1st Peter 1:2
1st Peter 1:1-2 (see also 2nd Thessalonians 2:13)
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, to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood: May grace and peace be yours in the fullest measure.
Jerry Falwell comments: “The implication is that God has purposely placed these Christians in their respective communities to serve Him; they are selected temporary residents who are representatives of God.” (Liberty Bible Commentary, p.2600, emphasis mine)
Lawrence Vance writes: “Calvinists who appeal to 1 Peter 1:2 as a proof text for Unconditional Election normally make foreknowledge into foreordination exactly like we will see the Calvinists do in Romans 8:29.” (The Other Side of Calvinism, p.377, emphasis mine)
However, foreknowledge is not foreordination. The former is an attribute of an omniscient Being, while the latter is just a predetermined plan. How could Calvinists possibly confuse the two?
Foreknowledge presents a significant problem for Calvinistic theology which teaches blind decrees, such that God looks at “nothing” by which He is moved to elect anyone for anything:
John Calvin writes: “For God looks at nothing outside Himself by which He is moved to elect us, for the counsel of His own will is the only and proper and (as they say) intrinsic cause of election.” (Calvin’s New Testament Commentaries: Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians and Colossians, p.130, emphasis mine)
Calvin writes: “Hence, when Peter calls them elect according to the foreknowledge of God, he is showing that the cause of it depends simply on God alone, because He of His own free will has chosen us. Thus the foreknowledge of God excludes every worthiness on the part of man.” (Calvin’s New Testament Commentaries, Hebrews and I and II Peter, p.230, emphasis mine)
Calvin adds: “It is futile subtlety to seize on the word foreknowledge and to attach to the merits of man that election which Paul always ascribes to the purpose of God alone.” (Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God, p.71, emphasis mine)
Calvin writes: “Peter, too, salutes the elect as elect according to the foreknowledge of God (1 Pet 1.2). Is this because some foreseen virtue in them inclined God’s favour towards them? Not at all: Peter is not comparing men among themselves to make some better than others; he puts high above all causes the decree which God determined in Himself. It is if he had said they are now to reckon themselves among the sons of God, because, before they were born, they had been elected.” (Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God, p.71, emphasis mine)
Calvin writes: “Peter does not flatter believers as though they were all elected for their individual merits, but by recalling them to the eternal counsel of God declares that they are entirely void of any worthiness. In this passage also Paul repeats in other words the remarks which he had just made concerning God’s purpose. It follows from this that this knowledge depends on God’s good pleasure, because in adopting those whom He would, God had no foreknowledge of anything outside of Himself, but simply marked out those whom He purposed to elect.” (Calvin’s New Testament Commentaries: Romans and Thessalonians, pp.180-181, emphasis mine)
Here we go again with the “merits.” I’d still like to know how foreknowledge marks something out?
Calvinist, William MacDonald, explains: “…left to himself, no sinner would trust the Savior, and so in His foreknowledge He marked out certain ones to be trophies of His grace.” (Believer’s Bible Commentary, p.2250, emphasis mine)
Calvin writes: “Again, God did not choose us because we believed, but in order that we might believe, lest we should seem first to have chosen Him. Paul emphasises that our beginning to be holy is the fruit and effect of election. Hence, they act most preposterously who place election after faith. Then, when Paul lays down as the unique cause of election the good pleasure of God which He has in Himself, he excludes all other causes.” (Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God, p.69, emphasis mine)
John Calvin writes: “First he points out the eternity of election, and then how we should think of it. Christ says that the elect always belonged to God. God therefore distinguishes them from the reprobate, not by faith, nor by any merit, but by pure grace; for while they are far away from him, he regards them in secret as his own.” (John: Calvin, The Crossway Classic Commentaries, p.393, emphasis mine)
Calvin writes: “God knew before the world was created those whom He had elected for salvation.” (Calvin’s New Testament Commentaries, Hebrews and I and II Peter, p.229, emphasis mine)
It becomes very obvious that Calvinism has a big problem with actual foreknowledge. Is it any wonder that the strategy of Calvinists has been to redefine fore-knowledge into fore-planning? Next you will see how it is redefined as fore-loving:
Calvinist, George Whitefield, explains: “For if foreknowledge signifies approbation, as it does in several parts of Scripture, then we confess that predestination and election do depend on God’s foreknowledge. But if by God’s foreknowledge you understand God’s fore-seeing some good works done by his creatures as the foundation or reason of choosing them and therefore electing them, then we say that in this sense predestination does not any way depend on God’s foreknowledge.” (A Letter from George Whitefield to the Rev. Mr. John Wesley, emphasis mine)
Whitefield cannot bring himself to say, fore-seeing [faith]. He has to say “works” in order to poison the well, in order to avoid the obvious conclusion that God is making a decision based upon something that He knows about the people in question, in terms of being vessels fit for use in the ministry. (Of all of the Calvinistic trial-baloons, I’m surprised that no Calvinist had argued that God had chosen them for duty according to His knowledge of their being fit vessels, prepared by an Irresistible Grace.)
Calvinist, Erwin Lutzer, writes: “Calvinists point out, however, that the word foreknowledge does not just mean ‘to know beforehand.’ In both the Old and New Testaments it means, ‘to regard with favor.’ Amos quoted God as saying to Israel, ‘You only have I chosen among all the families of the earth’ (3:2). Similarly, the New Testament uses the word in the sense of ‘fore-loved.’ Paul wrote, God hath not rejected His people whom He foreknew (Rom. 11:2). The word cannot mean simply to know in advance but refers to God’s special favor. Other passages support this understanding of the word (Matt. 7:23; 2 Tim. 2:19; 1 Pet. 1:20). To be elect according to foreknowledge is to be elect on the basis of God’s favor or choice.” (The Doctrines That Divide, p.182, emphasis mine)
Wait. It means to be chosen on the basis of God’s choice?
Adrian Rogers comments: “Foreknowledge does not mean to cause to happen. Some people think that if God foreknows it, then God makes it happen. That would mean that because God foreknew that there was going to be blasphemy or sodomy or rape that God caused it to happen. And of course He does not cause those things to happen. The astronomers know when Halley’s comet is going to appear again. But their knowledge does not cause it to happen. Foreknowledge means on thing: knowing ahead of time. God has foreknown you and your salvation, if you know Christ.” (Foundations For Our Faith: Vol.II, A Study in Romans Chapters 5-9, pp.91-92, emphasis mine)
And knowing ahead of time signifies Prescience: “Knowledge of things before they exist or happen; foreknowledge; foresight.” (Dictionary.com) Indeed, Calvinists seem to think that God foreknowledged the future.
Jerry Vines explains: “God’s knowledge of the future doesn’t determine the future any more than man’s knowledge of the past determines the past.” (Calvinism – A Baptist and his Election, emphasis mine)
Calvinist, James White, asks: “If God’s foreknowledge is perfect, does it not follow that the future is, in fact, fixed? And if it is fixed, upon what basis did it take the shape it did? Is the outcome of all history merely the fortuitous result of the decisions of free creatures, and if so, how can God claim glory for its final form?” (Debating Calvinism, p.360, emphasis mine)
Go back to the mirror illustration. The future is indeed fixed, and fixed by all who are living in it, both God and man, and since God is eternal, He can tell us exactly what is going on in the future. Moreover, God will receive final glory because Scripture tells us of a time when every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord. (Philippians 2:10-11)
The odd thing about the Calvinist objections is that, what if we should say that Jesus chose His disciples according to foreknowledge? Why would that create a major theological dilemma? Sometimes it seems that Calvinists fight simply for the sake of fighting. Jesus knew who He was choosing, and even pointed out that He knew that one of the ones that He was choosing was a devil, meaning Judas. (John 6:64, 70) Each person fit the purpose for which they were chosen. Why, then, the big battle over the argument of “merits”? They were chosen from the standpoint of what they were, eleven fit vessels and one un-fit vessel, which then made him fit for another purpose. It seems that Calvinists have made a mountain out of a molehill. There is every reason to believe that this was an election to service, which Calvinists recognize about John 15:16 anyway.
Question: What does it mean that these Christians were chosen according to the “foreknowledge of God the Father”?
Answer: It means that God’s omniscience served as the basis for what He chose to do.
Question: How were they were chosen “by the sanctifying work of the Spirit”?
Answer: It means that the Holy Spirit makes them fit for duty.
Question: However, wouldn’t that render 1st Peter 1:1-2 as meaning: “chosen according to the foreknowledge of [nothing but the counsel of His own will]”?
Question: Why does Calvin use buzz words such as “merits” and “virtue”? Why doesn’t he instead say, “faith”?
Answer: Because Calvinists frequently like to engage in a debate trick known as “poisoning the well.” The fact that faith is non-meritorious, Calvinists already know. (Romans 3:27) Their angle is that they want you to think that anything other than Calvinism is works-based, even if the opposition teaches Justification by Faith.
By redefining Foreknowledge as “approbation” or “favor,” Calvinists confound foreknowledge with fore-loving in order to make Calvinism work.
Chosen according to the “foreknowledge of God” would indicate that they are not accidentally scattered, but placed exactly where God wants them. By reminding them that God knows the future, they can relax in knowing that God has the right people in the right places. The reference to the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit would suggest that God has rendered them fit for duty. As missionaries for the Gospel, they are literally on a mission from God.
Question: According to Calvinism, foreknowledge only refers to God’s counsel and plan. So does that mean that God must first plan something in order to foreknow it?
Daniel Whedon answers: “If God’s omniscient foresight of all that is or is not in the future is the effect of God’s determination, then an attribute of God is created by an act of God. If God’s foreknowledge depends on his determination, and must wait until after its existence, then he can have no foreknowedge of his own acts, and must wait for present or post-knowledge of them.” (Freedom of the Will: A Wesleyan Response to Jonathan Edwards, pp.225-226, emphasis mine)
Foreknowledge is like a mirror. It receives the image. It does not cause the image. Calvinists present a very unnatural view of foreknowledge in order to maintain Calvinism.
