Now to you who believe, this stone [Jesus] is precious. But to those who do not believe, “The stone the builders rejected has become the capstone,” and, “A stone that causes men to stumble and a rock that makes them fall.” They stumble because they disobey the message – which is also what they were destined for. But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.
What could be clearer? Nonbelievers were destined to fall, believers were chosen for salvation as God’s nation set apart (holy) from those nonbelievers. Believers “declare the praises of [God]” to damned unbelievers by showing the “wonderful light” that God gave “us” but not “you”. I turn to my new NIV study Bible notes for some clue, but they’re not much help.
NIV study notes for 2:8 read: “Some see here an indication that some people are destined to fall and be lost. Others say that unbelievers are destined to be lost because God in his foreknowledge saw them as unbelievers. Still others hold that Peter means that unbelief is destined to result in eternal destruction.”
Any way you look at it, the chasm between believer and nonbeliever, saved and unsaved, loved and unloved is clear. Or is it?
In light of that, what can we make of verse 9 “But you are a . . . royal priesthood . . .
What good is a priesthood without a people? Aren’t priests supposed to facilitate reconciliation between God and man? If all God’s “chosen” are a royal priesthood, then aren’t we “chosen” for the purpose of bringing God’s love and mercy to those destined for destruction and in so, doing save them? In Adam, all are destined for destruction, but God sent His Son to thwart that destruction. As God’s chosen people, we are sent to do our small part in thwarting the “destiny” of those unbelievers headed away from God. I see no room for saying God has planned for these to be lost. I personally can’t see room for “god foreknew them to be unbelievers and so gave up on them.” Even in the idea of Christians as a “holy nation” cannot be taken as exclusive. Isaiah 56:7 reads “My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations” and Jesus found this important enough to quote when he clears the temple (Mark 11: 12-19) pointing out that Israel had failed to follow God’s inclusive call in favor of exclusiveness. “Holy” means set apart for the purpose of reaching all nations, not for the purpose of being isolated.
I’m having trouble expressing this in a way that’s different from the Christian rhetoric. We talk about “saving people” but after they convert to Christianity we say they had already be chosen and destined for salvation as opposed to those who won’t eventually come to believe and so were destined for hell. I’m saying that Bible appears to me to say these people are destined to destruction until they come to Christ. If God can and will save them through his “chosen” here on earth, then why must we cling to the idea that He can’t or won’t at any other time, especially given that God is outside of time! If “destined for disobedience” can here be seen to mean a changeable destination, what might we find when we look at other passages on “eternal damnation” in this light?
Make no mistake. I believe those who refuse God and disobey must face the consequences of a very real, very terrible, very eternal punishment for their disobedience. For if they were to be punished for a million years for all their sins against themselves, humanity, and God, it would not be enough, so eternity is the only just sentence. Jesus redeemed Christians from this terrible fate by his work on the cross. Who am I to deny God the right to redeem whomever, whenever he chooses?
So why rush now? If people will have an eternity to be redeemed (as is my sincere hope, and that is a hope in the character of a loving, just God, who hasn’t revealed his whole plan to us, so if I am mistaken I pray that He will forgive me this hope because my faith is in Him alone), why bother about bringing the good news now? Because WHO WOULD WAIT! If I knew of a place on earth spacious and fertile, why would I not rush to the poor in places with no room and no means for a living simply because I know if they kept wondering they’d eventually find that place and live and prosper? It is urgent that people hear the Good News of Jesus Christ, whether or not they only have this life to turn to God. At the same time, there is no rush. It would do no good to force the poor and destitute to move to this land I’ve found if they don’t want to leave and can’t see the good in it. They will not till the land and grow and prosper. In fact, it would probably lead to their resentment and further delay their eventual prosperity! God’s timing is perfect timing, in that we can rest assured. “With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.” (2 Peter 3:8) It has nothing to do with any human time measurement. It is not up to us for “apart from me you can do nothing.” (John 15:5) Amen! “We proclaim him, admonishing and teaching everyone with all wisdom, so that we may present everyone perfect in Christ. To this end I labor, struggling with all his energy, which so powerfully works in me.” (Colossians 1:28-29) Amen and Amen!
What good is a priesthood without a people? Aren’t priests supposed to facilitate reconciliation between God and man? Very well said! I have heard this idea before, but not so succinctly and eloquently put.
He that believeth shall not make haste. There is plenty of time. You must not imagine that the result depends on you, or that a single human soul can be lost because you may fail. The question, as far as you are concerned, is whether you are to be honored in having a hand in the work that God is doing, and will do, whether you help him or not. Some will be honored: shall it be me? And this honor gained excludes no one: there is work, as there is bread in his house, enough and to spare. It shows no faith in God to make frantic efforts or frantic lamentations. (George MacDonald)
