A Response to the Foreknowledge View of Election

A response to Dr. Gaines (1)

In a full program covering a number of issues, Dr. James White begins an examination of Dr. Steve Gaines’ sermon on the sovereignty of God from back in September. It is a very useful response to what is known as the “foreknowledge view of election” (the idea that God chooses people in eternity past based on His knowledge of their future actions in time – looking through the corridors of time He sees certain people responding positively to the gospel and then elects them on that basis). Dr. White shows this to be a completely unbiblical position. The response to Dr. Gaines’ sermon begins around the 1 hour mark of the show:

A response to Dr. Gaines (2)

As Dr. James White noted on his blog. “We continued our review of the September 8th sermon by Dr. Steve Gaines, and also noting the disastrous results of refusing to recognize the difference between the prescriptive will of God and the decretive will of God.”

Response (3)

Dr. White writes, “Continued our review of Pastor Steve Gaines’ sermon on election from 9/8/2013 today. Started off, though, with about 20 minutes on the will of God, the divine decree…”

Response (4)

James writes, “Had to start off with a little Caner news (specifically, materials from the police report of the criminal complaint Ergun Caner tried to use to stop us from giving our presentation in Lindale last year). The wave of documentation continues to grow and grow, and the shrill attacks of Caner and his defenders (Lumpkins, Rogers, Penn, et al) only show they well know the truth. But I got through that fairly quickly and managed to finish up my review of Pastor Steve Gaines’ sermon from September of 2013.”

Defending Calvinism

radiomicBack in March this year, I had the privilege of being interviewed on the Apologia Radio show and was asked a number of questions about Divine election. I continue to get good feedback from people who have listened to the broadcast.

Today someone wrote,

“Feeling incredibly blessed by this episode of Apologia Radio tonight. I’ve listened to it a total of at least 6 times since it’s aired. Each time a) makes me want to dive in to Scripture for the next week without any sleep but b) brings me a whole new level of understanding. I really encourage everyone to challenge their traditions and listen with an open heart to what is being said.”

If you have yet to hear the show online, perhaps it can be a blessing to you. It can be found at this link.

Elect According to Foreknowledge

storms-sScripture makes it clear that Divine election is based on the foreknowledge of God. That is not a matter of dispute. The question is ‘what exactly what does this mean?’

In Dr. Sam Storms explains:

In an earlier post we were looking at how Peter identifies his readers (and us). The first thing he said is that we “elect exiles.” But he doesn’t stop with that. He proceeds to define election both in terms of its basis and goal.

(1) We are elect, says Peter, “according to the foreknowledge of God the Father.”
The first thing this tells us is that divine election was an eternal, pre-temporal act of God before the foundation of the world. According to Paul in Ephesians 1:4, God “chose us” in Christ “before the foundation of the world”; he “predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ”. In 2 Timothy 1 Paul says that God “saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began” (v. 9).

If that weren’t enough, in Revelation 13 and 17 John speaks of God’s elect as those whose names were written in the Lamb’s book of life “before the foundation of the world.”

“Foreknowledge” does not mean that God merely observes the elect or sees them or is aware of them or has knowledge of who they are or has information concerning their lives. Nor does it mean that God simply predicts our conversion or knows about it in advance.

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; 1 Cor. 8:3; Gal. 4:9; II Tim. 2:19; 1 John 3:1 Continue reading