Ok, define Easter

Where do you get the notion that Easter didn't exist back then?

Let's look @ what Scripture has to say about the Edomite(Idumeans) and Easter(Ishtar,Ashteroth,et al):

1.As an Edomite, Herod, and his people was long associated with the false gods. (2nd Chronicles 25:14; 20).

2.Ashtoreth(Ashteroth) worship was already happening early with the Cannanites(1 Kings.11:5,33;2 Kings.23:13).


3.As we find in Scripture(KJB),Edom(Esau,an Idumean) married of the daughters of Canaan,exposing themselves to their false gods; see Genesis 26:34 and 36:2.


4.Not to mention Nebuchadnezar(He and the Babylonians worshipped Ashteroth as Ishtar) conquered Edom(Jeremiah 27:3-6.),further exposing Esau's decendents to Ishtar.


6.Herod(an Edomite)was waiting for his pagan Easter(Ashtaroth,Astarte, Ishtar,Easter,whatever)--(1 Sam. 7:3; 1 Kings 11:5, 33; 2 Kings. 23:13; Jeremiah. 7:18; 44:18), rather than the Lord's Passover (Ex 12:27; Lev 23:5).

Easter and Passover happens around the same time;the KJB is correct for translating it Easter.


Of course,I dont expect any of the Alexandrian sect to accept what Scripture says.

 

Well AA, aren't you doing the same by rejecting what "easter" means in the context of the Acts 12:4 passage?

Acts 12
2 And he killed James the brother of John with the sword.
3 And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.)
4 And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.

Matthew 26:17 Now the first day of the feast of unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover?

See the passage above? It parallels the Acts 12 passage in terms of the days of unleavened bread and the Passover, it is even clearer in the Greek (the dreaded language in which God chose to reveal the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ).

Azumos - Unleavend Bread.
Pascha - Passover.

These two Greek NT words are always associated with and synonymous with the Passover season.

Luke 22:1 Now the feast of unleavened bread (Azumos) drew nigh, which is called the Passover (Pascha).

There isn't any doubt in the koine what is being said here in Acts 12:3-4. Herod wanted to placate the Jews by causing minimal offence and enhance his image in their sight by waiting until after the Passover (which had already started) to kill Peter, a Jew by birth.

Granted in 1611 the 17th century reader knew this is/was the intent of Luke. Even then IMO it was not the wisest choice and certainly (again IMO) needs to be amended in modern versions so as to eliminate the confusion and strife it causes (as witnessed by this thread) and to bring it back to the koine intent for the 21st century English reader.

Last, Why revert to an ad hominem? Will it convince anyone?

HankD

 

The original writings are Greek, not English. One Greek word has many English words. One English word has many Greek words.

Right, I agree.

Was the Acts written in English?

My questions are not same:

Easter -- AFTER

Passover -- BEFORE

 

This argument continues to amaze me. The word use in the greek is translated passover. It does not translate into easter in any language. The translators decided to do this in the book of Acts. That does not make it right. Adios means goodbye, if a group of translators came along and wrote that it means hello that would not make it so. If those who desire to promote their Kjvo agenda keep up this insanity, then the reality is that no word ever has a definite meaning or translation. It is not the place of any group of translators to change the meaning of the original when they bring it into their language but to take great care to have a literal translation. In this case there is no literal translation, but a liberal one.

Bro Tony

 

I understand what you are saying T. My problem is that the word translate to passover not easter, whenever it was done, and by whoever did it.

Bro Tony

 

Nice dance step! Did you learn that at the KJVO School of Dance, by any chance?

You still can't accept that Easter is the wrong translation, can you, Askjo? Sad...

 

What part of Easter, 1. Resurrection Sunday, 2. The Jewish Passover (obsolete) don't you understand? </font>[/QUOTE]Ditto for you, TCassidy...extremely sad...you folks are shown repeatedly that the KJV has an unfortunate mistranslation in it, and yet you cannot accept the truth. By avowing that Easter is the correct translation, you are adding to the Scriptures something that was not found in early manuscripts...where will it end?

 

THank you T. Now if what you say is the case why only translate it easter in Acts and not in the other places in the New Testament. If what you say is true then the translators were not consistant in their translations. Thank you.

Bro Tony

 

Anti_Alexandrian: 6.Herod(an Edomite)was waiting for his pagan Easter(Ashtaroth,Astarte, Ishtar,Easter,whatever)--(1 Sam. 7:3; 1 Kings 11:5, 33; 2 Kings. 23:13; Jeremiah. 7:18; 44:18), rather than the Lord's Passover (Ex 12:27; Lev 23:5).

Sorry, A_A, you haven't studied your history very well. The names of Ishtar/Asherah/Ashteroth had long-been replaced by Pallas Athene/Minerva for the planet venus, and Aphrodite/luna for the moon. No one was worshipping any idol called Ishtar in Herod's time and place. Besides that, A_A, the Greek word 'pascha' meant ONLY PASSOVER when Luke wrote Acts.

 

quote:Originally posted by robycop3:
This has nothing to do with what I asked. I asked, "How was Herod involved in Easter when it didn't exist in his time?"I believe the rest of the readership here sees it's useless to Askjo because Jo won't answer. Askjo, you didn't answer my question at all...You failed to deal with the fact that EASTER DIDN'T EXIST in Luke's time. However, as a foe of KJVOism, I have answers of TRUTH to any KJVO legit questions.

Askjo:The original writings are Greek, not English. One Greek word has many English words. One English word has many Greek words.

I know that. Once again...the problem is that EASTER DID NOT EXIST when Luke wrote acts. Calling what Luke wrote by the name EASTER is equivalent to saying that in Acts 8 he was writing about an Ethiopian driving an automobile.


quote: Now...Care to try to deal with the fact that EASTER DIDN'T EXIST when Luke wrote Acts?

Was the Acts written in English?

Never said it was.

My questions are not same:

Easter -- AFTER

Passover -- BEFORE

Ya just don't wanna answer, do ya? Let the rest of the readers take note...Askjo simply WILL NOT deal with the fact that Easter didn't exist when Luke wrote Acts.

 

So let me see ifin I'm understanding you right...
So your saying even in spite of Scripture clearly showing the Edomite and Easter being contemporary,you still maintain your postion?

 

So, you believe all dictionaries are also incorrect when they give "the Jewish Passover" as an accepted secondary meaning of "easter" from the 8th century until the early 17th century?

And you are also saying that not only are the KJV translators idiots for making such a stupid mistake but also Tyndale (Tyndale Bible), Cranmer (the Great Bible), and Whittingham (the Geneva Bible), are equally wrong and "sad" for translating "pasXa" as "easter" (or a spelling variant thereof). And you are saying the Bishops' Bible is equally wrong and "sad" for recognizing what every good dictionary says, that "easter" was an accepted term meaning "passover" in the 8th through early 17th centuries?

And you are saying that the standard reference work on the English language, the Oxford English Dictionary is also wrong, and "sad" because it says that "easter" still meant "the Jewish Passover" in 1611?

And you are saying that one of the most respected publishers in American, Random House, is wrong for saying the same thing?

In fact, are you saying that anybody who actually knows what they are taking about, and can read a good dictionary, is wrong simply because they have proven you to not know what you are talking about? </font>[/QUOTE]Ah, another KJVO advocate who likes to misquote others and put words in their mouths! Is this something taught by the KJVO movement? Apparently it is, since so many KJVO adherants so frequently misrepresent what others have said. It is almost a given that a KJVO advocate will try to bend your words to suit their own misguided purpose. It is sad the extent to which you folks will misrepresent others when you have painted yourself into a corner, in the feeble hopes of making your own arguments seem true. It is sad that anyone cannot accept truth. And it is sad that so many people have fallen victim to the KJVO myth! Now, do you want to try to put some more words in my mouth?

 

Moderator note: This thread has passed the standard cut-off of page five. The topic is still active, but a great amount of name calling and personal attacks has crept in. Please refrain from such and discuss the issue, not each others characters based on their choice of interpretation.

Roger
C4K