Just in case anyone missed this post (the longer title made it easy to miss the "ESV" part) ...
"A Random Verse That Destroys Calvinism (And "Is The ESV a Calvinist Bible?")
In that post, I write about a bunch of verses that I believe were intentionally translated to be more Calvinistic. (Click on it to see the verses.)
"A Random Verse That Destroys Calvinism (And "Is The ESV a Calvinist Bible?")
In that post, I write about a bunch of verses that I believe were intentionally translated to be more Calvinistic. (Click on it to see the verses.)
And why would I think that the translators of this Bible version would do that?
(From that post...)
The ESV and ESV Study Bible are majorly preferred by Calvinists. In fact, it's often considered "The Calvinist Bible."
Why? And why would translators of a Bible make these kinds of Calvinist tweaks to Scripture?
Wayne Grudem and J.I. Packer were editors on the ESV Study Bible (this is for the ESV Global Study Bible). Grudem and Packer are both popular, strong, dogmatic Calvinists. Very Big Names in the world of Calvinism. Grudem in the General Editor and Packer is the Theological Editor. And there were other Calvinist contributors and committee members for this Bible and its study notes, such as and at least Schreiner, Ortlund, and Poythress. And I suspect that Collins and Dennis are Calvinists too, based on the Calvinists they run/write with and the people online who identify their books as "reformed."
Why? And why would translators of a Bible make these kinds of Calvinist tweaks to Scripture?
Wayne Grudem and J.I. Packer were editors on the ESV Study Bible (this is for the ESV Global Study Bible). Grudem and Packer are both popular, strong, dogmatic Calvinists. Very Big Names in the world of Calvinism. Grudem in the General Editor and Packer is the Theological Editor. And there were other Calvinist contributors and committee members for this Bible and its study notes, such as and at least Schreiner, Ortlund, and Poythress. And I suspect that Collins and Dennis are Calvinists too, based on the Calvinists they run/write with and the people online who identify their books as "reformed."
(I try to find clear indications that someone calls themselves "reformed" or "Calvinist." But if I can't find that, I look for phrases they use, people they write with, topics they write about, groups they belong to, and the Statements of Faith of the schools or churches they work at to help me determine if they are "most likely Calvinist." And from what I can tell, most of the main people who worked on the ESV and ESV Study Bible are definitely or most likely Calvinists.)
When you read the ESV Study Bible notes, you are getting information that has been filtered through the theological views of strong Calvinists. And so you will be getting a large dose of Calvinism.
Also, regarding the ESV itself (not the Study Bible), several Calvinists worked on the translation oversight committee, at least and from what I can tell, Packer, Grudem, Hughes, Poythress, Ryken (and once again, possibly Collins and Dennis. And I am quite sure that Arnold is too, based on the Statement of Faith of the school he worked at.).
Plus, if you look at the reviews for the ESV, there are many Calvinists who give it a glowing review - at least and from what I can tell, Piper, Sproul, Chandler, Mohler, Platt, Anyabwile, DeYoung, Chappell, Schreiner, Lutzer, etc.
This is telling.
I'm not saying the ESV itself, apart from the Study Bible, is an altogether bad translation, just that many Calvinists worked on it, many sing its praises, many hold it up over all the other translations, and a bunch of verses have been changed to be more Calvinistic. (This, to me, makes it unreliable.) So be discerning.
So there you have it: Calvinists helped translate the ESV Bible ... and then Calvinists added the study notes for the ESV Study Bible ... and then Calvinists hold it up as the best version and only version they will use.
Also, regarding the ESV itself (not the Study Bible), several Calvinists worked on the translation oversight committee, at least and from what I can tell, Packer, Grudem, Hughes, Poythress, Ryken (and once again, possibly Collins and Dennis. And I am quite sure that Arnold is too, based on the Statement of Faith of the school he worked at.).
Plus, if you look at the reviews for the ESV, there are many Calvinists who give it a glowing review - at least and from what I can tell, Piper, Sproul, Chandler, Mohler, Platt, Anyabwile, DeYoung, Chappell, Schreiner, Lutzer, etc.
This is telling.
I'm not saying the ESV itself, apart from the Study Bible, is an altogether bad translation, just that many Calvinists worked on it, many sing its praises, many hold it up over all the other translations, and a bunch of verses have been changed to be more Calvinistic. (This, to me, makes it unreliable.) So be discerning.
So there you have it: Calvinists helped translate the ESV Bible ... and then Calvinists added the study notes for the ESV Study Bible ... and then Calvinists hold it up as the best version and only version they will use.
You can't get away from the fact that this Bible is steeped in Calvinism.
No wonder Calvinists love it so much!
Two articles that might interest you about the ESV Bible:
ESV Bible Translation Revisions "Potentially Dangerous," Biblical Scholar Warns
"Why The ESV Translation Changes Matter: Two Things To Consider" [(NOTE: That link doesn't work anymore for some reason. But this one does for now.) This is about the implications of the ESV changing Genesis 3:16 from "your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you" to "your desire shall be contrary to your husband, but he shall rule over you." Why such a dramatic change, making it sound like a wife's desires are hardwired to be against her husband but that he will ultimately break her, rule her? Could this be part of what's behind the pervasive "complementarian" set-up in Calvinist churches? This article also highlights the audacity of the men who translated the ESV when they declared that it will be the last and permanent version of the ESV, basically saying that there can be and will be no changes made to it from here on out, as if no one could improve on what they did or correct it. (They have since recanted this decision. But to me, the damage has been done, as it has exposed the hearts and attitudes of the men who worked on this Bible, many of whom - it not most - are Calvinists. This should be concerning to all of us in the Church and make us very wary about these men!)]
And for more about the "complementarianism" of Calvinist churches, see:
Calvinism and Complementarianism: A Response to Kevin DeYoung
The Actual 4 Dangers of Complementarianism: A Response to the Gospel Coalition
Is there a Calvinist-Complementarian Connection?
No wonder Calvinists love it so much!
Two articles that might interest you about the ESV Bible:
ESV Bible Translation Revisions "Potentially Dangerous," Biblical Scholar Warns
"Why The ESV Translation Changes Matter: Two Things To Consider" [(NOTE: That link doesn't work anymore for some reason. But this one does for now.) This is about the implications of the ESV changing Genesis 3:16 from "your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you" to "your desire shall be contrary to your husband, but he shall rule over you." Why such a dramatic change, making it sound like a wife's desires are hardwired to be against her husband but that he will ultimately break her, rule her? Could this be part of what's behind the pervasive "complementarian" set-up in Calvinist churches? This article also highlights the audacity of the men who translated the ESV when they declared that it will be the last and permanent version of the ESV, basically saying that there can be and will be no changes made to it from here on out, as if no one could improve on what they did or correct it. (They have since recanted this decision. But to me, the damage has been done, as it has exposed the hearts and attitudes of the men who worked on this Bible, many of whom - it not most - are Calvinists. This should be concerning to all of us in the Church and make us very wary about these men!)]
And for more about the "complementarianism" of Calvinist churches, see:
Calvinism and Complementarianism: A Response to Kevin DeYoung
The Actual 4 Dangers of Complementarianism: A Response to the Gospel Coalition
Is there a Calvinist-Complementarian Connection?
[Now click on this link to my post where I share verses I found in the ESV that I think were deliberately translated to be more Calvinistic.]
