The Calvinist ESV: Eph. 1:11, 1 Thess. 1:2-5

#81 and 82 in "The Calvinist ESV" series, from the long post "A Random Verse That Destroys Calvinism (And 'Is the ESV a Calvinist Bible'?)":



I am not sure if I covered these next two already, but ...



#81: Notice the difference between the NIV (not the ESV this time) and the KJV versions of Ephesians 1:11: 


NIV: In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will..."


KJV: “In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will…”


In the NIV, being “chosen” was predestined – very Calvinist! - but in the KJV, a believer’s “inheritance” is what was predestined.  Big difference.



#82: 1 Thessalonians 1:2-5: In ESV, NIV, etc., verse 4 is tied to verse 5, being “chosen” is related to the gospel coming in power, as if Paul is saying that he knows they are chosen/elected/saved because the gospel came to them in power and in the Holy Spirit (and of course, it would not come to the non-elect that way because they cannot "hear" the gospel or respond), which can sound like a very Calvinist thing.


ESV verses 2-5: We give thanks to God always for all of you, constantly mentioning you in our prayers, remembering before our God and Father your work of faith and labor of love and steadfastness of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ.  For we know, brothers loved by God, that he has chosen you, because our gospel came to you not only in words but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction…”


But the KJV has different punctuation which gives a completely different meaning to it.    

KJV verses 2-5: We give thanks to God always for you all, making mention of you in our prayers; Remembering without ceasing your work of faith, and labour of love, and patience of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ, in the sight of God and our Father; Knowing, brethren beloved, your election of God.  For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance…”

What a difference it makes when you shift punctuation marks around!  


Verse 4 should be the end of verses 2-3 (a footnote to them), not the beginning of verse 5.  Paul is not speaking like a Calvinist here, not saying that they were individually and specifically “chosen” by God to be saved, evidenced by the gospel coming to them in power and the Holy Spirit.  He is saying that, knowing they are true followers of Jesus (part of the “elect” group because they chose to believe in Jesus), he can see (and thanks God for) how well they are living out their faith.  And then he goes on to stress that he shared the gospel with them in power and in the Holy Spirit and with much assurance, and that he lived it out among them, as examples to them.  Making verse 4 the beginning of verse 5 (as most modern translations do) is wrong, and it leads to Calvinism.  But like the KJV shows, it belongs at the end of verses 2-3.



A note about the ESV vs King James:

            If you really want to get into the nitty-gritty, read these articles about the men who wrote the Greek texts that the ESV is based on: "Westcott and Hort: Translator's Beliefs" and "Westcott and Hort and the Greek Text."  The ESV is based on the RSV, which is based on the Greek Texts of these two men (who, it sounds like, rejected the infallibility of Scripture, despised evangelicals, questioned Jesus's divinity and an eternal hell, did not believe Genesis and the creation story was literal, affirmed Darwin and evolution, etc.), which is based on two corrupted manuscripts which differ from the majority of the more reliable manuscripts that the KJV is based on.  

            So when something says that the ESV has only made 6% changes, it means "from the RSV," meaning that it's 94% the same as the RSV it was based on, a translation which was based on two corrupted manuscripts that disagree with the majority of the manuscripts available.  It would be like if a journalist interviewed 100 people about an event ... and 95 of them said the exact same thing, but 5 told a different story ... and the journalist decided to side with the 5 and print their story as fact.  Raises some red flags, doesn't it?

            In the course of researching this issue, and after not knowing for decades what to think of the whole "which translation is most accurate" debate, I now side with the King James.  I mean, I have several other translations, and I think different ones are good for different reasons, such as readability, compare and contrast, to hear God's Word in a fresh way, etc.  But when having to decide which one is more reliable and accurate, especially considering the significant differences like those above, I have to side with the KJV (not the New King James, just the King James).  And I've never been more sure of it than now, after all this research. 



Most Popular Posts Of The Month:

List of Calvinist Preachers, Authors, Theologians, Websites, etc.

Why Is Calvinism So Dangerous? (re-updated)

Is The ESV (English Standard Version) a Calvinist Bible?

Leaving Calvinism: Comments from Ex-Calvinists #11

As evil as it gets: Calvinism on babies and the unreached

How to Tell if a Church, Pastor, or Website is Calvinist (simplified version)

The Cult of Calvinism

When Calvinism Infiltrates Your Church

A Random Verse That Destroys Calvinism (And "Is The ESV a Calvinist Bible?")

The Bible vs. Calvinism: An Overview by Patrick Myers (a great resource)