I will answer all your questions, but I find it necessary to do one thing at a time with you, to avoid you travelling across the whole universe...so step by step it is.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
The Definition Of “Foreknowledge”
- Thread starter Baptizo
- Start date
Here is an example..we are speaking of the word know in this verse about Cain.
Not Lot, Methusalah, David, Elisha, or anyone else...why do you have to jump out of this verse.
Was it an "intellectual knowing of his wife that caused a pregnancy, or was it intimate?
I was the one who wanted to stay in Romans. You are the one who took us back to the beginning of time.
Intellectual knowing was definitely involved. Intimacy was also involved, but is not mentioned probably for the same reason it is not an acceptable topic on the BB.
Silverhair
Well-Known Member
Have noticed how some want to wander of into the wilderness when they see that their view does not hold up.
Knowing someone as a husband and wife do is not the same as God foreknowing from B4 creation those that will trust in Him.
I am surprised that @Zaatar71 does not know that or perhaps he hopes to muddy the waters.
To Understand the use in Romans 8, it is necessary to see how the bible helps determine the use. In the same way we come up with the biblical teaching on the trinity...we scan through all 66 books.
God foreknows or foreloves them, because He has determined to give the saving faith, not because He must learn who might believe.
This is why I suggest that you look at the 99% of the usage to rule out your overlaid definition.
You suggested the 99%...I got that. However I never said every time this word is used it is used it has this meaning. I suggested the context of the persons in view would determine the proper biblical use.
atpollard
Well-Known Member
The verses I posted were more comprehensive than merely a cherry picking to support my contention.
I strive to be more honest in conversations.
That was actually the point that I noted when I conceded that the adjective [G1588] did not generally connote election before salvation, but merely referenced the “body of Christ” as you had stated.
No, I think that is your assumption.
[2Ti 2:10 ESV] 10 Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.
I think it equally reasonable to assume that Paul endured hardship for the sake of the elect that he would reach and lead to Christ in the years to come … that THOSE elect would also obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus. It fits hand in glove with “as many as were appointed to eternal life believed” (Acts 13:48).
If you propose that Jesus CHOSE those that fist chose him as the meaning of “you did not choose me, but I chose you”, then we will be best served by agreeing to disagree and stopping here. This screams the same truth as …
[John 6:44-45 ESV] 44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. 45 It is written in the Prophets, 'And they will all be taught by God.' Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me--
… salvation begins with God teaching and drawing (and choosing) man; not the other way around.
NextStep; 1]We started with Adam
,2]then Cain,
3]now Adam a second time:25 And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son,
and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew.
So.. Is this saying Adam was gathering more general info or knowledge about Eve, as you suggest, or is it intimate as I am suggesting?It resulted in a child!
I’m not saying he looking for general information as you keep suggesting. I will tell you again that he became familiar with his wife again. He took knowledge of her. Lot took no knowledge of his daughters and still ended up with two more children. So it can’t be knowledge that makes anything happen.
This is what you meant, right?
This is why Jesus came and was lifted up on the cross, so that He would draw all men to Himself. That is what Jesus taught.
You see it one way. I see it another. We won't agree.
Last edited:
atpollard
Well-Known Member
1. Did Jesus in fact draw all men without exception or all men without distinction (some from ever people, tribe, nation and tongue)?
2. How is this reconciled with John 6:44b where those drawn (every single one) will be raised to life on the last day? … and John 6:43-44a where Jesus makes the point that the unbelievers should stop complaining since only those drawn by the Father can come to Jesus?
You can persist it attempting to suggest becoming familiar with his wife, has nothing to do with the resultant pregnancy, but I think I have pointed out what you are up to, so I have no need to convince you as you are not interested to see it, at this time . Go ahead and misuse the biblical term as it is used, and I will let those who read consider our back and forth... So Joseph did not "know" Mary, until the birth of Jesus, does not mean have marital relations, but you would have us understand Joseph did not become familiar with Mary before, during ,or after the birth?I’m not saying he looking for general information as you keep suggesting. I will tell you again that he became familiar with his wife again. He took knowledge of her. Lot took no knowledge of his daughters and still ended up with two more children. So it can’t be knowledge that makes anything happen.
I think I will keep to my version of it.
Jesus is speaking to a group of people who have already decided that they don’t believe Him. They have they sound good but they are asking for a validation of Jesus’ ministry. Specifically, they say that God gave manna in the wilderness. And they tempt Jesus and say what sign are you going to show us. Jesus told them that asked Him that He was the living bread. Jesus told them to believe in Him. They had asked what to do to do the works of God. Jesus told them believe in Jesus Christ, Himself.
Who was Jesus talking to? An evil and adulterous generation that was seeking a sign. They had already rejected Him.
Yes. There are some people who seeing, see not. It is because they have already rejected Jesus. They don’t want Him. So when they are offered salvation, they are given it in parables. If they were really interested, it is accessible. Because they don’t want it, their foolish heart is darkened. They knew God, and glorified Him not as God. But God the Father has given all who believe to the Son who does keep His own.
We both are putting our own understanding in this passage. It is necessary to do here because this passage doesn’t say anything about who in particular is drawn and who isn’t.
But verse 64 says that Jesus knew who believed and who didn’t. That is the context that is given to us about the discussion after it happened. The context is belief. I see belief as a personal choice. Free will.
I have told you what Scripture says. I have pointed out the usage of the word in the same context and shown that “know” is in fact knowledge which does not result in children. It is very clear when you look at the original languages. Lot clearly had no knowledge and still ended up with two children. Knowledge doesn’t equal a relationship. I pointed this out with the language God gave in the Hebrew. You reject it and rightly say that you will keep “your version.”
I will keep my understanding, and from the looks of how you explain away the clear John 6 passage in the previous post, you will keep doing what you do So be it.