The Definition Of “Foreknowledge”

[Silverhair]

The verses I posted were more comprehensive than merely a cherry picking to support my contention.
I strive to be more honest in conversations.

I understand that you are trying to support your view but as I read through those verses I did not see where any of the verse accomplished that task.

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).

That is a valid view regarding more people coming to salvation and thus becoming part of God's elect.

But you error when you say that those in Acts 13:48 had to be saved before they believed. That would make that verse contradict clear scripture such as Eph 1:13. Plus would not fit with the context of Acts 13:42-48 some repudiated the message and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life while others heard it and began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord. In other words they believed and were appointed to eternal life.

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.

No I am saying that the verse you used has nothing to do with repentance or being elect. Christ chose the disciples but they still had to come to the point of trusting in Him as messiah. Remember He also chose Judas.

Just as Joh says 6:45 says "Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me" Which aligns with Eph 1:13 & Rom 10:9-10

Jesus said He would draw all to Himself which He does. He did not say that He would force them to believe in Him. Jesus made the comparison between Himself and the serpent that Moses lifted up. Those that looked to the serpent in faith were healed just as those that look to Jesus in faith will be healed. But note God did not make the Jews look nor does He make us trust.

 

[Silverhair]

You see it one way. I see it another. We won't agree.

You do not have to agree with me but you should at the very least do your own investigation of the facts.

Do you not care if the foundation of the religion you hold to is in fact based on pagan philosophy?

 

[Alan Dale Gross]

I don’t disagree that the definition of “knowing” can mean to be in a relationship.

Foreknowledge - To have awareness of something before it happens or exists.

Why do some change the definition to mean that something is determined to happen or exist?

Right, then from God's Perspective, those He says He "knows" in 'a relationship',
includes Him Determining to Care for them in all the ways that He has Promised.

This is the negative instance of God's Termination
in Him not having an intimate, Saving, knowing relationship:

They define foreknowledge as "knowing beforehand" but use "know" as Jesus did when He said "I never knew you" (a relationship rather than a cognitive awarness).

At the same time, I don’t see how that also means that it has to be determined.

How about what this says about "Predestination highlights God's Foreknowledge',
from The Bible Hub: "Predestination highlights God's Foreknowledge
and His Intention to Conform believers to the Image of His Son,
as mentioned earlier in Romans 8:29.

It underscores the Assurance of Salvation, as God's Plan is Unchangeable and Certain."

Then, while they all certainly Work together in God's Eternal Plan of Salvation,
Romans 8:30 gives you somewhat of a differentiation between what you are saying
that you don't see 'Foreknowledge' as having any element of 'Predestination', or 'Determination' in it,
when the two words are separated, in Romans 8:29; "For whom He did Foreknow, He also did Predestinate",

and yet, given the Historical Fact that God is describing there the various elements involved in His Way of Going about Establishing His Relationship with His Chosen people, while the two words are given to us separately, how could they be anymore interlinked, i.e., "whom He did Foreknow" couldn't be any more directly linked to "He also did" (Determine to) Predestinate."

As they said in the article I shared, "When that term (knowledge) is used in connection with God, it often signifies to regard with favor, denoting not mere cognition but an affection for the object in view.

"I know thee by name” (Ex 33:17).

“Ye have been rebellious against the Lord from the day that I knew you” (Deut 9:24).

“Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee” (Jer 1:5).

“They have made princes and I knew it not” (Hos 8:4).

“You only have I known of all the families of the earth” (Amos 3:2).

In these passages “knew” signifies either loved or appointed.

And also again, I believe those He says He "knows" in 'a relationship',
includes Him Determining to Care for them in all the ways that He has Promised,
as seen in the verses below;

“I am the good shepherd and know My sheep and am known of Mine” (John 10:14).

“If any man love God, the same is known of Him” (I Cor 8:3).

“The Lord knoweth them that are His” (II Tim 2:19).

Instead of imagining that these words signify no more than a simple cognition, the different passages in which they occur require to be carefully weighed.

If every passage in which it occurs is carefully studied, it will be discovered that it is a moot point whether it ever has reference to the mere perception of events which are yet to take place. The fact is that “foreknowledge” is never used in Scripture in connection with events or actions; instead, it always has reference to persons. It is persons God is said to “foreknow,” not the actions of those persons.

In proof of this we shall now quote each passage where this expression is found.

Here: https://www.baptistboard.com/threads/the-definition-of-“foreknowledge”.131608/post-2919687

 

[Reynolds]

You do not have to agree with me but you should at the very least do your own investigation of the facts.

Do you not care if the foundation of the religion you hold to is in fact based on pagan philosophy?

You need to lay off the nutty websites you obviously spend too much time on. I have investigated the issue thoroughly. Reformed theology has its roots in Scripture.

 

[Alan Dale Gross]

Since we are going this direction with definitions, a Calvinist is going to have to explain to me why you can’t lose your salvation based upon their use of the word and the use of the same word in
Romans 1:21.
Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

When used in connection to the lost souls in Romans 1:21, "knew" is in regard to the fact that they had a knowledge, or cognition, of the Being and Perfections of God, because that is what was just said in Romans 1:20; "For the Invisible Things of Him from the Creation of the World are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are Made, even His Eternal Power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:"

When used in connection to those lost souls, they "knew" and could "clearly see", and understand, "the Invisible Things of Him from the Creation of the World" and "even His Eternal Power and Godhead", and yet, that is not said to be any indication of them having Saving 'Knowledge', or a Saving 'Relationship', because the emphasis at the end of the verse is "that they are without excuse:"

It is the same Greek word without the “fore.” Let’s be consistent in our use of the language. I don’t see a relationship in either case. I have yet to find in Romans a case where the word is used in the context of a relationship. I will look deeper. If you happen to know of one or more please share them.

Below, you should be able to see how "know" can give an indication which signifies to regard with favor, as well as having the relationship of an affection for the object in view.

Being 'consistent in our use of the language' can never place a restriction on the usage of a word as being bound to expressing the same sense of the word in every case it is used.

"Love not the World", for example, would fall rather flat if it were believed
that its meaning there must be identical to its usage in John 3:16;

"For God so Loved the World, that He Gave His Only Begotten Son,
that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have Everlasting Life".

or to try to the word "world" always has to mean the same thing
and then still make any sense out of John 3:17

"For God Sent not His Son into the World to condemn the World;
but that the World through Him might be Saved."

This explains the word 'knowledge' when it is used in connection with God:

As they said in the article I shared, "When that term (knowledge) is used in connection with God, it often signifies to regard with favor, denoting not mere cognition but an affection for the object in view.

"I know thee by name” (Ex 33:17).

“Ye have been rebellious against the Lord from the day that I knew you” (Deut 9:24).

“Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee” (Jer 1:5).

“They have made princes and I knew it not” (Hos 8:4).

“You only have I known of all the families of the earth” (Amos 3:2).

In these passages “knew” signifies either loved or appointed.

 

[Silverhair]

You need to lay off the nutty websites you obviously spend too much time on. I have investigated the issue thoroughly. Reformed theology has its roots in Scripture.

Do the actual research yourself.

The foundation of Augustinian-Calvinism Dr. Ken Wilson

I doubt you will even bother checking anything out as that would cause you to rethink what you have placed your trust in.

The pagan philosophy brought into the church by Augustine and later Calvin etc. has been a source of rot within the body.

If you have investigated the issue thoroughly then I can only conclude that you are being willfully blind.

 

[Ben1445]

When used in connection to the lost souls in Romans 1:21, "knew" is in regard to the fact that they had a knowledge, or cognition, of the Being and Perfections of God, because that is what was just said in Romans 1:20; "For the Invisible Things of Him from the Creation of the World are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are Made, even His Eternal Power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:"

When used in connection to those lost souls, they "knew" and could "clearly see", and understand, "the Invisible Things of Him from the Creation of the World" and "even His Eternal Power and Godhead", and yet, that is not said to be any indication of them having Saving 'Knowledge', or a Saving 'Relationship', because the emphasis at the end of the verse is "that they are without excuse:"


Below, you should be able to see how "know" can give an indication which signifies to regard with favor, as well as having the relationship of an affection for the object in view.

Being 'consistent in our use of the language' can never place a restriction on the usage of a word as being bound to expressing the same sense of the word in every case it is used.

"Love not the World", for example, would fall rather flat if it were believed
that its meaning there must be identical to its usage in John 3:16;

"For God so Loved the World, that He Gave His Only Begotten Son,
that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have Everlasting Life".

or to try to the word "world" always has to mean the same thing
and then still make any sense out of John 3:17

"For God Sent not His Son into the World to condemn the World;
but that the World through Him might be Saved."

This explains the word 'knowledge' when it is used in connection with God:

I see no reason why the world should be divided into two different definitions. God created the world. It is corrupted. God loves His creation and Gave Himself to redeem his creation. The redeemed creation is told not to love the world. It is corrupted. We are not able to save it and so we are told to not love it or the things that are in it. We are told to have love to the brethren. We are told to preach the gospel to every creature because God loves them. There is a difference of ownership between the two uses of the word. It need not be a new word.
John 3:16 and 17 being the same statement of God’s love for His creation, I don’t think it needs explanation separately.
Do take note that it doesn’t say that “God so loved the world that…that if the world believes…” it says whosoever indicating people. If I understand the word world as being the creation, I can substitute the word word creation and it doesn’t change any doctrine. It doesn’t change any meaning. It need not have any new meaning.
If I were a Calvinist I’d be worried about the meaning of world not being just the elect anymore in John 3. But I don’t need TULIP to understand the Bible. And I am not Reformed. The Bible is right the first time and I don’t need to reform the words to understand them.

 

[Ben1445]

Do the actual research yourself.

The foundation of Augustinian-Calvinism Dr. Ken Wilson

I doubt you will even bother checking anything out as that would cause you to rethink what you have placed your trust in.

The pagan philosophy brought into the church by Augustine and later Calvin etc. has been a source of rot within the body.

If you have investigated the issue thoroughly then I can only conclude that you are being willfully blind.

This is a good book. I must admit that I read the abridged version that was intended for more common distribution. That was plenty thick.

 

[Ben1445]

As they said in the article I shared, "When that term (knowledge) is used in connection with God, it often signifies to regard with favor, denoting not mere cognition but an affection for the object in view.

"I know thee by name” (Ex 33:17).

Very simple to understand. God takes extra recognition of Moses.
I like dogs. I like some more than others. I like German short-haired pointers. I take more knowledge of them because I like them more than the next mutt over. My extra general knowledge shows that I have more interest in a particular object. If there were a particular pointer that I liked more than the rest, I would also know its name and a lot more about it. I don’t find any conflict with the omniscience of God in this subject. When in judgment God says, “depart from me I never knew you,” He is saying the exact opposite as He told Moses. One God takes notice of because Moses responded to God. The other God takes no notice of because their names are not written in the Book. Because they have a form of godliness, but they deny God still. This denial is part of the free will that they are judged for.

“Ye have been rebellious against the Lord from the day that I knew you” (Deut 9:24).

This is another example that strengthens my point. If God had a relationship with Israel based on the word knew, did He swallow up Korah into the ground right to heaven based upon this knowing that God did before their rebellion.
This passage makes much more sense when it is understood that God took notice of them.

“Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee” (Jer 1:5).

This is specifically talking about the calling of a prophet. This is the first statement in that calling. God said to Jeremiah that He took notice of Jeremiah before he was born. It doesn’t mean that they had a relationship before Jeremiah was born. Jeremiah is saved by grace through faith just like anyone else. God knew already that the character and obedience of Jeremiah was such that he would be the prophet that God would need to preach to His rebellious nation. God already knows the future. God said a similar thing of Paul.
Acts 9:16
For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake.
Of Jeremiah, it doesn’t say I chose him to believe in me. It says I chose him to be a prophet.

“They have made princes and I knew it not” (Hos 8:4).

They set up leaders without the Lord’s knowledge involved. They did a similar thing at Ai when they left Jericho. They made their own decisions without asking knowledge of God. We both know that God doesn’t mean that he found out weeks later that they had departed from Him. He is saying that the people that are being set up are not according to His knowledge.

“You only have I known of all the families of the earth” (Amos 3:2).

God hasn’t taken extra knowledge of any other nation. God has not set His name amongst any other people.
Have you ever tried having a relationship without knowledge of the other person or group of people. How much of a relationship do you think you have if you have no information about your wife, or your friends, or your church. There can be no relationship without knowledge.

In these passages “knew” signifies either loved or appointed.

I still disagree. I can read each of these passages and understand them with a definition of cognition. When God appoints, He clearly says it apart from knowledge. God is not telling Jeremiah twice that he was ordained. God is showing a progression of events. “I took notice of you. I called you.” Is an accurate representation.
“I had a relationship with you before you were born and then I called you,” or “I ordained you and then I ordained you,” don’t make as much sense as a knowledge interpretation.

 

[Silverhair]

This is a good book. I must admit that I read the abridged version that was intended for more common distribution. That was plenty thick.

As did I. I looked into getting his actual thesis but it was a tad expensive so passed on it.

 

[atpollard]

But you error when you say that those in Acts 13:48 had to be saved before they believed.

I did not claim that ANYONE is/was saved before they believed. I do not believe that to be true or how salvation works.
I did say, and do believe, that people were and still are “elect” (chosen by God for salvation) before they believed.
We see this played out in “all that the Father gives me will come to me” (John 6:37) and “even when we were dead [God] made us alive” (Eph 2:5) and “I chose you out of the world” (John 15:19) … which all point to God making the first move and then we respond.

 

[Van]

Nobody is suggesting that God has to refer to a third-party source in order to gain knowledge about what the future looks like.

Yes, God does not need to examine His knowledge of the unfixed future because He has chosen not to know it.

 

[Van]

You are describing here the heretical God of Open Theism, not the One of the Bible though

You are again posting "taint so" without basis. Your believe in Open Theism because you believe as I do, that God is not the author of sin.

You apparently have no understanding of our God as described in scripture, due to any citation of an attribute differing from the God who can remember no more forever, and allow things to happen by chance rather than by predestination.

 

[Ben1445]

I did not claim that ANYONE is/was saved before they believed. I do not believe that to be true or how salvation works.
I did say, and do believe, that people were and still are “elect” (chosen by God for salvation) before they believed.
We see this played out in “all that the Father gives me will come to me” (John 6:37) and “even when we were dead [God] made us alive” (Eph 2:5) and “I chose you out of the world” (John 15:19) … which all point to God making the first move and then we respond.

No argument that God makes the first move. (We appear to disagree only on who God has made motion towards and whether or not we can refuse Him.)
Unless anyone here is writing from heaven and just hasn’t said anything, none of us are with Jesus and will come to Him. Not all people, only believers. But salvation is not all realized. There is more to come and not every verse that is used is talking about belief. Some of them like Romans 8 are talking about the redemption of our physical body.

 

[Silverhair]

I did not claim that ANYONE is/was saved before they believed. I do not believe that to be true or how salvation works.
I did say, and do believe, that people were and still are “elect” (chosen by God for salvation) before they believed.
We see this played out in “all that the Father gives me will come to me” (John 6:37) and “even when we were dead [God] made us alive” (Eph 2:5) and “I chose you out of the world” (John 15:19) … which all point to God making the first move and then we respond.

I am not questioning that God has made the first move be it, creation, conviction of sins, the gospel message. God foreknows all those that will freely trust in Him but He did not pick a select group so that only they could believe in Him as you are suggesting.

We are made alive by God when we respond in faith to Him not before. We are elect when we are in the "Elect One" Rom_8:10 If Christ is in you,... the spirit is alive because of righteousness. 1Co_15:22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. Eph_2:5 even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), Eph 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith;...

Yes God makes the first move, He sent his son Joh 3:17 "For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. He sent the Holy Spirit Joh 16:8 "And He, when He comes, will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment;... He even points to Him through creation Rom 1:20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. So man truly has no excuse.

But the reality is that man still has the responsibility to respond to all these various entreaties. Rom 10:9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; Eph 1:13 In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise,

The bible tells us Jesus will draw all men Joh 12:32, that God desires all men to be saved 1Ti 2:3-4. These clearly show that God has not pre - chosen/elected some for salvation but rather salvation is available to all.

 

[Van]

We know that all of God's heavenly blessings work together for good to those He has called into His kingdom. Before creation God planed the method He would use to redeem those He would choose to redeem during their lifetime. Using this knowledge acquired or formulated before creation, God has partially implemented His plan of redemption.

Thus according to His foreknown redemption plan, He predestined those to be chosen to be conformed to the image of His Son, our Lord Jesus.

Thus, the believers He planned to call into His kingdom, based on crediting their faith as righteousness, He also predestined, to be born anew, as a new creation.

Thus those born anew, having undergone the washing of regeneration were justified, as whatever God held against them was removed, the circumcision of Christ.

Thus those justified, were also glorified, united with Christ, made eternally alive together with Christ.

None of this indicates God chose specific foreseen individuals before creation. To the contrary, since we once lived as "not a people" chosen for God's own possession, scripture precludes individuals from being chosen for salvation before creation.

 

[JonC]

How about what this says about "Predestination highlights God's Foreknowledge',
from The Bible Hub: "Predestination highlights God's Foreknowledge
and His Intention to Conform believers to the Image of His Son,
as mentioned earlier in Romans 8:29.

It does not really matter in terms of debating the topic.

One could quote Wesley and say "how about what this says?".

Beza placed predestination and sovereignty where it is now found in Reformed theology. Others don't, so they understand these philosophical ideas differently and come to different conclusions about the mind of God. Others believe we cannot know the mind of God because He is above man.

What I mean is that simply sharing what others who hold your position believes is really not helpful in debating against those who disagree with your view.

I am not, btw, disagreeing with you. Just making a minor point.

 

[Baptizo]

Yes, God does not need to examine His knowledge of the unfixed future because He has chosen not to know it.

He has chosen not to know it?

Wouldn’t He have to know about something first before choosing to not know it anymore?

Sounds like you’re saying that God’s mind functions like a database where He can internally delete files of information.

 

[Zaatar71]

He has chosen not to know it?

Wouldn’t He have to know about something first before choosing to not know it anymore?

Sounds like you’re saying that God’s mind functions like a database where He can internally delete files of information.

Yes, good point you make. That suggestion sounds a bit odd, don't you think? it Looks like we see over and over as people actually attempt to say scripture is wrong, they then post ideas that are miles away from the moon, lol how very strange to type an idea like that!

 

[atpollard]

Him but He did not pick a select group so that only they could believe in Him as you are suggesting.

Respectfully, John 6:44 states EXACTLY that. It states that no one CAN (is able to) come to Jesus unless they are part of the “them” that the Father draws, and that each and every one of “them” WILL be raised on the last day.