There is no doubt that the Bible teaches the doctrine of election. The language of God’s picking and choosing fills the pages of Scripture. For some people this language can be difficult to read and even more difficult to accept. How can a good and gracious God choose people for salvation based on no merit of their own? How can that be fair?
Some have tried to deal with what they see as the thorny doctrine of election by a misunderstanding of the term “foreknowledge.” They have no problem with election because they understand election to mean that God simply looked down the corridors of time and saw who would exercise faith and then elected those people to salvation. This helps to alleviate some of the pressure they feel when talking of “picking” and “choosing.”
But is this the correct understanding of the biblical term foreknowledge? Is God’s election a response to those who will exercise faith in Him? In these couple of posts I hope to shed some light on the biblical term foreknowledge and its relationship to election.
Definitions
There are 2 main explanations of the term “foreknowledge.” One explanation takes “foreknowledge” to be simple prescience. God knows in the sense that he perceives those who will exercise faith in Him. This would be the equivalent of saying that I “know” that my car is an ugly green. I understand the facts of the situation because my senses have supposed them to be true.
The second explanation argues that the term “foreknowledge” means a bit more than simple knowledge. Those holding to this explanation would teach that the term can mean intimate knowledge and not just prescience. The dispute is based on the Greek word proginosko. One Arminian writer ( C. Gordon Olson) says, “The verb simply means, ‘to know beforehand, foreknow’ and the noun, ‘foreknowledge,’ or ‘prescience.’” He claims that Calvinists have made far too much of the supposed “pregnant meaning” in the Greek term proginosko.
The facts show that it is plausible to think that this term connotes more than simple prescience. There are multiple locations throughout the New Testament where the term cannot possibly mean a simple prescience (Mt. 25:12; Jn. 10:14; I Cor. 8:3; 2 Tim. 2:19). In fact, the term can and often does mean much more than natural perception. The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament states: “Thus knowledge has an element of acknowledgement. But it also has an element of emotion, or better, of movement of will . . . .” In another place the same dictionary says: “His foreknowledge, however, is an election or foreordination of His people (Rom. 8:29; 11:2) or Christ (I Pet. 1:20).”
With this proper understanding of “foreknowledge” as an intimate knowledge, it helps us to see that God does not simply perceive who will choose Him and then elect them. “Thus, ‘according to the foreknowledge’ suggests ‘according to God’s fatherly care for you before the world was made’” (Wayne Grudem).
Specific Texts
There are several places throughout Scripture where the term “foreknowledge” is used. I would like to look at a few of those and explain how implausible it is that the term means simple prescience. First, in Acts 2:23 the passage says that Jesus was “delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God.” It is interesting to note here that the word by is used of God’s foreknowledge. Would simple knowledge act in this way? Simple foreknowledge would know but would not act.
Romans 8:29 also uses the word “foreknowledge” in reference to our salvation. It is used as the beginning link in a series of words that describe the acts of God in salvation. In this passage the object of the verb “foreknew” is personal, referring to “those whom.” Foreknowledge here means to set a personal love upon. It is very close in meaning to the next word in the chain, predestined, but there is a difference. “Foreknowledge” emphasizes God’s covenantal love for the one He has chosen, while “predestined” emphasizes his electing will.
Three chapters later in Romans 11:2 we have a conclusive example that “foreknowledge” as used in the Bible means “intimate knowledge” and not simply to know beforehand. The verb here cannot mean only knowledge based on what we know of Israel and the surrounding context. Did God see in advance some reason to choose Israel as His special nation? There was nothing worthy about the people of Israel. In fact, it was quite the opposite. They were most unworthy (see v. 3)! Yet, Romans 11:2 says that God foreknew them. Surely, the word used here must mean something more than to look down the corridors of time and see who responds as God desires.
Finally, I Peter 1:1, 2 is the classic text used to teach that God’s election is based on His foreseeing man’s faith. The passage says that we “are chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father.” Proponents of Arminianism teach that we should understand this to mean that God’s election is based on His foreknowledge. God only chooses those whom He sees will respond in faith. Even a casual glance at the text will show this is an impossible assumption to take from the text. The verse clearly says “according to” and not “on the basis of.” The preposition translated “according to” in English is kata in Greek. This word can never mean “on the basis of.” It has a variety of definitions, and they all indicate “the harmony of the items mentioned . . . ” (Buswell). Thus, foreknowledge does not provide the basis for election. Rather, it always operates in harmony with His electing will. His knowledge is predicated on His choosing, not on the influence of any outside will. Nothing about this passage suggests that God reacts to human faith.
In our next installment (scheduled for next weekend) I will take a look at some further reasons for denying that “foreknowledge” means simply to know beforehand. In so doing, I hope to show that there are clear biblical reasons to believe that God’s choice of who will be saved is based on His sovereign prerogative alone.
No comments:
Post a Comment