The Whole Hole-y Calvinist Dictionary

"To have previous knowledge of; know beforehand especially by paranormal means or by revelation" (Merriam Webster"). The original greek is προγινώσκω (proginosko) which is a compound word comprised of πρό (pro) – meaning "before" and γινώσκω (ginōskō) – meaning "to know." When the Bible state that God foreknows a person, it means that God actually knows someone in advance — He is aware of them, their existence, their thoughts and their actions before they happen.

Calvinits do not have clear agreement on the meaning of "foreknowledge" other than to be certain it does not mean to have the traditional meaning of prior knowledge or to know beforehand.

Calvinism argues that foreknowledge means to love first or choose first and such attribute of love moved God to choose the elect without regard to their existence, their thoughts and their actions.  Of course this definition simply removes what we normally think of as "knowing" a person and replaces it with "choosing" or "determining." So instead of God actually having knowledge of people before they exist, it is more like He pre-decides their existence and destiny before they exist.
Generally Calvinism shifts the focus of "foreknowledge" from what it does mean to what it does not mean, redefining "knowledge." Calvinism may claim that their defiinition actually means more than to "know." However, what is clear is that Calvinism removes what it means to know and changes the focus from what any non-Calvinist, theologian otherwise, would claim that it means to know someone and, instead, claims that it means to pre-determine what someone will do.

Why Does Calvinism refuse to allow God to have "foreknowledge" of individuals, especially as it is used in 1 Peter 1:2 ("Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father . . .")? This interpretation is necessary to the Calvinist teaching of "Unconditional Election" which concludes that God chose (or elected) who to save without consideration of the future response of individuals to the gospel message. However, if God has all the facts but refuses to use them in election, then He is intentionally not making the best decision, but rather a decision based upon partial knowledge. By ignoring all details about a person (their faith, response, character, etc.), God is electing without knowledge, not with knowledge. And yet, Calvinism still wants to call God's selection "foreknowledge", even though it is the opposite of knowing. If a human judge did this — ignored important facts and made decisions arbitrarily — we would call that injustice. Calvinist Foreknowledge is actually "Not-Knowledge."

      1) It is not knowledge.
      2) It is not awareness.
      3) It is not relational.
      4) It is not personal.
      5) It is a deliberate refusal to consider what God fully knows.

"Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied."

	Literal Understanding	God's election was based upon His foreknowledge of future events. In the context of the passage the basis upon which God chose humans to salvation was based upon His knowledge of their obedience to the gospel of Jesus Christ.
	Calvinist Understanding	God's election was not based upon foreknowledge of human response to the gospel; God chose to elect some portion of humanity to salvation for reasons that we do not know - other than to be sure His decision had nothing to do with God's knowledge of future human response.
		The Calvinist argument is similar to the Calvinist interpretation of 1 John 4:19 - "We love him, because he first loved us." Although the word "because" expresses causation, Calvinism denies that the primary cause of a believer's love of God is the believer's loving response to God's love. Rather, Calvinism argues that the primary cause of a believer's love is God's decree that believer's love Him - in essence, denying the causation expressly stated in 1 John 4:19.

"For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren."

	Literal Understanding	Those whom God foreknew to respond with obedience to the gospel of Jesus Christ, He conforms to the image of Jesus, so that many may bear the character of Jesus who is the Heir and Head of the church.
	Calvinist Understanding	Similar to the Calvinist understanding of 1 Peter 1:2, Calvinism argues that God's election was not based upon foreknowledge of human response to the gospel or any other prior knowledge; God chose to elect some portion of humanity to salvation for reasons that we do not know other than to be sure it had nothing to do with God's consideration of human response. As noted above, this interpretation is necessary to the Calvinist teaching of "Unconditional Election" which claims God chose without considering the future response of individuals to the gospel message - though He has complete knowledge of the future, He deliberately refused to consider such knowledge. Rather, He decided each individual's future eternal fate based upon what can only be described as part of what He knows, clearly something less than His complete and perfect knowledge.

God is the supreme authority with ultimate control. He is all-powerful and all-knowing, and the Creator of everything. He can act as He pleases. However, Scripture does not teach that God is obligated to directly control every human decision for His sovereignty to remain intact. God may allow humans to choose and still remain fully sovereign (Deuteronomy 30:15–19). He may respond, warn, be grieved, or be pleased by human decisions (Numbers 25:3; Luke 7:30). Thus, while God is sovereign and in ultimate control, He has sovereignly chosen to create human beings with:

• an ability to obey and an ability to disobey,
• an ability to believe and an ability to disbelieve,
• an ability to accept Him and an ability to reject Him.

This act of creation is not a threat to His sovereignty; rather, it is an expression of His sovereignty.

1a) Ability to Obey: Scripture teaches that obedience is possible and expected.

Joshua 24:24: “And the people said to Joshua, ‘The LORD our God we will serve, and His voice we will obey!’” Deuteronomy 30:11–14: God says His commandments are not too difficult for them; obedience is possible. John 14:21: “He who has My commandments and keeps them, it is he who loves Me.”

1b) Ability to Disobey: Scripture also affirms the real possibility of rejecting God’s commands.

Luke 7:30: “But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the will of God for themselves, not having been baptized by him.”

These passages assume real human moral responsibility, not predetermined behavior.

2a) Ability to Believe: Scripture presents belief as a genuine human response.

John 3:16: “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish…” John 6:29: “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent.” Acts 16:31: “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.”

2b) Ability to Disbelieve: Scripture equally presents unbelief as something a person may choose.

John 5:40: “But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life.” John 3:18: “He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already…”

Belief and unbelief are presented as genuine options, not predetermined outcomes.

3a) Ability to Accept: Scripture treats acceptance of God as a meaningful decision.

John 1:12: “But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God…” Acts 2:41: “Then those who gladly received his word were baptized…” 2 Corinthians 5:20: “We implore you on Christ’s behalf, be reconciled to God.”

3b) Ability to Reject: Scripture also affirms that people may refuse or resist God.

John 1:11: “He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him.” Matthew 23:37: “How often I wanted to gather your children together… but you were not willing!”

These are not merely hypothetical invitations. Scripture consistently treats acceptance and rejection as real human responses to God’s grace.

Calvinism does not search Scripture to define "sovereignty." Rather, it begins with a philosophical premise:

If God is sovereign, then human choice cannot play any role in salvation.

Nowhere does Scripture make any statement of this sort. Rather, it is a definition required to uphold the Calvinist doctrine of "Irresistible Grace."

Calvinism constructs its own definition of “sovereignty,” one that leaves no room for free will to have any role in salvation. If God granted humans the ability to respond (to choose to accept or to reject the gospel), then, by definition, grace would be resistible, which directly contradicts the Calvinist doctrine of Irresistible Grace. Because Irresistible Grace denies any genuine exercise of human will regarding belief or rejection, Calvinism must draw a firm line: God may allow some degree of human freedom in life, but absolutely never with regard to salvation. If humans could choose to either Jesus or not to receive, then grace would no longer be irresistible; by definition, it would be resistible.

In addition to the conflict between the doctrine of Irresistible Grace and a definition of "sovereignty" which allows even the slightest exercise of human free will with regard to salvation, almost the entirety of Calvinism fails if sovereignty creates a human ability to respond to or reject the gospel:

If God could grant humans an ability to choose to respond to or reject Jesus, then the Calvinist doctrine of "Total Depravity" is incorrect.

If God could grant humans the ability to choose to respond to or reject Jesus, then His election must take into account each individual’s decision before choosing whether to elect or condemn (or, for those who reject double predestination - before choosing whether to elect or not to elect). Thus, the Calvinist doctrine of "Unconditional Election" is incorrect.

The conflict between the core teachings of Calvinism and the slightest exercise of human free will to believe in the gospel or to reject the gospel fully slams the free will door shut. Is it any surprise that Calvinism creates its own definition of “sovereignty” which entirely prohibits human free with regard to one subject: the choice to believe or reject the gospel of Jesus Christ. But search the Bible and we find no definition of sovereignty that has anything to do with the choice to believe or reject. Rather Calvinism pursues a philosophical definition of “sovereignty” which is a theological construct, not a biblical definition. In essence, “because we believe in ‘Irresistible Grace’ we conclude that any ability to resist God’s grace conflicts with God’s ‘sovereignty’.” And so Calvinism creates another unholy definition, not because it is rightfully set forth in scripture, but because it is a necessity in order to uphold the Calvinist doctrine of Irresistible Grace.