It seems more natural to me to connect the EN AGAPH with the thought
expressed in verse 4, and to start a new thought with verse 5. Is there a
good reason for rendering it this way?
I also wonder about the translation of PROORISAS in NASB as a simple past
tense, when it is a participle. Isn't the NKJV more correct when it
translates it as "having predestined?"
(I'm not slamming the NAS either, I like it alot! :-)
Thanks for helping me to learn.