Responding To Jeff Durbin - Does Ephesians 1 Teach Calvinism?

Recently Jordan sent in a question to Apologia Studios concerning Ephesians 1:4 and the contradictions in this passage to Calvinism. The guys at Apologia discussed this question in one of their recent radio shows which you can view in the link below. In this episode of Rightly Dividing, Jordan gives a reply to Apologia Studios and their answer to his question.

The topic of Calvinism is something that I have personally spent a lot of time studying and thinking about for the past decade. In recent years this theology has grown a lot in popularity, being propagated by popular and prominent pastors and christian leaders like John Piper, James White, John Macarthur, RC Sproul and ministry organizations like the Gospel Coalition and Apologia Studios.

This theology is based on a particular understanding of passages like Romans 9, John 6 and Ephesians 1, which are interpreted by Calvinists in a way that results in the conclusion that God has determined before the foundation of the world which individuals he will save and has ultimately created a countless mass of humanity throughout history for the purpose of condemning them to eternal torment in hell for committing sins that he himself determined that they commit. This may be a bit more of an abrasive and pointed way of putting it, but I think if you come to understand the claims and beliefs of the theologians mentioned above who teach these doctrines, you will see that this is an accurate and honest representation of their ultimate conclusions.

I personally find the view of God that is communicated in Calvinism to be immoral and a gross misrepresentation of what the bible actually describes God to be like. Although I do have moral and emotional apprehensions toward this theology, that is not ultimately the reason why I came to reject it. I came to reject it on biblical grounds. After examining the many Calvinistic proof texts like Romans 9 and Ephesians 1, I became convinced that Calvinists are simply misunderstanding and misinterpreting these texts.

I make videos about this topic because it is important to me and I believe that bad theology (bad ideas about God) are harmful to people emotionally, mentally and spiritually. My goal in making videos like this is not to demonize Calvinists who teach these things or to say they are evil heretics or anything of the sort, but to simply explain why I strongly disagree with their conclusions and offer what I consider to be a better way of understanding the many biblical texts that are often used to support these views.

SUPPORT:

GREAT LIGHT STUDIOS FILMS:

FEAR NOT ONLY BELIEVE

METAMORPHOSIS | From Violent Drug Dealer To Jesus Follower

SEEK FIRST (Freedom From Anxiety And Fear)

#calvinism #calvinismdebate #christianity

[Richard_Rz]

These videos are sooo helpful. I could watch them all day.

[inTruthbyGrace]

Acts 13:48... does anyone ever address the FACT that the verb ἦσαν regarding appointing in Acts 13:48 is conjugated as 3rd person *_PLURAL_* active indicative Imperfect that means God did NOT do that appointing (bc its a 3rd person plural) and it was in the process of happening while they believed (bc its the imperfect tense)
Note:
1. the ones who believed were the very same ones doing the appointing ...

2. God is not mentioned in verse 48,

3. the concept that the "gentiles" are appointing themselves _to_ eternal life is the direct contrasting corollary to the Jews "judging themselves _unworthy_ of eternal life in verse 46 ..

4. if God had done the appointing it would have been a 3rd person *_singular_* medio-passive 1aorist, the same verb conjugation we see when Jesus appointed the apostles in Matt 28:16 ἐτάξατο

[delanagracejohnson]

ap·point·ed
/əˈpoin(t)əd/
Learn to pronounce
adjective
1.
(of a time or place) decided on beforehand; designated.
"she arrived at the appointed time"
Similar:

[shakazulu]

There are 30+ verses that tell us that life (regeneration) is rhrough faith. They will not address this.

[shakazulu]

Yes every single blessing is IN and THROUGH Christ. Regeneration (ETERNAL LIFE) included. This is the number one heredy of calvinism, that God gives “life” apart from Jesus is pure heresy. They messed up your question completely in typical calvinist fashion.

[shakazulu]

Stay on this message! Hardcore calvinists will do everything they can to deny their heresy but this contradiction WILL help those on the fence or that are new to calvinism that have not become hardened in their error yet.

[LothairOfLorraine]

In Ephesians 1:3ff, Paul is stating that there are no spiritual blessing outside of Christ. Calvinism, in my reading, has God's decree placing us in Christ (see, Jhn 6:26-44) and at some point in our lives, are regenerated and begin receiving spiritual blessings.

[The-Bladeslinger]

@9:04 in Galatians 1:15 - 17 Paul was set apart to preach to the Gentiles.

[frankthendsonofst]

I would not worry a bit about "calvinistic pub talk" especially when Durban or James W. leading....

[ramonapetro]

Good question!! I appreciate you taking the time to make the video. I never considered this problem with Calvinism (though many others). Have you read the oldie but goodie books by Robert Shank: Elect in the Son and Life in the Son?

[tabithapearson]

"If we are chosen before we are born then wouldn't a baby who dies soon after it is born and isn't chosen going to hell? That kind of counters the teaching of the age of accountability?" David's question.

[lawrencestanley]

So, at about 5:00 into the video, I'm confused... Are you asserting that God "chooses us" after we first "choose Christ?" If so, then, my immediate question would be "how in the world could a sinner choose Christ?" I would direct you to Melanchthon's Loci Communes (and I would hope that you would not think Melanchthon to be a "Calvinist), under the heading "The Source of Original Sin, " he states: "After creating man without sin, almighty God was present with him through his Spirit, who aroused him to pursue righteousness. Had Adam not fallen, the same Spirit would be guiding all his descendants. But now after the sin of Adam, God is at enmity with man, so that his Spirit is not present with him as his guide. So it is that the soul, blind and lacking the light and life of heaven, esteems itself with all eagerness, seeks its own advantage, has nothing but carnal desires, and hates God. No words can describe the corruption of the human heart. The creature who is not filled with love of God necessarily loves himself most. The flesh cannot love spiritual things.”

I would assert then that the Bible teaches that NO MAN contains the autonomy of nature within himself that would enable him to even be desirous of Christ, let alone have the ability to act on those desires even if he had them. This is why in so many places like John 6 we read that it takes a miracle of God to change the very nature of man, to open his heart through regeneration which then produces fruits like repentance and faith. This is exactly what we see with Lydia in Acts 16 where the Lord opened her heart to respond to the things spoken by Paul.

One more note... Based on your illustration where you assert that "Calvinism equals election is the vine, " you demonstrate to me that you have not read Calvin's "Institutes of the Christian Religion, " and you mischaracterize his teachings to the point that I'm sure that you do not understand them. If you have read his work, then my apologies, would you then be so kind as to point out to me where in his "Institutes" did Calvin say that election is the vine? I have my copy of the "Institutes" here on my Kindle, and I would be happy to discuss this.

[lawrencestanley]

At 19:37, you reject Acts 13:48 as a demonstration of "Calvinism." I hate that word by the way... If Calvin knew that men were calling themselves by his name, he would throw up in his mouth. No, what this DOES demonstrate is God's choice in election... Stated by Westminster:

"All the elect, and they only, are effectually called (Acts 13:48): although others may be, and often are, outwardly called by the ministry of the Word (Matthew 22:14), and have some common operations of the Spirit (Matthew 7:22, Hebrews 6:4-6); who, for their willful neglect and contempt of the grace offered to them, being justly left in their unbelief, do never truly come to Jesus Christ (John 12:38-40, Acts 28:25-27, John 6:64-65, Psalm 81:11-12).”

You don't seem to understand the Greek here, so, rather than reading me, here it is as explained by Dr. Dan Wallace,
"Acts 13:48 is indeed a strong verse on God's sovereign choice of those who would be saved. The verb TETAGMENOI does not occur in Acts 20:13, but the aorist form of it does occur in Acts 29:23. There, the middle voice is indeed used and is translated like an active verb. However, the aorist has a distinct middle form that is different from the passive form. The perfect tense, found in Acts 13:48, does not. Context, lexeme, and usage are key. In 1 Corinthians 16:15, an active voice verb is used. So, neither of these texts offers a real parallel to Acts 13:48. The problem with taking the verb in Acts 13:48 as a middle is that it would have to be a direct middle (the idea would be 'they appointed themselves'), which is nonsense in this context and is extremely rare of a usage overall. I know of no linguistic ground for overturning the traditional translation here.

To understand fully what is meant, an inquiry needs to made into the specific grammatical form of τασσω (tasso) in Acts 13:48. There are two basic forms of translation seen in the passage: "were appointed" and "had been appointed." The reason for this difference is due to a somewhat awkward wording of the text.

In this verse, tasso is a perfect tense, passive voice, participle (more on this below). But it is preceded by ειμι (eimi) "to be" in the imperfect tense (ησαν). So a literal rendering of the phrase then would be "were, having been appointed."

To simply this, some versions simply use the "were" and then the meaning of tasso. Others try to retain the perfect tense sense of tasso by using "had been" and ignoring the verb "to be" altogether. However, all versions retain the passive voice of tasso by using a form of "to be" ("were" or "been") with the past tense "appointed."

Since all translations retain the passive voice from tasso, it is most appropriate to retain the perfect tense from it also. So "had been appointed" is the most grammatically correct translation. However it is translated, there are important implications both to tasso being in the perfect tense and the passive voice.

First, the perfect tense in Greek indicates a completed action that occurred in the past that has continuing results to, at least, the "present" (the "present" being the time of the events that are being recorded).

However, the word "believed" in this verse is in the aorist (simple past) tense. The aorist is used simply because Luke was writing at a later date. But if the "appointment" also occurred at the same time, then Luke would have also used the aorist for it, but he did not, he used the perfect.

The "appointment" to believe came BEFORE the hearers actually believed. So one cannot say this verse means, "those who believed were appointed to eternal life" making the "appointment" coming after "believing." Luke meant what he said, that those who previously had been appointed were the ones who then believed.

Second, the passive voice means the subject is not the cause of the action. That would be the active voice. Moreover, the passive does not mean the subject caused or did the action in their own interest. That would be the middle voice in Greek. So one cannot say those who believed appointed themselves.

What the passive voice means is that the subject is the recipient of the action; the cause of the action is someone or something other than the subject. Moreover, in Greek, there is what is known as the "divine passive." This means that God is the one causing the action even if God is not specifically mentioned in the text.

In this context, there is no human who could have "appointed" people to believe. Paul and Barnabas are proclaiming the Gospel but they are not the ones deciding who would believe. So a divine passive would be most logical in this text. What this means is, it is God who "appointed" people to believe.

Putting the above two grammatical points together, sometime prior to when the people "believed, " God had already "appointed" them to eternal life.

Moreover, if someone insists on translating tasso as "disposed" in this verse, it must still be asked, when and who "disposed" the ones who believed?

Given the perfect tense, they were "disposed" before they believed. And given the passive voice, they did not "dispose" themselves; it would still be true that it was God who, prior to their believing, gave them the "disposition" or "inclination" to believe.