The Calvinist ESV: Eph 3:9, Mark 10:24, Luke 4:4, 1 Peter 1:14

#77-80 in "The Calvinist ESV" series, from the long post "A Random Verse That Destroys Calvinism (And 'Is the ESV a Calvinist Bible'?)":

 

#77: Ephesians 3:9 (KJV): “And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid by God, who created all things by Jesus Christ.”  And the ESV: “and to bring to light for everyone what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God who created all things.”  

In the KJV, notice that Paul is preaching the gospel of Christ (verse 8) in an effort to make all men see it.  But in the ESV, he’s just bringing it to light, exposing it to everyone.  

It's kinda like the difference between helping people put a puzzle together... or merely putting the box in front of them and saying, "See!  There's a puzzle."  The first is to help all people put the puzzle together correctly, to help them understand it, believing that everyone can do it with a little help... but the second is merely about putting the puzzle in front of them, pointing out the fact that it's there.  

The KJV stresses that all men can see the gospel and that Paul is trying to help all men see it, but the ESV is merely about the gospel being presented to all but not necessarily about all men being able to see it or about helping all men see it.  This fits perfectly with Calvinism which believes that God only gives the elect eyes to see the truth but that He blinds the minds/eyes of the non-elect because He predestined them to hell.  

#78: This is not about Calvinism, but it’s significant nonetheless, to help show the corruption of the manuscripts the ESV (and other modern translations) is based on.  Mark 10:24 (KJV): “Children, how hard it is for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God.”  But in the ESV: “Children, how difficult it is to enter the kingdom of God!”  How misleading!  It's not hard to enter the kingdom of God.  Jesus has done all the work for us, and all we have to do is accept it, to believe.  But it is hard for those who trust in their riches to enter the kingdom of God because they put their faith in money, convinced that they don’t need anyone else, even Christ, because they can do it all on their own.  I wonder who it is who wants to convince people that it's too hard to get saved?  Because it’s sure not God!

#79: Another not-Calvinist-but-significant one: Luke 4:4 (KJV): “Then Jesus answered him saying, ‘It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.”  And the ESV: “And Jesus answered him, ‘It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone.’’”  Well, duh, of course we can’t live by bread alone.  That is just a fact.  But why remove the whole point of this verse, that man shall live not just by bread but by “every word of God”?  Who is the one who wants people to be unaware of their need for the Word of God?  Who is the one who loves to whisper “Did God really say…?”  Because it’s sure not God!

#80: In 1 Peter 1:14, the KJV warns "As obedient children, not fashioning yourselves according to the former lusts in your ignorance,".  Notice that it emphasizes that people fashion themselves to their former lusts.  The people are responsible for choosing to mold their lives around their lusts or not.  But the ESV simply says "As obedient children, do not be conformed to the passions of your former ignorance."  

I know it seems small, but the ESV removes the clear statement that they fashion themselves, downplaying the idea that we are responsible for deciding what to fashion ourselves after.  According to Calvinism, God decides what we will be like, and He fashions us to be a certain way, and there's nothing we can do about it (yet they will talk like they think we can actually make decisions and choices, while hiding their belief that we can't).  But the KJV clearly says that we fashion ourselves to be a certain way, contradicting Calvinism.

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.