As I said, you must believe the English corrects the Greek. No way you can worm your way out of it.
The whole KJVO mess is based upon half-truths, innuendo and mental and linguistic gymnastics such as this.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
scriptural case for or against KJV-only
- Thread starter Logos1560
- Start date
- Status
As I said, you must believe the English corrects the Greek. No way you can worm your way out of it.
The whole KJVO mess is based upon half-truths, innuendo and mental and linguistic gymnastics such as this.
Well, I do not know Greek, but I know the same Greek word is often translated as many different English words in the scriptures. Even a casual search of nearly any word in Strong's Concordance will show this.
For example, the word "prison" in Acts 12:4 is variously translated as the words, prison, watch, imprisonment, hold, cage, and ward.
I am not a translator, but I imagine translators have to consider many factors when translating a word. In the case of Easter in Acts 12:4, it is not possible this could have been the Passover, because Peter was taken during the Feast of Unleavened Bread and Passover was past. I believe the KJB translators knew this was speaking of Easter, a pagan celebration of the time.
It's more of a problem for you, if it must be translated Passover, then you have the problem of the Passover following the Feast of Unleavened Bread, which is not possible.
I'll bet you conveniently overlook that. :thumbsup:
A straight forward reading of the passage creates no problem for me.
Here is the definition from the Complete Word Study Dictionary New Testament
G3957
πάσχα
páscha; neut. noun transliterated from the Hebr. pesach (H6453), to pass over, spare. The Passover, an exemption, immunity (Sept.: Exo_12:11, Exo_12:21). The great sacrifice and festival of the Jews which was instituted in commemoration of God's sparing the Jews when He destroyed the firstborn of the Egyptians. It was celebrated on the fourteenth day of the month Nisan. For the institution and particular laws of this festival see Ex. 12; Lev_23:5; Num_9:2-6. The later Jews made some additions. In particular they drank four cups of wine at various intervals during the paschal supper. The third of these cups, called the cup of benediction, is referred to in 1Co_10:16 (cf. Mat_26:27). In the NT, tó páscha, the Passover, may refer to the festival or to the paschal lamb.
(I) The paschal lamb, a year-old lamb or kid, slain as a sacrifice (Sept.: Exo_12:27). According to Josephus, the number of lambs sacrificed at Jerusalem in his time was 256,500. They were slain between the ninth and eleventh hour, which is from 3:00 to 5:00 p.m. Metaphorically used of Christ (1Co_5:7).
(II) Páscha also referred to the paschal supper as the commencement of the seven day festival of unleavened bread called tá ázuma (G106). See Exo_12:15 ff.; Lev_23:5 ff.
(A) It was used of the paschal supper alone (Mat_26:18 meaning to keep or celebrate the paschal supper). Heb_11:28 means that Moses instituted and kept the Passover (Sept.: Exo_12:48; Num_9:4 ff.).
(B) In a wider sense it also included the seven days of unleavened bread, the paschal festival (Mat_26:2; Mar_14:1; Luk_2:41; Luk_22:1; Joh_2:13, Joh_2:23; Joh_6:4; Joh_11:55; Joh_12:1; Joh_13:1; Joh_18:39; Joh_19:14; Act_12:4). The whole Passover is sometimes called the Feast of Unleavened Bread. See ázumos (G106), unleavened; arníon (G721), lamb; amnós (G286), sacrificial lamb; arḗn (G704), lamb.
(C) The expression "to eat the passover" means to keep the festival (Mat_26:17; Mar_14:12, Mar_14:14; Luk_22:11, Luk_22:15; Joh_18:28; Sept.: Exo_12:43 [cf. 2Ch_30:18]); "to make ready the passover" (a.t.) means to prepare for eating (Mat_26:19; Mar_14:16; Luk_22:8, Luk_22:13); to kill the passover (Mar_14:12; Luk_22:7; Sept.: Exo_12:21; Deu_16:2, Deu_16:5-6).
The Strong's Concordance is connected with the KJV, and therefore must include "Easter" in its definition.
G3957
πάσχα
pascha
pas'-khah
Of Chaldee origin (compare [H6453]); the Passover (the meal, the day, the festival or the special sacrifices connected with it): - Easter, Passover.
This would only be a problem for those who elevate the KJV to an idolatrous state.
Oh, so anyone who believes the KJB is the word of God is an idolator?
Is someone who believes the MVs are the word of God an idolator?
Just want to see if you have a double standard.
You forgot a couple of other important ones.
Ezekial 45:21
In the first month, in the fourteenth day of the month, ye shall have the passover, a feast of seven days; unleavened bread shall be eaten.
Luke 22:1
Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover.
We see here that it is not wrong to call the entire seven day feast of unleavened bread passover. Herod was looking to please the Jews. They would not have cared if Herod had someone killed on some pagan celebration that they had no part in, but they would not have been pleased if Herod had killed Peter during the week long passover feast - they would not have been able to participate. I will take what the Bible actually says over your man made theories.
Luke 22:1 and Acts 12:4
Your claims are what is wrong, and they do not deal with all the facts. You ignore the fact that the Greek word used at Acts 12:4 was used to include the feast of unleaved bread.
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, the above KJV-only statements 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.”
The pre-1611 English Bibles had used the rendering "Easter" to refer to the Jewish Passover. The 1535 Coverdale's Bible even used "Easter" in several Old Testament verses including at Ezekiel 45:21.
You have presented no sound evidence that suggests that any early English Bibles used "Easter" to refer to some "pagan festival."
The immediate context of Acts 12:4 demonstrated that king Herod was aware that his earlier action “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 verse or context does not say that Herod was keeping or observing pascha. “The people” of Acts 12:4 would be referring to or be including the Jews mentioned in verse 3. 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. Therefore, the context supports the understanding that the Jews would be the ones keeping the pascha instead of the view that Herod was keeping it. If Herod was also keeping it, the context indicates that it was the Jewish pascha that he was keeping and not some pagan festival. 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 12:4 is in agreement with the understanding that this Greek word was used in the same sense as in Luke 22:1. KJV-only author Floyd Jones asserted that “the context is the decisive factor for determining the final connotation of any word or phrase” (Which Version, p. 14). If there remains any uncertainty concerning how the word pascha was used at Acts 12:4, it should be translated and interpreted by the light of what is plain, clear, and certain as in Luke 22:1.
Is it not sound reasoning to consider Luke and the Holy Spirit competent and credible witnesses as to the sense in which the Holy Spirit used the word pascha at Luke 22:1 and Acts 12:4?
Your claims are what is wrong, and they do not deal with all the facts. You ignore the fact that the Greek word used at Acts 12:4 was used to include the feast of unleaved bread.
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, the above KJV-only statements 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.”
The pre-1611 English Bibles had used the rendering "Easter" to refer to the Jewish Passover. The 1535 Coverdale's Bible even used "Easter" in several Old Testament verses including at Ezekiel 45:21.
You have presented no sound evidence that suggests that any early English Bibles used "Easter" to refer to some "pagan festival."
The immediate context of Acts 12:4 demonstrated that king Herod was aware that his earlier action “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 verse or context does not say that Herod was keeping or observing pascha. “The people” of Acts 12:4 would be referring to or be including the Jews mentioned in verse 3. 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. Therefore, the context supports the understanding that the Jews would be the ones keeping the pascha instead of the view that Herod was keeping it. If Herod was also keeping it, the context indicates that it was the Jewish pascha that he was keeping and not some pagan festival. 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 12:4 is in agreement with the understanding that this Greek word was used in the same sense as in Luke 22:1. KJV-only author Floyd Jones asserted that “the context is the decisive factor for determining the final connotation of any word or phrase” (Which Version, p. 14). If there remains any uncertainty concerning how the word pascha was used at Acts 12:4, it should be translated and interpreted by the light of what is plain, clear, and certain as in Luke 22:1.
Is it not sound reasoning to consider Luke and the Holy Spirit competent and credible witnesses as to the sense in which the Holy Spirit used the word pascha at Luke 22:1 and Acts 12:4?
So, wanting people to be accurate in stating what the KJV teaches = hating the KJV? Although I consult many other English translations (some older than the KJV and some newer than the KJV), the KJV is my main study bible - it has been for many years and I don't see that changing.
Disagreeing with a KJV-only theory does not suggest that anyone hates the KJV as you incorrectly and improperly claim.
My view of Bible translation is actually the same view as that held by the KJV translators themselves. I grew reading the KJV and still use it, and if I have any bias, it would be for the KJV, not against it. I accept the KJV as what it actually is: a translation of the Scriptures in the same sense and way that the pre-1611 English Bibles such as the 1560 Geneva Bible are and later English translations such as the NKJV are.
I do not appreciate your attempt to accuse me falsely of hating the KJV.
Luke 22:1 and Acts 12:4
Are you claiming that Luke 22:1 in the KJV is translated incorrectly? Are you conveniently overlooking Luke 22:1?
Luke 22:1
Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover.
While the one day of passover was over, the seven days of the feast of unleavened bread that is also called passover was not over. It is possible that the word passover was used to include the feast of unleavened bread just like it was used at Luke 22:1 and Ezekiel 45:21. Luke 22:1 proves that it is possible and that your assertion is incorrect.
The godly translators of the 1560 Geneva Bible had no problem with correctly translating the Greek word at Acts 12:4 as "passover" in agreement with how it was also used at other verses.
Your incorrect claims have been answered and refuted by Luke 22:1 and Ezekiel 45:21.
Are you claiming that Luke 22:1 in the KJV is translated incorrectly? Are you conveniently overlooking Luke 22:1?
Luke 22:1
Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover.
While the one day of passover was over, the seven days of the feast of unleavened bread that is also called passover was not over. It is possible that the word passover was used to include the feast of unleavened bread just like it was used at Luke 22:1 and Ezekiel 45:21. Luke 22:1 proves that it is possible and that your assertion is incorrect.
The godly translators of the 1560 Geneva Bible had no problem with correctly translating the Greek word at Acts 12:4 as "passover" in agreement with how it was also used at other verses.
Your incorrect claims have been answered and refuted by Luke 22:1 and Ezekiel 45:21.
Do you not think that the King James translators knew this word pascha was normally translated passover? They translated this word as passover 28 times in the scriptures, this is the one exception.
There was an ancient pagan celebration for Astarte or Eastre, this celebration occured at almost the same time as the Passover. This is Easter, not the Christian celebration.
http://christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-t020.html
You sure could fool me.
That's a serious charge to make against fellow Christians. You should think carefully before making such a charge.
Why not?
No one worships the scriptures.
What if it is? How would you answer that?
Nah, there's a serious problem when you hate one version like this.
From the same website:
The book of Acts was originally written in the Greek language by the Christian Gentile and physician Luke. The Greek word that the King James Version translates as “Easter” is most certainly not the name “Easter,” it is actually the word “Pascha” (Hebrew: Pesach) which means “Passover”—
http://christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-t019.html
If you have been fooled it is your own fault. . The fact that you cannot accept clearly made statements and logical arguments for a position as anything but hate is not my fault.
We should, as we grow in Christ, be able to discern between good and evil.
Heb 5:13 For everyone who partakes only of milk is not accustomed to the word of righteousness, for he is an infant.
Heb 5:14 But solid food is for the mature, who because of practice have their senses trained to discern good and evil. (NASB)
What that means is being careful, as I have been, in making judgments concerning these kinds of issues. The KJVO crowd are guilty of idolatry because of the way they have elevated this one translation. It goes beyond the acceptable confession regarding Scripture. The common statement of faith concerning the Bible is to confess a belief in sufficiency and inerrancy concerning the original manuscripts. What the KJVO-ist does is claim the work of men are on par with the works of God. It assumes that God's work was not done when John wrote Revelation and He again inspired men in the early 1600's to rewrite His Word.
KJV preferred do not cross the line for the obvious reason, they have a personal preference while not claiming inerrancy. Further, they do not generally claim other translations are evil and the people that prefer them are evil.
No translation is perfect. Why? Because they are works of men.
Actually it was not an exception in most of the pre-1611 English Bibles of which the KJV was a revision. The pre-1611 English Bibles except for the 1560 Geneva Bible had used "Easter" as a rendering to refer to the Jewish Passover several times.
There is also solid historical evidence from the 1600's that indicates that the majority of the KJV translators may not have been responsible for the rendering “Easter” at this verse and thus they may not have made an exception at Acts 12:4 as you assumed or claimed. Instead they likely supported the Geneva Bible’s rendering “Passover.” Just as the KJV translators changed the Bishops’ Bible’s two other uses of “Easter” at John 11:55 to “Passover,” they may have also changed this third use at Acts 12:4.
In a book printed in 1671 based on a manuscript written by Henry Jessey (1601-1663) earlier, Edward Whiston indicated that a great prelate, the chief supervisor of the KJV, inserted “Easter” back into the text of the KJV at this verse as one of the 14 changes he was said to have made (Life and Death of Mr. Henry Jessey, p. 49). In his 1648 sermon entitled “Truth and Love,“ Thomas Hill also noted that Acts 12:4 “was another place that was altered (as you have heard) to keep up that holy time of Easter, as they would think it” (Six Sermons, p. 25).
Was the goal of inserting the rendering “Easter” back into the text at this verse in order to present faithfully the meaning of the Greek word in English or was it intended to give the readers a different meaning? In his volume on Acts in his An Interpretation of the English Bible, B. H. Carroll observed: “Pious Episcopalians and Romanists use this verse of the A. V. to confirm their custom of celebrating Easter” (p. 184). James Woolsey asserted: “To support, from the Scripture, the idea of Easter-Sunday and Easter-day, they suppress the original word which the Holy Ghost moved the inspired penman to use, and employed the Saxon word Easter” (Doctrine, p. 93). Concerning “Easter” at Acts 12:4, James Edmunds and T. S. Bell commented: “The excuse is, that by this utter disregard of what the Holy Spirit really said, the solemn feasts of the Church are sustained” (Discussion, p. 33). The evidence that this rendering was inserted for the purpose of keeping up the Church of England’s celebration of the holy time of Easter should be an embarrassment to those who claim to be defending faithful and accurate translating.
In addition to the evidence in the 1560 Geneva Bible, there are other writings or books made by believers that demonstrate that believers in the 1600's still considered the Greek word at Acts 12:4 to refer to the Jewish passover. 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.”
The Jews did not celebrate any ancient pagan festival in Acts 12, and the context indicates that it was likely the Jews that were the ones that were observing the feast of unleavened bread called the Passover.
You present no evidence that demonstrates that King Herod would deliberately seek to displease the Jews by observing a pagan festival. You are ignoring or skipping over the evidence from the context that was presented earlier. Furthermore, the known historical evidence indicates that this King Herod attempted to please the Jews and attempted to keep some Jewish customs.
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).
It is time that you face the facts. Your claims and arguments have been answered and refuted.
You have not refuted me, but actually support my argument. What you posted verifies that the King James translators indeed made an exception at this one point. The controversy is over the reason why. You say to support the Episcopalians and Catholics, but that is the very question up for debate.
Here is an interesting article showing this very controversy has existed for years.
http://midacts.net/easter/
And to say the Jews did not celebrate pagan festivals is absurd, God condemned the Jews for pouring out drink offerings to the "Queen of Heaven" This was Astarte, from where we get "Easter".
Jer 44:16 As for the word that thou hast spoken unto us in the name of the LORD, we will not hearken unto thee.
17 But we will certainly do whatsoever thing goeth forth out of our own mouth, to burn incense unto the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, as we have done, we, and our fathers, our kings, and our princes, in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem: for then had we plenty of victuals, and were well, and saw no evil.
You say the king would not do this, the word of God says different.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Status