[ponyespresso]

29 For whom he foreknew, he also foreordained to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren

I am interested in why you did not stress the word foreknew, and just jumped straight into emphasizing the word foreordained?

[jboot]

I am interested in why you did not stress the word foreknew (rather than or in addition to foreordained)

Because it is significant. In the essay above, "foreordained" is made subject to (and inferior to) "forknew". I do not disagree with the role and importance of foreknowledge, yet it does not diminish the fact that our salvation was part and parcel of God's sovereign will, not ours. The names of the believers were already written in the book of life before the foundation of the world. The soul of the one foreknown did not exist when this decision was made, and could have no part in it. The fact that they were foreknown stands, but does not take precedence over their predestination, or in any way detract from the sovereignity of God.

It is rather unique (and slightly amusing) to see someone put an Arminiean spin on Rom. 8:29-30, though.

[rwfromkansas]

I am interested in knowing why you have chosen not to read the Greek and learn what "foreknow" means, choosing instead to believe it simply means to "know beforehand."

And furthermore, I am interested in knowing how you believe that "whom he foreknew" somehow can be biblically twisted into a "PERSON'S ACTION he foreknew," as in the accepting of God's offer of salvation. I do find that quite interesting that you can make such a leap from 'whom'...the person himself being known and understood completely by God....to simply the "person's action"....the one action of accepting Christ. You destroy the beautiful complexity of foreknowledge by making it simply seeing beforehand.

By destroying the complexity of foreknowledge, part of God, you destroy the COMPLEXITY AND BEAUTY OF GOD.