KJVOnlyist lets learn together where this doctrine began :)

[KJV1611]

John832, your confusion comes from your lack of understanding of the feasts of the Lord. Here's a quick lesson on the feasts.

Passover is on the 14th day of the month.
The feast of unleavened bread starts on the 15th day of the month and runs for 7 days.

Herod took Peter during the feast of unleavened bread. Now remember what I just said, the feast of unleavened starts the day after Passover. Passover had already come and gone, however Easter was still a few days away.

Another point of confusion on your part is that you don't know history. Maybe this will help you, Easter and Passover are not synonymous. Easter is a pagan holy day and Passover is a Jewish holy day. The Jews that killed Jesus and wanted to kill Peter... they were Pagans, they were waiting for their holy day to pass.

 

[john832]

John832, your confusion comes from your lack of understanding of the feasts of the Lord. Here's a quick lesson on the feasts.

Passover is on the 14th day of the month.
The feast of unleavened bread starts on the 15th day of the month and runs for 7 days.

Herod took Peter during the feast of unleavened bread. Now remember what I just said, the feast of unleavened starts the day after Passover. Passover had already come and gone, however Easter was still a few days away.

Another point of confusion on your part is that you don't know history. Maybe this will help you, Easter and Passover are not synonymous. Easter is a pagan holy day and Passover is a Jewish holy day. The Jews that killed Jesus and wanted to kill Peter... they were Pagans, they were waiting for their holy day to pass.

My confusion? I have kept the Feasts of the Lord since 1969. I have a faint idea about what they are. It is you who have the confusion. The Feasts of the Lord are still around, in fact Paul taught the Corinthians they should be keeping the Passover and the Days of Unleavened Bread...

1Co 5:6 Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?
1Co 5:7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
1Co 5:8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

The context makes it plain he is not talking about the feast of Ishtar.

 

[KJV1611]

First you have to prove that the KJV is God's account, which you can't. Calling other bibles "New Age" reminds me of how Edison tried to show people that AC electricity was bad. He would electrocute a dog using AC electricity and then tell people it is too dangerous to have in your home. You labeling all other bibles New Age is just as wrong as claiming the KJV is an inspired version. It is totally groundless and with out merit.

I will comment on your post later. First I would like to show you where your logic is severely flawed. I'm pretty sure you don't believe the inerrant pure word of God exists today am I correct? If I'm wrong and you do believe it exists, where is it?

 

[KJV1611]

My confusion? I have kept the Feasts of the Lord since 1969. I have a faint idea about what they are. It is you who have the confusion. The Feasts of the Lord are still around, in fact Paul taught the Corinthians they should be keeping the Passover and the Days of Unleavened Bread...

1Co 5:6 Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?
1Co 5:7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
1Co 5:8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

The context makes it plain he is not talking about the feast of Ishtar.

If you know how the feasts work, then you know beyond the shadow of a doubt that they took Peter just a few days after Passover. Why on earth would you think they were waiting for Passover to pass? Do you think they were waiting til the next year?

 

[The_highwayman]

That is some of the strangest reasoning I have seen in a long time...

Act 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.

The word Easter appears exactly once in the entirety of the KJV. Wonder why there is no command to keep Easter, or no scripture that show us that Easter replaces the Feasts of the Lord. The word that was translated here for Easter is...


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.

And now for HeRose benefit...

G3957
πάσχα
pascha
Thayer Definition:
1) the paschal sacrifice (which was accustomed to be offered for the people’s deliverance of old from Egypt)
2) the paschal lamb, i.e. the lamb the Israelites were accustomed to slay and eat on the fourteenth day of the month of Nisan (the first month of their year) in memory of the day on which their fathers, preparing to depart from Egypt, were bidden by God to slay and eat a lamb, and to sprinkle their door posts with its blood, that the destroying angel, seeing the blood, might pass over their dwellings; Christ crucified is likened to the slain paschal lamb
3) the paschal supper
4) the paschal feast, the feast of the Passover, extending from the 14th to the 20th day of the month Nisan
Part of Speech: noun neuter

I could C&P it but you can look it up (it is somewhat long), Barclay recognizes it as the Passover and Days of Unleavened Bread.

From Bullingers...

Easter. Greek. to pascha, the Passover. Easter is a heathen term, derived from the Saxon goddess Eastre, the same as Astarte, the Syrian Venus, called Ashtoreth in the O.T.

From 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 paschaThe 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.

John Gill matter of factly states...

intending after Easter,
or the passover,

It is a mistranslation of the word pascha. It should have been Passover.

Do not fall into this trap John, KJB only folks do not believe in the Greek or the Hebrew and only the English translation.

 

[john832]

If you know how the feasts work, then you know beyond the shadow of a doubt that they took Peter just a few days after Passover. Why on earth would you think they were waiting for Passover to pass? Do you think they were waiting til the next year?

????

Your statement makes no sense.

 

[KJV1611]

Do not fall into this trap John, KJB only folks do not believe in the Greek or the Hebrew and only the English translation.

It's a conundrum huh highwayman. It is blatantly obvious the KJV is correct and you have no argument against it. It's almost like God wrote it that way.

 

[john832]

Do not fall into this trap John, KJB only folks do not believe in the Greek or the Hebrew and only the English translation.

Yep. I fell for that one.

 

[KJV1611]

????

Your statement makes no sense.

Let's simplify a little bit. Was Peter taken before or after Passover? Very simple question... before or after?

 

[john832]

Let's simplify a little bit. Was Peter taken before or after Passover? Very simple question... before or after?

Unless you have some other secret knowledge that says different the KJV itself shows that Herod took Peter and then came the Days of Unleavened Bread.

 

[danschance]

I will comment on your post later. First I would like to show you where your logic is severely flawed. I'm pretty sure you don't believe the inerrant pure word of God exists today am I correct? If I'm wrong and you do believe it exists, where is it?

The KJV like all bibles are translated from Hebrew and Greek manuscripts. If we search for problems between all the manuscripts available to us, we see that we can list all those discrepancies on a post card or two. This means God has made sure we are not without His word.

Where your logic is severely flawed is that you believe the creator is inferior to its creation. The KJV came from Hebrew and Greek manuscripts, but you claim the KJV is better than the manuscripts it came from!

Martin Luther produced a German translation 100 years before the KJV. So is Luther's translation also a "New Age" bible or is it inspired?? How can we determine this? What did people have for a bible before the KJV? Did God forget to make an inspired version for 1600 years? Do non-English speaking have an inspired version or a New Age version? Or maybe God simply loves English speaking people so He gave them an inspired version and left the others out in the cold? Make sense to you? Of course not.

 

[The_highwayman]

If you know how the feasts work, then you know beyond the shadow of a doubt that they took Peter just a few days after Passover. Why on earth would you think they were waiting for Passover to pass? Do you think they were waiting til the next year?

It is interesting to note the Geneva Bible says this and The Geneva was translated into English 51 years before the KJB:
Acts 12.3-4

[SUP]3 [/SUP]And when he saw that it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further, to take Peter also (then were the days of unleavened bread.)

[SUP]4 [/SUP]And when he had caught him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to be kept, intending after the Passover to bring him forth to the people.

 

[The_highwayman]

It's a conundrum huh highwayman. It is blatantly obvious the KJV is correct and you have no argument against it. It's almost like God wrote it that way.

You guys always, always forget about the Geneva Bible:

It is interesting to note the Geneva Bible says this and The Geneva was translated into English 51 years before the KJB:
Acts 12.3-4

[SUP]3 [/SUP]And when he saw that it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further, to take Peter also (then were the days of unleavened bread.)

[SUP]4 [/SUP]And when he had caught him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to be kept, intending after the Passover to bring him forth to the people.

 

[LT]

'Easter' is a mistranslation. There is no possible argument for 'Easter' being the proper translation. Your argument about the Feast of Unleavened Bread is beyond broken; where do you hear things like this nonsense. Read Leviticus for yourself.

NASB is the infallible word of God.

 

[KJV1611]

Unless you have some other secret knowledge that says different the KJV itself shows that Herod took Peter and then came the Days of Unleavened Bread.

No, no secret knowledge... I just know how to read.
1st - Herod proceeded to take Peter
2nd -Then were the days of unleavened bread
3rd - Then they apprehended him.

Peter was taken a few days after Passover. You know that, I know that and so does everyone else reading this thread.

Act 12:3 And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.)
Act 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.

 

[soldierofchrist4ever24]

'Easter' is a mistranslation. There is no possible argument for 'Easter' being the proper translation. Your argument about the Feast of Unleavened Bread is beyond broken; where do you hear things like this nonsense. Read Leviticus for yourself.

NASB is the infallible word of God.

Thanks to everyone so much for the input and dude above me i really like the NASB as well clearly in my opinion a better translation of the koine greek. lol i as i said, have no problems with the KJV or KJB as some call it. but it is just silly to say its the only bible we should use.

in Christ
brother Travis

 

[KJV1611]

The KJV like all bibles are translated from Hebrew and Greek manuscripts. If we search for problems between all the manuscripts available to us, we see that we can list all those discrepancies on a post card or two. This means God has made sure we are not without His word.

Where your logic is severely flawed is that you believe the creator is inferior to its creation. The KJV came from Hebrew and Greek manuscripts, but you claim the KJV is better than the manuscripts it came from!

Martin Luther produced a German translation 100 years before the KJV. So is Luther's translation also a "New Age" bible or is it inspired?? How can we determine this? What did people have for a bible before the KJV? Did God forget to make an inspired version for 1600 years? Do non-English speaking have an inspired version or a New Age version? Or maybe God simply loves English speaking people so He gave them an inspired version and left the others out in the cold? Make sense to you? Of course not.

Without admitting it you just said the inerrant word of God does not exist today. Well kind of it does, but it spread over 25 different books that have both truth and error in each of them. I'm curious, how do you know which part of each flawed bible is accurate. I can tell you how most do it... when the bible says something they disagree, well of course that cant be right it doesn't fit what I believe. Let me find another translation and see if it agrees with me. Trust me the way these new translations keep changing you will be able justify any belief or any sin you want.

 

[KJV1611]

Peace out everybody. This is going no where in a hurry. I will admit that many of KJV onliers have really given the KJV onliers a bad name. We will all get our chance to give our account to the Lord one day... he will set us all straight. I love you guys and certainly mean no harm to any of you.

 

[LT]

Without admitting it you just said the inerrant word of God does not exist today. Well kind of it does, but it spread over 25 different books that have both truth and error in each of them. I'm curious, how do you know which part of each flawed bible is accurate. I can tell you how most do it... when the bible says something they disagree, well of course that cant be right it doesn't fit what I believe. Let me find another translation and see if it agrees with me. Trust me the way these new translations keep changing you will be able justify any belief or any sin you want.

That is a bold assertion. You'll need to show me what belief is justified by NASB that is denied by KJV.

I do feel bad for you. It is sad to see someone so distracted over words that they can no longer discern the Truth within the Word of God.
You need to stop listening to internet teachers, and get into the Word for yourself. Not just looking through it with an agenda in mind, but reading it daily with the goal of getting closer to God's will in your life.
(You will say that you are reading the Bible, but it is clear that you are more interested in versions, errors, and issue, than you care about spiritual things. This is a clear sign that you are not studying the Bible, but only studying the issues of the Bible.)

I don't condemn you for your belief, as it has nothing to do with salvation, but I wish to see you grow in Christ by getting over this small issue that has distracted you from the Call of Christ, which is edification, encouragement, evangelism and serving your brothers (I ran out of words that start with 'e' lol).

 

[KJV1611]

That is a bold assertion. You'll need to show me what belief is justified by NASB that is denied by KJV.

I do feel bad for you. It is sad to see someone so distracted over words that they can no longer discern the Truth within the Word of God.
You need to stop listening to internet teachers, and get into the Word for yourself. Not just looking through it with an agenda in mind, but reading it daily with the goal of getting closer to God's will in your life.
(You will say that you are reading the Bible, but it is clear that you are more interested in versions, errors, and issue, than you care about spiritual things. This is a clear sign that you are not studying the Bible, but only studying the issues of the Bible.)

I don't condemn you for your belief, as it has nothing to do with salvation, but I wish to see you grow in Christ by getting over this small issue that has distracted you from the Call of Christ, which is edification, encouragement, evangelism and serving your brothers (I ran out of words that start with 'e' lol).

Ok, I'm not done yet lol. Let's see get to the big issues. What is the message Jesus is trying to convey in this passage LT? Is this passage about you or Jesus?

Mat_5:30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.