KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE VS. MODERN ENGLISH BIBLES
- Thread starter KingJamesVersionBibleOnly
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Does it matter? If Easter is one-word term for such events today, does not mean that it should be put to the Bible back to times when it had not such meaning.
"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."
Acts 12:4, KJV
This is historically wrong. Because it was after Jewish Pasha, not after our today´s Easter.
If the KJV had "Paul was writing on his computer", it would be historically wrong. It does not matter that today it would be our term.
"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."
Acts 12:4, KJV
This is historically wrong. Because it was after Jewish Pasha, not after our today´s Easter.
If the KJV had "Paul was writing on his computer", it would be historically wrong. It does not matter that today it would be our term.
Mark 14:1 has "pascha", translated "passover" in the KJV. Acts 12:4 has "pascha", translated "Easter" in the KJV. Apparently there wasn't a different word for it; or if there was, it wasn't used in Acts 12:4.
There doesn't seem to be any text-based justification for the difference in translation. I would defer to a Greek scholar, but I strongly suspect they wouldn't find any difference either.
There doesn't seem to be any text-based justification for the difference in translation. I would defer to a Greek scholar, but I strongly suspect they wouldn't find any difference either.
1 John 4:16 God is love and He who lives in love lives in
God and God lives in Him.
This is all we need to know. Nowhere in scripture does it say
that he who know most is closest to God. Jesus scolded the
Pharisees often because they knew the laws inside out but
they did not know God. It is faith that saves us through grace
and KJV or any other version will tell us that. I have no idea
where it started that intellectualism is stronger than internalism
but it is wrong. Totally wrong. It is possible to know everything
about God and not know God. At the same time it is possible to
know little facts and yet live in the heart of God. Peter was wrong
9 times out of 10 about what Jesus said to him but still Jesus chose
Peter to feed His sheep. Jesus knew that Peter's faith would not
waver. It amuses me where pastors as televangelists tack the title
Dr. in front of their names as if to illustrate credibility. We need
to surrender to God completely and have a personal intimate relationship
with Him as the Holy Spirit is in us when we confidently accept Him.
You can know everything and be nothing to God and on the reverse side
of the coin have deep faith and be everything to God. It is absurd to
debate which bible will get you to that point.
God and God lives in Him.
This is all we need to know. Nowhere in scripture does it say
that he who know most is closest to God. Jesus scolded the
Pharisees often because they knew the laws inside out but
they did not know God. It is faith that saves us through grace
and KJV or any other version will tell us that. I have no idea
where it started that intellectualism is stronger than internalism
but it is wrong. Totally wrong. It is possible to know everything
about God and not know God. At the same time it is possible to
know little facts and yet live in the heart of God. Peter was wrong
9 times out of 10 about what Jesus said to him but still Jesus chose
Peter to feed His sheep. Jesus knew that Peter's faith would not
waver. It amuses me where pastors as televangelists tack the title
Dr. in front of their names as if to illustrate credibility. We need
to surrender to God completely and have a personal intimate relationship
with Him as the Holy Spirit is in us when we confidently accept Him.
You can know everything and be nothing to God and on the reverse side
of the coin have deep faith and be everything to God. It is absurd to
debate which bible will get you to that point.
Eostre, the ‘easter fertility goddess’ has her own celebration every March 21st, the spring equinox. That’s why Easter is different every year, as it’s celebrated after the first full moon after 3/21 on that following Sunday.
EOSTRE
Germanic Fertility Goddess
Also known as Ēostre, Ostara, Eastre
Spring Goddess of Fertility and bouncy bunny girl
She has her own festival on 21 March, the Spring Equinox, in which bouncing springy behavior is encouraged.
A Germanic goddess, EOSTRE was very popular with the Anglo-Saxon pagan brigade who worshipped her under the name — and kicked off the whole Easter business without a JESUS in sight. If you ever wondered what eggs and bunnies have to do with crucifixion and resurrection, the answer is: absolutely nothing.
EOSTRE’s sacred animal is a cute wittle wabbit — an obvious symbol of fertility — and the egg is her symbol of fertile purity. So Easter Egg hunts are actually packed with symbolic meanings of rebirth and renewal. And Elmer Fudd is obviously just a high priest of the Great Easter Bunny.
In case you think we’re being flippant, recent research suggests that EOSTREherself may have been invented during a mischievous moment by the Venerable St BEDE. This well-known monk mentioned her in connection with the pagan festival Eosturmonath in a book written in 750 A.D. — but extensive research has failed to find a trace of her prior to that. Could he possibly have been fibbing?
Rabbits and hares are ubiquitous in mythology. Every culture seems to have a rabbit god — and they’re nearly always trickster spirits. This, we feel, explains a lot. We also have a terrific theory explaining why stage magicians love doing tricks with eggs and rabbits. Was EOSTRE pulled out of a hat?
EOSTRE - the Germanic Goddess of Fertility (Germanic mythology)
EOSTRE
Germanic Fertility Goddess
Also known as Ēostre, Ostara, Eastre
Spring Goddess of Fertility and bouncy bunny girl
She has her own festival on 21 March, the Spring Equinox, in which bouncing springy behavior is encouraged.
A Germanic goddess, EOSTRE was very popular with the Anglo-Saxon pagan brigade who worshipped her under the name — and kicked off the whole Easter business without a JESUS in sight. If you ever wondered what eggs and bunnies have to do with crucifixion and resurrection, the answer is: absolutely nothing.
EOSTRE’s sacred animal is a cute wittle wabbit — an obvious symbol of fertility — and the egg is her symbol of fertile purity. So Easter Egg hunts are actually packed with symbolic meanings of rebirth and renewal. And Elmer Fudd is obviously just a high priest of the Great Easter Bunny.
In case you think we’re being flippant, recent research suggests that EOSTREherself may have been invented during a mischievous moment by the Venerable St BEDE. This well-known monk mentioned her in connection with the pagan festival Eosturmonath in a book written in 750 A.D. — but extensive research has failed to find a trace of her prior to that. Could he possibly have been fibbing?
Rabbits and hares are ubiquitous in mythology. Every culture seems to have a rabbit god — and they’re nearly always trickster spirits. This, we feel, explains a lot. We also have a terrific theory explaining why stage magicians love doing tricks with eggs and rabbits. Was EOSTRE pulled out of a hat?
EOSTRE - the Germanic Goddess of Fertility (Germanic mythology)
Last edited:
Albert Barnes...
Intending after Easter - There never was a more absurd or unhappy translation than this. The original is simply after the Passover (μετὰ τὸ πάσχα meta to pascha. The word "Easter" now denotes the festival observed by many Christian churches in honor of the resurrection of the Saviour. But the original has no reference to that, nor is there the slightest evidence that any such festival was observed at the time when this book was written. The translation is not only unhappy, as it does not convey at all the meaning of the original, but because it may contribute to foster an opinion that such a festival was observed in the time of the apostles. The word "Easter" is of Saxon origin, and is supposed to be derived from "Eostre," the goddess of Love, or the Venus of the North, in honor of whom a festival was celebrated by our pagan ancestors in the month of April (Webster). Since this festival coincided with the Passover of the Jews, and with the feast observed by Christians in honor of the resurrection of Christ, the name came to be used to denote the latter. In the old Anglo-Saxon service-books the term "Easter" is used frequently to translate the word "Passover." In the translation by Wycliffe, the word "paske," that is, "Passover," is used. But Tyndale and Coverdale used the word "Easter," and hence, it has very improperly crept into our King James Version.
Intending after Easter - There never was a more absurd or unhappy translation than this. The original is simply after the Passover (μετὰ τὸ πάσχα meta to pascha. The word "Easter" now denotes the festival observed by many Christian churches in honor of the resurrection of the Saviour. But the original has no reference to that, nor is there the slightest evidence that any such festival was observed at the time when this book was written. The translation is not only unhappy, as it does not convey at all the meaning of the original, but because it may contribute to foster an opinion that such a festival was observed in the time of the apostles. The word "Easter" is of Saxon origin, and is supposed to be derived from "Eostre," the goddess of Love, or the Venus of the North, in honor of whom a festival was celebrated by our pagan ancestors in the month of April (Webster). Since this festival coincided with the Passover of the Jews, and with the feast observed by Christians in honor of the resurrection of Christ, the name came to be used to denote the latter. In the old Anglo-Saxon service-books the term "Easter" is used frequently to translate the word "Passover." In the translation by Wycliffe, the word "paske," that is, "Passover," is used. But Tyndale and Coverdale used the word "Easter," and hence, it has very improperly crept into our King James Version.
True, yet the KJVO'er will only resort (robotically) to the same old rhetoric; "The KJV is the pure Word of God. It has no errors. God promised to preserve his word. Do you have a Bible you can call pure, one that isn't corrupt, preserved?" This instead of accepting that the version they use has translational issues and isn't by any means "perfect."