 |
| 
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 7/13/2003 1:37 PM (GMT -6) |   | Below are a couple of articles that bring up some very interesting points with regard to the actual biblical teaching concerning "foreknow" or "proginosko." The first article demonstrates that the use of the word, "proginosko" (usually translated, "foreknow" in the English translations of the Scriptures) actually refers to past knowledge instead of "foreknowledge" in the classic sense.
This article clearly shows that the definition of foreknowledge in the classical sense is far afield of the biblical definition.
http://pelajus.com/proginosko.html
The second article is a good basic study on "Does God Change His Mind?" It deals with the common objections to the idea, shows these objections to be not founded in either Reason or good hermeneutics, and to my mind demonstrably proves from Scripture that God indeed does change His mind (repent or change his previous decisions) when circumstances warrant:
http://pelajus.com/godrepent.html
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
Edited by - John Earp on 07/14/2003 02:17:23 AM
Edited by - John Earp on 07/17/2003 12:55:31 AM | | Back to Top | | |
 |
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 7/13/2003 9:19 PM (GMT -6) | | Hey you guys need to read this! 
Especially PoW, Paul, and ReasonableDoubt! 
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Starkman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747
| Posted 7/14/2003 3:25 AM (GMT -6) | | I'm reading it, I'm reading it (Starkman waves a hand to John to say, "I'm here and paying attention!)
| | Back to Top | | |
|
GregBoyd
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 1818
| Posted 7/14/2003 6:17 AM (GMT -6) | | Solid stuff John.
GB
"The responsibility is with the chooser -- God is blameless." Plato, Republic, 10. | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 7/14/2003 7:13 AM (GMT -6) | | What really amazed me about the first article when I first read it was that an entire DOGMA of exhaustive definite foreknowledge is built upon not a scriptural foundation but a philosophical one. The fact is there is absolutely NO scriptural evidence supporting the classical definition of foreknowledge. I wonder why classical theologians don't notice this fact.
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
|
ReasonableDoubt
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 655
| Posted 7/14/2003 7:29 AM (GMT -6) | | "The fact is there is absolutely NO scriptural evidence supporting the classical definition of foreknowledge"
You sure about that?
"Everyone who believes in God at all believes that He knows what you and I are going to do tomorrow." - C. S. Lewis | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 7/14/2003 2:15 PM (GMT -6) | | Yes. The first article linked at the top of this thread, "Proginosko, A Word Study," amply demonstrates th0e NT Gk. usage of the term commonly translated "foreknow/foreknew" refers not to foresight, but to historical knowledge, as in "God has not cast off his people whom He foreknew" (i.e., Jews). (Rom. 11:2).
Edited by - John Earp on 07/14/2003 7:34:27 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
ReasonableDoubt
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 655
| Posted 7/14/2003 5:41 PM (GMT -6) | | WHo wrote these articles? I looked in vain to find an author. Just curious.
In the first article it is talking only about the specific greek word for foreknowledge. I'm not a Hebrew or Greek scholar so have no clue about the truth of this. But what then is your position regarding prophecy? SInce there is no scriptural evidence for foreknowledge , according to you, how do you explain prophecy- both in the New Testament and in Revelation- among other places? Please explain some of the specific verses that are prophecies particularly in the Old Testament and how they do not refer to foreknowledge.
In the second article I find it telling that the king James version is used. FOr example, Judges 2:18 in the NIV is "Judges 2
18 Whenever the LORD raised up a judge for them, he was with the judge and saved them out of the hands of their enemies as long as the judge lived; for the LORD had compassion on them as they groaned under those who oppressed and afflicted them. "
Having compassion versus repenting. Well, to us modern English readers, there is a difference. The word "repenteth" in old English perhaps doesn't necessarily mean the same thing as we think it to now. I often wondered while reading the King James Version of the Old Testament- who was God repenting to in all these verses? If repenting merely means "change one's mind" with no pejorative meaning- that's one thing. But it's undeniable that the way Christians use the words now means that you are telling God that you are sorry and turning from your wicked ways, and asking forgiveness for your sins. God obviously cannot do that. So i'm wondering if this is all a big question of semantics here. So much is reliant on translation. As any linguist will tell you, in every language there are words that are not translatable into other languages. My Mexican friends will often say something in Spanish, I'll ask, what did you say? And they'll tell me something similar to what they meant, but preface it by saying there really is nothing in the English language to adequately express their intent.
"Everyone who believes in God at all believes that He knows what you and I are going to do tomorrow." - C. S. Lewis | | Back to Top | | |
|
Chris Grant
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2003
Total Posts : 151
| Posted 7/15/2003 3:47 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
The fact is there is absolutely NO scriptural evidence supporting the classical definition of foreknowledge.
"And I do this for a wise purpose; for thus it whispereth me, according to the workings of the Spirit of the Lord which is in me. And now, I do not know all things; but the Lord knoweth all things which are to come; wherefore, he worketh in me to do according to his will."
"But they reside in the presence of God, on a globe like a sea of glass and fire, where all things for their glory are manifest, past, present, and future, and are continually before the Lord."
Oh, wait. You probably meant Biblical evidence.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
ReasonableDoubt
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 655
| Posted 7/15/2003 4:15 AM (GMT -6) | | | Laika - why are you so constantly sarcastic? It seems that almost every post of yours is like this recently. Why can't the debate be kept civil? | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 7/15/2003 6:54 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
WHo wrote these articles? I looked in vain to find an author. Just curious.
The author of the article, due to ecclesiastical pressure within his denomination, has chosen to remain anonymous. His pen name is Pelajus. He can be reached directly through his website, which is http://pelajus.com
quote:
But what then is your position regarding prophecy? SInce there is no scriptural evidence for foreknowledge , according to you, how do you explain prophecy- both in the New Testament and in Revelation- among other places? Please explain some of the specific verses that are prophecies particularly in the Old Testament and how they do not refer to foreknowledge.
I see no problem whatsoever, based on God's omnipotence, to view these things as God saying, "This is what I'm going to do or cause to happen, and this is when I'm going to do it," and then bringing it to pass.
quote:
In the second article I find it telling that the king James version is used.
Actually, the author is decidedly non-KJV, and has many links on his website to sites debunking the KJ-only idea. I am not sure why he chose to use KJV in this quote, but as far as I know, "repent" is a valid translation of the Heb. term transliterated "nacham." The NRSV translates this as "changed His mind." Even if we take the less intense translation, "had compassion on," we are still left to wonder how God can have emotions if he is in fact timeless and knew with absolute certainty from all eternity past precisely how everything that ever happened would happen.
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Fleetwood
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2003
Total Posts : 110
| Posted 7/15/2003 11:37 AM (GMT -6) | | You make an absurd statement based on one website article by a man who lacks both the integrity and courage to post his name? I read the article. His bias and unprofessionalism is obvious. I find it laughable to see a man make the statement you did based on one piece of anonymous internet writing by a man urging readers to read Pinnock.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Laika
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 2433
| Posted 7/15/2003 12:49 PM (GMT -6) | | Fleetwood
quote:
You make an absurd statement based on one website article by a man who lacks both the integrity and courage to post his name? I read the article. His bias and unprofessionalism is obvious.
It's not obvious to us, so point it out.
And your rebuttal of the paper's apologia of "proginosko" is where?
Edited by - Laika on 07/15/2003 5:51:07 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
Paul5388
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 295
| Posted 7/15/2003 1:45 PM (GMT -6) | | Laika,
quote:
Yes, I really admire him. He had the courage to stand up against the religio-political machine of his day and teach what he believed to be the truth. And I believe that much of what he taught was true. Like Pelagius, I do not believe in the doctrine of Original Sin. This is a construct of Augustine, brought in by him from his days as a Manichean cultist, and believed in by Augustine because of his problem with lust. He could not keep from sinning, therefore it was not his fault; it was sin that was born in him at conception. It is because of Pelagius' courage in the face of opposition from the likes of Augustine, Jerome and Emperor Honorius, and his willingness to stand for truth that I chose my screen name. (from the Pelajus FAQS page)
and from Pinnock's From Augustine to Arminius: A Pilgrimage in Theology quote:
God is able to be inside time, and not only outside of it.
Just a little quote that everyone wanted to ignore in the "Counterfactuals" thread.
Edited by - Paul5388 on 07/15/2003 6:46:22 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 7/15/2003 1:50 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
God is able to be inside time, and not only outside of it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just a little quote that everyone wanted to ignore in the "Counterfactuals" thread.
Now, THAT'S BETTER. (But why did you ask Laika about Time being "meaningless" to God? That one got me!) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Paul5388
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 295
| Posted 7/15/2003 4:00 PM (GMT -6) | | POW,
Quien sabe? Who knows? Maybe it was just a carry over from the "Counterfactuals" thread where Laika has been insistant that God has always been bound up in time.
EDIT: I answered the wrong question. Time is meaningless to God if He doesn't recognize the difference between 1000 years and 1 day and vice versa. So, He is either outside of time's constraints or He needs a new battery in His watch (He can't use a self wind because He doesn't move (remember He is everywhere) to keep it wound up)!
Edited by - Paul5388 on 07/15/2003 9:05:02 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 7/15/2003 4:12 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
You make an absurd statement based on one website article by a man who lacks both the integrity and courage to post his name?
So says he who goes by a pen name. LOL.
quote:
I read the article. His bias and unprofessionalism is obvious. I find it laughable to see a man make the statement you did based on one piece of anonymous internet writing by a man urging readers to read Pinnock.
The study stands on its own merits. I challenge you to refute it, point by point, if you can. Of course, I doubt you will, oh pseudonomynous one.
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 7/15/2003 4:42 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Hey guys!
Excellent articles John. I'm especially interested in the one on whether "the foundation of the world" is a mis-translation.
Albert, you might find the following article interesting:
http://twtministries.com/articles/9_openness/katabole.html
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Paul5388
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 295
| Posted 7/15/2003 4:46 PM (GMT -6) | | John,
Pelajus doesn't seem to very much on top of things and doesn't seem to be much more than a parrot for Pinnock. Why do I say that? Well, consider that there are other words that are closely related to "foreknow/proginosko", like "foreknowledge/prognosis" that were completely ignored. In Acts 2.23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain: you will notice "determinate counsel" used in conjunction with "foreknowledge". Do you have any idea when God decided the sacrifice of Jesus was necessary? Would it be in the "past history" or would it have been before the foundation of the world?
Consider also that "Instance #4" (I Peter 1.20) doesn't even properly address the object of foreknowledge. Recognizing the KJV uses "foreordained" instead of "foreknow" you should get the impression that what was known before and pre-determined was not the person, but the incarnation that was "manifest in these last times for you,". I think the NIV and Pelajus have struck out again!
| | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 7/15/2003 5:32 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
John,
Pelajus doesn't seem to very much on top of things and doesn't seem to be much more than a parrot for Pinnock.
This seems to be your standard resort when you find something you disagree with, Paul. Curious. Are YOU a parrot?
Paul
Why do I say that? Well, consider that there are other words that are closely related to "foreknow/proginosko", like "foreknowledge/prognosis" that were completely ignored. In Acts 2.23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain: you will notice "determinate counsel" used in conjunction with "foreknowledge". Do you have any idea when God decided the sacrifice of Jesus was necessary? Would it be in the "past history" or would it have been before the foundation of the world?
John
I'll not presume to speak for my man Pel, but it seems to me that all Openness authors I am aware of refer to the death of Jesus as in fact within the realm of the determined future.
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 7/15/2003 5:48 PM (GMT -6) | | albert:
Interesting. I will have to think on that for a while. We did recently have a discussion on the book of life and the foundation of the world. You may find the comments interesting:
http://www.gregboyd.org/gbfront/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=2238
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Paul5388
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 295
| Posted 7/15/2003 6:00 PM (GMT -6) | | John,
I just checked for feathers and I didn't find any! But, to make you happy, I will change to "pre-recorded playback", especially since "monkey see, monkey do" wouldn't be very nice.
If the incarnation is "within the realm of the determined future" then everything leading up to the incarnation would also have to be within that same realm. He was foreknown and foreordained to appear at a given point in the history of manknd and any change in history would have changed that point.quote:
For want of a nail
the shoe was lost.
For want of a shoe
the horse was lost.
For want of a horse
the rider was lost.
For want of a rider
the battle was lost.
For want of a battle
the kingdom was lost.
And all for the want
of a horseshoe nail.
The little things add up. Song of Solomon 2:15 Take us the foxes, the little foxes, that spoil the vines: for our vines have tender grapes.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 7/15/2003 6:17 PM (GMT -6) | | Paul
If the incarnation is "within the realm of the determined future" then everything leading up to the incarnation would also have to be within that same realm. He was foreknown and foreordained to appear at a given point in the history of manknd and any change in history would have changed that point.
John
It seems to me that all that was really necessary was for God to find a virgin who was pure and holy and would be willing to say, "Be it unto me according to thy word."
quote:
For want of a nail
the shoe was lost.
For want of a shoe
the horse was lost.
For want of a horse
the rider was lost.
For want of a rider
the battle was lost.
For want of a battle
the kingdom was lost.
And all for the want
of a horseshoe nail.
My dad used to use that one in his sermons a lot. So you agree at least that there is a sequence involved, right?
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Paul5388
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 295
| Posted 7/15/2003 7:21 PM (GMT -6) | | John,
Not quite so fast. The virgin had to meet certain criteria, not just for God to "find a virgin". Since, His linage was to come from His mother, she had to be Jewish, but not just Jewish, she had to be from the tribe of Judah in the linage of David. Then she would have to have a relative named Elizabeth, who would have a son named John that was not named after his father and would function as Elijah and wander in the wilderness and eat honey and locusts. Then there would have to be a census that would take them to Bethlehem from Nazareth so prophecy could be fulfilled, just like fleeing to Egypt was fulfillment of prophecy.
No, if you don't have Ruth or Rahab, you don't have David and you don't have Jesus. There is a genetic composition that has to be for a person to exist, otherwise he/she is someone else.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 7/15/2003 7:45 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
[quote]John,
Not quite so fast. The virgin had to meet certain criteria, not just for God to "find a virgin". Since, His linage was to come from His mother, she had to be Jewish, but not just Jewish, she had to be from the tribe of Judah in the linage of David.
This far I agree with you, and it seems to me that this still does not require a closed future. The rest of the things you list later are not subjects of prophecy, to my knowledge.
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
| 150 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 11:43 AM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|