Is There an Echo in Here?

One of the biggest problems in theological discussion is the straw-man fallacy. This fallacy is when someone takes a caricature of their opponent's position and attacks that caricature rather than their opponent's actual position. It's hard to find theological discussion today that doesn't engage in this wrong-headed and unchristian logical error. 

    Calvinists are often fond of accusing their opponents of straw-manning their position. And many times, said Calvinists are right. Many people misrepresent what Calvinists believe and such misrepresentation needs to stop. Calvinists do not believe in a monstrous god who plays people like puppets. They do not (for the most part) believe that God actively keeps people from believing. So don't say that they do! 

    But Calvinists are often just as guilty of misrepresenting Arminians. I'm not speaking just of keyboard warrior Calvinists, but of well-known, reputable Calvinist teachers. For example, they often teach that Arminians believe they can work up faith on their own without help from God. No true Arminian believes any such thing. We believe that faith is a gift of God as surely as the Calvinists do. The question is not if faith is a gift but if said gift is resistible or not. That's the difference in the Calvinist and Arminian views. 

    Furthermore, despite what Calvinists often argue, Paul does not see faith as a work. So, by saying that we must "exercise" faith in Christ to be saved is not saying that we must be saved by works! Many Scriptures could be cited here, but see Romans 4:5, for example: "But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness" (NKJV). Ephesians 2:8–9 shows clearly that faith is both a gift of God and not a work. 

    Now at this point, many Calvinists will claim that I do not understand the point they're making because, under Arminianism, faith is still something you "do." I can grant that, but Calvinism does not escape this problem. Because, under Calvinism, God does not do the believing for you. It is still "your faith." It might be irresistible, but it is still something you "do." So, if faith is a work under Arminianism, it is also a work under Calvinism.

    Furthermore, please don't just quote Calvinist (or Arminian) talking points. Go to the Scripture and exegete it! The Word of God is the common ground upon which this discussion must take place if any edification is to be had from it. 

    I close with a plea to those on both sides: please do not insulate yourself in an echo chamber. Read scholars from the other side. When I was a Calvinist I pretty much only read and listened to other Calvinists. I know many Calvinists are the same. I also know many non-Calvinists avoid listening to and reading Calvinists like the plague. But these unchristian representations will continue until we get out of our echo chambers and read those who disagree! You might not agree with the other side, and that's fine, but you should at least know what they actually believe. Trust me, you will be a better Calvinist or Arminian if you leave the echo chamber. Study to show yourself approved and let iron sharpen iron. 

soli Deo gloria 

Do You Need the Original Languages to Preach? A Few Thoughts in Progress

It is very common in my circles and in the works I read to stress the importance of preachers knowing Greek and Hebrew. (Most seem to forget that a few chapters in the OT are written in Aramaic, as well!). Let me say upfront that I agree that learning the biblical languages is worthwhile and very helpful in many instances. I would encourage all preachers to learn them, something that is much easier now with seminaries offering online education. However, I do not want to go as far as to say that they are absolutely essential to pastoral and preaching ministry. Here are some thoughts I have: 

1. First, there are a plethora of excellent English translations available today. One can use the NASB, ESV, NKJV, NLT, NIV, CSB, HCSB, NET, KJV, etc. with great profit. (There are some translations to avoid, but that's another post for another time). Read and compare different translations. Then, go to the commentaries. Get yourself some more technical commentaries, ones that are still accessible to the English reader, and dive in. Compare different commentaries. In this way you will see what the options are and what the reasons are for the options. You might not be able to confidently evaluate all the issues, but you will be able to dig deeper if you use these resources.

2. Along with the first point, I'm going to issue an (unpopular) caveat. Do not use the languages if you have not been trained in the languages.* A lot of people know the Greek alphabet so they can look up words or use an interlinear, but this level of knowledge is not sufficient for doing exegetical work in the languages. Your understanding of the languages will be virtually nonexistent if you haven't spent time actually working in the languages (i.e. translating texts). I have friends who try to use the languages without knowing them and it often leads them into error. 

    I'll share an embarrassing story on this point. When I was in college, I never took Hebrew. But, I thought I understood enough to wax eloquent on the subject, at least to a degree. I remember posting on a discussion board for a class about what the Hebrew word for "day" (יום) meant. While my understanding wasn't completely wrong, it was mostly ignorant and I even had the pronunciation/spelling of the word wrong. I still cringe when I think about it! 

3. Another thing to remember is that preachers should make it a habit of preaching from both OT and NT. To use the languages in preaching, then, you need to be trained in both. But very few seminary graduates are truly skilled in both. Most of time preachers know some Greek but barely survived Hebrew! I ended up focusing in OT, so my Hebrew is stronger than my Greek, although I have a competent level of training in both. But I'm still careful when using the languages because I do not presume to be more of an expert than the scholars I am reading, especially in Greek. This leads to me my final point. 

4. I hate to say it, but one year of each (Greek and Hebrew) is not enough for you to use them well. Even if you did well in the classes, your understanding of the languages will probably be very mechanical and not sensitive to the various ways different biblical authors utilize the languages. A rigid, mechanical understanding will often lead to error. (For example, see all the various ways well-meaning preachers have misused the aorist tense in Greek). It is not until the third semester that you are actually working with syntax in a way that's helpful for interpretation. And to really develop your skills, you need to progress beyond the third semester. 

5. You can know and preach God's Word without knowing the language! Finally, a comforting word. You do not need to be skilled in either of the languages to be used by God to preach his Word and shepherd his flock! While I recommend learning and using the languages, I do not view it as a requirement. It often adds depth to your reading and preaching, but you will often get the gist from utilizing the appropriate translations and commentaries. There are too many examples of preachers without the requisite training who nonetheless preached God's Word accurately and mightily. It's about your humility and submission to the Word. It's about God's gift of wisdom and the Spirit's illumination. This is not to downplay the significance or importance of the languages. If at all possible, you should learn them and you should utilize the resources I mentioned above. But you should not feel like you can never be used of God without proficiency in Greek/Hebrew/Aramaic. 

These are just a few of my thoughts on this issue. Many will disagree with parts of what I say and that's ok. Just remember that true, biblical wisdom is a gift from God and is not about formal learning, but holy living (James 3:13–18). 

soli Deo gloria