KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE VS. MODERN ENGLISH BIBLES

  • 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.

trofimus

Senior Member
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
"The word Easter does not appear to be derived from Ishtar, but from the German Eostre, the goddess of the dawn—a bringer of light. English and German are in the minority of languages that use a form of the word Easter to mark the holiday. Elsewhere, the observance is framed in Latin pascha, which in turn is derived from the Hebrew pesach, meaning of or associated with Passover."

https://blogs.scientificamerican.co...eyond-ishtar-the-tradition-of-eggs-at-easter/

So, this one hypothesis says that English word Easter is from a goddes called "bringer of light", in Latin, Lucifer.

I am not sure if its better than Ishtar of Babylon.
 
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
Thank you brother for challenging me on this. My eyes are starting to be opened to this thought.
A logical approach is to look at the time of the Passover celebration, there were multitudes of both Jews and Gentile proselytes present in Jerusalem. Herod knew that if he brought forth Peter to be killed before the assembled masses, they would have to make public the accusations laid against him. Peter might well preach a sermon in his defense. Peter had already preached sermons with the result that 3000 were converted at Pentecost and another 5000 on a later day. If several thousands more believed the preaching of Peter about Christ and the resurrection, he might well have a riot on his hands. Perhaps Herod thought it better to wait till the multitudes had gone home after the Passover week, and then deal with Peter in a quieter fashion.

It is not that Herod himself was celebrating an alleged "Ishtar", or the Jewish Passover or what would come to be called the Christian Easter. Rather, it is the Holy Ghost speaking here in Acts 12:4 and telling us what this Passover celebration would come to signify for the believers in a risen Lord Jesus Christ.
It's also where God gave the English name for the fulfillment of Passover in the English language. :)
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
24,707
13,391
113
You can do the research.
If you care go do your research.
I have done mine.
When you present an assertion with absolutely no evidence to support it, and then expect others to do the research to confirm or deny it, you are engaging in a logical fallacy called a burden of proof reversal. Nobody has any obligation to research your assertions. I could say, "The moon is made of green cheese. Prove me wrong!" It's the same principle. Saying that you have done your research is irrelevant. Your assertions will simply be ignored if you don't support them.

I read the examples and would hope someone would be so kind as to tell me the truth in the same manner as I tell others the truth.

I think that promoters of modern bibles hope that gentle kindness extends so far as to allow corruption in the churches.
I see the damage the corruption is causing and the love of God’s truth compels me to disturb the complacency of Christians today.

Also, readers are fully aware of the hypocrisy of the modern bible defenders on this thread, in that they are false accusers, mockers, etc...
I can easily see corruption (as you call it) in the KJV, so your charge of "false accusers, mockers, etc." falls flat. Further, you are given to making harsh accusations (usually false) and mocking others, so I take it whence it comes. Your contributions would be much more valuable if you didn't envelop them in vitriol. If you choose not to learn, you will be ignored... and eventually banned.
 

Joseppi

Senior Member
Jan 4, 2018
887
7
18
Thank you brother for challenging me on this. My eyes are starting to be opened to this thought.
A logical approach is to look at the time of the Passover celebration, there were multitudes of both Jews and Gentile proselytes present in Jerusalem. Herod knew that if he brought forth Peter to be killed before the assembled masses, they would have to make public the accusations laid against him. Peter might well preach a sermon in his defense. Peter had already preached sermons with the result that 3000 were converted at Pentecost and another 5000 on a later day. If several thousands more believed the preaching of Peter about Christ and the resurrection, he might well have a riot on his hands. Perhaps Herod thought it better to wait till the multitudes had gone home after the Passover week, and then deal with Peter in a quieter fashion.

It is not that Herod himself was celebrating an alleged "Ishtar", or the Jewish Passover or what would come to be called the Christian Easter. Rather, it is the Holy Ghost speaking here in Acts 12:4 and telling us what this Passover celebration would come to signify for the believers in a risen Lord Jesus Christ.
To further this thinking I suggest that Herod, who was involved in the murder of Jesus, was desiring to stem the growth of the Christian Church, as would also please Satan and the Jewish authorities, and so, considering the psychological effect of publically judging and condemning Peter the foremost apostle of the new sect, Herod was seeking for the church of Jesus to be in full audience observing his greatness and authority.
Note that later on Herod was instead the very one judged publically before many witnesses and died.

Thus the judgment of God upon Herod immensely furthered the public awareness of the authority of Jesus’ name.

Acts 12:1 Now about that time Herod the king stretched forth his hands to vex certain of the church.
Acts 12:2 And he killed James the brother of John with the sword.
Acts 12:3 And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.

Acts 12:4 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.

Notice that it’s “the people” not the Jews only that Herod desired to reveal his great authority to.

Acts 12:21 And upon a set day Herod, arrayed in royal apparel, sat upon his throne, and made an oration unto them.
Acts 12:22 And the people gave a shout, saying, It is the voice of a god, and not of a man.
Acts 12:23 And immediately the angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not God the glory: and he was eaten of worms, and gave up the ghost.
Acts 12:24 But the word of God grew and multiplied.

Notice how God judged Herod publically. And how he showed Herod’s heart was toward receiving the worship of the people.

So, I think it is clear that Easter suited Herod’s megalomania best since, the real enemy of Herod was the miracle worker Jesus of Nazareth, who wouldn’t stay dead.
 

MarcR

Senior Member
Feb 12, 2015
5,486
183
63
Easter comes from Eastre which means:

Ēostre or Ostara (Old English: Ēastre [æːɑstre], Northumbrian dialect Ēostre [eːostre]; Old High German: *Ôstara ) is a Germanic goddess who, by way of the Germanic month bearing her name (Northumbrian: Ēosturmōnaþ; West Saxon: Ēastermōnaþ; Old High German: Ôstarmânoth), is the namesake of the festival of Easter in some languages. 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 honor, but that this tradition had died out by his time, replaced by the Christian Paschal month, a celebration of the resurrection of Jesus.

Note 1 - The pagan connection can only be tied to ONE MAN'S writings (Bede). Only one person can be cited as tying Easter to anything pagan.

Note 2 - Even the one guy from the 8th century who claims that Easter was pagan in origin professes that even by the 8th century, that tradition had die out and it had been replaced by the Christain celebration of the resurrection of Jesus.

Note 3 - You guys that have bought into the Easter is a pagan holiday have been duped!
The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary makes no mention of Beade. Easter was honored in both England and in Saxony.

The PCBE indicates that the Saxon OEstre signified 'goddess of the east' which was an oblique reference to Astarte who in turn was derived from Ishtar. The Schaff Herzogg Encyclopedia has a very similar article. Both works are highly regarded 19th century Scholarship.
 
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
"The word Easter does not appear to be derived from Ishtar, but from the German Eostre, the goddess of the dawn—a bringer of light. English and German are in the minority of languages that use a form of the word Easter to mark the holiday. Elsewhere, the observance is framed in Latin pascha, which in turn is derived from the Hebrew pesach, meaning of or associated with Passover."

https://blogs.scientificamerican.co...eyond-ishtar-the-tradition-of-eggs-at-easter/

So, this one hypothesis says that English word Easter is from a goddes called "bringer of light", in Latin, Lucifer.

I am not sure if its better than Ishtar of Babylon.
That's just the webpages opinion. They didn't show any evidence, it's all speculation.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
24,707
13,391
113
If you would treat the Holy Bible as a legal document you wouldn’t casually accept modern perversions of scripture so humbly.
Fallacy: circular reasoning.
The poster claimed legalism was important and so I pointed out that if he thought so then why does he ignore corruption in the texts of modern bibles.
Your circular reasoning is this: "If you would treat the Holy Bible as a legal document"... If someone treats any book as a legal document and argues from that basis, they would see things differently. You assume the KJV is accurate, and then assert that people wouldn't accept different wordings simply because they differ from the KJV.

On the other hand modern bibles are admitted as being error ridden, and I have found corruption in them. So they can’t be legal documents.
Admitted by whom? Your focus on "legal documents" is irrelevant. Your findings of alleged corruption carry no more weight than anyone else's, but I'm quite happy to apply your very broad definition of "corrupt" to the KJV as well.

And, obviously bibles contradicting one another proves that collectively they can’t be scriptural.
So the KJV isn't scriptural either, because it contradicts the newer translations on many matters.
 
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary makes no mention of Beade. Easter was honored in both England and in Saxony.

The PCBE indicates that the Saxon OEstre signified 'goddess of the east' which was an oblique reference to Astarte who in turn was derived from Ishtar. The Schaff Herzogg Encyclopedia has a very similar article. Both works are highly regarded 19th century Scholarship.

Where are they getting "goddess of the east from"? Bede I would assume. Like I said that's just one citation by one man as proof that Easter is pagan. We are better off sticking to etymological evidence like John146 did instead of speculation based on one mans opinion.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
24,707
13,391
113
I can't see anything in the Greek, nor anything in Scripture to justify a different word for "Passover fulfilled" instead of simply, "Passover" in Acts 12. Use of the term "Easter" therefore appears to be anachronistic, regardless of the word's origin.
 

Joseppi

Senior Member
Jan 4, 2018
887
7
18
When you present an assertion with absolutely no evidence to support it, and then expect others to do the research to confirm or deny it, you are engaging in a logical fallacy called a burden of proof reversal. Nobody has any obligation to research your assertions. I could say, "The moon is made of green cheese. Prove me wrong!" It's the same principle. Saying that you have done your research is irrelevant. Your assertions will simply be ignored if you don't support them.
I reject your burden of proof argument.
There are reasons why I don’t show secular research.
One is, that the modern bible version lovers always wander off to trivial stuff to avoid the Authorized exposing of the corruption in the modern bibles.
Secondly, I know that all true research will exalt the text of the Authorized because, regardless as to whether people, including heathen scholars, believe its true or not, it is God’s book not man’s.
Thirdly, I have done my research as led by the Holy Ghost. And if others don’t do their own fairminded research then they aren’t going to listen to anything I tell them that is contrary to their bias’. They aren’t interested in truth at all.
Fourthly, I know the Holy Ghost always helps me tell the truth.
I can easily see corruption (as yocall it) in the KJV, so your charge of "false accusers, mockers, etc." falls flat. Further, you are given to making harsh accusations (usually false) and mocking others, so I take it whence it comes. Your contributions would be much more valuable if you didn't envelop them in vitriol. If you choose not to learn, you will be ignored... and eventually banned.
I want to wake folks up to truth.
I am sure that I should grow to be a kinder, wiser, man. And I like to get others to respond to their best so as to reveal the weakness and lack of depth in their arguments against faith in the Authorized Holy Bible. It’s probably a fault of mine.
But, my experience is that nevertheless, God will not let anyone off the hook that denies truth and promotes corrupt bibles, even if the try to claim the messenger is the problem.
 

MarcR

Senior Member
Feb 12, 2015
5,486
183
63
"The word Easter does not appear to be derived from Ishtar, but from the German Eostre, the goddess of the dawn—a bringer of light. English and German are in the minority of languages that use a form of the word Easter to mark the holiday. Elsewhere, the observance is framed in Latin pascha, which in turn is derived from the Hebrew pesach, meaning of or associated with Passover."

https://blogs.scientificamerican.co...eyond-ishtar-the-tradition-of-eggs-at-easter/

So, this one hypothesis says that English word Easter is from a goddes called "bringer of light", in Latin, Lucifer.

I am not sure if its better than Ishtar of Babylon.

I agree that there ia no DIRECT etymological link between Easter and Ishtar.

Both the Popular and Critical Bible Encyclopedia and the Schaff Herzogg Encyclopedia agree that easter is derived from the Saxon Oestre; but, unlike your source, both agree that Oestre signifies goddess of the EAST NOT goddess of the DAWN.

They both go on to associate the goddess of the EAST with Astarte of the Greeks, Artamis of Ephesis.

It is Astarte that is linked with Ishtar. Hence there is a connection of Easter with Ishtar; but it is very indirect.
 

trofimus

Senior Member
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
I agree that there ia no DIRECT etymological link between Easter and Ishtar.

Both the Popular and Critical Bible Encyclopedia and the Schaff Herzogg Encyclopedia agree that easter is derived from the Saxon Oestre; but, unlike your source, both agree that Oestre signifies goddess of the EAST NOT goddess of the DAWN.

They both go on to associate the goddess of the EAST with Astarte of the Greeks, Artamis of Ephesis.

It is Astarte that is linked with Ishtar. Hence there is a connection of Easter with Ishtar; but it is very indirect.
How would Greek goddess got into the language of Germans and not to any other language along the road from Greece?

Also, how is East to be Greece for Germans?

BTW now I wondered about the name of Austria and I found this:

"The name "Austria" is a latinization of German Österreich (that is, the spelling of the name Austria approximates, for the benefit of Latin speakers, the sound of the German name Österreich). This has led to much confusion as German Ost is "east", but Latin auster is "south"."


If it was influenced by Latin and not by German, it could mean South.
 
Last edited:
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
I can't see anything in the Greek, nor anything in Scripture to justify a different word for "Passover fulfilled" instead of simply, "Passover" in Acts 12. Use of the term "Easter" therefore appears to be anachronistic, regardless of the word's origin.
You want see anything in the Greek to justify it. The KJV just used a different word to talk about the same event. In my opinion, they used it to denote the one time that passover was mentioned after it had been fulfilled.... they got the word from Wycliffe and Luther, both used their languages version of Easter to denote passover in all forms - fulfilled or not fulfilled.

Luke 2:41—This passage refers to a Passover festival before the Resurrection, using pascha (πάσχα).
Wycliffe—And his fadir and modir wenten ech yeer in to Jerusalem, in the solempne dai of pask.
Luther—Und seine Eltern gingen alle Jahre gen Jerusalem auf das Osterfest.
Tyndale—And his father and mother went to Hierusalem every yeare at the feeste of ester.
KJV—Now his parents went to Jerusalem every year at the feast of the passover.
 

Joseppi

Senior Member
Jan 4, 2018
887
7
18
Your circular reasoning is this: "If you would treat the Holy Bible as a legal document"... If someone treats any book as a legal document and argues from that basis, they would see things differently. You assume the KJV is accurate, and then assert that people wouldn't accept different wordings simply because they differ from the KJV.
I responded to a claim that legalism matter so I gave an example.
I understand your circular reasoning argument.
I know that most people imagine it’s ok to think of scripture as under man’s control, but the legal facts prove that scripture is of God and must be secured by God lest the legal status of his Bible is ruined.
He will never allow that.
Admitted by whom? Your focus on "legal documents" is irrelevant. Your findings of alleged corruption carry no more weight than anyone else's, but I'm quite happy to apply your very broad definition of "corrupt" to the KJV as well.
Arguing against my person won’t help you.
The problem you confront is that the Authorized is truly Authorized by God.
It will not fall when you attack it, instead you will fail and fall. And if that occurs it’s on you alone because the Holy Ghost is willing to teach you better.

[/quote]So the KJV isn't scriptural either, because it contradicts the newer translations on many matters.[/QUOTE]The Authorized is the scripture of God.