The Meaning of Foreknew in Romans 8:29

[Dave...]

"The Meaning of Foreknew in Romans 8:29"

I copied this out of a book that I once owned called "The Five Points of Calvinism, Defined, Defended and documented" about twenty years ago. You'll still find it floating around the internet on some forums. I wanted to confront that interpretation that I once defended.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0875528279?tag=thethreshold-20

To my surprise, I found it, but not by me, rather, it was on www.moergism.com. Perhaps they copied my copy, as it still has some mistakes pointed out in the spell checker, mostly with spacing that I just now fixed.

You should read it, as some of the points made in that article I'll be discussing and using for proof of my position. You can read it here if you like.

The Meaning of "Foreknew" in Romans 8:29 | Steele & Thomas
David N. Steele and Curtis C. Thomas explain "foreknew" in Romans 8:29 as God's sovereign, covenantal love rather than mere foresight of faith.
www.monergism.com

Romans 8:29-30 For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.

QUOTE FROM THE BOOK:
God has always possessed perfect knowledge of all creatures and of all events. There has never been a time when anything past, present, or future was not fully known to Him.* But it is not His knowledge of future events (of what people would do, etc.) which is referred to in Romans 8:29,30, for Paul clearly states that those whom He foreknew He predestined, He called, He justified, etc. Since all men are not predestined, called, and justified, it follows that all men were not foreknown by God in the sense spoken of in verse 29.

It is for this reason that the Arminians are forced to add some qualifying notion. They read into the passage some idea not contained in the language itself such as those whom He foreknew would believe etc., He predestined, called and justified. But according to the Biblical usage of the words "know," "knew," and "foreknew" there is not the least need to make such an addition, and since it is unnecessary, it is improper. When the Bible speaks of God knowing particular individuals, it often means that He has special regard for them, that they are the objects of His affection and concern. For example in Amos 3:2, God, speaking to Israel says, "You only have I known of all the families of the earth; therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities." The Lord knows about all the families of the earth, but He knew Israel in a special way.* They were His chosen people whom He had set His heart upon. See Deuteronomy 7:7,8; 10:15. Because Israel was His in a special sense He chastised them, cf. Hebrews 12:5,6.*God, speaking to Jeremiah, said, "Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you," (Jeremiah 1:5). The meaning here is not that God knew about Jeremiah but that He had a special regard for the prophet before He formed him in his mother's womb. Jesus also used the word "knew" in the sense of personal, intimate awareness. "On that day many will say to me, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?' And then will I declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from me, you evildoers' " (Matt. 7:22,23). Our Lord cannot be understood here as saying, I knew nothing about you, for it is quite evident that He knew all too much about them – their evil character and evil works; hence, His meaning must be, I never knew you intimately nor personally, I never regarded you as the objects of my favor or love. Paul uses the word in the same way in I Corinthians 8:3, "But if one loves God, one is known by him," and also II Timothy 2:19, "the Lord knows those who are His." The Lord knows about all men but He only knows those "who love Him, who are called according to His purpose" (Rom 8:28) – those who are His! ...END QUOTE

I would add that Calvinism is also adding a qualifying notion. That being, Whom He foreknew [from the foundations of the world]. That simply is assumed into the text. If that was what was meant, it would be easy to just say it, as Peter did in 1 Peter 1:20

1 Peter 1:2 He indeed was foreordained [foreknew] before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you (Also see 1 Peter 1:2)

(ESV) "He was foreknown before the foundation of the world but was made manifest in the last times for the sake of you"

The same Greek word for "foreordained" in 1 Peter 1:20 and "foreknew" in Romans 8:29. Also see John 17:24.

John 17:24 Father, I desire that they also whom You gave Me may be with Me where I am, that they may behold My glory which You have given Me; for You loved Me before the foundation of the world.

So foreknown [from the foundations of the world] is assumed by the Calvinist interpretation. It sounds reasonable, right? There is predestination right after that.

Let me offer some context that Calvinism doesn't use because their understanding of Scripture limits that context. In Romans 8:28-28, Paul is speaking of true OT believers. That's the flow of the whole book in context, and the more immediate context is the same. They were foreknown as believers already, and were given to the Son by the Father, so that He would not lose one of them, thus predestined to be what? Conformed to the the image of His Son. These were already appointed to eternal life as true OT believers, and were thus foreknown by God, but would need to make the transition to the Gospel message as believers. These He also called (with the Gospel), His Sheep will hear His voice. Those He called, He also justified [in Christ, Pentecost and beyond] also see Romans 3:25. And those He justified, He glorified.

It's actually fits perfectly. If you think that sounds wrong, consider that Paul tells us who is foreknown in Romans 11:2, just as the article points out, but fails to connect the dots.

Romans 11:1-5 I say then, has God cast away His people? Certainly not! For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God has not cast away His people whom He foreknew. Or do you not know what the Scripture says of Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel, saying, "Lord, they have killed Your prophets and torn down Your altars, and I alone am left, and they seek my life"? But what does the divine response say to him? "I have reserved for Myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal." Even so then, at this present time there is a remnant according to the election of grace.

It's Israel. That's the same point that the five points of Calvinism was making, they just didn't examine that Scripture with the entire context, since most Calvinists believe that there is no transition from the Old Testament to the New Testament. That there is no difference in the way God deals with people from one to the other. That OT believers were saved and already had all the benefits of being in Christ. I disagree with that. Listen to the argument made in that article, it actually supports what I'm saying.

This Gospel that these Jews were hearing was completely different from what they expected and understood. Paul is explaining the Law verses grace. How physical Israel is different from Spiritual Israel. How God chastising the Jews and including the Gentiles was part of His eternal plan. How those Jews who God had chastised could still be a part of that plan of salvation. It's a covenant by faith, not of the Law. Peter makes the same kind of Argument to similar minded Jews of that time who were also ignorant as to what was happening in Acts1-2.

Acts 2:22-23 "Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a Man attested by God to you by miracles, wonders, and signs which God did through Him in your midst, as you yourselves also know-- Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death;

36 "Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ."

I'll give you the short argument. In the same context that the article uses, even the passage itself is quoted, considering the OT believers who loved God and thus were foreknown by Him....

1 Corinthians 8:3 But if anyone loves God, this one is known by Him.

Galatians 4:9 But now after you have known God, or rather are known by God, how is it that you turn again to the weak and beggarly elements, to which you desire again to be in bondage?

John 14:21 He who has My commandments and keeps them, it is he who loves Me. And he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and manifest Myself to him."

To use the same argument as the article, I think its not part of the Text, and therefore not necessary to add [from the foundations of the world] to the meaning of the word foreknew. I understand why that idea was assumed into the term foreknew from the Calvinist framework, but I believe that framework lacks the proper context. As the writer points out, God is speaking of a particular people who He foreloved. That's Israel. And they, the true believers, spiritual Israel, were predestined to take the next step in that transition from the Old Testament to the New Testament and come to faith in Jesus Christ, thus placing them in Christ, [after Pentecost] and as a result, being justified in Him and being conformed to His image.

[4WD]

"The Meaning of Foreknew in Romans 8:29"

I copied this out of a book that I once owned called "The Five Points of Calvinism, Defined, Defended and documented" about twenty years ago. You'll still find it floating around the internet on some forums. I wanted to confront that interpretation that I once defended.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0875528279?tag=thethreshold-20

To my surprise, I found it, but not by me, rather, it was on www.moergism.com. Perhaps they copied my copy, as it still has some mistakes pointed out in the spell checker, mostly with spacing that I just now fixed.

You should read it, as some of the points made in that article I'll be discussing and using for proof of my position. You can read it here if you like.

The Meaning of "Foreknew" in Romans 8:29 | Steele & Thomas
David N. Steele and Curtis C. Thomas explain "foreknew" in Romans 8:29 as God's sovereign, covenantal love rather than mere foresight of faith.
www.monergism.com

Romans 8:29-30 For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.

QUOTE FROM THE BOOK:
God has always possessed perfect knowledge of all creatures and of all events. There has never been a time when anything past, present, or future was not fully known to Him.* But it is not His knowledge of future events (of what people would do, etc.) which is referred to in Romans 8:29,30, for Paul clearly states that those whom He foreknew He predestined, He called, He justified, etc. Since all men are not predestined, called, and justified, it follows that all men were not foreknown by God in the sense spoken of in verse 29.

It is for this reason that the Arminians are forced to add some qualifying notion. They read into the passage some idea not contained in the language itself such as those whom He foreknew would believe etc., He predestined, called and justified. But according to the Biblical usage of the words "know," "knew," and "foreknew" there is not the least need to make such an addition, and since it is unnecessary, it is improper. When the Bible speaks of God knowing particular individuals, it often means that He has special regard for them, that they are the objects of His affection and concern. For example in Amos 3:2, God, speaking to Israel says, "You only have I known of all the families of the earth; therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities." The Lord knows about all the families of the earth, but He knew Israel in a special way.* They were His chosen people whom He had set His heart upon. See Deuteronomy 7:7,8; 10:15. Because Israel was His in a special sense He chastised them, cf. Hebrews 12:5,6.*God, speaking to Jeremiah, said, "Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you," (Jeremiah 1:5). The meaning here is not that God knew about Jeremiah but that He had a special regard for the prophet before He formed him in his mother's womb. Jesus also used the word "knew" in the sense of personal, intimate awareness. "On that day many will say to me, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?' And then will I declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from me, you evildoers' " (Matt. 7:22,23). Our Lord cannot be understood here as saying, I knew nothing about you, for it is quite evident that He knew all too much about them – their evil character and evil works; hence, His meaning must be, I never knew you intimately nor personally, I never regarded you as the objects of my favor or love. Paul uses the word in the same way in I Corinthians 8:3, "But if one loves God, one is known by him," and also II Timothy 2:19, "the Lord knows those who are His." The Lord knows about all men but He only knows those "who love Him, who are called according to His purpose" (Rom 8:28) – those who are His! ...END QUOTE

I would add that Calvinism is also adding a qualifying notion. That being, Whom He foreknew [from the foundations of the world]. That simply is assumed into the text. If that was what was meant, it would be easy to just say it, as Peter did in 1 Peter 1:20

1 Peter 1:2 He indeed was foreordained [foreknew] before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you (Also see 1 Peter 1:2)

(ESV) "He was foreknown before the foundation of the world but was made manifest in the last times for the sake of you"

The same Greek word for "foreordained" in 1 Peter 1:20 and "foreknew" in Romans 8:29. Also see John 17:24.

John 17:24 Father, I desire that they also whom You gave Me may be with Me where I am, that they may behold My glory which You have given Me; for You loved Me before the foundation of the world.

So foreknown [from the foundations of the world] is assumed by the Calvinist interpretation. It sounds reasonable, right? There is predestination right after that.

Let me offer some context that Calvinism doesn't use because their understanding of Scripture limits that context. In Romans 8:28-28, Paul is speaking of true OT believers. That's the flow of the whole book in context, and the more immediate context is the same. They were foreknown as believers already, and were given to the Son by the Father, so that He would not lose one of them, thus predestined to be what? Conformed to the the image of His Son. These were already appointed to eternal life as true OT believers, and were thus foreknown by God, but would need to make the transition to the Gospel message as believers. These He also called (with the Gospel), His Sheep will hear His voice. Those He called, He also justified [in Christ, Pentecost and beyond] also see Romans 3:25. And those He justified, He glorified.

It's actually fits perfectly. If you think that sounds wrong, consider that Paul tells us who is foreknown in Romans 11:2, just as the article points out, but fails to connect the dots.

Romans 11:1-5 I say then, has God cast away His people? Certainly not! For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God has not cast away His people whom He foreknew. Or do you not know what the Scripture says of Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel, saying, "Lord, they have killed Your prophets and torn down Your altars, and I alone am left, and they seek my life"? But what does the divine response say to him? "I have reserved for Myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal." Even so then, at this present time there is a remnant according to the election of grace.

It's Israel. That's the same point that the five points of Calvinism was making, they just didn't examine that Scripture with the entire context, since most Calvinists believe that there is no transition from the Old Testament to the New Testament. That there is no difference in the way God deals with people from one to the other. That OT believers were saved and already had all the benefits of being in Christ. I disagree with that. Listen to the argument made in that article, it actually supports what I'm saying.

This Gospel that these Jews were hearing was completely different from what they expected and understood. Paul is explaining the Law verses grace. How physical Israel is different from Spiritual Israel. How God chastising the Jews and including the Gentiles was part of His eternal plan. How those Jews who God had chastised could still be a part of that plan of salvation. It's a covenant by faith, not of the Law. Peter makes the same kind of Argument to similar minded Jews of that time who were also ignorant as to what was happening in Acts1-2.

Acts 2:22-23 "Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a Man attested by God to you by miracles, wonders, and signs which God did through Him in your midst, as you yourselves also know-- Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death;

36 "Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ."

I'll give you the short argument. In the same context that the article uses, even the passage itself is quoted, considering the OT believers who loved God and thus were foreknown by Him....

1 Corinthians 8:3 But if anyone loves God, this one is known by Him.

Galatians 4:9 But now after you have known God, or rather are known by God, how is it that you turn again to the weak and beggarly elements, to which you desire again to be in bondage?

John 14:21 He who has My commandments and keeps them, it is he who loves Me. And he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and manifest Myself to him."

To use the same argument as the article, I think its not part of the Text, and therefore not necessary to add [from the foundations of the world] to the meaning of the word foreknew. I understand why that idea was assumed into the term foreknew from the Calvinist framework, but I believe that framework lacks the proper context. As the writer points out, God is speaking of a particular people who He foreloved. That's Israel. And they, the true believers, spiritual Israel, were predestined to take the next step in that transition from the Old Testament to the New Testament and come to faith in Jesus Christ, thus placing them in Christ, [after Pentecost] and as a result, being justified in Him and being conformed to His image.

Foreknow does NOT mean foreordained.  Moreover, Foreknow does not mean foreloved.

Foreknow means simply to know beforehand; to have previous knowledge of, no more and no less.

As I have said before, God's foreknowledge is nothing more nor less than His omniscience applied to the future.

[Dave...]

Foreknow does NOT mean foreordained.  Moreover, Foreknow does not mean foreloved.

Foreknow means simply to know beforehand; to have previous knowledge of, no more and no less.

As I have said before, God's foreknowledge is nothing more nor less than His omniscience applied to the future.

This is how I see that passage in Romans 8:28-30

We always assume that predestination must be from spiritual death to spiritual life, as in unbeliever to believer. It can easily also be used in the smaller context. God predestines lots of things. True OT believers were still in Adam and not yet alive in Christ. They had the Promises as a result of their faith, and some even died having not received them. And some were still alive when that promise was being realized, thus the predestination. From the spiritual side of things, they were predestined from Adam with (OT) faith to Christ with (NT) faith, the life, since they were already appointed to eternal life from their OT faith. All that the Father gives me I shall not lose one of them, except Judas. Keep in mind, the passage specifically says that they were predestined to be conformed to the image of Christ. That can be taken as meaning from unbeliever to believer, as it is traditionally understood, but also can be understood in the smaller context as from OT believer to Christ believer, thus being placed into Christ by predestination, where all those promises are realized.

As was pointed out in the link, Romans 8:29 is clearly speaking of a specific people. I believe these people were Israel. There were promises made to both spiritual and physical Israel. But the spiritual Israel everyone is saved. I believe the Promises to physical Israel may have only been answered in type, like the Passover. I haven't worked that out yet. Spiritual Israel includes all believers, even Gentiles.

Do you see what I mean? God could have foreknown them already because of their OT faith. They still were not conformed, or begun to be conformed to Christlikeness if they had not yet trusted in the Gospel message and became 'in Christ', where that process begins, where the life begins. That's when they begin to be conformed to Christlikeness by the Spirit indwelling. The process of being perfected (Gal 3:2-3).

[4WD]

This is how I see that passage in Romans 8:28-30

We always assume that predestination must be from spiritual death to spiritual life, as in unbeliever to believer.

The change from spiritual death to spiritual life is salvation.  Salvation is not predestined, as such, in the sense of Reformed Theology "predestination". It is foreknown by God but not predestined.  What is predestined is that those who love God are foreknown and it is those who are predestined, called, justified and glorified. Those then become the elect.

I believe it is, and always was, God's purpose to save those who, given the message of the gospel, would willingly choose to love Him.