Your Bible translation

[Tinkerbell725]

pascha does not mean "dawn"

Luke used an Hebrew word - not a Greek word meaning dawn - and the word he used means "to pass over"

Whether "Πάσχα" should be Passover or Easter at Acts 12:4 must be determined by discerning who is using the word in this instance. If the word is used by a Jew, then the word would mean Passover. If the word is used by Herod, then the word would mean Passover or perhaps a pagan festival (although the possibility of "Πάσχα" referring to a pagan festival has no basis in history or etymology).



At the time of Luke's writing, "Πάσχα" at Acts 12:4 was no longer the Passover but Easter. When Luke speaks in Acts 12:4 as narrator, he is using words according to the mutual Christian perspective of himself and his readers. This is evident because he uses the word "church" (εκκλησία) at Acts 12:1 to refer to Christians

 

[Blik]

it is not worth it to me to sacrifice the truth in order to preserve the kjv.

I so agree. It is the truth in the Lord we look for, and that is best found, I feel sure, in the original language God first used to give us truth. All the other is translation and there is truth in all of them for all transcribers were doing their best to give us God's truth. We follow God, not some interpretation of Him. That language was Hebrew, for even if it was written in Greek God's word was written by men who had been raised Hebrew and thought in that language.

 

[Tinkerbell725]

Mystery, Babylon the Great, The Mother of Harlots and Abominations of the Earth..is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird...and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication...Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.” Revelation 17:2-5; 18:2-4

Note: You can also listen to a teaching video on Youtube regarding Proof the ESV, NIV, NASB etc. are the new Vatican Versions -

I have a copy of the Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece 27th edition right here in front of me. It is the same Greek text as the UBS (United Bible Society) 4th edition. These are the Greek readings and texts that are followed by such modern versions as the ESV, NIV, NASB, Holman Standard AND the new Catholic versions like the St. Joseph New American Bible 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible 1985 AND the Jehovah Witness New World Translation.

If you have a copy of the Nestle-Aland 27th edition, open the book and read what they tell us in their own words on page 45 of the Introduction. Here these critical Greek text editors tell us about how the Greek New Testament (GNT, now known as the UBS) and the Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece grew together and shared the same basic text.In the last paragraph on page 45 we read these words:

"The text shared by these two editions was adopted internationally by Bible Societies, and FOLLOWING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE VATICAN AND THE UNITED BIBLE SOCIETIES IT HAS SERVED AS THE BASIS FOR NEW TRANSLATIONS AND FOR REVISIONS MADE UNDER THEIR SUPERVISION. THIS MARKS A SIGNIFICANT STEP WITH REGARD TO INTERCONFESSIONAL RELATIONSHIPS.



IT SHOULD NATURALLY BE UNDERSTOOD THAT THIS TEXT IS A WORKING TEXT: IT IS NOT TO BE CONSIDERED AS DEFINITIVE, BUT A STIMULUS TO FURTHER EFFORTS TOWARDS DEFINING AND VERIFYING THE TEXT of the New Testament."

There it is folks, in their own words. They openly admit that this text is the result of an agreement between the Vatican and the UBS and that the text itself is not "definitive" - it can change, as it already has and will do so in the future, and is not the infallible words of God but merely "a stimulus to further efforts".

 

[Dino246]

Mystery, Babylon the Great, The Mother of Harlots and Abominations of the Earth..is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird...and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication...Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.” Revelation 17:2-5; 18:2-4

Note: You can also listen to a teaching video on Youtube regarding Proof the ESV, NIV, NASB etc. are the new Vatican Versions -

I have a copy of the Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece 27th edition right here in front of me. It is the same Greek text as the UBS (United Bible Society) 4th edition. These are the Greek readings and texts that are followed by such modern versions as the ESV, NIV, NASB, Holman Standard AND the new Catholic versions like the St. Joseph New American Bible 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible 1985 AND the Jehovah Witness New World Translation.

If you have a copy of the Nestle-Aland 27th edition, open the book and read what they tell us in their own words on page 45 of the Introduction. Here these critical Greek text editors tell us about how the Greek New Testament (GNT, now known as the UBS) and the Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece grew together and shared the same basic text.In the last paragraph on page 45 we read these words:

"The text shared by these two editions was adopted internationally by Bible Societies, and FOLLOWING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE VATICAN AND THE UNITED BIBLE SOCIETIES IT HAS SERVED AS THE BASIS FOR NEW TRANSLATIONS AND FOR REVISIONS MADE UNDER THEIR SUPERVISION. THIS MARKS A SIGNIFICANT STEP WITH REGARD TO INTERCONFESSIONAL RELATIONSHIPS.



IT SHOULD NATURALLY BE UNDERSTOOD THAT THIS TEXT IS A WORKING TEXT: IT IS NOT TO BE CONSIDERED AS DEFINITIVE, BUT A STIMULUS TO FURTHER EFFORTS TOWARDS DEFINING AND VERIFYING THE TEXT of the New Testament."

There it is folks, in their own words. They openly admit that this text is the result of an agreement between the Vatican and the UBS and that the text itself is not "definitive" - it can change, as it already has and will do so in the future, and is not the infallible words of God but merely "a stimulus to further efforts".

Still more fear mongering.

 

[tanakh]

For the past few years I have gone back to using the KJV which is the Bible I grew up with. I have no other reason for using it apart from
my copy belonged to my Mother and has a sentimental value. I do have several other translations which I use from time to time

 

[tanakh]

Mystery, Babylon the Great, The Mother of Harlots and Abominations of the Earth..is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird...and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication...Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.” Revelation 17:2-5; 18:2-4

Note: You can also listen to a teaching video on Youtube regarding Proof the ESV, NIV, NASB etc. are the new Vatican Versions -

I have a copy of the Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece 27th edition right here in front of me. It is the same Greek text as the UBS (United Bible Society) 4th edition. These are the Greek readings and texts that are followed by such modern versions as the ESV, NIV, NASB, Holman Standard AND the new Catholic versions like the St. Joseph New American Bible 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible 1985 AND the Jehovah Witness New World Translation.

If you have a copy of the Nestle-Aland 27th edition, open the book and read what they tell us in their own words on page 45 of the Introduction. Here these critical Greek text editors tell us about how the Greek New Testament (GNT, now known as the UBS) and the Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece grew together and shared the same basic text.In the last paragraph on page 45 we read these words:

"The text shared by these two editions was adopted internationally by Bible Societies, and FOLLOWING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE VATICAN AND THE UNITED BIBLE SOCIETIES IT HAS SERVED AS THE BASIS FOR NEW TRANSLATIONS AND FOR REVISIONS MADE UNDER THEIR SUPERVISION. THIS MARKS A SIGNIFICANT STEP WITH REGARD TO INTERCONFESSIONAL RELATIONSHIPS.



IT SHOULD NATURALLY BE UNDERSTOOD THAT THIS TEXT IS A WORKING TEXT: IT IS NOT TO BE CONSIDERED AS DEFINITIVE, BUT A STIMULUS TO FURTHER EFFORTS TOWARDS DEFINING AND VERIFYING THE TEXT of the New Testament."

There it is folks, in their own words. They openly admit that this text is the result of an agreement between the Vatican and the UBS and that the text itself is not "definitive" - it can change, as it already has and will do so in the future, and is not the infallible words of God but merely "a stimulus to further efforts".

As far as I know none of the versions quoted contain the Apocryphal books so they are not officially recommended by the Vatican.
I note that the JW New world translation is included in the list which I find unbelievable considering the Watchtower view of the Catholic Chuch!

 

[Tinkerbell725]

As far as I know none of the versions quoted contain the Apocryphal books so they are not officially recommended by the Vatican.
I note that the JW New world translation is included in the list which I find unbelievable considering the Watchtower view of the Catholic Chuch!

They don't have to actually recommend officially. The fact that the catholics are involved, there is something going on. I would rather chose a version translated by people not friends with vatican. The text they used as basis is a suspicious text.

 

[tanakh]

Still more fear mongering.

If this site is to be believed no Bible is safe from ''them'' who try to undermine it. If ever an original manuscript were found
signed by its Author I suspect someone would say it was forged. Perhaps there should be a Paranoid translation published to
satisfy those who distrust all the others

 

[calibob]

I've always used the NIV and NLT, but have started getting into the ESV. I find it hard to settle on one main translation (I know the advice is ususally to have one for devotional and reading, and refer to others). So I'm curious, what do you use and why? Have you changed translation, and why? Please note I'm not interested in a debate about translations, I think they're all good.

1611 kjv for memory verses and niv for reading paragraphs. I started with kjv but the language is so odd I can't read it like a normal book. I prefer niv but the odd language makes verses easier to memorize and on tv or movies it's quoted most often. I have a study partner and we read both together 1 chapter at a time and discuss the differences.

 

[calibob]

I used to read verse by verse, Catholic prayer book or topical style. It's far to easy for me to get off track and out of context that way. now I read paragraph by paragraph like people really speak. After all the Lord didn't have a stenographer taking dictation. That's why the 4 Gospels are different.

 

[John146]

The Holy Spirit has led me to finding that there is a serious problem with the KJV. You have the spirit of the Lord, I have the spirit of the Lord.

It was through my search to find what the Lord wants of my attitude toward the Jewish religion, for they deny Christ. As a searched I found I was to respect them and not judge them. I found that during the translation done of the KJV, the world did not believe this, and that version of the bible reflects that as expressed in their translation of the word Passover with the word Easter expresses.

My conclusion is that the Holy Spirit uses what scripture and any other that we test to be certain it is truth, and it tests this for us. It does not mean we are not to study.

If you had put all truth in your mind and it had retained all scripture, the Holy Spirit would use that information for you.

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 the risen Lord Jesus Christ.

The KJB is accurate, in that it uses the word "passover" BEFORE the death and resurrection of Christ and then "Easter" the only time the word occurs in the book of Acts AFTER His resurrection. The only time the word is used in the New Testament referring to a Post-Resurrection time line is in Acts 12:4 where the King James Bible correctly has translated this Greek word as Easter.

The passover was a type of the true lamb of God who delivers His people out of the bondage of sin. Yet in the Jewish passover, there is no type of the resurrection, only the death of the lamb. The main theme of the preaching in Acts is the glorious resurrection of the lamb of God, Jesus Christ.

The Holy Ghost is speaking through the Gentile Christian named Luke here in Acts 12, and he is referring to this event as the Christian Paska, which became known in English as Easter.

Does not the same thing occur in Scripture with what was previously called the "passover meal"? The Holy Ghost, speaking through Paul, now refers to the "passover meal" as "The Lord's Supper" in 1 Corinthians 11:20. It is no longer celebrated only once a year but can be celebrated as many times a year as we wish. See 1 Corinthians 11:26. But only once a year do we celebrate the resurrection, and in English and many other languages, this event is called Easter.

 

[cv5]

sure sounds to me like you're arguing for reading the Bible in its original languages, not English
the 'correct words' IMO would be the ones in the language it was written, not this language we are speaking, a language of a people in the ends of the earth, almost as far away from Israel as you can get on a globe.

some of the differences are stemming from differences between the septuagint vs masoretic texts. for me this is the biggest hurdle, because i'm not qualified to judge between them. but they are not differences that change the gospel or change the truth -- typically, what i do is try to understand the Christology of a passage that seems to vary a lot between translations. then, if one source seems to agree with the Christology and the other seems to confound it, i consider that to be evidence that the one supporting the Christology is the correct one.
i look at passages that seem to vary greatly in translation as treasures; something amazing is in them, speaking of Christ - something difficult to understand and very much worth digging out. my faith isn't challenged by such things; quite the opposite, i'm excited by them! it means i've found a wonderful thing, to meditate on.

"masoretic texts"

These texts have unquestionably been altered. Throw this version in the trash can IMO.

 

[cv5]

http://www.kjvtoday.com/home/easter-or-passover-in-acts-124

View attachment 198465

Hmmmm. All of the Bible versions that I checked erroneously use the term translated to "Easter".
Interesting. Nothing to be overly exited about. Decent scholarship has ferreted out all of the anomalies.

 

[posthuman]

Whether "Πάσχα" should be Passover or Easter at Acts 12:4 must be determined by discerning who is using the word in this instance. If the word is used by a Jew, then the word would mean Passover. If the word is used by Herod, then the word would mean Passover or perhaps a pagan festival (although the possibility of "Πάσχα" referring to a pagan festival has no basis in history or etymology).



At the time of Luke's writing, "Πάσχα" at Acts 12:4 was no longer the Passover but Easter. When Luke speaks in Acts 12:4 as narrator, he is using words according to the mutual Christian perspective of himself and his readers. This is evident because he uses the word "church" (εκκλησία) at Acts 12:1 to refer to Christians

that is very, very weak argument.

Luke used exactly the same word pascha all throughout the gospel of Luke.
Herod was raised as a Jew. his parents were proselyte Jews.
Acts 12:1 -- Herod is vexing the church, not embracing it.
Acts 12:2 -- Herod puts James to death, not Herod is celebrating the church.
Acts 12:3 -- Herod sees that this pleases the Jews -- so he goes further to continue to please the Jews -- and take Peter. Herod is decidedly on the side of the Jews, not on the side of the Christian church, so it is ludicrous to say the context implies Ishtar is the correct translation of Pascha here.
Acts 12:3 -- it was the time of the days of unleavened bread -- no bones about it, the Levitical feast.
Acts 12:4 -- it is Herod's intention after Pascha to bring Peter out before the people. what people? the Jews. the church is by no means a majority of the populous.

we are talking about a Jewish ruler of a Jewish people in a time-frame described by Jewish holy days and this Jewish ruler of Jewish people acting according to a Jewish calendar. Luke uses an Hebrew word in the middle of the Greek dialogue -- a word that does not mean dawn and has no relationship to Eos the Roman dawn goddess. Luke uses a word "Pascha" which is indisputably a reference to Passover -- which occurs at the end of the days of unleavened bread.


you are trying to backwards-justify a glaring mistake, and the further you go with it, the further away from the truth you get.

 

[posthuman]

The KJB is accurate, in that it uses the word "passover" BEFORE the death and resurrection of Christ and then "Easter" the only time the word occurs in the book of Acts AFTER His resurrection.

why didn't Luke use a different word?


is the KJV/B more accurate than the actual Bible?

 

[posthuman]

The only time the word is used in the New Testament referring to a Post-Resurrection time line is in Acts 12:4 where the King James Bible correctly has translated this Greek word as Easter.

this is not true.

Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened:
for Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us.
(1 Corinthians 5:7)
​

per your logic, the KJV ((tho i've quoted GNV here)) is in error in this verse.
it should be ((per your supposed justification)) "Christ our Easter" or more accurately, "Christ our Ishtar"

 

[posthuman]

Eos the Roman dawn goddess.

excuse me, Eos is properly the Greek dawn goddess. the Romans appropriated the Greek pantheon and called her Aurora.

 

[posthuman]

Hmmmm. All of the Bible versions that I checked erroneously use the term translated to "Easter".
Interesting. Nothing to be overly exited about. Decent scholarship has ferreted out all of the anomalies.

you obviously did not check

NIV
NLT
ESV
BSB
NASB
CSB
GNT
HCSB
ISV
NET
ABE
GWT
NST
KJV2000
ASV
DRB
ERV
WNT
WEB
YLT
GNV
Darby
LEB
RSV
Wycliff
Mounce
AMP
Phillips
CJB
Aramaic Bible in Plain English
EXB
EHV


. . . ?


literally the only translation that puts "Ishtar" in Acts 12:4 is KJV
so i'm really curious about what you mean by "all the Bible versions you checked" --- what, you checked exactly two of them? KJV and AKJV ?

good grief, even 'the Message' has Passover here.

 

[cv5]

Hmmmm. All of the Bible versions that I checked erroneously use the term translated to "Easter".
Interesting. Nothing to be overly exited about. Decent scholarship has ferreted out all of the anomalies.

Oooops. My bad, only occurs in the KJV. Search engine had me fooled.

 

[cv5]

you obviously did not check

NIV
NLT
ESV
BSB
NASB
CSB
GNT
HCSB
ISV
NET
ABE
GWT
NST
KJV2000
ASV
DRB
ERV
WNT
WEB
YLT
GNV
Darby
LEB
RSV
Wycliff
Mounce
AMP
Phillips
CJB
Aramaic Bible in Plain English
EXB
EHV


. . . ?


literally the only translation that puts "Ishtar" in Acts 12:4 is KJV
so i'm really curious about what you mean by "all the Bible versions you checked" --- what, you checked exactly two of them? KJV and AKJV ?

good grief, even 'the Message' has Passover here.

Yep. Sorry my bad. Search engine had be fooled. KJV only. And the Greek term is indeed Passover. Nothing there to cause any great concern.....