Featured No Conflict In The KJV

12:1 Now about that time, Herode the King stretched foorth his hands, to vexe certaine of the Church.
12:2 And he killed Iames the brother of Iohn with the sword.
12:3 And because he saw it pleased the Iewes, hee proceeded further, to take Peter also. (Then were the dayes of vnleauened bread.)
12:4 And when hee had apprehended him, hee put him in prison, and deliuered him to foure quaternions of souldiers to keepe him, intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people

12:11 And when Peter was come to himselfe, hee said, Now I know of a suretie, that the Lord hath sent his Angel, and hath deliuered mee out of the hand of Herode, and from all the expectation of the people of the Iewes

Textus Receptus Bibles

 

You did not clear it up. William Tyndale used "Easter" for the Jewish passover, not for a claimed pagan festival. The 1535 Coverdale’s Bible has “Easter” at many verses, especially in the Old Testament (Lev. 23:5, Num. 9:2, Josh. 5:10, . . . Ezek. 45:21), which the KJV changed to “passover.“

You do not demonstrate that Luke claims that King Herod was the one who was observing the passover, and you do not demonstrate that Herod would have been observing some pagan festival.
In his commentary on Acts, Paton Gloag asserted that the Herod of Acts 12 “was strict in the observance of the Mosaic law” (I, p. 415). Gloag added: “According to the strict Jews, it was not reckoned lawful to defile their festal days with executions, and Herod Agrippa prided himself on being a strict observer of the law” (I, p. 416). In his commentary on Acts, William Humphrey reported that Josephus maintained that this Herod was “strongly attached to the Jewish law” (p. 100). In his commentary, Livermore maintained that “Herod forbore to execute Peter during the feast of Passover, out of regard to the custom of the Jews” (p. 177). In his 1645 commentary on Acts, John Lightfoot (1602-1675) noted: “Agrippa, having laid hold upon him, deferred his execution till after the Passover” (p. 322). Likewise, the 1645 Westminster Annotations have this note on “the days of unleavened bread” at Acts 12:4: “These words intimate the cause why he deferred Peter’s execution, for reverence of the Passover, which lasted eight days.” In the 1695 second edition of his Paraphrase on the New Testament, Richard Baxter has this note on Acts 12:4: “He set sixteen soldiers to keep him, that after the Passover he might sacrifice him to the people.”

You seem to be ignoring the context at Acts 12:4. The immediate context of Acts 12:4 demonstrated that king Herod was aware that his earlier action of vexing certain of the church “pleased the Jews” (Acts 12:3). The context also revealed that Herod “proceeded further” to take another action that he thought would please the Jews. Would Herod be continuing to please the Jews if he supposedly waited to observe a pagan holiday or festival? Would the celebrations and practices associated with a pagan festival please or offend the Jews? Does the context actually maintain that Herod in proceeding further to take Peter would then do something contradictory to this action intended to please the Jews?

It was actually Luke that used the Greek word pascha for the time for which Herod was waiting since this verse gives no indication that Herod was being directly quoted. The Bible verse or context does not directly say that Herod was keeping or observing pascha. “The people” of Acts 12:4 could be referring to or would be including the Jews mentioned in verse 3. In Acts 12:11, it refers to “the expectation of the people of the Jews.” Therefore according to the context, the Jews were clearly the people that Herod wanted to please again by his further action. Therefore, nothing in the verse and context proves that Herod could not have been waiting for the Jews to finish keeping their pascha so that he could bring Peter forth and please the Jews again. In other words, the context indicates that Herod did not want to risk displeasing the Jews by executing Peter during their Jewish pascha and may not indicate whether Herod personally had any scruples or principles against executing Peter during a festival. Herod also would have no reason to seek to displease the Jews and to honor and respect the church that he was vexing by waiting until after any claimed church celebration. Therefore, the clear evidence from the context clearly supports the understanding that the Jews would be the ones keeping the pascha [also called the feast of unleavened bread in Luke 22:1] instead of the assertion that Herod had to be the one keeping it. If Herod was also keeping it, the context indicates that it was the Jewish pascha that he would be keeping and not some pagan festival nor any Christian celebration.

Moved by the Holy Spirit, Luke could definitely have used the Greek word in the same sense as he did in Luke 22:1. Comparing Scripture with Scripture, the context of Acts 12:3-4 is in agreement with the understanding that this Greek word was used in the same sense as in Luke 22:1.

Perhaps your interpretation of Acts 12:4 would make that verse in the KJV conflict with Luke 22:1 and Ezekiel 45:21.

 

If I am not mistaken, the word "passover" originated with Tyndale.


Tyndale, Exodus 12:43, And the Lorde sayde vnto Moses ad Aaron, this is the maner of Passeover: there shall no straunger eate there of,

 

By the way, the original person who transcribed many early English Bibles, including Tyndales did not understand early modern printing. For instance "Moses and Aaron," . In the original a, in and, had a hyphen - over the "a" meaning an "n" or "m" was to be supplied. Early printers used abbreviations to shorten or lengthen lines. A lot of times the modern transcriber should have wrote "the" but instead wrote "ye". In early printing a capitol looking Y was actually the "thorn" letter th sound. A little tiny "e" over top meant "the". A little over Halfway down the page has more information on early modern english printing.

Changes in the English Language

 

Yes, sir! .

Nah.

"Only the KJV reinforces the 1 Corinthians 5:7 teaching
on Christian Passover superseding the old one,
an indication that illustrates the outstanding skill in scholarship
of the KJV which satisfies and fulfills
The 1989 Baptist London Confession of Faith, (and other similar)

to be TRUSTWORTHY as God’s Word in the English language,
and as a "sufficient, certain, and infallible rule of all saving knowledge,
faith, and obedience"..."it Pleased the Lord"...
"to commit the same wholly unto writing;
which maketh the Holy Scriptures to be most necessary..."

( 2 Timothy 3:15-17; Isaiah 8:20; Luke 16:29, 31; Ephesians 2:20;
Romans 1:19-21; Romans 2:14,15; Psalms 19:1- 3; Hebrews 1:1;
Proverbs 22:19-21; Romans 15:4; 2 Peter 1:19,20 )
https://www.grbc.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/The-1689-Baptist-Confession-of-Faith.pdf

"The KJV precisely reflects the Greek text to us today,
use of Easter signifying the last day of Pascha in the first century
to avoid uncertainty on the number of days that Pascha lasted,
and to specify the day that Herod had to get past.

"Modern scholars represent translation precision as if it were error!"

"KJV scholarship illustrates
outstanding skill in scholarship
that has never been even remotely approached
by scholars today."

"Easter Is Correct: One Place Where Passover Does Not Apply."

"Scholars think Greek pascha in Acts 12:4
is incorrectly rendered Easter in the KJV, saying Passover is correct.

"They also note the term Easter wasn’t adopted
until well after the New Testament was written.

"They consider it totally inapplicable, and White agrees with them
(White, J.R. The King James Only Controversy. p233),
but they are all totally wrong.

Introduction.

"Scholars say the KJV follows Tyndale here
in rendering Easter for pascha in the New Testament,
but pascha is rendered passover everywhere else in the KJV,
Acts 12:4 being the only case where it's rendered differently.

"We should ask if there is a unique sense of the term in Acts 12
calling for a different rendering."

"The KJV translators would not likely have considered Easter
as the correct translation if Tyndale had not made it so prominent,
and the fact that they retained the term in just one case
indicates that their studies provided very good reasons
to continue its use, reasons that prove to be based on context and history."

"All this suggests that Providential Intervention in Translation work
applies mainly to words that influence the sense of a passage,
the scholarship of an ordained translation committee
being sufficient to ensure accuracy of the bulk of a verse or passage.

"It also indicates that Providential Intervention in a Translation
tends to be subtle, perhaps to ensure that it's not confused with inspiration..."

"When we study the context of Acts 12 and related history,
we find that Providence has preserved something uniquely important
here through the KJV.

"The case parallels that of Isaiah 7:14
where virgin refers to Mary in regard to the Savior's Virgin Birth.

"The Hebrew for virgin has more than one possible meaning,
and it can be rendered young woman or maiden in some contexts.

"But it can only be rendered virgin in Isaiah 7:14
since passage context and related word choice demand it.

"Pascha in Acts 12:4 has more than one possible meaning,
and Resurrection Day or Easter is demanded
by context & related history.

 

"If this is the right interpretation, in saying Herod killed James
and imprisoned Peter in the days of unleavened bread,
the text would be saying he did this
when Jewish Passover day was already over."

"Thus in verse 4, when Herod is said to put Peter in prison
to keep him in bonds until after passover,
this would be a passover day that comes after the usual Jewish one."

"Acts 12:4 can refer to something other than Jewish Passover day
so that after Passover would be incorrect."

"Context study in relation to history
denies rendering pascha as passover in Acts 12:4.

If it "can only mean Hebrew Passover in this passage
dealing with days of unleavened bread,
that doesn’t fit context and history."

"Now scholars are wrong in saying that Herod had to wait
until after Jewish Passover to execute Peter
since Jews objected to executions during their holy days.

"As Acts 12:3 says, the Jews approved of executing James
during their holy days of unleavened bread at that time.

"Thus context and history deny interpreting the Acts passage
to mean Herod intended to wait until after Jewish Passover to kill Peter."

But pascha as Resurrection Day fits context and history.

"Herod "killed James without repercussion,
but would fear that killing famous Peter, right after killing James,
might incite an uproar, especially
if he did so at the time of Resurrection Day.

"To Christians the day of Christ's Resurrection is sacred,
a time when public execution of Christ’s most famous disciple
would be very politically antagonistic,
mocking Christ's victory over death in the Resurrection.

"This would seem wise to Herod, and it is the reason
he would wait until after Christian Passover, not Hebrew Passover."

"Thus pascha in Acts 12
relates to Christ, the Passover of Christians (1 Cor.5:7).

Actually, Acts 12:4 can only refer to Christian Passover.

"The text must recognize that Herod's action
would be governed by timing of Christian Passover,
and by the Christian Passover
superseding of the Hebrew Passover in the book of Acts,
to give pascha a new meaning, which brings Easter into the picture.

"Today pascha equates to Easter day, but the initial sense is uncertain,
so KJV translators would use Hebrew passover
in a Christian sense for the 44 A.D. scene of Acts 12:4.

"They would know that Hebrew passover
signifies deliverance of God's people from slavery in Egypt
and from God's Judgment of Egypt, a nation signifying the world.

"They would see all this as paralleled & fulfilled
by the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus
that delivers God’s people from slavery to sin in the world
and from Judgment of the world unto Eternal Death.

The Providential Significance of easter at Acts 12:4

"Among active English versions, Easter
still appears exclusively in the KJV,
indicating God's Ordination of this version alone
to present that point in history when Christian passover
effectively began to supersede the Hebrew passover.

Summary

"KJV translators examined Tyndale’s work,
and they would retain Easter in Acts 12:4
due to the support of it by context and history.

"They were very skilled at evaluating such matters,
and the reasoning that they might follow
is reiterated in the outline below."

Alan's note: All these points in DETAIL are at:
KJB Textual Technology.

1. Pascha usually means passover, as KJV translators usually rendered it,
but its use in Acts 12:4 is denied by context/history
and the likelihood that Herod wouldn't need to wait
until after Hebrew Passover to execute Peter
since the Jews that Herod sought to please
would want Peter executed without delay.

2. At the historical time of events in Acts 12:4,
Hebrew Passover would coincide with Christian Passover in part,
the two starting on the same day,
but the Christian one would end on the 3rd day (Resurrection Day),
and the Hebrew one on the 7th day.

3. Herod was well-informed on matters of religion,
and would temporarily focus on a potential for a Christian uproar
and loss of his throne if he killed James, then killed famous Peter
and also insulted Christ by killing Peter at the time of Resurrection Day.
The cause of concern was his problem with the ruling Romans
who despised him.

4. Herod would focus on Christian Passover, especially the third day,
the one he had to get past in order to execute Peter
and continue to satisfy the Jews, without unduly aggravating Christians.

5. Herod was an Edomite, who pleased the Jews
to keep his throne, and to continue to keep it,
he would now think of Passover in the Christian sense,
and would wait until after the last day of Christian Passover,
or after Resurrection Day, to execute Peter.

6. The text must recognize that Herod's action
would be governed by the timing of Christian Passover,
which brings Easter into the picture.

7. KJV use of Easter would be proper since Resurrection Day
became Easter in the 8th century,
and would be more easily understood
than Christian Passover by all readers.

 

Comparing Scripture with Scripture, Luke, who was also the human writer of the book of Acts, clearly used the Greek word pascha to refer to either the entire period--the one day of Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread or as an acceptable name for the Feast of Unleavened Bread. Luke wrote: “Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover” (Luke 22:1).

Along with Luke 22:1, you also ignore Ezekiel 45:21 where the Passover is referred to as “a feast of seven days.” In Ezekiel 45:21, the name “Passover” was clearly used for or used to include the feast of Unleavened Bread, which is a feast of seven days. In Matthew 26:17, the name “Passover” was used for a time described as “the first day of the feast of unleavened bread.” After Jesus and his disciples had already observed the feast of Passover (Luke 22:14-15; John 13:1), the same Greek word was still used for a time when the feast of unleavened bread was in progress (John 18:28). Andreas Kostenberger wrote: “The best evidence suggests that John, as did other writers, used the term ‘Passover’ (pascha) with reference to the entire Passover week, including the Feast of Unleavened Bread (see especially Luke 22:1: ‘the Feast of Unleavened Bread, called the Passover’; see also John 18:39)” (Scorgie, Challenge of Bible Translation, p. 352).

At this verse, an edition of the KJV printed at London in 1660 has this marginal note: “Gr. The Passover.” Later, the 1853 American Bible Society’s edition of the KJV has a similar note: “Greek the Passover.” In their 1818 Oxford edition of the KJV, George D’Oyly and Richard Mant have this note for “Easter” at Acts 12:4: “’After the passover,‘ that is, after the days of unleavened bread, mentioned at verse 3” (Vol. 3).

 

Big Deal. Typical Irrelevant Shortsightedness.

The various other occurrences of the word translated "Passover"
aren't related to the necessity of "Easter" being required in Acts 12:4.

Ignore this, like you always do everything else, to hit on the KJV.

"In verses 2,3 Herod killed James and imprisoned Peter
during the days of unleavened bread. As others note,*
this can refer to the feast of unleavened bread,
the 6 days that follow an initial Jewish Passover feast day.

"Lev.23:5,6 and Ex.12:18 say passover
is at evening on the 14th day of the appropriate month,
and the feast of unleavened bread is 6 days from the 15th (at evening)
until the 21st day (at evening) -
Including Passover day gives the 7 days of unleavened bread of Lev.23:6.

"If this is the right interpretation,
in saying Herod killed James and imprisoned Peter
in the days of unleavened bread, the text would be saying
he did this when Jewish Passover day was already over.

"Thus in verse 4, when Herod is said to put Peter in prison to keep him in bonds
until after passover, this would be a passover day
that comes after the usual Jewish one.

"Acts 12:4 can refer to something other than Jewish Passover day
so that after Passover would be incorrect.

*See Moorman, J. A. Conies, Brass & Easter.
The King James Bible Page, Articles.

"Yet the term passover might include the feast day
and 6 days of unleavened bread. Its use as a 7-day event
appears in Ezekiel 45:21 that says…
"in the fourteenth day of the month, ye shall have the passover,
a feast of seven days; unleavened bread shall be eaten."

"Acts 12:4 might seem to mean Herod killed James
and imprisoned Peter during a 7-day period
that included Passover day and the 6 days of unleavened-bread,
which had not yet ended, and that he meant to kill Peter
after this 7-day Jewish Passover,
but that interpretation proves to be wrong.

"Context study in relation to history
denies rendering pascha as passover in Acts 12:4.

"That can only mean Hebrew Passover in this passage
dealing with days of unleavened bread,
and that doesn’t fit context and history.

"A lack of a fit relates to the friendship of Herod
with Roman Caesar Caligula who was despised by the Jews,
and also relates to the Edomite ancestry of Herod,
Edomites being a people historically antagonistic to Israel.
(see Broadman Commentary. Vol.10. 1970. Nashville. p75-76).

"Herod's rule was complicated, but he endured,
ingratiating himself with the Jews
by favoring their religion and culture.

"Acts 12:3 says Herod took Peter prisoner
since the Jews approved of his execution of James.

"They would see James as an enemy
as fast-growing Christianity threatened their religion & culture.

"Herod would want to further ingratiate himself
by executing Peter right after James,
so he had no reason to wait until after Jewish Passover,
the first Passover day or the entire 7-day feast.

"Executing Peter right after James was not a problem with the Jews.

"Yet he intended to wait, risking a problem with the Jews
by a suggestion of changing his mind
in acting against the foremost leader of the fast-growing church.

"Now scholars are wrong in saying that Herod
had to wait until after Jewish Passover to execute Peter
since Jews objected to executions during their holy days.

"That usually was the case, but it wasn’t a concern at this time in history.

"By this time Christians were considered heretics by the Jews,
so a public execution reinforced the Jewish position.

"As Acts 12:3 says, the Jews approved of executing James
during their holy days of unleavened bread at that time.

"Thus context and history deny interpreting the Acts passage
to mean Herod intended to wait until after Jewish Passover to kill Peter.

But pascha as Resurrection Day fits context and history.

"The initial Jewish 1st-century church
knew that Hebrew passover was typological,
and was fulfilled and superseded by Christ the ultimate Passover,
so they would observe a pascha that was based on the Crucifixion/Resurrection.

"Timing of Pascha observance by this church
would fit Acts 12 days-of-unleavened-bread context and history
since the only initial basis for the timing
was the Crucifixion and Resurrection timing relative to that of passover.

"The Crucifixion occurred on a passover preparation day
just before passover began that evening (Mt.27:62, Jn.19:14),
requiring a 3-day Crucifixion/Resurrection observance
starting the same day as 7-day Passover,
and at evening to keep them closely linked.*

"Herod could execute James and imprison Peter on an evening
that began the Jewish Passover day, or on the following day,
which would be during the days of unleavened bread,
and he might wait to execute Peter until after the third day,
which would be Resurrection Day.

"That this Resurrection Day was the case
is verified by Herod’s political situation."

"*In the 1st-century church,
pascha was a Crucifixion/Resurrection observance
starting on the evening Jewish Passover began
(other details, including number of days, are murky).
In the 2nd-century eastern church,
a 1-day pascha was observed starting the same time,
likely reflecting 1st-century timing of a 3-day pascha starting at that time.
By starting pascha observance on Crucifixion Day and making it 1-day long,
Resurection-Day observance fell on the day signifying Crucifixion Day,
an irregularity likely derived from an earlier 3-day event
starting the same time, (Easter and Paschal Controversies.
Evangelical Dictionary of Theology” 1984. Baker)."

from: KJB Textual Technology

 

"clearly used" IS WHAT YOU SAY THAT IT MAY "refer to either..."

If you don't know anything, it doesn't matter what you say, does it?

So, which is it that you would like to pick to be what you are saying?

It is "clearly used", or to, "refer to either...", of two or more choices?

If you don't know anything, it doesn't matter what you say, does it?

After The KJV translators demonstrated their command of the expertise
they possessed in their chosen occupation and assignment by
executing their highly commendable, historically expert,
contextually accurate, and grammatically astute rendering,
(with their linguistic experts being fluent in all of the relevant languages),
the panic in your desperate reliance
on invalid "General vs Specific" arguments,
and/or "Specific vs General" arguments, is astoundingly boring.

Move on.

If you don't know anything, it doesn't matter what you say, does it?

Just like "an edition of the KJV printed at London in 1660",
"the 1853 American Bible Society’s edition of the KJV",
or the "1818 Oxford edition of the KJV",
all of which had a marginal note carrying the authority of snake eyes.

If you don't know anything, it doesn't matter what you say, does it?

If you don't know anything, it doesn't matter what you say, does it?

 

Oh, my wow. So?

"Herod ever ingratiated himself with the Jews, being even devout in their religion, but he was despised by the Roman military and citizenry of Judea (see Funk & Wagnalls Encyclopedia Vol. 13. p81) that were crucial to his political control (see also Lk.23:12). Resultant political tension would control any significant political act that he indulged in.

"Pleasing Jewish leaders would always be a priority, but with his Roman situation, he couldn't afford to antagonize any large segment of the Judean population that could cause political unrest, and give local Roman leadership an excuse to depose him from office (they would need a good excuse since Caesar appointed Herod).

"He would worry about reaction of Christians to Peter's execution (The large Christian population still had political status since the governing Romans wouldn't persecute them for another 20 years).

"Herod killed James without repercussion, but would fear that killing famous Peter, right after killing James, might incite an uproar, especially if he did so at the time of Resurrection Day. To Christians the day of Christ's Resurrection is sacred, a time when public execution of Christ’s most famous disciple would be very politically antagonistic, mocking Christ's victory over death in the Resurrection.

"By such an act, Herod would make a political statement like the following:
“Is this your day of victory of eternal life over death? I’ll kill Christ’s great disciples at this time and make it a day of death. I’ll show you what I think of your God.” Christians endured persecution, but killing Peter right after James and insulting Christ might incite an uproar, and Herod would see the possibility.

"Executing Peter a little after Resurrection Day would allow Herod to side with Jewish leaders, without unduly risking heated widespread protest by Christians that would add to his difficulties with the Romans.

"This would seem wise to Herod, and it is the reason he would wait until after Christian Passover, not Hebrew Passover.

Thus pascha in Acts 12 relates to Christ, the Passover of Christians (1 Cor.5:7).

"For Jews the passover-observance is 7 days, as Ezekiel 45:21 says.

"But the early Christian Passover observance would be 3 days. To avoid political antagonism, Herod meant to kill Peter after Christian Passover, or more specifically, after Resurrection Day, the day of greatest concern to Christians, and thus to Herod.

"Herod was well-informed on matters of religion and would now focus on the Christian Passover, especially the third day signifying Resurrection Day, the day he had to get past to execute Peter and continue to satisfy the Jews, without unduly aggravating Christians. Herod's only reason for pleasing the Jews was to keep his throne, and to continue doing so, he would now be thinking of Passover in the Christian sense, and would wait until after the last day of Christian Passover, or after Resurrection Day, to execute Peter.

"Actually, Acts 12:4 can only refer to Christian Passover. Christ’s Passover superseded the Jewish one in the Resurrection, so pascha can only be Christian Passover in the New Testament after the Resurrection, or after Acts 1 where it appears 3 times. One use in Hebrews 11:28 refers to Old Testament times, so it isn’t pertinent. Another use in 1 Cor. 5:7 is the very passage showing Christian Passover superseding the Jewish one, so it must be rendered passover, and it clearly denotes Christian Passover since Christ and the Cross are its basis. The third use in Acts 12:4 can only be the Christian Passover.

"Further, after Christian Passover is best replaced by after Easter that is far better understood by all readers. And Easter fits Acts 12 context, communicating the full sense of Resurrection Day, despite the fact that the 1st-century observance was uniquely different from that of later times.

"The text must recognize that Herod's action would be governed by timing of Christian Passover, and by its superseding of the Hebrew Passover in the book of Acts to give pascha a new meaning, which brings Easter into the picture. Today pascha equates to Easter day, but the initial sense is uncertain, so KJV translators would use Hebrew passover in a Christian sense for the 44 A.D. scene of Acts 12:4.

"They would know that Hebrew passover signifies deliverance of God's people from slavery in Egypt and from God's judgment of Egypt, a nation signifying the world. They would see all this as paralleled & fulfilled by the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus that delivers God’s people from slavery to sin in the world and from judgment of the world unto eternal death.

"Thus they would see the 1st-century Christian Passover as a 3-day Crucifixion/ Resurrection observance paralleling and fulfilling the 7-day event. And they would see this 3-day Passover ending after Resurrection Day, or Easter, as the one Herod had to wait out to execute Peter.

"Now some object to rendering Resurrection Day as Easter, for the term is of pagan origin, and it didn’t have a Christian sense until well after the New Testament was penned so that its use in Acts is also anachronistic.

"But Pascha signified Resurrection Day by the 4th - 5th centuries, and Resurrection Day was Easter by the 8th, so ever since the 8th century, the KJV after Easter for after Pascha/Passover has been the proper current way to note the end of the 3-day Passover Herod had to wait out to execute Peter.

"This changing status of Easter from a pagan festival to its blessed status today illustrates the process by which God raises that which is unsanctified to the status of the sanctified, as also seen in the case of His raising of wretched sinners to the status of sanctified saints."

from: KJB Textual Technology

 

KJV calls it “Easter” because that’s the word English speaking people were familiar with. “Pascha” is Passover to the Jews; most Christians call it “Easter”, referring by extension to the Lord’s Last Supper at Passover time, where He fulfilled the prophetic meaning of Passover.

 

As a linguist I have to interrupt this discussion to say "Easter" in the KJV is technically an anachronism. This is a word or phrase from more modern times put back into a time when it did not exist. In other words, the holiday that we call "Easter" did not exist in the first century, though Christ had risen from the dead. If anything, the ονλυ Bible word for celebrating the Resurrection is "The Lord's Day" (Revelation 1:10, κυριακός), when Christians met together on Sunday to worship and serve Christ.

So, were the KJV translators right or wrong to render it "Easter"? That depends on your linguistic position. Is it okay to translate 1st century words with anachronisms, or not?

Carry on.

 

Ēostre (Proto-Germanic: *Austrō(n))
is a West Germanic spring 'goddess'.

" 'she is the namesake of the festival of Easter in some languages."

"The Old English 'deity' Ēostre is attested solely by Bede
in his 8th-century work The Reckoning of Time,
where Bede states that during Ēosturmōnaþ (the equivalent of April),
pagan Anglo-Saxons had held feasts in Ēostre's honour,

"but that this (pagan) tradition
had died out by his time,

"replaced by the Christian Paschal month,

a Celebration of the Resurrection of Jesus."

"By way of linguistic reconstruction,
the matter of a goddess called *Austrō(n) in the Proto-Germanic language
has been examined in detail since the foundation of Germanic philology
in the 19th century by scholar Jacob Grimm and others.

"As the Germanic languages descend from Proto-Indo-European (PIE),
historical linguists have traced the name
to a Proto-Indo-European goddess of the dawn *H₂ewsṓs,
from which may descend the Common Germanic 'divinity'
at the origin of the Old English Ēostre
and the Old High German *Ôstara."

Etymology.

"In Anglo-Saxon England, her springtime festival
gave its name to a month
(Northumbrian: Ēosturmōnaþ, West Saxon: Eastermonað),[7]
the rough equivalent of April,

"then to the Christian feast of Easter
that eventually displaced it.[4][8]

"In southern Medieval Germany, the festival Ôstarûn
similarly gave its name to the month Ôstarmânôth,
and to the modern feast of Ostern ('Easter'),
suggesting that a goddess named *Ôstara
was also worshipped there.[9][8]

"The name of the month
survived into 18th-century German as Ostermonat.[10]

"An Old Saxon equivalent of the spring 'goddess' named *Āsteron
may also be reconstructed from the term asteronhus,
which is translated by most scholars as 'Easter-house',
which would parallel
the Medieval Flemish Paeshuys ('Easter-house').[11]

Frankish historian Einhard also writes
in his Vita Karoli Magni (early 9th century CE);

"that after Charlemagne defeated
and converted the continental Saxons to Christianity, (* in 782)

"he gave Germanic names to the Latin months of the year,
which included the Easter-month Ostarmanoth.[12]"

from: Ēostre - Wikipedia

There, as far back as 782,

we have the name of the spring Easter-month Ostarmanoth

associated with 'Christianity'

(meaning the implied knowledge of Jesus' Resurrection).

*In 782 at the Massacre of Verden,

Charlemagne reportedly ordered the slaughter
of some 4,500 Saxons.

"Charlemagne eventually forced the Saxons
to convert to Christianity,

and declared that anyone who didn't get baptized
or follow other Christian traditions be put to death."

from: Charlemagne: Facts, Empire & Holy Roman Emperor - HISTORY

 

"Eosturmonath (April)."

"The Fourth month of the Old English calendar."

"The fourth month of the year, corresponding approximately
to the Roman and modern month of April, was called Eosturmonath.

Bede, writing in 725, tells us:

"Eosturmonath has a name
which is now translated "Paschal month",
and which was once called after a goddess of theirs named Eostre,
in whose honour feasts were celebrated in that month.

"Now they designate that Paschal season by her name,
calling the joys of the new rite
by the time-honoured name of the old observance."

"--Bede, On the Reckoning of Time, Chapter 15.
Translated by Faith Wallis.

"Paschal" is the Christian festival called Easter in modern English."

"So who was Eostre, the goddess who gave her name
and her festival to the Christian Easter?

"Kathleen Herbert says that 'eostre' in the Germanic languages
means 'from the east' and is cognate with the word for 'dawn'
in several Indo-European languages including Greek,
Latin and Sanskrit (Herbert 1994).

"The Old English season of summer,
when the days are longer than the nights,
begins at the spring equinox, and Eostre's month
would be the first month of summer.

"This would be consistent with Eostre as a 'goddess' of the dawn
and the coming of the sun, an altogether kinder and gentler image
than the 'goddess' of the previous month, Hretha."

"The Eostre's festival** was also associated
with the return of life in the spring,

this may have helped her feast merge
with the Christian festival of Easter,
which Celebrates the Return of Christ to Life.

"It may not have been at all difficult for people
to carry on celebrating the return of sun, light, warmth and life,
with a different name attached to the associated deity."

**Christian missionaries purportedly
subsumed the spring celebrations of an Anglo Saxon goddess
by the same name within their own Paschal rites.

"Sunday will be Easter, and I have been researching the pagan threads
woven through this most important of Christian holidays.

"A spring celebration of Jesus’ death and resurrection
dates back to the second century,
when it was primarily a ritual of baptism."

"As Venerable Bead (679-735 BCE) writes,
the month of April, or “Eostremonath,”
as named after a goddess of fertility (think “estrus” and “estrogen”),
spring, and the dawning of a day (think “east”).

AGAIN: "The newly-converted Anglo Saxon Christians,
Bede claimed;
were now borrowing this “time-honoured name”
to describe the “joys of the new rite”
the missionaries had introduced,****

**** ( = Baptism, picturing the death, burial,
and resurrection of Jesus Christ, in Christianity)."

"What is clear is that the Christian missionaries to England
had been instructed by their pope, Gregory, in a letter of 601 BCE***,
to allow the “heathens” to continue worshiping in their own temples
and practicing their own rituals as long as those temples
were purged of “idols”
and those rituals redirected to 'the Christian God'.

"Bede may be confirming, then, the continuation of pagan practices
under the auspices of a spring celebration of Jesus’ Resurrection,
as the origin of substituting the previous Paschal rites of the Jews,
with the month of April, or “Eostremonath,” eventually named “Easter.”

"References":

"Bede: The Reckoning of Time. Translated by Faith Wallis.
Liverpool University Press, 1999, ISBN 0-85323-693-3.

"Herbert, Kathleen. Looking for the Lost Gods of England.
Anglo-Saxon Books, 1994. ISBN 1-898281-04-1."

The year 601 BCE*** is an early, early, early association
of The Celebration of The Resurrection of Jesus
with:
the name for the month of April, or “Eostremonath,”
which the Day of The Celebration of The Resurrection of Jesus
was eventually named, shortened to “Easter.”

 

@Alan Gross. Nothing in the long post you wrote changes the fact the "Easter" in the KJV is an anachronism. It may have been used in later centuries, but nothing you wrote says the word existed in Greek in the first century. If the first mention of the word in history is from the 8th century, "Easter" is still an anachronism when used in the Bible--8th to 1st century anachronism, perhaps, but still an anachronism.

Should pasxa (πάσχα) have been rendered as "Easter" in the KJV? That is a different issue, and I have not commented on that. However, I will say that in the Japanese Lifeline NT we did not transliterate, but translated.

 

With Jesus' Accomplishment of His death, burial, and resurrection,
The Old Testament Jewish/Hebrew use of the word Pascha (Passover)
indicating the animal sacrifices typical of The Promised Messiah's,
which, of course, was where God was to See the Blood of the Sacrifice.

So, we have the Typical Pascha (Passover) Blood Sacrifice by the Jews,
being called 'The Passover', which was then fulfilled by Jesus,
on that very Day of Pascha (Passover), or 'The Passover'.

While, this Day of Pascha (The Passover) was,
from the Jews perspective taking place during
their 7-Day Festival of Unleavened Bread,
a New reckoning of 'Days' was established
by Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection,
when Jesus' Fulfilled that Typical Old Testament Passover Prophecy,

Then, with His Fulfillment of His Own additional prophecy,
where Jesus said that His burial, and resurrection, would be
"as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly;
so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights
in the heart of the earth" (Matthew 12:40).

Jesus' Fulfilled and Literally Accomplished
THE ETERNAL COVENANT of SALVATION, of The Triune Godhead,
by the Power of His blood and His Glorious Almighty Power shown

JESUS' Power of Eternal Life OVER Death, in His Resurrection,
was so Divinely significant, and of Eternally Spiritual importance
that a reconsideration regarding the observance of The Passover Day,
which was during the Jew's 7-day Festival of Unleavened Bread

and was that Passover Day and 7-day Festival season
was preempted, or replaced, by the 3-day period representing
Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection and, therefore,
SIGNIFYING The Gospel Message of The New Covenant, or Testament.

Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection were the Fulfillment
of the New Testament in His blood, The Gospel Message,
the Eternal Priority of Jesus Resurrection from the Dead the Third Day
becoming recognized in place of the Old Testament Promise
contained in The Passover Prophecy.

So, what did they do with the name of the 'Passover' Day?,
to create a distinction between these two separate observances,
of the Jews/Hebrew Old Testament Passover Day
and The New Testament Christians' Gospel Era Resurrection Day?

Since, Pascha (Passover) was translatably signified
by the synonym 'The Resurrection Day'
by at least the 4th - 5th centuries,

The 'Christian' Pascha of 'The Resurrection Day', was called 'Easter',
at least by the 8th century, when it had been established,
in common use, after the month that The 'Christian' Pascha
of 'The Resurrection Day' fell, as we have said and will repeat, below.

The name for the month of April, or “Eostremonath,”
which The Day of The Celebration of The Resurrection of Jesus
was eventually named at some point was shortened to “Easter.”

The New Testament Christians' Gospel Era Resurrection Day
could have easily been called:
The 'Christian' Pascha,
'The Resurrection Day',
'The Lord's (Annual) High Day'***,
'APRIL DAY', after the month in which it fell, etc.,

AND in FACT, AGAIN AS WE JUST SAW:

The New Testament Christians' Gospel Era Resurrection Day,
WAS NAMED AFTER THE MONTH IN WHICH IT FELL.

The Germanic month* of “Eostremonath**,” or Ēosturmōnaþ,
WAS THE NAME of that MONTH; Ēosturmōnaþ (the equivalent of April),
which was EVENTUALLY FORESHORTENED
to its CURRENT NAME that WE USE, "EASTER".

*By way of the Germanic month...
(Northumbrian: Ēosturmōnaþ,
West Saxon: Ēastermōnaþ;
Old High German: Ôstarmânoth)

**The Pre-Christian Solstice:
"...pre-Christian pagans celebrated the holiday
as one of the many solstices that surrounded
honoring a specific 'goddess' of the coming season.

"Originally known as the Spring Equinox,
the word Easter parallels the German word Ostern
which is derived from Eostre or Ostara,
the Anglo-Saxon 'Goddess of Spring'.

Here is a Disambiguation of Ostara.

***

 

Today "pascha" also legitimately equates to Easter day, for translation
by definition established by its usage in a Christian sense,
when Jesus' Fulfilled the Hebrew Passover's typical blood sacrifice,
indicating Jesus' literal blood sacrifice AND RESURRECTION.

"...so KJV translators
used the Hebrew Passover in a Christian sense", which is now
indicating Jesus' literal blood sacrifice AND RESURRECTION.
for the 44 A.D. scene of Acts 12:4.

WE SIMPLY HAVE AN ADDITION,
TO THE DEFINITION OF THE WORD "PASCHA",
FOR IT TO NOW INCLUDE AND RECOGNIZE
THE HISTORICAL OCCURRENCE AND ALSO INDICATE
JESUS' ETERNALLY SIGNIFICANT ACCOMPLISHMENT
IN HAVING CONQUERED DEATH FOR ALL TIME
SHOWN BY JESUS' RESURRECTION,
WHICH DEMONSTRATED JESUS' VICTORY OF LIFE OVER DEATH.

 

The KJV translators