Peter is "bursting forth" at Pentecost, preaching to the gathered crowd. The passage is the second section of his sermon. His tone is uplifting even though his words seem to condemn. He accuses the Israelites in his audience: Jesus was handed over to you; you had him crucified by those outside the law (Romans/gentiles); but, says Peter, this was God's plan and foreknowledge.
I don't know if I agree with Peter. Claiming this all as God's plan sounds like God manipulated people to do what was evil. I find that too difficult to believe. I suppose I am putting God in my own shape of box, but I prefer to believe in God's foreknowledge based on a deep knowledge of the people and their motivations and goals, without manipulation. God knew, I believe, that the chance that Jesus would avoid a tortured death was very small, but that the purpose - announcing the kingdom and demonstrating God's self in love and mercy - outweighed the suffering. It was not a risk because God knew that Jesus could not be destroyed by death.
There was, I think, always a possibility of another outcome. Not a big possibility, granted. Each person in the story had a free choice and someone could have tipped the balance to a different outcome. I do not believe God would have withheld opportunities for true righteousness - right action - from anyone, in order to make the story come out just as it did. We cannot know what might have been, of course, only what was. But if we are to believe that people can reform, can be redeemed from evil acts and influence, then even the chief actors in this central drama of our faith must have had alternate paths available and the freedom to choose good as well as evil and all shades of action in between.
