Debating Calvinism

Over the years, I’ve hosted some serious debates on many of the issues relating to Fundamentalism. I’ve had debates on various aspects of Calvinism too.

Recently in an old post on my blog, buried where few can see it, have been some comments by Greg and Don wanting to debate me on Calvinism. The insinuation was recently left that I don’t want to debate that topic or that I won’t allow a debate on it. To make such an enterprise simpler, I had asked that Greg read my explanation of the 5 points of Calvinism.

He’s done that, but I keep missing his comments because on very old posts on my blog the comment notifier doesn’t work for me (since I ported those posts over to my blog from my free wordpress.com blog). So I’m going to move that debate to this post.

In the comments, you can expect to see some interchange on that topic, and I’ll copy Greg’s most recent comment over and give my reply. We’ll see where that goes.

Rules for this comment thread are you must 1) read my explanation of the 5 points of Calvinism, and 2) try to stick to the Calvinism debate and 3) debate charitably following the spirit of my commenting policy. If you’re up to the challenge dive in. Know that I’ve been under the weather lately and have some catch up to do at work so I may not be interacting over here as regularly or quickly as I would like. But I will see all the comments and be sure to respond.

Details on Another Radio Interview this Saturday

I wanted to spread the word about another radio interview that I’ll be doing this Saturday. Kevin Thompson of Understanding Our Times Radio, an internet talk show will be interviewing me. It will be another live call-in show, so I’m inviting all my readers to jam Kevin’s phone-lines with comments and questions for me. Details on the interview are below, adapted from the Understanding Our Times announcement.

——————————————————————————————————————

Why is it that so many are leaving fundamentalist churches and embracing reformed theology? As the young, restless and reformed movement grows, hard-line fundamental Baptist churches seem to be in decline. Is this the end of fundamentalism? What is it about reformed theology that has attracted so many? We will ask these questions and more to Bob Hayton. Bob operates and contributes to several popular blogs including Fundamentally Reformed and Re:Fundamentals.org. This is a live program and your phone calls are encouraged.

Broadcast — Understanding Our Times

Website – http://www.blogtalkradio.com/understandingourtimes

Time — Saturday, June 5, at 6:00 pm EST/5:00pm CST

Length — 30 Minutes

Call-in Number – (347) 945-7171

You can join us live Saturday evening at 6:00 pm EST / 5:00 pm CST, or download the broadcast in mp3 format at a time more convenient for you.

“Understanding Our Times” is an interactive, live Internet talk-radio show that focuses on current events from a distinctly Biblical worldview. Host Kevin Thompson offers listeners timely discussion of meaningful issues with a variety of different guests each week. Callers are encouraged to call (347) 945-7171 to listen or ask questions. The stream and archives are available at http://www.blogtalkradio.com/understandingourtimes. The show is live every Saturday evening at 6:00 p.m. Eastern/ 3:00 p.m. PT. The show is hosted on BlogTalkRadio.com.

Because of Grace,

Kevin Thompson,
Rom 1:15

The Real Meaning of 1 Thessalonians 5:22

Anyone with roots in conservative evangelicalism, and particularly fundamentalism, will have heard 1 Thess. 5:22 used as justification for all sorts of personal standards. Going to see a movie, drinking from a dark bottle, using playing cards, wearing facial hair (for men) or wearing pants (for women) — all of these activities and more are condemned with the words: “Abstain from all appearance of evil” (1 Thess 5:22, KJV).

These words are used as a bully club to keep people in line with the group’s expectations, or more usually, that of the leader. What appears as evil to one is not necessarily going to appear as evil to another; and so, taken to an extreme, the careful Christian could hardly do anything for fear of it somehow being misconstrued as evil.

This basic interpretation of the verse has surprisingly wide attestation. A wide variety of commentators uphold this understanding: Matthew Henry, Adam Clarke, Harry Ironside, J. Vernon McGee and Albert Barnes. It certainly is not good to rush into things which appear to be evil. But the nuance I see as unwarranted is more adequately found in these thoughts by Ironside: “All of us should remember that others are watching us and taking note of how we behave. We ought to abstain from all that looks like evil…” Or as McGee puts it: “This… is the answer for questionable pastimes and amusements. If there is any question in your mind whether something is right or wrong, then it is wrong for you. Abstain from all appearance of evil.”

Scripture does teach that we should watch out for weaker brethren and not put stumbling blocks in their way. But this particular verse is taken to teach a testimony should be maintained and things avoided which might at a far glance from a passing stranger appear to be sinful, even if upon closer examination they are not. Consider some of these modern applications of this verse in a fundamentalist context.

Fundamentalist Applications of 1 Thess. 5:22

The verse is used in a list of “67 tests that can be used by a believer to decide upon a course of action“. It is the “Appearance Test”. “Would what I do assume any appearance of evil? Would my actions be misinterpreted or seen in a negative light?

It is used in a church statement of faith in relation to the dress styles church members should have. “We believe that Christian people should look and act like Christian people and not like those who love the things of this world…. Appearance shall be neat and clean, with short hair for men and longer for women. If any statement is to be made by means of dress, it should be a positive statement for Jesus Christ.”

It is used in a church constitution as follows: “The life of the pastor and his family should be an example of godliness and spirituality. They should not indulge in worldly or sinful practices which would tend to weaken the testimony of the church (1 Thess. 5:22 ).”

In a statement copywrighted by BJU Press, a group called the International Testimony to an Infallible Bible, lists 1 Thess. 5:22 as one of 5 reasons why “Christians… separate from the world and from worldliness…” The reason is “To make clear to Christians and non-Christians alike by their actions that they belong to God, not to the world (I Thessalonians 5:22).”

Cooper Abrams of bible-truth.org applies this to ecclesiastical separation: “This verse too is dealing with biblical separation from evil and sin in any form. It is the broadest of all the verses and plainly states to “abstain” from all appearance of evil. To “abstain” means to “hold one’s self off from” or to “refrain from.” Is not false doctrine evil? God clearly throughout His word over and over again condemns sin and false and idolatrous teachers. Is standing beside them, and working with those in doctrinal error “refraining” evil? The answer is obviously no. It is in fact standing with them.”

A popular King James Bible Only site, lists the NKJV’s rendering of the verse as “every form of evil” instead of “every appearance of evil” as one of 337 changes removed from the AV 1611.

David Cloud, an influential fundamentalist leader, applies the verse to everything from alcohol and TV to a new evangelical approach to ministry.

A Closer Look at 1 Thess. 5:22

Key to understanding 1 Thess. 5:22 is appreciating it in its context. Determining the meaning of the Greek word ειδους‚ (eidos) translated “appearance” by the KJV but “form” or “kind” in most modern Bible versions is also important.

Leon Morris in the Tyndale New Testament Commentary on 1-2 Thessalonians covers both of these points quite well. I’ll let him explain:

The positive injunction is followed by the negative. The form employed is a strong one with the preposition apo (as in iv. 3) used to emphasize the complete separation of the believer from evil. There is some doubt as to the meaning of the word eidous rendered appearance… as in AV [another abbreviation for KJV]…. The word eidos means the outward appearance of form (Lk. iii. 22, ‘shape’), without any notion of unreality. It is also used in the sense ‘sort, species, kind’. AV takes it in a third sense, ‘semblance’ as opposed to reality, but this does not seem to be attested elsewhere, and it is unlikely that the apostle would be concerned only with outward appearance (there is no word ‘even’ here to give the meaning, ‘even from the appearance of evil’). Our choice seems to be between ‘every visible form of evil’ (with no notion of unreality), and ‘every kind of evil’. The use of the word elsewhere in the New Testament favours the former; but there are enough examples of the term meaning ‘kind’ in the papyri to make the second quite possible. And in view of the context I am inclined to accept it. Paul is urging his friends to eschew evil of every kind.

The change from that which is good (lit. ‘the good’) in the previous verse to ‘every kind of evil’ in this is significant. The good is one, but evil is manifold, and is to be avoided in all its forms. — pg. 106, Eerdmans 1958 (1982 reprinted edition) [italics original, bolded emphasis mine]

I would add that The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology edited by Colin Brown (Zondervan, 1975) also explains that the modern concept of “semblance” is foreign to the Greek mind.

The distinction is commonly drawn between outward form and essential substance. Whilst this distinction is also found in Gk., the Gk. idea of form does not imply that every kind of form is a mere outward appearance…. [Speaking now specifically of the classical usage of ειδος]: the modern distinction between the external and the internal, the visible and the invisible, the husk and the kernel, and between the outward form and essential content is inappropriate and foreign to this aspect of Gk. thought…. The LXX uses eidos to translate mar’eh (sight, appearance, vision) and to’ar (form). Here too the outward appearance of the whole being is meant (cf. Gen. 29:17; Isa. 53:2 f.), and not merely the outer shell behind which something quite different might be supposed. — pg. 703-704 (vol. 1)

The closest that the Greek comes to the idea of “semblance” is with the word σχημα.

Moulton and Milligan in their Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament, present many papyrii examples contemporary to the NT of the meaning “kind” or “species” for the word ειδος. They also explain that the Greek word (ε)δικος‚ meaning “one’s own” comes from the word ειδος.

The meaning of 1 Thess. 5:22

Given the above closer look, I want to draw out what I believe is an appropriate interpretation and application from this text. I’ll be drawing from the immediate context of the verse beginning with vs. 19 – 23.

Don’t quench the Spirit by despising the role of prophecies in the local assembly. Instead of despising prophecies, you are to test everything (including prophecies). That test should result in your holding fast to “the good” and abstaining from every manifestation of evil. Some prophecies are evil, but the attitude of despising prophecies are also evil. As we test everything, we must approve the good and reject the various forms of evil. In fact we need God Himself to “sanctify (us) completely” so that we are “kept blameless at the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ”. Abstaining from “every form of evil” certainly fits in with that.

Now don’t be put off by the mention of prophecies. It is right there in the Bible. Whether or not prophecy applies to times beyond the NT is beside the point in our argument here. One thing is for sure, this teaching can be applied to the preaching and teaching of the Word. We shouldn’t despise teaching which we don’t like, but we should test it.

If it is legitimate to find a distinction between the appearance and the true nature of something in this passage, it would most appropriately apply to the prophecies which appear good but actually are forms of evil. I’m not convinced the Greek would allow this. The passage clearly addresses prophecies we don’t like but that are true. I don’t believe the opposite variety of prophecies (seem true but are bad) is referred to in this passage.

Other Articles

I refer you to the following articles for more on the real meaning of 1 Thess. 5:22.

“Living for God’s Glory: An Introduction to Calvinism” by Joel Beeke

Calvinism is all the buzz these days. Last year, Time Magazine listed the rise of “The New Calvinism” as number 3 on a list of “10 Ideas Changing the World Right Now” (see excerpt here). The five points of Calvinism are gaining adherents at a rapid rate. At the same time, a deep-seated rejection of Calvinism remains popular in large swaths of evangelicalism.

When it comes to the internet, fierce debates over Calvinism are the norm. Calvinists routinely suspect the worst of their “Arminian” opponents who are often pictured as near-Pelagians. Arminians think that Calvinists tout a dour, sour-faced God who gleefully condemns people to Hell with no chance for salvation. No wonder then, that Calvinists don’t evangelize.

From my vantage point, as a convert to Calvinism from a Baptist non-Calvinist viewpoint, both the Calvinist superiority complex and the Calvinism-is-of-the-devil overreaction share a common shortfall. Neither extreme really appreciates the full ramifications of Calvinism for all of life. Both have a certain amount of ignorance with respect to the history and teaching of Calvinism from the Reformation onward. A historical perspective and an appreciation for Calvinism’s impact on worldview and theology beyond the rather specific and limited focus of the five points would do much good all around.

It is these reasons and more which make Joel Beeke’s book Living for God’s Glory: An Introduction to Calvinism such an important resource. This book is packed with material illustrating how Calvinism impacts all of life.

The book starts off with an historical treatment of the origins of what we call Calvinism and a look at several of the Reformed confessions. Then it moves on to a Scriptural defense of the teachings of Calvinism. Here we find a treatment of the 5 points of Calvinism as well as the 5 solas. We also find that the sovereignty of God, or theocentrism is the doctrinal heart and soul of Calvinism.

The book goes further and surveys the piety of Calvinism and its impact in the church. In these sections we learn a lot from the Puritans on sanctification and church life. Particular emphasis is placed on the emphasis of the role of preaching in worship, which is truly Calvinism’s gift to the wider church.

The book then goes on to how Calvinism provides a “theology for all of life”. I was particularly struck by this section. The discussion of a Puritan home and marriage was eye-opening. Indeed the medieval era had downplayed the physical aspects of the marital union. The clergy were above sex, or were supposed to be, and that was left for mistresses and secret elopements. The marriage wasn’t about that, it was a societal convention. The Puritans took the Bible’s teaching on the importance of the marital union and brought back a Biblical morality and a healthy enjoyment of physical pleasures within the confines of marriage.

I also enjoyed the chapter on vocation, and how Calvinism invests the idea of a life’s calling with great significance. Political and ethical questions are also addressed from the perspective of Calvinism.

The book concludes with a chapter by Sinclair Ferguson on doxology as the end goal of Calvinism. As it was John Piper’s ministry in particular that drew me toward Calvinism, I can testify that Calvinistic theology if it is actively embraced and understood should tend toward a doxological thrust in life. Everything should be seen as flowing from God’s good hand, and our very salvation is a free gift of God’s grace. Calvinism should make us worshipful and humble, not proud.

Joel Beeke and the other contributors to this book are to be commended for showing us how doctrine should impact all of life. They open up the horizons of contemporary Christians to see the beauty of faithful orthodox piety of previous generations. The book does get long and can be quite varied at times. But the work can be seen as an anthology from which to glean what you find interesting and helpful. I recommend this book heartily.

This book is available for purchase at the following sites: Amazon.com, Westminster Bookstore, and direct from Reformation Trust

Disclaimer: This book was provided by Reformation Trust Publishing for review. The reviewer was under no obligation to provide a favorable review.

Quotes to Note 16: Paul a Minister of the New Covenant

A while back I finished Jason Meyer’s excellent new book The End of the Law: Mosaic Covenant in Pauline Theology (Broadman & Holman). It was there that I first grasped the significance of Paul’s declaration in 2 Cor. 3:6 “who has made us competent to be ministers of a new covenant“. Meyer argues that Paul was a minister of the new covenant in the same way that he ministered the gospel (see 2 Cor. 4). In other words, the new covenant is intimately related to the gospel. Let me allow Jason Meyer to explain.

…The source of Paul’s competence is not himself… it comes from God… God’s sufficiency surges within God’s new covenant, the base of operations for Paul’s ministry. God’s sufficiency is inherent or intrinsic to His new covenant…. Paul says this new covenant consists “not of the letter, but of the Spirit”….the Spirit defines the new covenant and makes it what it is….

These conclusions should not cause one to miss the semantic and grammatical links between “minister” (diakonos) and “covenant” (diatheke) in v. 6 Porter observed that “minister” (diakon-) words appear throughout the covenantal context of 2 Corinthians 3. The fact that Paul connects the service of his ministry to the concept of covenant is important in determining the relationship between the new covenant and the gospel. Paul presents parallel claims as a servant (diakonos) of the new covenant (kaines diathekes) and a servant (diakonos) of the gospel (euaggeliou). Further evidence emerges in 2 Corinthians 4:3-4 where the new covenant is parallel to “gospel” (euaggelion), especially in light of the repetition of previous themes like “glory” and “veiled”…. (pg. 75-78)

This understanding, that the very gospel Paul preached is connected to the new covenant, fits in with Jesus’ inaugurating the new covenant at the Last Supper. It fits with Hebrews 8 and 10 which apply the new covenant to the believing church of today, not a reconstituted Israel or house of Judah in years to come. The new covenant’s promise of a radical experience of the Spirit, fits with the New Testament’s emphasis on the Spirit’s present role in believers. We are living in the age of the new covenant. It is already here, but it is not yet here in the fullest sense.