Foreknowledge or Foresight?

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by J.D., Mar 20, 2006.

  1. J.D.

    J.D.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,553
    Likes Received:
    8
    Are the elect chosen according to foreknowledge or foresight?
     
  2. npetreley

    npetreley
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    0
    The word in Greek is proginosko, which means knew intimately in advance. It does not mean knew in advance what would happen or what they would do.

    So if by "foreknowledge" you mean knowing intimately, then it's foreknowledge. If you don't mean that, it's neither.
     
  3. J.D.

    J.D.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,553
    Likes Received:
    8
    Is there a Greek word for foresight, or foresaw, or foreseeing?
     
  4. Sularis

    Sularis
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    940
    Likes Received:
    0
    the "elect" such as I understand them - are chosen by foreknowledge so as to increase the harvest of "non-elect". It is part of God's sovereign actions to allow man "free" will all the while being sovereign
     
  5. npetreley

    npetreley
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    0
    There's foreknowledge as in knowing something in advance. That's prognosis. The relevant text in Romans 8 uses proginosko, though, which is to know intimately.

    Unfortunately we don't have English equivalents to the Greek words so they both get translated as foreknowledge. This is a frequent unfortunate problem with translations. There are whole passages that read like nonsense unless you look at the Greek. (Re: The whole conversation between Jesus and Peter regarding "do you love me?")
     
  6. donnA

    donnA
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2000
    Messages:
    23,354
    Likes Received:
    0
    foreknowledge or foresight?
    what does the bible say?
    Then thats the right one.
     
  7. J.D.

    J.D.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,553
    Likes Received:
    8
    I've heard people say that we are elect according to foreknowledge, which means God foresaw that some people would believe and therefore He elected them.

    So my question is, to put another way, is foreknowledge the same as foresight, and can it be proven yea or nay?
     
  8. npetreley

    npetreley
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    0
    That isn't what the Bible says.

    Yes and no. It depends on the Greek. In the case you're talking about, they are not the same.

    Yea, it can be proved.
     
  9. J.D.

    J.D.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,553
    Likes Received:
    8
    npetreley, when you say it can be proven, are you saying that it can be proven that foreknowledge and foresight are the same thing? If that's what your saying, then I'm challenging you to prove it. I say it's not the same. I'll wait for your reply and then I'll give my defense as to my position.
     
  10. npetreley

    npetreley
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    0
    When I'm saying yes and no, I don't mean they're the same. I'm saying that if the Greek word is prognosis, then it is foresight (even if it is translated as foreknowledge). If the Greek word is proginosko, then it is known intimately in advance.

    As it pertains to salvation, it is proginosko, which means it is NOT the same thing as foresight in the context of your question.

    In other words, I believe we agree. I'm just trying to be precise with my answer so someone can't just whip out some unrelated verse where "foreknowledge" is really foresight in order to "prove" I'm wrong.
     
  11. J.D.

    J.D.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,553
    Likes Received:
    8
    Thanks npet, we do agree in the main, but I will challenge this:

    "I'm saying that if the Greek word is prognosis, then it is foresight (even if it is translated as foreknowledge)."

    I had hoped I would get into this with an A, not a fellow C, but my source says something different so I'll use this as an opportunity to make my point.

    I'm not expert on any language, so I looked up the words in Strong's and here's what I got:

    proorao {pro-or-ah'-o}to see before (whether as respects place or time)

    proeido {pro-i'-do} to foresee

    proginosko {prog-in-oce'-ko}to have knowledge before hand
    2) to foreknow
    a) of those whom God elected to salvation
    3) to predestinate

    prognosis {prog'-no-sis}foreknowledge
    2) forethought, pre-arrangement

    So if there exists a Greek word for "foresight" (proorao, or proeido), and a completely different Greek word for foreknow (proginosko) and foreknowledge (prognosis), then why didn't God just say that we are "elect according to proorao or proeido?" Or, "for those he did proeido he did predestinate?".

    And how can some "theologians" get away with just glibbly substituting the one word for the other?
     
  12. Paul33

    Paul33
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    2,434
    Likes Received:
    0
    But when does foreknowledge kick in?

    I agree that election is based on foreknowledge (to know intimately in advance) and not on foresight (to foresee what others would do and then elect those who believe).

    If God decrees to create a universe where man has free will, and if God knows that man will sin and decrees to lift up Christ drawing all men to himself, and if God decrees that those who do not persist in rebellion but "do nothing" in the presence of the lifted up Christ will be found to be in Christ, then God can foreknow those who are in Christ and pass over those who persist in rebellion. Single predestination.

    The ones foreknown by God were passive before him (did nothing and therefore not a work) and were drawn by Christ and found to be in Christ. Therefore he knows them intimately in advance.

    The others persist in rebellion, remain in their sins, and remain outside of Christ, and are therefore not foreknown by God.

    So foreknowledge kicks in after the decree to lift up Christ. The result being that God gets all of the glory when someone is saved in real time and space, and the lost receive all the blame for persisting in rebellion against God and the lifted up Christ.

    What think ye?
     
  13. donnA

    donnA
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2000
    Messages:
    23,354
    Likes Received:
    0
    Then it is man who is in control of salvation and God is not sovereign. Or God has complete control.
     
  14. Helen

    Helen
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/Helen2.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2001
    Messages:
    11,703
    Likes Received:
    1
    Being given the gift of a choice of saying Yes or No to God's offer of salvation is NOT in any way decreasing God's sovereignty. Exactly the opposite: the fact that He has given us the freedom of choice shows His sovereignty is far greater than we can wrap our minds around.
     
  15. npetreley

    npetreley
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sorry, my bad. I was assuming you were using the word foresight to distinguish it from foreknow, not because you really meant "foresight". I agree 100% with what you said.
     
  16. npetreley

    npetreley
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    0
    I obviously disagree, but the problem I have with your response is that you simply dodged the whole issue.
     
  17. Helen

    Helen
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/Helen2.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2001
    Messages:
    11,703
    Likes Received:
    1
    Actually, I was simply responding to Donna. I am avoiding the rest as an obedience to Paul's instructions not to argue about words.

    It is very clear in the Bible that since God invented time, He is outside of it and therefore can see all of it at once. Calvinists claim this means that no man has a choice regarding salvation. But the Bible says differently.
     
  18. Linda64

    Linda64
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    2,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    Some Lessons About Election for Salvation

    1. Election is based on God's foreknowledge. (1 Peter 1:2)

    Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied. (1 Peter 1:2)


    2. Election means God planned man's salvation before the creation (Eph 1:5,11) . It means God, by his foreknowledge, has predestinated the Christian to a glorious future (1Pe 1:2-4; Ro 8:29-30) . It is not who is predestinated, but what we are predestinated to.

    Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, (Ephesians 1:5)

    In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will: (Ephesians 1:11)

    Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied. Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you, (1 Peter 1:2-4)

    For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified. (Romans 8:29-30)

    3. Election does not mean God arbitrarily chooses who will be saved and who will not be. He has revealed that He wants all men to be saved (2Pe 3:9).

    The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. (2 Peter 3:9)

    Way of Life Encyclopedia
     
  19. npetreley

    npetreley
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    0
    Free willers claim that this means God foresaw who would believe and who would not. But the Bible says differently.

    Now - how do you figure out which position is Biblical unless you look at the words that can tell you which one is right?
     
  20. J.D.

    J.D.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,553
    Likes Received:
    8
    Gettin a little off topic here, but I must respond to a couple of things.

    Helen said "I am avoiding the rest as an obedience to Paul's instructions not to argue about words."

    First of all, the scripture is, if I am assuming correctly "Of these things put [them] in remembrance, charging [them] before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, [but] to the subverting of the hearers." Now I declare that these are words to great profit, and there is no subversion going on.

    Secondly, if individual words were not important to Paul, why did he say this: Gal 3:16 "Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ." Do you know that "seed" is the only English word that will work in that verse, and Paul knew that the word had to have a double application, being plural in one sense and singular in the other? So individual words do matter.

    Then this:

    Linda64, I believe quoting David Cloud, said: "It is not who is predestinated, but what we are predestinated to." And then she said: "For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified. (Romans 8:29-30)

    Now let me do that again and highlight some words to show the blatant contradictions of arminian theology:

    It is not WHO is predestinated, but what we are predestinated to.

    For WHOM he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover WHOM he did predestinate, THEM he also called: and WHOME he called, THEM he also justified: and WHOM he justified, THEM he also glorified. (Romans 8:29-30)

    Linda, do you see the contradiction?

    Give me some more David Cloud quotes and let's see if we can shoot them down too. I've read his stuff, he's not as deep as he thinks he is.
     

Share This Page

Loading...