I THESSALONIANS 5:21-22

I have already discussed these verses in my blog on “I Thessalonians 5:22: 'Abstain from every appearance of evil.'” However, I want to approach it again from some slightly different angles followed by a critique of one interpretation I was taught early in my life.

Context within I Thessalonians

There are basically two different opinions on these verses: they either belong with the miscellaneous admonitions at the end of the book or, much more likely, they are firmly attached to the preceding discussion of spiritual gifts in the chapter and especially to verse 20 regarding prophecies within the church.

As Wanamaker says, “Although it is possible that the command in v. 21a and the clarifying imperatives of vv. 21b and 22 could be taken independently of the directives concerning charismatic gifts and manifestations in v. 19f., it seems much more probable that the conjunction de [“and”] in v. 21 has its normal adversative function and therefore that a close link exists between the thought of vv. 20 and 21.”

“Test Everything”

Cousins says, “The Christian must not uncritically accept – or reject – spiritual teaching but must be careful in all matters to distinguish the good and hold on to it.”

“The temptation to put the ideas of men on an equal footing with the Word of God is still present. In view of this danger Christians need to test what they hear and read, by comparing it with the Word of God, to determine if it is divine in its origin. This is difficult, but it is possible for a spiritual believer (I Cor. 2:14). Each Christian has the responsibility and ability to do this, though some have more discernment than others (cf. Acts 17:11; I John 4:1).” (Constable)

“For Paul the renewed mind has a critical role in discerning good (Rom 12:2; Phil 1:9-10; I Thess 5:21) in conjunction with the instruction of Scripture and common moral traditions.” (Mott)

M.B. Thompson: “Prophecies were tested, apparently by their coherence with fundamental traditions received from Jesus, the OT and the prior witness of the Spirit in the Christian community.”

Robeck: “Paul's injunction in I Thessalonians 5:20-21 that prophecy should not be despised but tested is not limited to a group of testing 'prophets.' It appears to be a congregational mandate.”

Fee notes that “the two places where Paul mentions the functioning of prophecy in the church [i.e. I Thessalonians 5:20-21 and I Corinthians 14:20], call for a 'testing' or 'discerning' of prophetic utterances.”

Unfortunately, it has been all too often my experience in various churches that many members of a congregation are either (a) more than willing to turn over their critical thinking abilities to the teacher or preacher and accept without question whatever he or she might say, (b) more likely to accept what a self-proclaimed expert on YouTube might have to say on a spiritual subject than listen to Christian leaders with recognized credentials, or (c) have never been taught critical thinking skills in the first place and don't even know where to begin.

Linguistic Considerations

Bruce notes that the Greek word eidos should be translated here as species, kind, or form rather than “appearance” as in KJV since that latter translation is based on another sense of the word. Similarly, Braumann states, “The eidos was the expression of the essence in visible form...the outward appearance of the whole being is meant [as in the Septuagint of Genesis 29:17 and Isaiah 53:2-3], and not merely the outer shell behind which something quite different might be supposed.”

“In the choice between “avoid every visible form of evil” and “avoid every kind of evil,” Morris prefers the latter and points out that “where this word is used of outward form...there is no suspicion that the outward form does not correspond to something real. The meaning will be 'evil which can be seen' and not 'that which appears to be evil.'”

The only commentator I could find who included things that may only appear to others as being bad was Constable, but even he appended Heibert's caution that “it is not always possible to abstain from everything which may appear evil to a narrow and foolish judgment.” To this demonstrable fact should be added Paul's comment in I Corinthians 10:29: “Why should I be captive to someone else's conscience.”

Scope

The next important topic concerns how wide a net Paul is casting in these two verses, which at least in their original context concern prophetic utterances in a congregational setting. Opinions vary among scholars. There are some who believe Paul's words have quite general applicability:

    Morris takes a rather broad view when he says that “as he turns from the thought of prophecy to that of testing out all things, and this in turn leads naturally enough to the retention of the good and the rejection of the evil...the words he uses are quite general, and they must be held to apply to all kinds of things, and not simply to claimants to spiritual gifts.”

    Hendricksen also believes that a more widespread thought is here: “...every form, whether the wicked and uninspired utterance concerns doctrine or life. It is probable that thus every is even broader, to be taken absolutely.”

    Constable agrees with this assessment and states, “Not only should pseudo-prophecies [see v. 20] be discarded but also, as Paul broadened his warning, every kind and form of evil should be avoided.”

    “Paul's dependence upon traditional teaching is not...restricted to that which may be called 'Christian,' and his admonition to the Thessalonians...seems in his own case to have a wide application. He never supposes that 'what is good and acceptable and perfect' (Rom:12:2) has an exclusively Christian provenance.” This is demonstrate by Paul's occasional appeal to secular proverbs (I Cor 15:33) or ethical lists compiled by contemporary Greek and Roman writers.     

Then there is the view of Wanamaker, who recognizes the original context of these verses but still feels that broader applicability is possible: “Although the three imperatives of vv. 21f. go specifically with the statements regarding the Spirit and its manifestations in vv. 19f., Paul's readers would almost certainly not have limited their applicability to this alone. The need to test everything and then either accept or reject it on the basis of whether it was good or evil had general relevance to every aspect of Christian thought and behavior.”

Other scholars prefer to limit the relevance of these verses to the more immediate context of I Thessalonians, with perhaps slight variations keeping the more modern church situation in view.

    “In 5:19-22 are several further directives dealing with how congregational worship should be conducted. They clearly suggest that the instructions of 5:16-22 apply in the first place to their worship as a faith community...The guidelines pertain to the exercise of spiritual gifts within the congregation.” (Elias)

    John Stott applies these verses to teachers within the church and says that we are given five tests by which to judge their teachings:

        1. Comparison with the Scriptures (Acts 17:10-11)

        2. Whether the teacher believes that Jesus Christ came in the flesh (I John 4:1-3)

        3. Adherence to the Gospel of grace (Galatians 1:6-9)

        4. The known character of the speaker (Matthew 7:15ff)

        5. Degree to which the teaching edifies the church and is conducive to peace, order, and love (I Corinthians 13)

    Morris states, “It is often thought today that prophecy in the early church was more or less like preaching today. There is something to be said for this, but the essence of prophecy in the early church understood it appears to have been that the Spirit of the Lord spoke to and through men.”

    Malherbe summarizes some of the above opinions before coming up with the most restricted application of the verses of any others proposed: “The panta ('everything') is problematic and has been thought by some to have reference to everything, even beyond spiritual gifts in general, by others to all spiritual gifts, by still others as all things expressed in inspired speech, by yet others to all spiritual gifts including prophecy, and, correctly, to prophecy. Rather than rejecting prophetic utterances out of hand, they should be tested in every respect...A consequence of the testing is that it identifies what is to be held on to . This is therefore not a general, disconnected saying, although Paul does use kalon ['good, genuine'] with an ethical sense elsewhere, but is the culmination of his directions in how prophecies are to be treated.”

Biblical Parallels

It is well recognized that the admonition to “abstain from every form of evil” stems from the Book of Job, where twice in the prologue, he is called “one who feared God and turned away from evil.” (Job 1:1,8)

“The fear of God is an expression found throughout the Old Testament and frequently in the Wisdom literature. It stands for a solid trust in God...Whoever fears God avoids the very appearance of evil. He shuns all enticements to wrongdoing (cf. 31:1-12) and never places his trust in any other god or thing (31:24-28).” (Hartley) In saying this, Hartley appears to waffle between the two meanings of eidos. Most other commentators on Job would not extend Job's adherence to the good to that extent; his concern was to avoid evil, not something that might just appear evil to others. The attitude of his friends through the whole book of Job demonstrates that the latter is impossible to avoid no matter how hard you might try.

“Biblical Hebrew has no word corresponding exactly to our term 'religion.' The closest approximation is 'fear of God/the Lord,' which the orthodox sages equated with the beginning and the end of wisdom. The fear of the Lord gives one the intelligence to avoid evil, Prov iii7, xiv7, xiv16, xvi 6.” (Pope)

Literary Form

Although it is seldom mentioned by commentators, Malherbe brings up another telling piece of information from the fact that verses 21b-22 constitute the equivalent of what would be called in the OT “antithetic parallelism,” in which the elements of one line of poetry form a purposeful contrast to those in the next line. This form occurs quite often in the Proverbs. Thus:

Hold fast to          what is             good;

Abstain from       every form of   evil.

Just as the “good” in line 1 is real good, not just its appearance, so the “evil” in line 2 is real evil, not just its appearance.

Application: Using Discernment

At the very conservative church in which I grew up, the constant mantra was for us to watch how we act in public because non-Christians might think we were sinning even if we weren't. Thus, we should avoid movie houses, pool halls, bowling alleys, dancing, listening to rock-and-roll music, playing any card games, reading books that might have off-color language in them, etc. etc. As proof texts, besides using the King James Version of I Thessalonians 5:22 on avoiding all 'appearances' of evil, our teachers and preachers would cite as a parallel passage Romans 14:13-23 warning against putting a stumbling block in front of another person.

But since I Thessalonians 5:20-21a tells us to test teachings within the church, let us briefly apply that principle to the interpretation I was given on verse 22 as well. As as we do, I think it is one teaching we can firmly reject. The problems with my church's interpretation are rather obvious and many:

    1. It goes against the meaning of the Greek word for “appearance.”

    2. It ignores the antithetic parallelism between verses 21b and 22.

    3. It does not recognize the OT passage in Job as the source of Paul's words.

    4. It ignores the immediate context within I Thessalonians which deals with behavior within the church body, not with our dealings with those outside the church.

    5. It improperly applies Romans 14:13-23 as a parallel teaching for its interpretation since that passage also deals exclusively with our relationships with our Christian brothers and sisters.

    6. It defies logical thinking since those outside the church would have been the last ones in the world to even think that any of our specifically banned or discouraged behavior was sinful in the slightest degree.

In fact, if you look at Romans 14:10 and 13a, you will see that as well as Paul teaching us not to put purposeful roadblocks in front of a fellow Christian by our behavior, the “weaker” Christians should similarly not judge us for exercising our freedom in Christ. It could, thus, actually be argued that the preachers in our church were the ones who were sinning by improperly judging the behavior of the rest of us.