Biblical Foreknowledge

John Caldwell · Oct 2, 2019

To clarify (as "literal" interpretation can be a tricky term):

I affirm a "literal" method of interpretation which asserts that the biblical text is to be interpreted according to the plain meaning conveyed by its grammatical construction and historical context. Therefore I do not accrpt "biblical meanings" liberal interpretation assigns to the text of Scripture.

Anthony D'Arienzo · Oct 2, 2019

↑

Scott,
Some topics do not lend themselves to one-sentence answers.

Take the op and work through one sentence at a time...say if you agree or do not agree.
That is exactly what I am doing.

You indicated that somewhere here there is a question, which you did very concisely. But in the OP there does not appear to be a concise question. That's the problem...not that there is not a simple answer, but there is no clear and concise question. This doesn't have to be so confusing or difficult, so I am trying not to add to the confusion. Maybe you can help.

You presented a challenge for an answer. And I'm ready and willing to oblige.

I, in turn, challenged you to offer a question.

From A.W.Pink;

When that term 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” ( Exo.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 ”( Hosea 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

Click to expand...

Scott...God knows everything and yet He speaks of a particular and special knowledge...agree?

Our all knowing God says this;
In like manner, the word “know” is frequently used in the New Testament, in the same sense as in the Old Testament. “Then will I profess unto them, I never knew you” ( Matt. 7:23). “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” ( 1 Cor. 8:3). “The Lord knoweth them that are His” ( 2 Tim. 2:19).

Agree?

Now lets zero in;
Now the word “foreknowledge” as it is used in the New Testament is less ambiguous than in its simple form “to know.” 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.

Agree???

John Caldwell · Oct 2, 2019

And then there is traditional Calvinism, where "foreknowledge" is another word for prescience (and prescience based on decree):

This foreknowledge or prescience is not speculative but active… since he foresees the things which are to happen, simply because he has decreed that they are so to happen… it is clear that all events take place by his sovereign appointment.

Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion (17340-17341). Signalman Publishing.

ScottA · Oct 3, 2019

Anthony D'Arienzo said:
↑

Scott...God knows everything and yet He speaks of a particular and special knowledge...agree?

Our all knowing God says this;
In like manner, the word “know” is frequently used in the New Testament, in the same sense as in the Old Testament. “Then will I profess unto them, I never knew you” ( Matt. 7:23). “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” ( 1 Cor. 8:3). “The Lord knoweth them that are His” ( 2 Tim. 2:19).

Agree?

Now lets zero in;
Now the word “foreknowledge” as it is used in the New Testament is less ambiguous than in its simple form “to know.” 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.

Agree???

I don't see where you have made your supposition clear.

If your point is to establish that foreknowledge refers to people rather than events, I agree. But I am not sure if you know what you have actually proven or discovered. What do you make of it?

ScottA · Oct 3, 2019

John Caldwell said:
And then there is traditional Calvinism, where "foreknowledge" is another word for prescience (and prescience based on decree):

This foreknowledge or prescience is not speculative but active… since he foresees the things which are to happen, simply because he has decreed that they are so to happen… it is clear that all events take place by his sovereign appointment.

Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion (17340-17341). Signalman Publishing.

That would also be the perspective of one seemingly standing still with feet planted firmly on the ground, while whirling through space. Meaning, that it may appear to be so on some level, but not in the bigger picture.

The question then becomes: What perspective are we concerned with, the created timeline events within the world of men, or the reality of God whom is the same yesterday, today, and forever, and who's kingdom is not of this world?

SovereignGrace · Oct 3, 2019

Anthony D'Arienzo said:
This ridiculous statement suggests, Spurgeon, all the reformers, puritans , did not know the gospel as they taught Calvinism properly understood is the gospel. JonC does not understand Calvinism or the gospel to make such a statement.

Its best to leave him to his own misery.

John Caldwell · Oct 3, 2019

ScottA said:
That would also be the perspective of one seemingly standing still with feet planted firmly on the ground, while whirling through space. Meaning, that it may appear to be so on some level, but not in the bigger picture.

The question then becomes: What perspective are we concerned with, the created timeline events within the world of men, or the reality of God whom is the same yesterday, today, and forever, and who's kingdom is not of this world?

I never thought about it that way. I like the example.

I think timelessness of God is often overlooked in these discussions. With topics like election, probably even foreknowledge, God is sometimes pictured as progresding, planning, developing etc. when a more accurate picture is probably along the lines of history unfolding in our experience (not God's).

Anthony D'Arienzo · Oct 3, 2019

ScottA said:
I don't see where you have made your supposition clear.

If your point is to establish that foreknowledge refers to people rather than events, I agree. But I am not sure if you know what you have actually proven or discovered. What do you make of it?

Yes...that is the main point Scott, no need to over think it.
In other words..WHOM He did foreknow...are predestined, called, justified,glorified....they call this...the golden chain of redemption.
It is spoken of and only true of believers.
The unsaved ...who remain unsaved...are never justified,or glorified.
Once you see.it, re read the passage a few times and you will get it. There is no other way to see.it.

Anthony D'Arienzo · Oct 3, 2019

The biblical meaning is the actual meaning. When God Defines it, THAT Settles it.

John Caldwell · Oct 3, 2019

SovereignGrace said:
Its best to leave him to his own misery.

That is an interesting statement.

My argument here is that traditional Calvinism (the Calvinism of John Calvin and Beza), held that "foreknowledge" is another word for prescience (and prescience based on decree). As evidence I offered this quote from John Calvin's Institutions:

"This foreknowledge or prescience is not speculative but active… since he foresees the things which are to happen, simply because he has decreed that they are so to happen… it is clear that all events take place by his sovereign appointment." (John Calvin. Institutes of the Christian Religion (17340-17341). Signalman Publishing).

I understand if you do not believe Calvin's interpretation to be correct. I do not understand if you think that it is foreign to Calvinism. But my question is in what way does my disagreeing with another member make me miserable? This does not make sense to me (we don't even know each other).

If you disagree with anything I've posted about Calvin defining foreknowledge as prescience based on divine decree then let's talk about it. The quote is above (there are many in the Institutions we can explore as well).

I do not adhere to Calvinism (like I said on another thread, I do not hold to Penal Substitution Theory). If you disagree with the traditional Calvinistic definition of "foreknowledge" (Calvin's definition) that is perfectly fine with me. My point was that Calvin used the traditional (the "literal") definition while many contemporary Calvinists do not. I said that I agree with the "literal" definition.

I do not understand your comment in the context of this thread or any other post I have made on the Christian Board.

John Caldwell · Oct 3, 2019

Anthony D'Arienzo said:
The biblical meaning is the actual meaning. When God Defines it, THAT Settles it.

Anthony,

Please provide the passage where God defines (or redefines) "foreknowledge". I think that that would go miles in settling the question.

Thanks,

John

Anthony D'Arienzo · Oct 3, 2019

John Caldwell said:
Anthony,

Please provide the passage where God defines (or redefines) "foreknowledge". I think that that would go miles in settling the question.

Thanks,

John

In post 828 commenting on Roman's 8:29-30 is where God had the Apostle Paul define biblical foreknowledge of persons, not events for us.
As Pink pointed out in posts 1,2....no one can refute it.
I do not think that those who cannot understand Calvinism correctly, have the capacity to welcome the truth here, but instead will go to any lengths to deny it.

Anthony D'Arienzo · Oct 3, 2019

John Caldwell said:
That is an interesting statement.

My argument here is that traditional Calvinism (the Calvinism of John Calvin and Beza), held that "foreknowledge" is another word for prescience (and prescience based on decree). As evidence I offered this quote from John Calvin's Institutions:

"This foreknowledge or prescience is not speculative but active… since he foresees the things which are to happen, simply because he has decreed that they are so to happen… it is clear that all events take place by his sovereign appointment." (John Calvin. Institutes of the Christian Religion (17340-17341). Signalman Publishing).

I understand if you do not believe Calvin's interpretation to be correct. I do not understand if you think that it is foreign to Calvinism. But my question is in what way does my disagreeing with another member make me miserable? This does not make sense to me (we don't even know each other).

If you disagree with anything I've posted about Calvin defining foreknowledge as prescience based on divine decree then let's talk about it. The quote is above (there are many in the Institutions we can explore as well).

I do not adhere to Calvinism (like I said on another thread, I do not hold to Penal Substitution Theory). If you disagree with the traditional Calvinistic definition of "foreknowledge" (Calvin's definition) that is perfectly fine with me. My point was that Calvin used the traditional (the "literal") definition while many contemporary Calvinists do not. I said that I agree with the "literal" definition.

I do not understand your comment in the context of this thread or any other post I have made on the Christian Board.

Calvin's quote is an attempt to bring clarity to what God has decreed. The thought being He has purposed it.
He is not defining the biblical term but addressing objectors who hold the Arminian point of view.

Anthony D'Arienzo · Oct 3, 2019

John Caldwell said:
Anthony,

Please provide the passage where God defines (or redefines) "foreknowledge". I think that that would go miles in settling the question.

Thanks,

John

The first three posts on this thread provide many verses to bring clarity.
Anyone who works through the verses will see it.

John Caldwell · Oct 3, 2019

Anthony D'Arienzo said:
In post 828 commenting on Roman's 8:29-30 is where God had the Apostle Paul define biblical foreknowledge of persons, not events for us.
As Pink pointed out in posts 1,2....no one can refute it.
I do not think that those who cannot understand Calvinism correctly, have the capacity to welcome the truth here, but instead will go to any lengths to deny it.

John Calvin defined "foreknowledge" as "prescience" in his Instututes. I do not think it fair to question his understanding of Calvinism.

Also, Calvinism is not difficult to understand. In fact, Calvinists have long applauded its construction and simplicity.

All I have done is agree with John Calvin's definition of "foreknowledge".

If you are implying that I do not understand Calvinism (not that I reject it, but that I do not understand it) then please be honest enough to provide a quote from this thread (or at least from this forum). Baseless claims are no good.

John Caldwell · Oct 3, 2019

Anthony D'Arienzo said:
Calvin's quote is an attempt to bring clarity to what God has decreed. The thought being He has purposed it.
He is not defining the biblical term but addressing objectors who hold the Arminian point of view.

John Calvin died long before the Arminian point of view was articulated.

Calvin was stating that foreknowledge is a pre-knowledge and that based on God's decree. They are linked, as you indicate (to the traditional Calvinist) but Calvin did not redefine the actual word.

Were you speaking of foreknowledge as a doctrine you would be correct (in terms of Calvinism). But in terms of the meaning of a word you are wrong.

The issue comes up in translations (famously with "atonement", "expiation", and "propitiation"). When we ignore the meaning of words and provide interpretation instead we pave the way to error.

John Caldwell · Oct 3, 2019

Anthony D'Arienzo said:
The first three posts on this thread provide many verses to bring clarity.
Anyone who works through the verses will see it.

So God does not actually define the word?

ScottA · Oct 3, 2019

John Caldwell said:
I never thought about it that way. I like the example.

I think timelessness of God is often overlooked in these discussions. With topics like election, probably even foreknowledge, God is sometimes pictured as progresding, planning, developing etc. when a more accurate picture is probably along the lines of history unfolding in our experience (not God's).

Yes, the whole idea of anything happening before the foundation of the world combined with the fact that everything of the world (including time) is created and made manifest in revelations having been (past tense) written aforetime, should tell us of the true nature of all things. It is the kingdom of God that is what is real and the world created and finite, and us thinking that the world is the measure of things, is wrong. Knowledge has been increased. Praise God!

lforrest · Oct 3, 2019

ScottA said:
Yes, the whole idea of anything happening before the foundation of the world combined with the fact that everything of the world (including time) is created and made manifest in revelations having been (past tense) written aforetime, should tell us of the true nature of all things. It is the kingdom of God that is what is real and the world created and finite, and us thinking that the world is the measure of things, is wrong. Knowledge has been increased. Praise God!

Then throw a wrench into to works, and consider the warning in revelations about names being potentally removed from the book of life. This implies a change in the eternal, Change ostensibly requires time. But all things came into being by God's word, even the eternal, so there it that.

ScottA · Oct 3, 2019

Anthony D'Arienzo said:
Yes...that is the main point Scott, no need to over think it.
In other words..WHOM He did foreknow...are predestined, called, justified,glorified....they call this...the golden chain of redemption.
It is spoken of and only true of believers.
The unsaved ...who remain unsaved...are never justified,or glorified.
Once you see.it, re read the passage a few times and you will get it. There is no other way to see.it.

I do see it, but was hoping to walk out just what it is that you have put your finger on. You see, if events are not the subject of foreknowledge and yet people are, then it is because we share a timelessness with God (the same yesterday, today, and forever). But also by that same realization, time is not only finite, but has no place in the reality of God and the kingdom. Therefore, when we read of the events of men we read of what is finite; but when we read of the would-be events of God, time can as should be removed for clarity on His level. This is the mind of Christ, and rightly dividing the word of truth.

Biblical Foreknowledge

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Certified Flunky

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads