1 Peter 2:8

[Jared]

My wife and I are going through 1 Peter in our devotions. I have a question concerning reprobation. We see a lot of monergistic language here in the following verses:

To those who are elect exiles
1 Peter 1:1a

According to his great mercy, he has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,
1 Peter 1:3b

Like newborn infants, long for the pure spiritual milk, that by it you may grow up into salvation— if indeed you have tasted that the Lord is good.
1 Peter 2:2-3

Then, in verse 8 of chapter 2:

They stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do.
1 Peter 2:8b

My question is, were they destined to stumble because they were non-elect, God had not caused them to be born again, and they had not tasted that the Lord is good?

Or, was God more active in their stumbling? Did he actively harden their hearts or did he let them choose what they would by nature, being sinners and then harden their hearts as a response to them hardening their own hearts?

I tend to lean toward an understanding of Romans 9 that says that we harden our hearts and God hardens our hearts simultaneously.

Romans 9:18 says:

So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.

So, it would seem to logically follow that if God wasn't having mercy on someone, then he would be hardening them. Perhaps not indefinitely, if they're elect, but at least until the appointed time for their conversion.

 

[A.J.]

Dr. R.C. Sproul is helpful here. He says in ""Double" Predestination" that

In the Reformed view God from all eternity decrees some to election and positively intervenes in their lives to work regeneration and faith by a monergistic work of grace. To the non-elect God withholds this monergistic work of grace, passing them by and leaving them to themselves. He does not monergistically work sin or unbelief in their lives. Even in the case of the "hardening" of the sinners' already recalcitrant hearts, God does not, as Luther stated, "work evil in us (for hardening is working evil) by creating fresh evil in us."2 [emphasis added]

2. Martin Luther, The Bondage of the Will (Westwood: Fleming H. Revell, 1957), p. 206.

Dr. Sproul adds:

Thus, the mode of operation in the lives of the elect is not parallel with that operation in the lives of the reprobate. God works regeneration monergistically [in the lives of the elect] but never sin [in the lives of reprobates]. Sin falls within the category of providential concurrence.

.... Only by considering election and reprobation as being asymmetrical in terms of a positive-negative schema can God be exonerated from injustice. [emphasis added]

---------- Post added at 08:07 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:06 PM ----------

Hope that helps.

 

[larryjf]

My question is, were they destined to stumble because they were non-elect, God had not caused them to be born again, and they had not tasted that the Lord is good?

Yes, they were destined to stumble because they were non-elect. It does not necessarily follow that they had not tasted the good things of the Lord. Even the non-elect taste His goodness if they are members of a church and experience the blessing of such membership...but they are only externally joined to the Lord, they don't receive their very life from Him (Jn 15).

Or, was God more active in their stumbling? Did he actively harden their hearts or did he let them choose what they would by nature, being sinners and then harden their hearts as a response to them hardening their own hearts?

God ordains the elect and the reprobate, so He does make a choice that can't be altered by the creature. However, He does not directly tempt or move them to stumbling. It would be through secondary causes that such are brought about.