Posts: 3,305
Joined: September 2003
|
|
|
Forums30
Topics7,741
Posts54,750
Members974
|
Most Online732 Jan 15th, 2023
|
|
|
#56950
Sat Sep 04, 2021 11:25 AM
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,489 Likes: 13
Needs to get a Life
|
OP
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,489 Likes: 13 |
Is there an easy way to show someone with very limited knowledge of the Bible, that the word “foreknowledge” as in how it is used in Romans chapters 8 & 9, means fore-loved as in an intimate sense?
So far, my explanations are going right over the person’s head.
Tom
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,417 Likes: 55
Head Honcho
|
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,417 Likes: 55 |
John Gerstner has an excellent explanation of this issue; the various meanings of "foreknowledge" in his address given at the PCRT Conference 1978 which I attended. The transcript can be found here: TULIPAnd, here is the relevant section: Fasten your seat belts for a moment, and brace yourselves for what is going to sound like absolute, unmitigated dogmatism. What that word, foreknew means is: whom He fore loved; whom He fore owned; whom He fore chose as His own. That doesn’t sound like foreknowledge does it? Not in the ordinary use of the English language. But you see unfortunately, you see we don’t have two words in the English language to distinguish mere information about, and actual communion with. We use one word for two ideas. And unfortunately here, clearly the idea is not, not in the sense to have information about, but actually love for and communion with. And all I have to do is remind you, as my wife reminded me I didn’t remind them in Pittsburgh last week, is that the Bible uses language that way all the time. The Lord knows the way of the righteous, but the way of the wicked shall perish. Now doesn’t the Lord know the way of the wicked, as well as, the way of the righteous, as far as having perfect information is concerned. When that says the Lord knows the way of the righteous, in a way that He doesn’t know the way of the wicked, this isn’t talking about not having information about, but not having love for. When Christ slams that door in the foolish virgins face, who refuses to admit that after that unfortunate pleading, far from me I never knew you, of course He didn’t intimate that for a moment He isn’t acquainted with them—He never owned them as His.
At the last judgment, you shall say, so haven’t I prophesied in they name; haven’t I cast out devils in thy name; haven’t I done mighty works in thy name? Depart from me ye workers of iniquity, I never knew you. He knows them so well, He designates them as workers of iniquity when He says I never knew you. You see my friends what that golden chain means is, whom God for loved, He predestinated to a very special benefit, here spelled out as: calling; justification; and glorification. And so it comes to pass that God having foreknown, fore loved, foreordained, unconditionally elected, certain persons that the purpose of the atonement comes into sharp focus.
simul iustus et peccator
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,489 Likes: 13
Needs to get a Life
|
OP
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,489 Likes: 13 |
This is good.
Is there anything from the context and meaning in the applicable passages that show what is actually meant by the word “Foreknowledge” or “foreknow”.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,417 Likes: 55
Head Honcho
|
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,417 Likes: 55 |
Is there anything from the context and meaning in the applicable passages that show what is actually meant by the word “Foreknowledge” or “foreknow”. Yes, if one properly exegetes the passage. IF <-- "foreknew" is simply prescience (knowledge about), then what would have been that knowledge about those individuals that precipitated God to predestinate them, consequently call them, justify them and finally glorify them?  And, if there was something God perceived in them, then most importantly 1) salvation must be of works and not grace, 2) God is not omniscient for before He allegedly perceived that whatever was of those individuals, that knowledge was unknown to God. Oh, and don't forget to include another salient question concerning God's "prescience"... where did these individuals come from? Did not God create them and determine their beginning and their end? Are you beginning to see the impassable problems if one defines "foreknew" as simply knowledge about? Ephesians 1 certainly answers the question concerning those whom He foreknew. ![[Linked Image]](https://the-highway.com/Smileys/wink.gif)
simul iustus et peccator
|
|
|
|
0 members (),
141
guests, and
7
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are no members with birthdays on this day. |
|
|
|
|