The Meaning of 'foreknew' in Romans 8:29

“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.“ Romans 8:29,30

Broadly speaking there have been two general views as to the meaning and use of the word “foreknew” in Romans 8:29. One class of commentators (the Arminians) maintain that Paul is saying that God predestined to salvation those whom He foreknew would respond to His offer of grace (i.e., those whom He saw would of their own free will repent of their sins and believe the gospel). Godet, in commenting on Romans 8:29, asks the question: “In what respect did

God thus foreknow them?” and answers that they were “foreknown as sure to fulfill the conditions of salvation, viz. faith; so: foreknown as His by faith.” ¹ The word “foreknew” is thus understood by Arminians to mean that God knew beforehand which sinners would believe, etc., and on the basis of this knowledge He predestined them unto salvation.

The other class of commentators (the Calvinists) reject the above view on two grounds. First, because the Arminians’ interpretation is not in keeping with the meaning of Paul’s language and second, because it is out of harmony with the system of doctrine taught in the rest of the Scriptures. Calvinists contend that the passage teaches that God set His heart upon (i.e., foreknew) certain individuals; these He predestined or marked out to be saved. Notice that the text does not say that God knew SOMETHING ABOUT particular individuals (that they would do this or that), but it states that God knew the individuals THEMSELVES – those whom He knew He predestined to be made like Christ. The word “foreknew” as used here is thus understood to be equivalent to “foreloved” – those who were the objects of God’s love, He marked out for salvation.

The questions raised by the two opposing interpretations are these: Did God look down through time and see that certain individuals would believe and thus predestine them unto salvation on the basis of this foreseen faith? Or did God set His heart on certain individuals and because of His love for them predestine that they should be called and given faith in Christ by the Holy Spirit and thus be saved? In other words, is the individual’s faith the cause or the result of God’s predestination?

God has always possessed perfect knowledge of all creatures and of all events. There has never been a time when anything pas, 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 know 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!

Murray’s argument in favor of this meaning of “foreknew” is very good. “It should be observed that the text says ‘whom He foreknew’; whom is the object of the verb and there is no qualifying addition. This, of itself, shows that, unless there is some other compelling reason, the expression ‘whom he foreknew’ contains within itself the differentiation which is presupposed. If the apostle had in mind some ‘qualifying adjunct’ it would have been simple to supply it. Since he adds none we are forced to inquire if the actual terms he uses can express the differentiation implied. The usage of Scripture provides an affirmative answer. Although the term ‘foreknew’ is used seldom in the New Testament, it is altogether indefensible to ignore the meaning so frequently given to the word ‘know’ in the usage of Scripture; ‘foreknow’ merely adds the thought of ‘beforehand’ to the word ‘know’. Many times in Scripture ‘know’ has a pregnant meaning which goes beyond that of mere cognition. It is used in a sense practically synonymous with ‘love’, to set regard upon, to know with peculiar interest, delight, affection, and action (cf. Gen 18:19; Exod. 2:25; Psalm 1:6; 144:3; Jer. 1:5; Amos 3:2;

Hosea 13:5; Matt 7:23; I Cor. 8:3; Gal. 4:9; II Tim. 2:19; I John 3:1). There is no reason why this import of the word ‘know’ should not be applied to ‘foreknow’ in this passage, as also in 11:2 where it also occurs in the same kind of construction and where the thought of election is patently present (cf. 11:5,6). When this import is appreciated, then there is no reason for adding any qualifying notion and ‘whom He foreknew’ is seen to contain within itself the differentiating element required. It means ‘whom he set regard upon’ or ‘whom he knew from eternity with distinguishing affection and delight’ and is virtually equivalent to ‘whom he foreloved’. This interpretation, furthermore, is in agreement with the efficient and determining action which is so conspicuous in every other link of the chain – it is God who predestinates, it is God who calls, it is God who justifies, and it is He who glorifies. Foresight of faith would be out of accord with the determinative action which is predicated of God in these other instances and would constitute a weakening of the total emphasis at the point where we should least expect it….It is not the foresight of difference but the foreknowledge that makes difference to exist, not a foresight that recognizes existence but the foreknowledge that determines existence. It is a sovereign distinguishing love.” ²

Hodge observes that “as to know is often to approve and love, it may express the idea of peculiar affection in this case; or it may mean to select or determine upon….The usage of the word is favourable to either modification of this general idea of preferring. ‘The people which he foreknew,’ i.e., loved or selected, Rom. 11:2; ‘Who verily was foreordained (Gr. foreknown), i.e., fixed upon, chosen before the foundation of the world.’ I Peter 1:20; II Tim. 2:19; John 10:14,15; see also Acts 2:23; I Peter

1:2. The idea, therefore, obviously is, that those whom God peculiarly loved, and by thus loving, distinguished or selected from the rest of mankind; or to express both ideas in one word, those whom he elected he predestined, etc.” ³

Although God knew about all men before the world began, He did not know all men in the sense that the Bible sometimes uses the word “know,” i.e., with intimate personal awareness and love. It is in this latter sense that God foreknew those whom He predestined, called, and justified, as outlinsed in Romans 8:29,30!

As was pointed out above, it is unnecessary and therefore indefensible to add any qualifying notion such as faith to the verb foreknew in Romans 8:29. The Arminians make this addition, not because the language requires it, but because their theological system requires it – they do it to escape the doctrines of unconditional predestination and election. They read the notion of foreseen faith into the verse and then appeal to it in an effort to prove that predestination was based on foreseen events. Thus particular individuals are said to be saved, not because God willed that they should be saved (for He willed the salvation of everyone) but because they themselves willed to be saved. Hence salvation is make to depend ultimately on the individual’s will, not on the sovereign will of Almighty God – faith is understood to be man’s gift to God, not God’s gift to man.

Haldane, comparing Scripture with Scripture, clearly shows that the foreknowledge mentioned in Romans 8:29 cannot have reference to the foreseen faith, good works, or the sinner’s response to God’s call. “Faith cannot be the cause of foreknowledge, because foreknowledge is before predestination, and faith is the effect of predestination. ‘As many as were ordained to eternal life believed,’ Acts 13:48. Neither can it be meant of the foreknowledge of good works, because these are the effects of predestination. ‘We are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works; which God hath before ordained (or before prepared) that we should walk in them;’ Eph. 2:10. Neither can it be meant of foreknowledge of our concurrence with the external call, because our effectual calling depends not upon that concurrence, but upon God’s purpose and grace, given us in Christ Jesus before the world began, 2 Tim. 1:9. By this foreknowledge, then, is meant, as has been observed, the love of God towards those whom he predestinates to be saved through Jesus Christ. All the called of God are foreknown by Him, - that is, they are the objects of His eternal love, and their calling comes from this free love. ‘I have loved thee with an everlasting love; therefore with lovingkindness I have drawn thee,’ Jer. 31:3.” ⁴

Murray, in rejecting the view that “foreknew” in Romans 8:29 refers to the foresight of faith, is certainly correct in stating that “It needs to be emphasized that the rejection of this interpretation is not dictated by a predestinarian interest. Even if it were granted that ‘foreknew’ means foresight of faith, the biblical doctrine of sovereign election is not thereby eliminated or disproven. For it is certainly true that God foresees faith; he foresees all that comes to pass. The question would then simply be: whence proceeds this faith which God foresees? And the only biblical answer is that the faith which God foresees is the faith he himself creates (cf. John 3:3-8; 6:44;45,65; Eph. 2:8; Phil. 1:29; II Pet. 1:2). Hence his eternal foresight

of faith is preconditioned by his decree to generate this faith in those whom he foresees as believing, and we are thrown back upon the differentiation which proceeds from God’s own eternal and sovereign election to faith and its consequents. The interest, therefore, is simply one of interpretation as it should be applied to this passage. On exegetical grounds we shall have to reject the view that ‘foreknew’ refers to the foresight of faith.” ⁵

¹ Frederic Godet, Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, p 325. Italics are his.

² John Murray, The Epistle to the Romans, Vol. I, pp. 316-318. Italics are his.

³ Charles Hodge, Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, pp. 283, 284. Italics are his.

You're up awful late. Get a job on the 3rd shift? :>P

In any case, the notion that God can make decisions now is sometimes ignored.

No one said God didn't make decisions in the past according to a human perspective. All your verses suggest that God has made decisions in the past.

The point is that God still makes decisions.

The point is that God is OUTSIDE of time. You want verses on that, or are you convinced that God is not bound by time?

Thank you for your patience and dedicated effort to communicate your understanding of Scripture.

I will likewise afford some dedicated effort in reviewing the Scripture with respect to the particular argument.

I have studied these passages before, although I don't share the same immediate conclusion that the initial faith isn't possible from man who has not yet been reborn.

But it is fair for me to go back and review them to understand if I am in error or if their is some confusion in the tense of the passages being used to form the argument against initial faith.

I'll try to post back my understanding and other reinforcing doctrine as applicable in short order.

God Bless and Merry Christmas.

You're up awful late. Get a job on the 3rd shift? :>P

You know after 10 years of nightshift I can not shake ths late night thing

In any case, the notion that God can make decisions now is sometimes ignored.

God is God and he can make decisions any time he pleases..but the history of this earth and its people are set ..that is what the word of God says.

No one said God didn't make decisions in the past according to a human perspective. All your verses suggest that God has made decisions in the past.

The bible is written for men. God speaks to us in language we can understand. He is talking to us in mans time not Gods. He is telling us that he counted the cost before he created the earth . He ordained all the events of the earth including the cross and our salvation before any of us existed..that is what the bible says Steve.That is a great assurance..we know He will not change his mind about saving us or the method of salvation . We know we can trust His promises because he is unchanging . If we held a doctrine like the LDS that God is always changing his mind or making new plans ..you could have no faith in Him or his plan.

He spoke to us in our time to assure us

The point is that God still makes decisions.

Not about this earth or His people or history

He is the God that KNOWS the end from the beginning

The point is that God is OUTSIDE of time. You want verses on that, or are you convinced that God is not bound by time?

I want verses that confirm your speculation that God is not bound by his word to us ..that he changes His mind about who He will save and who he will damn ..

Consider Saul and the witch of Endor. Saul inquired regarding his fate in battle the next day and he was told that since he had resorted to conjuring the dead, it had been decided that day he would perish in battle the following day.

There are other passages where Christ definitely used language respecting the volition of those he was speaking, posing conditionals and telling of consequents which would have happened otherwise had other paths been followed. Their meanings definitely reflect that history may have been altered based upon our decisions, actions and inactions.

I consider these examples to not contradict God's omniscience, but rather our perception of His all-knowing nature might not be as implicit has we sometimes make it.

My gut feeling is that there are a lot of contrived injustices in the world which will never be made equitable, simply because both sides are corrupt and in perfect justice, neither will benefit. If one is out of fellowship with God, there's a lot of injustice going on, which might not ever be recognized as worthy any judicial amends.

BTW, somebody was asking the other day about the lineage of Christ as recorded in the Gospels and noted the number of generations not matching the actual kings in Jewish history,...I heard one theory recently that in God's lineages, he is only considering the generations of Jewish ancestry with salvation,...thereby accounting for 3 missing generations in the geneology. I remember a similar argument about 10 years ago, but had forgotten it.

Surely you have met at least one Calvinist who at one time in their lives was unregenerate. I know many believers who exercised faith before they ever recognized any rebirth of their spirit.

I also know many unbelievers who fail to exercise any type of faith which I would identify with a saving faith and many who are so wretched as beyond any comprehension I might gain.

I've read Romans about 10 times and individual chapters more frequently, as well as a number of commentaries, but by no means do I consider faith to be impossible for one who has not yet come to Christ.

The passages also refer to a natural man, in comparison to the believer so as to help describe things of the spirit. That doesn't mean unbelievers can't become believers nor that the efficacious grace doesn't happen after an initial faith of the unregenerate man, but after a common grace of the call of the Father.

Consider Christ and His selection of disciples. He picked Judas.

Are we to infer from this statement that you believe that Jesus didn't know that Judas would betray Him? Or that Jesus only became aware of Judas' potential for betrayal AFTER Jesus had chosen him? That would be a pretty unorthodox and creative reading of scripture.

Christ marveled at the faith of the Roman Centurion who didn't need Christ to accompany him, but merely acted on obedience.

The Centurion demonstrated an understanding of authority and rank. Also, the Centurion demonstrated that he had at least a rudimentary knowledge of spiritual things, because he recognized that Jesus spoke with authority, which gave him hope that Jesus could speak the word and heal. I would say that if the disciples had questioned why Jesus performed a miracle for a Gentile, He would have said nearly the same as He said when questioned why the blind man He healed was born blind: That the Glory of God might be manifested in him. How? By healing him. Everything that Jesus did, everything that happened to Him and the disciples, was for an example to us.

Good morning Michael. The best friend at my wedding nearly 30 years ago was a Townsend.

I did not follow your logic about the doctrine of the Trinity contradicting election based on God's foreknowledge.

However, you are called to testify to this: Does God possess total, absolute Knowledge?

Does God possess total, absolute Power?

Does God possess total, absolute Presence?

What do you say to each of these questions?

Surely you have met at least one Calvinist who at one time in their lives was unregenerate. I know many believers who exercised faith before they ever recognized any rebirth of their spirit.

EVERY Christian was at one time unregenerate. We all are saved in time. Our Election was before the foundation of the world, but it is manifested IN time, not outside of time. The faith we're talking about is saving faith, not the faith that every person has with regard to the rising of the sun, gravity, etc. Saving faith is a gift of God. The natural faith that man possesses is just that: natural faith. It proceeds from a corrupt and depraved heart, and therefore cannot be saving faith. No bad tree can bring forth good fruit, neither can a bad well produce good water. The faith that the natural unregenerate man produces is not capable of obtaining salvation, in fact it is a stench in God's nostrils, coming as it does from a fallen, corrupt, and depraved heart. The depravity of man prevents him from doing, saying, or producing anything of value toward salvation. That includes his natural faith.

Salvation is OF GOD. It originates in God, it proceeds from God, and it is initiated by God, and completed by God. Man makes no active contribution to his salvation, he brings nothing of any value into the process. Man is the recipient of salvation. You are arguing for man's faith as being the initial step in the process. It is God who initiates the process in those whom He has chosen.

1) If God cannot make decisions NOW then he is not God.

I don't think any of us is trying to say that God cannot make decisions. But decisions (choices) are made in light of information/knowledge. So to say that God "changes His mind" or makes a different decision is to imply that He either a)did not possess certain knowledge at the time of the original decision, or b)was wrong.

2) If God makes decisions NOW, then by virtue of his infinitely omnipresent nature, he made those decisions before the foundation of the earth.

There is a problem here. While in eternity there is no time, there is still logical order. Decrees/decisions/actions/etc. still maintain a logical order, they simply exist without respect to time. When you say that God simultaneously makes a decision now (within creation/time) and before the foundation of the earth (logically preceding creation/time) you are in essense saying that He made the decision before He made the decision. The only means by which you can hold to your assertion is in keeping with xzins' notion that God foreknows His own decisions/actions within time. All time, including God's interation with it, is known from the start. Within time there is the perception of reaction, but in the larger scope of God's infinite and eternal omniscience, omnipotence and omnipresence, such actions are actually proactive by virtue of God's ordination of the circumstance.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

THE MEANING OF “FOREKNEW” IN ROMANS 8:29