COL 1: 18

[prism]

Mod Hat: This is a misrepresentation of what Josheb said. What he said is this:

@Josheb already tag me for that in post #86

 

[prism]

That's nice. It is not, however, an answer to the question asked.

It was an answer in response to what you had said..."Satan knows God. God knows Satan, too. God does not know Satan salvifically. Satan is not a member of the Church."
(which IMHO was off topic)

I can quote scripture, too. Unblessedly, those two quotes you've posted do not answer the question asked. Would you please answer the question asked?

Do you think John 17:3 and Acts 13:48 occur apart from also being (salvifically) known by God?

John 17:3 KJV
And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
Acts 13:48 KJV
And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.

Define 'salvifically known by God' without the concepts of election or predestination.

 

[makesends]

Colossians 1:18 (KJV) And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

Looking at Colossians 1:18, I ask, "How could the church exist in the Old Testament when the incarnation and resurrection had not happened yet?"

I'm just now seeing this thread for the first time. Without reading others' answers, I ask: With that logic, how can Christ's death redeem those in the OT times? Are they not redeemed, and saved? Are they not IN CHRIST?

What you said sounds quite a bit like the Dispensationalists around whom I grew up, as though there are two gospels --OT and NT

 

[Arial]

@Josheb already tag me for that in post #86

He is not a moderator. So he brought it to your attention. Did you correct your misstatement?

 

[prism]

I'm just now seeing this thread for the first time. Without reading others' answers, I ask: With that logic, how can Christ's death redeem those in the OT times? Are they not redeemed, and saved? Are they not IN CHRIST?

What you said sounds quite a bit like the Dispensationalists around whom I grew up, as though there are two gospels --OT and NT

Just one promise. God speaks a promise, we believe, we are justified. (But yes, I have Dispy leanings)
Acts 20:28 KJV
Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

His blood speaks of His incarnation and death.
I don't know what being dispensational has to do with it.

 

[prism]

He is not a moderator. So he brought it to your attention. Did you correct your misstatement?

I don't have a way to post-edit.

 

[Dave]

Maybe a distinction needs to be made between when the promise of salvation was made and when it actually became reality, with regards to OT saints. In other words, were the OT saints in the Church based on the promise alone? I would say no. Pentecost birthed the Church for believers, OT and NT. It wasn't available to them or us before that.....because what makes us saved, both legally and literally (born again), was not available yet. Being "in Christ", the Church, before Pentecost would not yet have had the ingredients to save. That's why it all had to wait until Pentecost. Just my two cents, keep the change. lol

Dave

 

[makesends]

Just one promise. God speaks a promise, we believe, we are justified. (But yes, I have Dispy leanings)
Acts 20:28 KJV
Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

His blood speaks of His incarnation and death.
I don't know what being dispensational has to do with it.

Do you believe in one gospel or two? Was the way the elect who died before Christ were saved, differ from how they are saved after Christ? --That's what Dispensationalism has to do with it.

 

[prism]

Do you believe in one gospel or two? Was the way the elect who died before Christ were saved, differ from how they are saved after Christ? --That's what Dispensationalism has to do with it.

One Gospel by way of ...'God promises/we believe.'Same in both testaments.
I see dispensationalism as having more to do with a literal approach to Scripture,which inevitably to a distinction between Israel and the Church rather than two ways of salvation.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

Do you believe in one gospel or two? Was the way the elect who died before Christ were saved, differ from how they are saved after Christ? --That's what Dispensationalism has to do with it.

Actually no

Dispensationals believe in one gospel. Abraham was saved by faith before the law
David was saved by faith after the law.
All people of all time has been saved by faith.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

One Gospel by way of ...'God promises/we believe.'Same in both testaments.
I see dispensationalism as having more to do with a literal approach to Scripture,which inevitably to a distinction between Israel and the Church rather than two ways of salvation.

The church is Gods promise, in you shall all nations be blessed and will be fulilled

Israel was given a specific promise, which had nothign to do with anyone salvation, including their own (which they denied)

Its not to covenant gospels (2 ways to heaven)

its 2 eternal covenants

 

[Josheb]

Define 'salvifically known by God' without the concepts of election or predestination.

Sure

• Knowing about God is different than knowing God.
• God knows everybody, but He does not know all people as being saved in Christ. In other words, He knows different people differently. He knows the saved Christologically, or He knows them as being in Christ.

It has absolutely nothing to do with doctrinal definitions of election or predestination. That is a red herring. Now, will you please answer the question asked?


Do you think John 17:3 and Acts 13:48 occur apart from also being salvifically known by God?



.

 

[makesends]

Actually no

Dispensationals believe in one gospel. Abraham was saved by faith before the law
David was saved by faith after the law.
All people of all time has been saved by faith.

That is not quite what I was taught. During the "dispensation of works"/"law dispensation" (I was taught), salvation was by works--(though sins forgiven at the cross).

 

[prism]

Knowing about God is different than knowing God.

That's axiomatic.

• God knows everybody, but He does not know all people as being saved in Christ. In other words, He knows different people differently. He knows the saved Christologically, or He knows them as being in Christ.

Since God is eternal, from the eternal perspective, I would say He does know all that are being saved beforehand

It has absolutely nothing to do with doctrinal definitions of election or predestination. That is a red herring. Now, will you please answer the question asked?


Do you think John 17:3 and Acts 13:48 occur apart from also being salvifically known by God?

One person's red herring is another person's meal.

John 17:3 KJV
And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
Acts 13:48 KJV
And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.

I think at this point it wouldn't matter what I'd answer, you'll find a point of disagreement either way. But I will say 'no' to your question, based on your definition of 'salvifically known by God'.

 

[Josheb]

.....I will say 'no' to your question, based on your definition of 'salvifically known by God'.

Just to clarify:

No, I, @prism, do not believe John 17:3 and Acts 13:48 occur apart from also being salvifically being known by God.

Is that what I am to understand is your position? Do I have that correctly understood?

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

That is not quite what I was taught. During the "dispensation of works"/"law dispensation" (I was taught), salvation was by works--(though sins forgiven at the cross).

Like I said earlier that group is a small group and shunned by mainstream dispensationalism. I know there is on one Christianchat.com that believes this. He was a loaner and we eventually had to ignore him.

Sadly all groups have their offshoots that give us a bad name

 

[prism]

Just to clarify:

No, I, @prism, do not believe John 17:3 and Acts 13:48 occur apart from also being salvifically being known by God.

Is that what I am to understand is your position? Do I have that correctly understood?

Earlier (Post #112), you had said defining 'salvifically being known by God as

• "Knowing about God is different than knowing God.
• God knows everybody, but He does not know all people as being saved in Christ. In other words, He knows different people differently. He knows the saved Christologically, or He knows them as being in Christ."
• 
  
• I disagreed in #114 saying "Since God is eternal, from the eternal perspective, I would say He does know all that are being saved beforehand."
• So by going by your definition, I would (agreeing with you) and also say no, but going by my understanding to the term 'salvifically known' (from God's eternal perspective) I would answer, 'yes'.

 

[Josheb]

I disagreed in #114 saying "Since God is eternal, from the eternal perspective, I would say He does know all that are being saved beforehand."

But the question was not about God knowing all that are being saved beforehand. The original question was, "Do you think John 17:3 occurs apart from also being (salvifically) known by God?" That question was originally asked because John 17:3 was posted without explanation in response to "It's not enough to claim to 'know' God or Jesus." (see Posts 67 and 73). That question was later amended to include Acts 13:48 because of the difficulty experienced getting a simple yes or no answer.

Whether God's knowledge of an individual's salvation is known in eternity, prior to, at, or after the individual's salvation does not change the question or the answer.

So by going by your definition, I would (agreeing with you) and also say no, but going by my understanding to the term 'salvifically known' (from God's eternal perspective) I would answer, 'yes'.

And that "Yes," is incorrect.

Consider the following: In Matthew 7 (as I believe I previously covered) Jesus is met by people by people who claim to know him and their evidence for knowing him is their performance of prophecies, casting out demons, and miracles but Jesus stated he never knew them and they were commanded to leave. His knowing them was not limited to their conversion. His knowing them was not limited to knowing them before they were converted, at their conversion, or after their conversion. His knowing them was not qualified by their conversion or lack of conversion. It was not qualified by time at all. The moment Jesus said he never knew them..... that included his knowledge of them in eternity, his knowledge of them before his incarnation, his knowledge of them before he began his earthly ministry, before he hung on the cross and his "never" includes all his knowledge of the future in which that person is not known.

To further confound this "yes" God, technically knows everyone in Christ and He does so from His eternal perspective. He knows some in Christ salvifically. All the rest He knows in Christ judgmentally, having already pronounced His condemnation (John 3:18).

When it comes to being saved from sin and wrath, it is not enough to know God. A person must know and be known by God..... and be known by God as someone who is saved by grace through faith and created in His Son for good works that He had already planned for that individual to perform. And....... to bring all this back around to the op....... that is how the Church could have existed in the Old Testament. There have always been people God saved from sin and wrath. Those living during the Old Testament were not perfected and had not attained all that God had promised but by grace and through faith they were, nevertheless, known by God as members of the Christological covenant He initiated long ago.

Hebrews 11:1-2, 39-40
Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. For by it the men of old gained approval.................... And all these, having gained approval through their faith, did not receive what was promised, because God had provided something better for us, so that apart from us they would not be made perfect.

Those "men (and women) of old" are made perfect in "us." Who is the "us" in that verse? To whom does that "us" refer? According to that epistle, the "us" is those to whom God has spoken through His Son (vs. 1:1), those who will inherit salvation (vs. 1:14). Those men and women of old who gained approval by God by their faith (faith, not faithfulness) are not made perfect in those who inherit salvation.

So, no, John 17:3 and Acts 13:48 does not occur apart from being salvifically known by God (whether from His eternal perspective or His knowledge of all that happens temporally*).






* God's knowledge does not vary.
.

 

[prism]

And that "Yes," is incorrect.

Didn't realize I was a prophet. (from #114)..."

I think at this point it wouldn't matter what I'd answer, you'll find a point of disagreement either way. But I will say 'no' to your question, based on your definition of 'salvifically known by God'."

 

[Josheb]

Didn't realize I was a prophet. (from #114)..."

I think at this point it wouldn't matter what I'd answer, you'll find a point of disagreement either way. But I will say 'no' to your question, based on your definition of 'salvifically known by God'."

It is not rationally possible to disagree with any correct answer. It would not matter what the question was or what the answer was, if and when the answer is correct. In the current case what has been posted is not being addressed. Instead, my posts have been misrepresented, it's proven difficult to get topical responses in a timely manner, and irrelevant and factually incorrect content obfuscates the conversation.

It's ironic because Post 118 implicitly affirms the position of the eternal God's eternal position (a point of agreement) and follows it through to its logically necessary condition. Since God's omniscient knowledge is eternal, He always knows the saved person. That is how and why the question asked must be answered with a "No," and it is Post 119 that is posting disagreement incorrectly, inconsistently, and hypocritically. If agreement was desired then Post 119 should read, "Ah, yes, I see how God's knowledge of the saved from the ternal perspective means John 17:3 and Acts 13:48 cannot occur apart from a salvific knowledge of God by God." If was wanted, then the opportunity availed itself and was ignored.

The fact is those two verses cannot occur apart from also being salvifically being known by God.

I disagreed in #114 saying "Since God is eternal, from the eternal perspective, I would say He does know all that are being saved beforehand."

Hmmm.... So, it's okay for you to disagree but no one else can disagree - not even if their position is wholly scriptural and yours is not? It's okay for you to disagree even though that statement is not actually a point of disagreement? It looks like contrariness solely for the sake of contrariness.


The fact is scripture teaches a person must know God and be known by God in a salvific manner in order to be saved. God knows who is saved from an eternal perspective. Therefore, when Jesus states eternal life is knowing him (Jn. 17:3) that cannot occur apart from salvifically being known by God, even from God perspective in eternity in which He already knows who is and is not saved. The exact same condition exists with Acts 13:48 because no one is ordained to eternal life eternally or temporally without their knowing and being known salvifically by God. In point of fact those two verses redundantly affirm what was first posted in Post #67. In other words, there never was any disagreement until the question asked was answered incorrectly. John 17:3 and Acts 13:48 completely affirm all that is posted in Post 67 and Post 114 is part of the problem to be solved.

The bottom line is that no one is saved unless the know God and are known by God salvifically and that could have and should have been affirmed with a simple "Amen!" fifty-three posts ago.



And, because no one is saved without salvifically knowing and being known by God, that is one way to answer the question asked in this opening post.

Looking at Colossians 1:18, I ask, "How could the church exist in the Old Testament when the incarnation and resurrection had not happened yet?"

The Church could exist because the gospel was preached during the Old Testament and some believed its promises. They salvifically knew God and were known by Him even though Christ was not yet revealed.

Galatians 3:16
Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. He does not say, "And to seeds," as referring to many, but rather to one, "And to your seed," that is, Christ.

The promises of God's God-initiated covenant with Abraham were spoken to Abraham and Jesus. The covenant God initiated when He chose, called, commanded, and culled Abraham was a Christological covenant! Since the Church is the population of actually saved people (not faux saved people) and its membership is attained by God by His grace through faith He gifts for that purpose, all of the Old Testament people listed in Hebrews 11 were approved by God.

Hebrews 11:39
And all these, having gained approval through their faith.....

Luke 7:50
And He said to the woman, “Your faith has saved you; go in peace.”

If Jesus meant she was saved from sin and wrath, then she is an example of someone who was saved after the incarnation but prior to Christ's death and resurrection for it is by grace she was saved through faith just like everyone else who has ever been saved. The words of Peter could be applied to ever individual listed in Hebrews 11.

1 Peter 1:6-12
In this you greatly rejoice, even though now for a little while, if necessary, you have been distressed by various trials, so that the proof of your faith, being more precious than gold which is perishable, even though tested by fire, may be found to result in praise and glory and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ; and though you have not seen him, you love him, and though you do not see him now, but believe in him, you greatly rejoice with joy inexpressible and full of glory, obtaining as the outcome of your faith the salvation of your souls. As to this salvation, the prophets who prophesied of the grace that would come to you made careful searches and inquiries, seeking to know what person or time the Spirit of Christ within them was indicating as He predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories to follow. It was revealed to them that they were not serving themselves, but you, in these things which now have been announced to you through those who preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven—things into which angels long to look.

Jesus does not have to be seen; he has to be believed. That's how the Church could exist in the Old Testament when the incarnation and resurrection had not yet happened.

It is odd that an appeal would be inappropriately made to God's eternal perspective as a point of dissent because there has never been a point in creation when Jesus was not the resurrection. Jesus was the life, the resurrection, and the only way to God salvifically long before his incarnation. That is who and what is Jesus eternally. It's not a post incarnation condition. It's not a post resurrection condition, either. Jesus stated he is the life, the resurrection, and the only way to God long before he hung on Calvary. John 17:3 and Acts 13:48 do not occur outside a saved person salvifically knowing God and being known by Him. A person must know and be known in order to be saved.

The correct response to ALL of this is a plain, simple, unequivocal and unqualified, "Amen!" so don't be disagreeable, or disagree.