| UP |
A. Introduction B. The Re-definition of Foreknowledge C. The Nature of Divine Foreknowledge, Based on Seven Passages D. The Nature of Divine Foreknowledge, Based on Theological Considerations E. Key Passages on Order, and the Problem with a One-dimensional Diagram F. The Order, Using a Two-dimensional Diagram ————————————————————————————————————— |
For centuries theologians have discussed the order of salvation, referred to by the Latin phrase ordo salutis. Their focus has often been on the mind of God in planning salvation and on the work of the Holy Spirit in applying salvation to the individual.
Even though many theologians concentrate on logical order, the Bible indicates both logical and chronological order in salvation. Thus, this paper attempts to answer the question: What is the logical and chronological order of steps taken by God in his planning, execution, and application of salvation?
Historical schemes regarding the ordo salutis place their emphasis on logical order, and have been categorized by their relative placement of two key elements: election (God's decision to select some for salvation) and the fall (God's decision to permit the fall). The scheme which places election logically after the fall is called "infralapsarian" from a combination of the Latin infra (below or subsequent) and lapsus (to slip or fall). The infralapsarian scheme includes the following seven steps.
1. Creating man in God's image
2. Permitting the fall
3. Electing some to eternal life
4. The atonement by Christ
5. The Holy Spirit's conviction of the world
6. Regeneration of the elect
7. Sanctification of the regenerate
The scheme known as "supralapsarian" (using the Latin supra, above or before) switches the positions of steps 2 and 3 and thus places election logically prior to the fall. There are many variations on these two schemes, but they all attempt to use a simple list, such as that above. In other words, they use a one-dimensional model, which we will show later to be inadequate.
Many of the modern discussions of the ordo salutis are driven by Calvinistic assumptions regarding the nature of foreknowledge. Unfortunately, foreknowledge is often understood, not as pure prior knowledge (that is, simply knowing a fact or event ahead of time) but as something more – fore-favoring or fore-loving, and thus, in effect, fore-choosing. This Calvinistic re-definition of foreknowledge has the effect of eliminating pure foreknowledge from the discussion by essentially equating foreknowledge with election and thus reducing the discussion of the ordo salutis to a restatement of the distinctive teachings of Calvinism. Such schemes, in addition to the elimination of pure foreknowledge, also fail to include man's response of repentance and faith.
The Calvinistic re-definition of foreknowledge is seen in the following quotations:
Foreknowledge is the synonym of "forelove" and so "whom he foreknew" (Rom. 8:29) is equivalent to election in Christ (Eph. 1:4) (John Murray, article on "Elect, Election" in Baker's Dictionary of Theology,1960)
Foreknow is synonymous with fore-love. (Clarence B. Bass, article on "Election" in The Zondervan Pictorial Bible Dictionary, Zondervan, 1967)
"To foreknow" anyone is to enter into communion with a view to conferring special favor upon him .... Foreknowledge according to the biblical usage of the verb 'know' [citation of 8 references here] implies favor or grace as the eternal beginning of all the other processes of salvation .... (G. T. Thomson and Francis Davidson, commentary on Romans 8:28-30 in The New Bible Commentary, 2d ed., Eerdmans, 1954)
It is not uncommon for those who hold this Calvinistic view of foreknowledge to attempt to gain support from the usage of the word "know" in scripture, as do Thomson and Davidson in the above quotation. The claim is that "know" in the Bible is really a euphemism for something much more significant or more intimate. But this is a bogus argument for two reasons.
First, the word "know" occurs well over 700 times in the Bible, most commonly in the Old Testament as a translation of the Hebrew word YADA. Based on the context of all of those occurrences, only about twenty (3%) are euphemistic, referring to something more intimate or more significant than simple knowledge. And in those twenty passages it is the context which shows that "know" is being used euphemistically. The euphemistic meaning is not built into the word "know." These twenty occurrences are the pool of passages from which the Calvinistic writers always draw their examples – a bad case of selective sampling. So it is certainly not the case that "know" in the Bible typically means favor or love.
Second, "know" and "foreknow" are two different words, in English as well as in Greek and Hebrew. Even if it were true that "know" was commonly used euphemistically, the question would still be open regarding "foreknow." As Greek grammarians point out, compound verbs (two roots) do not necessarily have a meaning that is equal to the combination of the etymologies of the two roots.
Thus it would be unwise to assume that the biblical meaning of "foreknow" can be based on the biblical meaning of "know," even if "know" were commonly used euphemistically (which it is not, as we demonstrated above). Carson, for example, warns against the "root fallacy" in which "meaning is determined by etymology; that is, by the root or roots of a word," referring to the practice as "linguistic nonsense" (D. A. Carson, Exegetical Fallacies, 2nd ed., Baker Books, 1996, p. 28).
Mickelsen concurs:
Beware of all etymological pronouncements that are not well supported by contemporary usage. … Etymology may sound erudite but when wrongly handled it leads to mistakes. (A. Berkeley Mickelsen, Interpreting the Bible, Eerdmans, 1963, p. 128-129)
The meaning of "foreknow" and "foreknowledge" in the Bible must be determined by the passages that use these terms, not by a few select passages that use part of these terms, nor by one's theological predisposition. And the key to the interpretation of those passages must be, as always, the context.
What is the nature of God's foreknowledge? And what is its place in God's planning process? The words "foreknow" and "foreknowledge," that is, the Greek verb proginosko (προγινωσκω) and the noun prognosis (προγνωσις) are used in seven passages in the New Testament. The following two tables cite these seven passages with the English translations of proginosko and prognosis highlighted.
All seven of these passages make perfectly good sense in their contexts when a straightforward meaning, pure foreknowledge, is used. There is no need to adopt specialized meanings for these words. The first two passages apply to human foreknowledge.
| New American Standard Bible | New International Version | |
| So then, all Jews know my manner of life from my youth up, which from the beginning was spent among my own nation and at Jerusalem; since they have known about me for a long time previously, if they are willing to testify, that I lived as a Pharisee according to the strictest sect of our religion. | Acts |
The Jews all know the way I have lived ever since I was a child, from the beginning of my life in my own country, and also in Jerusalem. They have known me for a long time and can testify, if they are willing, that according to the strictest sect of our religion, I lived as a Pharisee. |
| You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, be on your guard | 3:17 |
Therefore, dear friends, since you already know this, be on your guard |
In the first passage, Paul is making his defense before King Agrippa. The knowledge that the Jews had about Paul was foreknowledge in the sense that the earlier events of Paul's life and the Jews' knowledge of those events both occurred prior to the present time (when Paul is making his defense).
In the second passage, two different interpretations of the foreknowledge are possible. One interpretation is this: Peter is reminding his readers that the information he has just written them is not new. They have known this information from his own previous letter (2 Peter 3:1) and from Paul's writings (3:15-16). Thus, in this interpretation (similar to Acts 26:4-5), his readers had foreknowledge in the sense that the information and the knowledge of that information were both prior to the present time (when Peter is writing this second letter.) A second possible interpretation is this: Peter is forewarning his readers. Notice that his focus is squarely on the future in verses 10-14. So, in this interpretation, when he indicates in verse 17 that his readers foreknow this, he means that they have present knowledge of future events. Of course, it is knowledge which comes by means of instruction from the divinely inspired writers rather than from their own direct perception or observation.
Thus, human foreknowledge, far from being miraculous, is merely knowledge which has existed for some time and is thus prior to the present time, or knowledge about the future which is learned from God's messengers. The fact that the word proginosko is used (as it is in the above two passages) about human foreknowledge clearly establishes that there is nothing in the word itself that requires inclusion of the ideas of determining or favoring. Therefore, if these extra ideas are to be included in one's interpretation of the remaining five passages, they must come from the context. We will see that there is nothing in the context of these remaining passages which requires these extra ideas. When an interpreter "finds" such ideas in these passages, they come from his own theological bent, rather than from the passages.
In contrast to human foreknowledge, divine foreknowledge is both direct and prior to the events. God directly observes or perceives the events ahead of time. The five remaining passages illustrate this divine foreknowledge.
| New American Standard Bible |
New International Version |
|
| Jesus the Nazarene, ... delivered up by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death. |
Acts |
Jesus of Nazareth ... was handed over to you by God's set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross. |
| For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the first-born among many brethren; |
8:29 |
For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. |
| God has not rejected His people whom He foreknew. |
11:2 |
God did not reject his people, whom he foreknew. |
| Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who reside as aliens, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, who are chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, that you may obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood: |
1:1-2 |
Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To God's elect, strangers in the world, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia, who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and sprinkling by his blood: |
| Christ ... was foreknown before the foundation of the world, but has appeared in these last times for the sake of you |
1:19-20 |
Christ ... was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake. |
When we consider the usage of the words "foreknow" and "foreknowledge" in these five passages, we find nothing in the context that would require us to re-define foreknowledge. Each passage can be easily understood by adopting a straightforward meaning – divine foreknowledge is simply direct knowledge ahead of time. This is obviously a miraculous knowledge – something which God does but which humans cannot do.
Acts 2:22-23 simply expresses the idea that God had long planned to have Jesus suffer for our sins, and God knew ahead of time how the Jews (using "godless," "wicked" men, the Romans) would treat Jesus. And Jesus predicted this treatment during his earthly ministry (Matthew 16:21). On the one hand, if we adopt the Calvinistic understanding of foreknowledge, these men were not free agents and their actions were directly caused by God, that is, God directly caused what is characterized here as godless and wicked. On the other hand, when we understand the "predetermined plan" as applying simply to God 's loving plan to provide a savior, and when we understand the foreknowledge as non-determinative, the passage makes perfectly good sense.
Romans 8:29-30 is a passage of reassurance. It teaches that there is an unbroken chain that starts with God's prior knowledge of every person who responds positively to the gospel. Based on that prior knowledge, every such person is predestined to be conformed to the likeness of God's Son, and, in time, is called, justified, and finally glorified.
Romans 11:2 indicates that God did not reject his people whom he foreknew. The context is crucial in helping us understand what this passage is teaching. God's people, the ones he foreknew and did not reject, are the spiritual descendants of Abraham, not his physical descendants. These are believing Jews, and Paul is one of them (verse 1), as were the 7,000 during the time of Elijah (verses 2-4) and the remnant in the time of Paul (verse 5). This is in keeping with the point Paul made when this same issue was raised earlier in 9:6 – "not all who are descended from Israel are Israel." It is also in keeping with Romans 2:28, "a man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly ... a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly." It is also in keeping with Paul's clear teaching in Romans 4:11-12 that Abraham is the father of both believing Gentiles and believing Jews. Once it is understood that "his people" refers to believers, not the nation of Israel, it is easy to see how the foreknowledge here is the same pure foreknowledge found in Romans 8:29.
1 Peter 1:1-2 simply teaches that the recipients of Peter's letter were elect, chosen according to God's direct foreknowledge of each believer's repentance and faith. There are some Calvinists who deny that this passage teaches that election is based on foreknowledge. For example, Buswell points out that the Greek preposition kata (translated “according to” in this passage) actually means “in harmony with” rather than “on the basis of” or “on account of,” and thus does not indicate that election depends on foreknowledge (J. O. Buswell Jr., A Systematic Theology of the Christian Religion, Vol 2, p 140). However, even without a strong connecting word between these terms, the terms themselves imply that one is based on the other. Whenever a person's action is said to be in harmony with that person's knowledge, it is a safe assumption, based on the nature of action and the nature of knowledge, that the action stems from the knowledge, or that the knowledge forms the basis of the action, even when the weakest preposition is used. There are several phrases suggested in standard Greek dictionaries for translating kata with the accusative, including “according to,” “corresponding to,” and “with reference to.” Any of these phrases substituted for kata in the above passage yields the same basic meaning.
1 Peter 1:19-20 simply indicates that, although the Father (indeed, all three members of the trinity) knew before the foundation of the world that it would be the second person of the trinity, the Son, who would come to earth as our savior, that fact was not known by man until "these last times." Notice that not all translations preserve the Greek proginosko in this passage. The NIV uses "chosen," the King James Version uses "foreordained," the Revised Standard Version uses "destined," and the New English Bible uses "predestined," as though knowing ahead of time and choosing or determining are the same thing. But they are certainly not the same thing. These faulty translations appear to stem from the theological position of the translators rather than the requirements of the wording in the Greek. This is borne out by the fact that not all translations substitute these stronger words for "foreknown" (besides the NASB quoted above, see, for example, the American Standard Version, and the English Standard Version).
Also, notice that whenever foreknowledge is mentioned in the same sentence with other divine acts, it is always separated from those other acts:
This is another indication that foreknowledge should be thought of as "pure foreknowledge," that is, simply knowing beforehand, without adding in the concepts of determining, choosing, or predestining. Thus, each passage makes perfect sense when foreknowledge is understood as pure foreknowledge.
God is sovereign. Some things happen because God determines ahead of time that they must happen, and he directly causes them to happen. As part of God's sovereignty, he created man in his own image and likeness (Genesis 1:26-27), making man a free agent, able to make choices for which God holds man accountable. Thus, besides those things which happen because God directly causes them to happen, there are other things which God, in his sovereignty, allows to happen – they are caused directly by free human agents who make genuine decisions. (Of course, God is their indirect cause since he is the creator of the agents who cause them.) Acts 2:22-23, cited in the above table, refers both to the predetermined plan of God and to foreknowledge, and is thus a recognition of these two types of events.
God knows these human decisions ahead of time but does not directly cause them. Severe problems in one's theology would arise if one held the view that God did directly cause every event. For one thing, there would be no such thing as genuinely free human agents. Also, since many of these decisions and actions are evil, God would be the cause of evil. This would completely contradict the rest of the Bible's teachings regarding God's holiness and his complete separation from sin (Isaiah 6:3; 59:2; Habakkuk 1:13; James 1:13-15; 1 Peter 1:15-16).
The fall of mankind is an example of something which God allowed, but did not directly cause. Remember that God instructed Adam not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Genesis 2:17), and he punished Adam after he did eat of that tree (Genesis 3:17-24). Accepting the story of the fall as factual, we must say that God allowed the fall. To say that he directly caused the fall would make God the author of sin.
A similar argument applies to individual salvation. God is sovereign, and his sovereignty is exhibited in his determination that there is only one plan of salvation. Within that sovereign plan, God requires all men to choose for or against Christ. God knows beforehand whether an individual will accept or reject Jesus Christ as savior, without causing him to do either.
God knows both good and evil events ahead of time. Before the creation of the world he know that Jesus would die for man's sins (Acts 2:23; 1 Peter 1:19-20), so he also had to foreknow that Adam would fall. If, as Calvinists insist, foreknowing and fore-determining are to be equated in connection with good events, such as the atonement of Christ and the salvation of individuals, then these two concepts must also be equated in connection with evil events. Remember that the Bible explicitly states that Jesus knew ahead of time that many of his initial followers would not believe in him (John 6:60-66), that Judas would betray him (John 6:64; 13:11, 19, 26-27), and that Peter would deny him (John 13:39; Luke 22:31-34), all of which are evil events. In these cases, it seems like nonsense to equate foreknowledge with fore-favoring or fore-determining.
Thiessen expands the argument:
If God could foreknow that man would sin without causing him to sin; if he foreknew that the inhabitants of Keilah would betray David into the hands of Saul before they had had the chance to do so (1 Samuel 23:11-12); if Jesus could know that the fate of Tyre and Sidon, and of Sodom and Gomorrah, would have been different had they had the manifestations of His works which were granted to Chorazin and Bethsaida and to Capernaum (Matthew 11:21-24); if God could foreknow that the Jews would kill Christ without causing them to do so and before he had created man (Luke 22:22; Acts 2:23; 4:27-28); then He can also foreknow what man will do in response to prevenient grace, whether or not they will receive "the grace of God in vain" (2 Corinthians 6:1-2). The Scriptures teach that election is based on foreknowledge (Romans 8:29; 1 Peter 1:1-2). (Henry Clarence Thiessen, Introductory Lectures in Systematic Theology, Eerdmans, 1949, page 156)
Those who insist that foreknowledge must be equated with election are letting their theology determine their interpretation of scripture. In the fields of philosophy and theology, arguments are often deductive, that is, they proceed from the general to the specific. Certain grand assumption are adopted and all the evidence is then interpreted in the light of these assumptions. Sanday offers this relevant observation as part of his comments on the relationship between foreknowledge and predestination in Romans 8:29-30:
These two phrases indicate two distinct steps. God, in His infinite foreknowledge, knew that certain persons would submit to be conformed to the image of His Son, and He predestined them for this. When we argue deductively from the omniscience and omnipotence of God, human free-will seems to be obliterated. On the other hand, when we argue deductively from human free-will, the divine foreknowledge and power to determine action seem to be excluded. And yet both truths must be received without detriment to each other. (W. Sanday, Commentary on Romans, in Ellicott's Commentary on the Whole Bible, Zondervan, 1959 printing, page 238)
For further discussion of related theological topics, see the paper Calvin and Arminius.
The following passages identify several elements in salvation, and imply a certain order among those elements. The elements are highlighted in the following quotations.
For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified. (Romans 8:29-30)
And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession – to the praise of his glory. (Ephesians 1:13-14)
The above passages place certain elements in order. Some of this order is chronological. For example, in Romans 8:28, the very concept of foreknowledge (because of the "fore") requires some passage of time. (The same can be said for predestination.) And in the Ephesians passage, a certain amount of time is implied by such phrases as "having believed," "a deposit," and "until the redemption." Some of the order is also logical in the sense that certain elements are basic to other elements. For example, justification is certainly basic to (a prerequisite for) glorification.
We interpret the call mentioned in Romans 8:30 to be the specific call of the saved, since all who are called are also justified and glorified. Thus, we place the call together with justification and sealing, which also pertain to positional aspects of salvation. We also place together the inheritance and the glorification as obviously future aspects of salvation. Thus we arrive at the following six steps as a preliminary order of salvation.
| foreknowledge | predestination | hearing | belief | calling, justification, sealing |
inheritance, glorification |
The two passages which form the basis of this diagram focus on the individuals who become saved. Such elements as hearing, belief, and calling are repeated over and over again throughout history with each individual. But such a one-dimensional diagram becomes quite inadequate when we attempt to add other elements to the sequence. For example, consider John 3:16.
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. (John 3:16)
In this passage we have two additional elements which are not repeated over and over again. God's love is continuous through all eternity, so it is difficult to place it on a simplistic diagram like the one above. Also, God's giving of his Son is a one time event in history upon which the salvation of all believers (both those before and after Christ) is based. It is difficult to place this Christ event on a diagram which focuses on the chronology of individual salvation. Clearly, a different type of diagram is needed.
The following diagram is two-dimensional and attempts to combine both chronological order and logical order. Also, with this diagram we expand the above preliminary six steps by adding elements from other passages, as explained below the diagram.
The chronological is shown horizontally with the left side of the diagram occurring first, the right side later. The primary chronological issue is the foreknowledge of God from before the foundation of the world whereby he knows long ahead of time what decisions and actions all free agents will make. Of particular concern, of course, are those decisions individual human beings make in response to the gospel – the decision to accept or reject Jesus Christ as savior.
The logical is shown by vertical relationships between the building blocks in the right half of the diagram. Each level depends on the level underneath it and each level serves as a prerequisite for the level above it. For any level to be true, the level below it must be true. For example, the fall (level 2) cannot occur unless man is created with the ability to choose (level 1). Similar prerequisite/dependency relationships exist at all higher levels of the diagram. (Of course, some of the logical relationships are also chronological. In some cases, one level must occur some time before the next level.)
God creates man in his own image (Genesis 1:26-27), which includes the ability to make free moral choices (see the paper The Imago Dei). This ability is a prerequisite for the fall.
Adam and Eve sin (Genesis 3:6). God punishes Adam and Eve for their sin, which includes discomfort and eventual physical death, as well as banishment from the garden of Eden (Genesis 3:16-19, 22-24) and personal separation from a holy God (Isaiah 59:2), which is spiritual death.
Sin and death are passed on to all men (Romans 5:12-19, especially verse 12). There is noone who can claim to be free of personal sin (Psalm 14:2-3; Romans 3:10-12). This is man's lost condition – the problem. God's solution is the incarnation and substitutionary death of Jesus Christ.
God, who loves all people, creates a solution by sending Jesus to earth to live as a man, and then to take the punishment for our sins (John 3:16; Romans 5:8; 1 Peter 3:18). Jesus, the "lamb" who shed his "precious blood" for us, is foreknown (1 Peter 1:19-20).
Paul teaches that one cannot believe without hearing the gospel (Romans 10:14). But on his own, man wants nothing to do with God or the gospel (Romans 3:10-12). He is dead in his sins (Ephesians 2:1). But God does not leave man in this helpless state, he enlightens all men (John 1:9), convicts all men (John 16:8; Jude 15), and draws all men (John 12:32; compare John 6:44). Then, when they hear the gospel message of Christ's death on their behalf, they are free (due only to God's grace) to receive Christ.
The entire New Testament teaches that the condition of salvation is repentance and faith (John 3:16-18; Acts 16:30-31; 17:30; Romans 3:22; Ephesians 2:8-9). This is termed receiving Christ, or believing on Christ, and is the logical prerequisite to being included in God's family (John 1:12). Thus, level 5 is prerequisite to level 6.
God knows long ahead of time how each individual will respond. This foreknowledge is the basis for God's actions of electing or choosing (1 Peter 1:1-2) and predestining (Romans 8:29). Predestination is the divine act which, for the individual who responds in repentance and faith, "locks in" his salvation (level 6) and his eventual glorification (level 7).
The individual who has turned from his sin (repentance) and has trusted (faith) in Jesus Christ as his savior, is thus forgiven of his sins, justified, regenerated, given eternal life, adopted into God's family, and given the Holy Spirit (John 1:12-13; 3:16; Acts 10:43; Galatians 2:16; Ephesians 2:4-5; Colossians 1:13-14; 1 John 2:12; Ephesians 1:13-14). In the words of Jesus, "he has crossed over from death to life" (John 5:24). This is positional: he is no longer lost, but is now saved; no longer dead in sin, but alive to God; no longer the enemy of God, but God's child.
Although there are several aspects to sanctification, at level 7 we are referring to the gradual growth of the believer towards Christlikeness. This involves both the faithful help of the Holy Spirit and the unpredictable daily responses of the individual. Thus the individual may make rapid progress in his sanctification, or slow progress, or may even lose ground and act "like mere men" (1 Corinthians 3:1-3; 11:27-32).
Glorification, however, is certain (Romans 8:16-18). It is not based on sanctification, but on positional salvation and upon God's predestination. It is the guaranteed inheritance of all believers (Ephesians 1:13-14).