Is It A Conspiracy by Hyper Calvinists?

Over the years I have cited, as have others, John Calvin's remark from his commentary on First Corinthians where he said "we are born again by faith." I cited this to a man today and I went to Calvin's commentary on First Corinthians 13:13 that are available online and here is what they uniformly give:

"Besides, there is bestowed upon faith a signal commendation, which does not apply to love, when John declares that it is our victory, which overcometh the world. (1 John 5:4.) In fine, it is by faith that we are born against that we become the sons of God — that we obtain eternal life, and that Christ dwells in us. (Ephesians 3:17.) Innumerable other things I pass over; but these few are sufficient to prove what I have in view — that faith is, in many of its effects, superior to love. Hence it is evident, that it is declared here to be superior — not in every respect, but inasmuch as it will be perpetual, and holds at present the first place in the preservation of the Church."

I searched all the sites that have Calvin's commentaries and I could not find where one had "again" instead of "against." Obviously the word "against" is a typo. Since all have the same typo I can only assume that they all copied from the same source. I could not believe this. I know that Calvin originally wrote "born again by faith." So, why has this blunder not been corrected? Is it a conspiracy by the Hyper Calvinists? If any of my readers have Calvin's commentaries, please check and see what you have.

Further, in Calvin's original there is a comma after "again" and reads "in fine, it is by faith that we are born again, that we become the sons of God."

In Calvin's commentary on I John 5: 1 he says "for since God regenerates us by faith." In his commentary on John 1: 13 he wrote: "It may be thought that the Evangelist reverses the natural order by making regeneration to precede faith, whereas, on the contrary, it is an effect of faith, and therefore ought to be placed later."

In Calvin's famous "Institutes of the Christian religion," chapter three is titled "Regeneration by Faith." In that chapter he equates regeneration with repentance, saying: 

"In one word, then, by repentance I understand regeneration, the only aim of which is to form in us anew the image of God, which was sullied, and all but effaced by the transgression of Adam."

He says: "Repentance follows faith, and is produced by it." 

In that chapter he also wrote:

"Although we have already in some measure shown how faith possesses Christ, and gives us the enjoyment of his benefits, the subject would still be obscure were we not to add an exposition of the effects resulting from it."

"Now, since Christ confers upon us, and we obtain by faith, both free reconciliation and newness of life, reason and order require that I should here begin to treat of both...That repentance not only always follows faith, but is produced by it, ought to be without controversy (see Calvin in Joann. 1:13)...Those who think that repentance precedes faith instead of flowing from, or being produced by it, as the fruit by the tree, have never understood its nature, and are moved to adopt that view on very insufficient grounds."

The man to whom I cited Calvin's words said that all believers in the doctrines of grace (i.e. Calvinists) believe that regeneration is before faith. I told him that was not true. He then responded by saying "they occur at the same time." Anyone can see the contradiction. He first says one is before the other and then says they are at the same time. I then gave him the Calvin citation and also stated that Spurgeon also taught that one was born again by faith. He wanted to challenge that too. After I gave the citations to prove that not all Calvinists believe that regeneration precedes faith he said he did not want to debate the question in the comment section. So, I said, "fine, but you should at least admit that you were wrong to say all Calvinists believe that regeneration precedes faith." He did not. I invited him to come and debate the question here in this blog. I also made some comments that disappeared but he says he did not delete them. I did have Internet issues yesterday, so that could be the cause. But, I remain suspicious.