missing what proginwskw means when a person is the object. Ginwskw can refer to awareness of factual information, but it is primarily about knowing "experientially" or "relationally."

If you say that you know someone, you are not simply saying that you have factual knowledge about that person. For instance, most people in the USA know who the current President is. However, if you say that you know the President, you mean that you have some form of mutual relationship with him. You have communicated or met in some form and you both have experiential knowledge of each other's person.

Examine the following passages:

Mat 1:24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:
Mat 1:25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

Being betrothed to Mary, Joseph obviously knew information about her. In fact, he already knew her in the sense that he had mutual relationship with her. This is a euphemism for certain activity beyond mere personal relationship, but the point is that it is not referring to factual knowledge about a person or what that person does.

Mt 7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
Mat 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

If this is referring to Jesus having factual knowledge about certain people, then we have a theological problem that would beyond even open theism. Obviously, the word knew here has to do with a mutual relationship, and not factual awareness.

What, then, of foreknow (proginwskw)? Well, the same rule would apply when a person is the direct object.
If God knows someone, it means that He has a mutual relationship with that person.
If God foreknows someone, it means that He has a mutual relationship with the person "beforehand."

Rom 8:28 And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.
Rom 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.
Rom 8:30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom[/u] he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

Those whom God foreknew (i.e. fore-relationshipped), He called them according to His purpose. If God had a relationship with certain people before they even existed, then how can God be the "Great Responder" in this golden chain of redemption?!
Those He called, He justified. This cannot, cannot, canNOT be the "general call"! The same ones that are "called" [according to His purpose] are justified!

Things that make you go "Hmmm."

 

Your question is begging the question. I answered what the passage in the OP actually means by defining proginwskw and showing examples in Scripture. The question is NOT "what did God foreknow about" anyone because the verse says "whom he did foreknow" NOT "about whom he did foreknow." Romans 8:28-30 is NOT saying that God foreknew something about people and therefore called them. It says that God foreknew them. This is a term of relationship, NOT of factual knowledge.

God's calling, justification, sanctification, and glorification of these individuals is NOT based on Him having foreknowledge of what they would do, but rather on Him "fore-relationshipping" them according to the kind intention and mystery of His will.

I believe you totally missed my point, and you are reading foreknowledge of facts into these verses.

Where do you get this idea from this verse? It simply says that God chose us "beforehand" for His sanctifying purpose. Nowhere does this put a precondition of factual awareness.

Yup. And the word for foreordained in v.20 is a form of proginwskw as well (as used in v.2), demonstrating that "foreknow" and "foreordain" are somewhat interchangeable. Things that make you go "Hmmm."

You keep making assumptions that beg the question at hand.

 

Aren't you trying to put two of these connotations on the one use of the word? This is where you are question begging.

ginwskw or proginwskw as an intransitive, or as a transitive with something impersonal as a direct object would carry definitions 1 and 2. As a transitive with something personal as a direct object, either would carry definitions 3 and 4 by virtue of what knowing a person would require if done "beforehand."

God knew before them who those he predetermined beforehand and called them[/quote]God called those whom he "predetermined beforehand" because this is what is implied by foreknowing a person.

Yup. God knew them (personally, relationally, NOT merely "what they would do").

He based His decision to call, justify, sanctify, and glorify certain people upon His mysterious decision to foreknow them (i.e. enter into a loving relationship with them). He effectuated His relationship by calling, justifying, sanctifying, and glorifying them. He justified the ungodly.
He did not base His redemptive chain on individuals based on "foreseen faith." That is NOT what this passage says. It is based on His foreknowing them, NOT their "actions." To assume that His foreknowing them has to do with foreknowing "what they would do" is reading into the text, pure and simple.

NO, it is NOT. More question begging. You have yet to prove your assumption that God's redemptive chain is based on foreknowing actions. It is based on His eternal choice to "fore-relationship" people according to the mystery of His will.

I believe that God is omniscient and that He knows and "foreknows" all things past, present, and future. However, the question at hand is on what basis is God's redemptive chain on certain people. The answer lies in the definition of what it means to know or foreknow people.

Sure, God eternally knew the fall would occur. Your assumptions is that God foreknowing people means that His actions are based on His foreknowing what they would do. That is NOT what Romans 8:28-30 says.

Yes, and the word for foreordained is from the same word as "foreknowledge" in v.2. Did God simply foreknow "what Jesus would do" or did He foreordain it? It's the same thing when God foreknows people. He foreordains them. He chooses them by entering into a relationship with them in eternity. On the basis of His choice to enter into a relationship with certain sinners, He brings this relationship about in time by calling them, justifying them, sanctifying them, and glorifying them. Romans 8:28-30 teaches effectual calling, not a response to "foreseen faith."

 

He "foreknows" everything about everything.

What, then, do you suppose Jesus meant when He said that He would say to certain people in the last day "I never knew you." Does this mean that He was unaware of their existence or the things they did? Of course not! The knew has to do with relationship, NOT awareness of factual knowledge.

God knows about everyone and everything.
God knows people (He has a relationship with them), and there are people that God does not "know."
This is the difference in meaning between knowing people and knowing actions. Understand?

Now, if knowing people implies a mutual relationship (not awareness of facts), then foreknowing people implies the same thing: a mutual relationship, but "beforehand."

There is NOTHING in Romans 8:28-30 to say that God's redemptive chain is based on His foreknowing actions. It is based on His foreknowing people (entering into a mutual relationship).

 

But listen to yourself.

If God is God and he knew the choices they would make, and God cannot change, and God cannot be wrong; then doesn't it stand to reason that even what God knew before hand was determinative since it could not happen any other way?

 

The answer lies in the mystery of God's will and is not something that the creature has to understand. If the creature can hold his creator--the Self-Sufficient One--morally accountable, then there is a moral standard that exists independently from God's will to which God can be subject. That makes no sense whatsoever and begs the question about from where the definition of morality comes.

Paul anticipates such questions in Romans 9:

Rom 9:14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
Rom 9:15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
Rom 9:16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.

Rom 9:19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
Rom 9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
Rom 9:21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

If Paul thought the way you do, he would have replied to the question like: "Oh, you misunderstood me. I wasn't saying that God really intervened in their will. That would be wrong!."

No, what he says is "O man, who are you to answer back to God. Shall the molded say to the molder 'Why did you make me like this?'"

It seems you are putting God in a little box and God can't work outside the box you choose to him Him because that doesn't fit your belief system. You assume that libertarian free will is true and must be true for moral responsibility, and therefore, God cannot accomplish His will because He is restrained by the autonomous will of His creatures.

I was taught and was a synergist most of my life. I became a monergist simply by reading the Bible and being humbled and losing debates.

I believe I have also paid scrupulous attention to the definition of words in Scripture on this thread and have showed other passages that prove it. You are arguing from your assumption of foreseen faith that begs the question, because that is the very challenge of the definition of the words in the verses in question.

God did not "randomly" select people. He elected them "before the foundation of the world" and "according to the kind intention of His will" and "the mystery of His will." His choice was not "random." It was according to His purpose. Just because we do not understand God's will does not mean it was "random." Once again, here we have the creature demanding of God an explanation even as faithful Job did.

Ask God, not me. Scripture only gives us statements like the above. It is neither my ability nor duty to answer for God.

Election is manifested outwardly. There is no one who is elect who does not believe, and vice versa. The question is "why does one believe and another does not?"

The Scriptures give evidence for how we know we are elect and how we can judge if another is elect. If we believe the Gospel, we are justified.

The text in the OP shows that God does a chain of things to people that He foreknew. If you don't like that, don't blame me. Blame the Scripture.

Php 1:27 Only let your conversation be as it becometh the gospel of Christ: that whether I come and see you, or else be absent, I may hear of your affairs, that ye stand fast in one spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the gospel;
Php 1:28 And in nothing terrified by your adversaries: which is to them an evident token of perdition, but to you of salvation, and that of God.
Php 1:29 For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake;

2Th 3:2 And that we may be delivered from unreasonable and wicked men: for all men have not faith.

If one believes the Gospel, one is saved. However, this faith in the Gospel that saves must be given effectually by God (whereby they then believe); otherwise, no one would believe.

Sure, God knows everything about everything. That is not in dispute. But, what does Jesus mean when He says "I never knew you"? Obviously, He is not talking about information, but a mutual relationship. In the same way, if God foreknows a person it is NOT referring to knowledge of information, but rather a mutual relationship. The fact that God can "foreknow" a person "before" that person exists in time demonstrates that the relationship was initiated and effectuated by God, not by the person. We love Him because He first loved us. The text of Romans 8:28-30 says nothing about God's redemptive chain being based on God having "foreknowledge" of what someone would do (such as "foreseen faith"). God's redemptive chain of calling, justifying, sanctifying, and glorifying is based on His eternal choice to enter into a relationship with such persons "beforehand."

Nope. Never said that He was. In fact, not only did He know that you would call on Him, but it was part of His eternal decree that you would.

Because He foreknew us (not something we would do), our calling on Him was based on His calling of us. This calling is not the "general call" because, according to Romans 8:29-30, the very same people that are "called" are "justified," "predestined to be conformed to the image of His son," and "glorified." They are not a [/i]subset[/i] of the ones who are "called" in this context.

He not only "made the provision for man to be saved" but He actually atoned as a substitute for the elect. He actually paid for their sins. He brings them effectually to faith in the gospel by the Spirit such that they fall into His embrace in love. They are translated (passive participle) from darkness into light. God changes them from being God haters to God lovers.

Never, but there is a big difference in meaning between knowing about a person and knowing a person. Jesus said that there are people that He "never knew." This must be referring to relationship, not factual knowledge. To foreknow a person, then, must mean to have a mutual relationship with that person "beforehand."

 

How do you know what God can do regarding eternal relationships? I have demonstrated that that is what foreknew regarding people in this context must mean. You have failed to prove otherwise. You have only assumed factual knowledge based on your tradition. This is the "question begging" that I am talking about.

This is the question begging I am talking about rearing its ugly head again. You have not proven this one bit, yet it is the very question at hand to determine the message of Romans 8:28-30 in the OP.

There is no randomness in God's eternal purpose. Just because we as the creature do not have a 100% revelation of the mysterious will of the Creator does not make it random. Man does not have to understand God to believe God and what He actually has revealed about Himself in a limited fashion.

Yes, those whom God foreknew He predestinated to be conformed to the image of His Son. Those whom God "fore-relationshipped," He determined in His eternal council that He would do certain things to them: call them, justify them, sanctify them, and glorify them.

Prove that salvation is based on "foreseen faith" in man, which seems to be what you are arguing. You cannot just assume this. That is question begging. It is the question at hand in Romans 8:28-30. You need to define foreknow in context against what I have demonstrated from Scripture.

Yup!

If you are trying to imply that God's calling, justifying, sanctifying, and glorifying of us was based on "foreseen faith," you have to prove that. If you just assumed that, you are question begging, because that is the question at hand.

Sure.

Of course not. Your contention that salvation is either based on "foreseen faith" or "randomness" is a false dichotomy and is a fallacy of the excluded middle. The excluded middle here is the infinite will of God that He did not reveal in Scripture.

You keep asserting that if God does not depend on the autonomous cooperation of His creatures to effectuate His desire in them that the only alternative is "randomness." Just because we do not have 100% revelation of God's eternal decree does not mean His decree is "random." We do not have to understand how and why God does what He does to believe that He has a purpose in it. That's what humanism requires. As Christians we do not have to define God by human reasoning to believe Him.