Ruination from Calvin and Zwingli Today
Fraudulent Text Followed by Paraphrases Sold as Translations
Luther and his team of
Biblical scholars had the best concept of Biblical translating, as Eric Metaxis
explained so clearly:
Perhaps most important in translating an ancient language into a modern language is maintaining the innate poetry of the language, even and perhaps when that "poetry" takes the form of prose. The language should be supple, vivid, and powerful, but the theological ideas behind the words must not suffer along the way. Martin Luther, The Man Who Rediscovered God and Changed the World, p. 273.
The destruction of the Bible’s
text began with the Zwinglian and Calvinist attitude of knowing more about God
than God. Something new – a different text of the New Testament – was more
exciting than thousands of examples from the 1100 years of Christian rule in
the Greek-speaking Byzantine Empire. Once scholars planted their flags on the
new and different, Wescott and Hort joined the celebration with their absurd
rules for judging the New Testament text. Anyone could be a text critic and
dazzle others by citing exceptions to the traditional readings. This was
precious groundwork for a combined assault on the translation and exegesis of
God’s Word.
Without a textual standard,
translations from friendly and helpful people could begin rolling off the
presses, each one a guaranteed if minor best seller - the equivalent of a key
to the mint. People resisted the counterfeit Bibles until the press lords came
up with a new approach – name academics from every denomination to give the new
Bible credibility and gravitas among
their peers. License it for use in the Christian education materials and change
the entire translation every few years, enough to the phantom zone. Control the
text and therefore the translations through the international Bible societies.
Now the ruling norm is secure
in the hands of the modernists, ecumaniacs, and unionists. The Lutherans will
not stand behind or even mention any form of the King James. Meanwhile, the
Calvinists will howl, scream, and jibber when any of their errors are omitted
from the new Bibles. The nursing journal I put away at the Yale Medical Library
had a solution for difficult patients: “Do you want your enema before or after
your meal?” Now the Lutherans are offered two equivalent choices – the wretched
NIV or the version whose senior editor is a Calvinist – the ESV.
The Chief Article Sacrificed to a god named Calvin
The Reformation did not begin as a denomination or in a denomination. The purifying fire
began solely as a way of addressing errors of the Church through Biblical
exposition. The early days of the Reformation were chiefly debates about the
Bible and only later included the early Church Fathers, like Augustine, to show
that their teaching was also Biblical.
Zwingli and Calvin began denominations
in opposition to Luther’s Biblical doctrine, and their sects have splintered
into many more, each sect occupying one or more places on the Apostles Creed
and pretending it is the entire truth of Christianity.
Therefore, the Chief Article
is the standard for all of Christianity and must be understood as that measure
by the Bible alone, even if no one was left with the courage to treat it.
This
article concerning justification by faith (as the Apology says) is the chief
article in the entire Christian doctrine, without which no poor conscience can
have any firm consolation, or can truly know the riches of the grace of Christ,
as Dr. Luther also has written: If this only article remains pure on the
battlefield, the Christian Church also remains pure, and in goodly harmony and
without any sects; but if it does not remain pure, it is not possible that any
error or fanatical spirit can be resisted. (Tom. 5, Jena, p. 159.) 7] And
concerning this article especially Paul says that a little leaven leaveneth the
whole lump.
Book of Concord, Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration, Article III, 6f.
Book of Concord, Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration, Article III, 6f.
Thus the language about this
article being the Master and Prince, the Judge of all articles, the article on
which the Church stands or falls – is only about Justification by Faith, not
later supposed improvements, additions, or clarifications. (F. Bivens, and Mark Zarling pretend their UOJ dogma is the Chief Article!)
 |
| These open Calvinists rejoice in teaching the same Objective Justification as ELCA, which is why they work so well together. |
Calvin’s Double Predestination
The Bible teaches the Word and
Sacraments as the Means or Instruments of God’s grace. The Holy Spirit is
united with the Word, whether in the invisible form of teaching and preaching
or the visible form of Holy Baptism and Holy Communion.
Calvin taught consistently
that the Holy Spirit may or may not be united with preaching, teaching, baptism,
or communion. The Sovereign God term really suggests a fickle and untrustworthy
god, divorced from the Word of Jesus and the Sacraments of the Savior.
Against the Bible, many in the
past have taught a universal, general, or prevenient grace – all meaning the
same thing – grace without the Means of Grace. Calvin taught in all editions of
the Institutes that God predestined a
certain number to be saved and a certain number to be damned, so one is a believer
as a result of predestination, not from hearing the Word, as Paul taught so
clearly in Romans 10.[1]
Double predestination is just
as much a rejection of Justification by Faith as the dumbed-down version,
Objective Justification, also known as
1.
General Justification,
2.
Universal Objective Justification, and
3.
The Justification of the World.
Calvin’s dogmas are contradictory
and always suffer from erosion. In Pietism, rationalistic theologians combined
the universality of the Atonement (He died for all) with a fragment of the
Chief Article, creating a toxic alloy – God justified the entire unbelieving
world, without the Word, without the Means of Grace, without faith. That is the
honest definition of Objective Justification. The equally twisted Subjective
Justification part – man must accept this universal absolution – was quickly
overshadowed by the first part (or side). Justification has a side? The
American Protestant to elucidate these points was the Calvinist Leonard Woods.
CFW Walther and his circle accepted the Halle Pietist version of the world
being absolved when Christ rose from the dead, from Bishop Martin Stephan
conveniently taught.[2] They later adopted the Objective
and Subjective Justification terms from the Calvinist Woods, based on the Halle
theologian Knapp.
This Universalism won in the
latest version of the NIV, where in Romans 3, not only have all sinned, but all – yes all – have been justified, though the second all is not in any text. That no longer matters when the clergy know
little Latin and less Greek.
[1]
Romans 10 is often called the Means of Grace chapter, as Isaiah 55 is. The
language could not be any clearer, but many other Biblical passages supposed
the same harmonious concept.
[2] Stephan
was perhaps the first serial sex abuser among Lutherans, and the Walther circle
knew all about it. Walther did not organize and lead the riot against Stephan
until it became known that their bishop inflicted the young women with
syphilis, as he had the wife he abandoned in Europe.
 |
| The entire Book of Concord teaches Justification by Faith. |
 |
| Walther did not know the Biblical languages well, so he used the Halle error about 1 Timothy 3:16 to back the OJ error. |
