The Definition Of “Foreknowledge”

[Ben1445]

You avoided my question that proves that either your view is incorrect or Jesus failed.
In what sense was Itzcoatl drawn to Jesus Christ that he had the chance to hear and reject?

[Are you agreeing with the Mormons that Jesus appeared to the Pre-Colombian Americans?]

And all the people who lived before Abraham. Don’t forget that they didn’t have Jesus either.

 

[Ben1445]

Jesus said He would draw all men and He does unless you do not believe the word of God. God has drawn men form all walks of life but they still have to believe the gospel message B4 they are saved. You make a logical error when you equate one being drawn meaning that the one drawn must be saved. That is not what the biblical text says.
Joh 6:44 “No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day. This aligns with what Christ said in Joh 12:32.

But what does the next verse tell us
Joh 6:45 It is written in the Prophets: ‘And they will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard the Father and learned from Him comes to Me—

So while all are drawn not all will come to Jesus.

Man can know God through the various means that God has provided but knowing about God is not the same a knowing God. While God desires that all will trust in Him He does not force anyone to do so.

So when you refer to Rev 5:9 it is true. People from every tribe and tongue and people and nation will be saved, it is those that as Rom 10:9 tell us "confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved."

So yes you should let scripture explain scripture. The word of God does not contradict itself.

It’s just DEI Christianity.

 

[Ben1445]

God is Talking to His Saved children in Exodus 33:17; whom He Knew by name AND THOSE WHO HE HAD GIVEN TO JESUS TO SAVE (JOHN 17).

God wasn't Talking to anyone lost, like those in Matthew 7.

The word know doesn’t change definitions no matter what the situation is. What is known is given beyond the use of the word with other words. It doesn’t change definitions because you like a better one.
If you have to change definitions to make sense of the Bible, you are essentially writing your own Bible.

 

[atpollard]

And all the people who lived before Abraham. Don’t forget that they didn’t have Jesus either.

[John 12:32 NKJV] "And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all [peoples] to Myself."

The statement from Jesus did not apply to all people when Jesus walked the earth (he had not yet been “lifted up”) and it did not apply to the countless generations before the First Century (he had not yet been “lifted up”), but it does apply to America in 1450 (Jesus had been “lifted up” … but the people of the Americas had not heard about it yet).

So how were they (the people of the Americas in 1450) DRAWN to Jesus to accept or reject him?

“They were not.” is the correct answer, because Jesus never claimed to draw every person without exception. Even the NKJV understood and clarified by adding [peoples] to “all”.

 

[Silverhair]

It’s just DEI Christianity.

DEI Christianity. That's not a bad way to describe the C/R view.

 

[Aaron]

Whether you call it foreknowledge or forethought it does not equate to cause.

Neither does speech equate to cause . . . except when God speaks.

You are trying to made an idea equal to an action.

Thoughts are actions. ...and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ...

God desires that all should come to repentance,

I'm certain that the "us-ward" qualification has been explained to you countless times. There are those passages that are difficult, but this one isn't one of those. This one is so simple and clear only silver-haired anti-Cal curmudgeons could be too stubborn to yield.

Moving on...

that is forethought. But we know that not all do repent, why not if your premise were true?

See above.

But if your premise were true then God could in fact be charged with evil.

If God says he creates evil and darkness, Isaiah 45:7, meaning that he sends and rules the evil, yet holds that He is not the author of the evil, then who is Silverhair to argue with that? What knowledge does Silverhair possess by which he judges God?

So Paul says that one vessel is created to hold treasure, another is created to hold garbage. Pharaoh was raise up for the specific purpose of attempting to withstand God and to be destroyed.

And when Paul anticipated the carnal objections, like the ones Silverhair makes, to his exposition of God's sovereignty, He said, Who art thou, O man, that repliest against God? You don't that's a good rebuttal, but that's not because it's a weak one, it's because you're not humble enough to consider it.

Did God foreknow that Satan would sin, of course. So if forethought equals cause then He caused Satan to sin and also all the sins the man would commit.

The Scriptures are completely silent about the world of angels and how evil entered in. (No, the Devil was never known as Lucifer.)

This we know, the evil that entered in serves God's eternal purposes. It's revealed to us that the Son would would have a work to do, and that even 'before' the beginning, that work would be to offer His body as a sacrifice for sin, and by that work earn a Name above all names in all existence. Without that work, He would not be worthy of that Name, nor of the worship due it.

There was never any alternative. It could never be any other way.

So...enough of this presumptuousness about the world of angels. As far as this world is concerned, which is the only world we've been given some revelation concerning, God determined that Adam would fall and sell out his progeny to sin. And He did this for the sake of His Son, Jesus Christ, Who came to do the Father's will, and that was to save His people from their sins, and bring many sons to glory.

If God's council is the cause of Satan sinning and thus Adam doing the same, no free will involved, then the responsibility for sin falls back to God as neither Satan or Adam could do other than God determined that they do.

In the end of the matter, in the New Heaven and the New Earth, there will be no 'ability' for anyone to sin, as you put it. So what what has become of your beloved 'free will.'?

If free will makes one's choice true love, is God now unjust to take it away?

Your man-made religion lands the responsibility for sin right back at the feet of God. If man has no free will but can only do as God has decreed there is no other option.

petitio principii

 

[Aaron]

I could write fairy tales too but a scenario that you dreamed up doesn’t really add to the conversation. But I would agree with you and say that your idea is not Scriptural. But it is also nothing like what I am saying.

You could also tell me if you're here by God's determinate will, or if you just kinda lucked out. Which is it do you think?

 

[Ben1445]

[John 12:32 NKJV] "And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all [peoples] to Myself."

The statement from Jesus did not apply to all people when Jesus walked the earth (he had not yet been “lifted up”) and it did not apply to the countless generations before the First Century (he had not yet been “lifted up”), but it does apply to America in 1450 (Jesus had been “lifted up” … but the people of the Americas had not heard about it yet).

So how were they (the people of the Americas in 1450) DRAWN to Jesus to accept or reject him?

“They were not.” is the correct answer, because Jesus never claimed to draw every person without exception. Even the NKJV understood and clarified by adding [peoples] to “all”.

were you there to document it. You assume something that you don’t know.
And no, before you run with it, I will tell you that I don’t think that Jesus showed up in the western hemisphere.
But you haven’t been here the whole time to be sure that God doesn’t love people who He made, in the west, before whatever date you want to put there. That is one that I will wait to hear the full matter of before drawing my own conclusions. But since they of centuries ago are out of time, and the people who are alive are still part of every creature, we don’t need to concern ourselves with the dead. We should concern ourselves with the living.
And the same way that I don’t take my theology from dictionaries, I won’t take it from some people who decided that the way the Bible was translated doesn’t support their theology. I do use the KJV because I have looked at the who and how it was translated and I don’t find following translations or versions to be better. In the same way, I would never use the Legacy Bible. I know that the people who put it together have a bias towards Calvinism and it affects the way they interpret Scripture. Then they choose words that say what they think it means.
I prefer to stick to the KJV and study the original languages as necessary. But what you just told me is that they recognized that they needed to reinforce their doctrine of leaving people out of opportunity for salvation. It doesn’t sound like a reasonable foundation for a change.

 

[Ben1445]

You could also tell me if you're here by God's determinate will, or if you just kinda lucked out. Which is it do you think?

Yes, God created me. Yes, God had knowledge of me before I had knowledge of myself.
So to quote you,
“And?”

 

[atpollard]

were you there to document it. You assume something that you don’t know.
And no, before you run with it, I will tell you that I don’t think that Jesus showed up in the western hemisphere.
But you haven’t been here the whole time to be sure that God doesn’t love people who He made, in the west, before whatever date you want to put there. That is one that I will wait to hear the full matter of before drawing my own conclusions. But since they of centuries ago are out of time, and the people who are alive are still part of every creature, we don’t need to concern ourselves with the dead. We should concern ourselves with the living.
And the same way that I don’t take my theology from dictionaries, I won’t take it from some people who decided that the way the Bible was translated doesn’t support their theology. I do use the KJV because I have looked at the who and how it was translated and I don’t find following translations or versions to be better. In the same way, I would never use the Legacy Bible. I know that the people who put it together have a bias towards Calvinism and it affects the way they interpret Scripture. Then they choose words that say what they think it means.
I prefer to stick to the KJV and study the original languages as necessary. But what you just told me is that they recognized that they needed to reinforce their doctrine of leaving people out of opportunity for salvation. It doesn’t sound like a reasonable foundation for a change.

The KJV inserted [men] into the original in place of [people] … the original John 12:32 just says “and I, if I be lifted up from the earth, all will draw unto me” [original Greek word order with KJV word translations].

(just for your Information)
if you think the native Americans MIGHT have heard the gospel before Columbus arrived in 1492 then I have nothing to say to you on that subject.

 

[Silverhair]

Neither does speech equate to cause . . . except when God speaks.


Thoughts are actions. ...and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ...


I'm certain that the "us-ward" qualification has been explained to you countless times. There are those passages that are difficult, but this one isn't one of those. This one is so simple and clear only silver-haired anti-Cal curmudgeons could be too stubborn to yield.

Moving on...


See above.


If God says he creates evil and darkness, Isaiah 45:7, meaning that he sends and rules the evil, yet holds that He is not the author of the evil, then who is Silverhair to argue with that? What knowledge does Silverhair possess by which he judges God?

So Paul says that one vessel is created to hold treasure, another is created to hold garbage. Pharaoh was raise up for the specific purpose of attempting to withstand God and to be destroyed.

And when Paul anticipated the carnal objections, like the ones Silverhair makes, to his exposition of God's sovereignty, He said, Who art thou, O man, that repliest against God? You don't that's a good rebuttal, but that's not because it's a weak one, it's because you're not humble enough to consider it.


The Scriptures are completely silent about the world of angels and how evil entered in. (No, the Devil was never known as Lucifer.)

This we know, the evil that entered in serves God's eternal purposes. It's revealed to us that the Son would would have a work to do, and that even 'before' the beginning, that work would be to offer His body as a sacrifice for sin, and by that work earn a Name above all names in all existence. Without that work, He would not be worthy of that Name, nor of the worship due it.

There was never any alternative. It could never be any other way.

So...enough of this presumptuousness about the world of angels. As far as this world is concerned, which is the only world we've been given some revelation concerning, God determined that Adam would fall and sell out his progeny to sin. And He did this for the sake of His Son, Jesus Christ, Who came to do the Father's will, and that was to save His people from their sins, and bring many sons to glory.


In the end of the matter, in the New Heaven and the New Earth, there will be no 'ability' for anyone to sin, as you put it. So what what has become of your beloved 'free will.'?

If free will makes one's choice true love, is God now unjust to take it away?


petitio principii

Well it is clear that you have not even thought through the man-made religion that you hold.

You still come up with the same tired comments that show your total allegiance to the C/R view. Have you even bothered to research the foundations of that religion. Hint it is not the word of God as He inspired it.

By your own words you at best are no more than a meat robot as you do not have any free will and just do as it has been determined for you to do.

Since under your C/R view God has to determine all thing or as the LBCF/WCF put it "God hath decreed in himself, from all eternity, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely and unchangeably, all things, whatsoever comes to pass."
Then your man-made religion does in fact make God the great and only sinner.

For that and many other reasons people are wise to reject that philosophy.

But perhaps God has determined that at some point you will come to realize that you have been following the wrong path and will trust what He actually said or perhaps He will just let you stay in the philosophy He has chosen for you.

You deny man's free will which is a rather illogical comment as you could not even come to that conclusion unless you had a free will.

 

[Ben1445]

The KJV inserted [men] into the original in place of [people] … the original John 12:32 just says “and I, if I be lifted up from the earth, all will draw unto me” [original Greek word order with KJV word translations].

(just for your Information)
if you think the native Americans MIGHT have heard the gospel before Columbus arrived in 1492 then I have nothing to say to you on that subject.

You clearly didn’t listen to what I said because you jumped on it anyway.
But since you did, Columbus wasn’t the first person to sail a boat and for that matter, he had a hard time getting one. It is possible someone beat him to it. But if it wasn’t possible, we don’t need to worry about because nobody would be there anyway. It wasn’t possible.
Since I don’t have all knowledge of the subject, I will find out in eternity same as most everyone else.

And the Greek is clear enough without adding in tribes and nations and tongues and people (TNTP). Actually, adding TNTP really just muddies the water and creates new doctrine.
One other reason I am sure that the writers of Scripture were not reformed is that they didn’t abbreviate as becomes necessary.

 

[Silverhair]

The KJV inserted [men] into the original in place of [people] … the original John 12:32 just says “and I, if I be lifted up from the earth, all will draw unto me” [original Greek word order with KJV word translations].

(just for your Information)
if you think the native Americans MIGHT have heard the gospel before Columbus arrived in 1492 then I have nothing to say to you on that subject.

Joh 12:32 and I,G2504 ifG1437 I be raised up highG5312 fromG1537 theG3588 earth,G1093 I will draw allG3956 G1670 toG4314 myself.G1683 ABP+

Joh 12:32 And I, κἀγὼ when ἐὰν I am lifted up ὑψωθῶ from ἐκ the τῆς earth, γῆς, will draw ἑλκύσω all [men] πάντας to πρὸς Myself.” ἐμαυτόν. BSB

Joh 12:32 And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all peopleN67 to myself." NET+
N67 tn Grk "all." The word "people" is not in the Greek text but is supplied for stylistic reasons and for clarity (cf. KJV "all men").

If the Holy Spirit had wanted to say some men He had a word He could have used. Example Joh_9:16 Therefore G3767 some G5100 of G1537 the Pharisees

G5100
τίς
tis
tis
An enclitic indefinite pronoun; some or any person or object: - a (kind of), any (man, thing, thing at all), certain (thing), divers, he (every) man, one (X thing), ought, + partly, some (man, -body, -thing, -what), (+ that no-) thing, what (-soever), X wherewith, whom [-soever], whose ([-soever]). Strong


Jesus said that at the cross He would draw all men to Himself. He did not mean everybody will be saved for He made it clear that some will be lost (Joh_5:28-29). If the drawing by the Son is the same as that of the Father (Joh_6:44), it means He will draw indiscriminately.

 

[atpollard]

Jesus said that at the cross He would draw all men to Himself. He did not mean everybody will be saved for He made it clear that some will be lost (Joh_5:28-29). If the drawing by the Son is the same as that of the Father (Joh_6:44), it means He will draw indiscriminately.

In what sense was Itzcoatl drawn to Jesus Christ that he had the chance to hear and reject (since he died 50 years before the gospel arrived in the Americas)?

 

[Ben1445]

In what sense was Itzcoatl drawn to Jesus Christ that he had the chance to hear and reject (since he died 50 years before the gospel arrived in the Americas)?

Again I ask, were you there?
This is at best a hypothetical question and can’t really be answered.

 

[Ben1445]

Again I ask, were you there?
This is at best a hypothetical question and can’t really be answered.

Especially since you reject Romans 1as an answer.
Which was written after Jesus was lifted up.