Tuesday, February 12, 2019

More Calvin Ruined the Protestant Faith
Text, Translation, and Justification by Faith - All Trashed

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.
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.