PAGANIZATION OF THE CHURCH....Easter vs Resurrection Sunday

[Jason0047]

Anyways, continuing on the the topic of the word Easter:

Now, would I use the word "Easter" today in reference to the Christian understanding of Passover? Probably not. For most people today do not associate the word "Easter" with the "Passover" anymore like they did back in the 1600's. In other words, I use words in communicating with people to get them to better understand me. I speak Late Modern English (Modern English) to them and not Early Modern English (1600's English) to them. For how would it go over with people I talk with today if I used "thee's", and "thou's" always with them?

 

[Jason0047]

So how does the above bolded jive with your worship of the 1611 King JIM translation/transliteration of the bible?

Yeah, I really don't see folks today bowing down to an actual book as if it was a magical object or anything. Do you? So you would be wrong that people are actually worshiping an actual book. So your claim is just not true of the majority of KJV-Onlyists or those who think it is the divinely inspired Word of God.

 

[Jason0047]

Yeah, I really don't see folks today bowing down to an actual book as if it was a magical object or anything. Do you? So you would be wrong that people are actually worshiping an actual book. So your claim is just not true of the majority of KJV-Onlyists or those who think it is the divinely inspired Word of God.

Besides, believing something to be holy does not equate with worshiping it. For example: The Ark was a holy object, but that doesn't mean everyone worshiped it falsely and or that God wanted them to worship it.

 

[dcontroversal]

Yeah, I really don't see folks today bowing down to an actual book as if it was a magical object or anything. Do you? So you would be wrong that people are actually worshiping an actual book. So your claim is just not true of the majority of KJV-Onlyists or those who think it is the divinely inspired Word of God.

You say it is divinely inspired and perfect...now you say the 1611 English changes and causes confusion with some people...so which is it...perfect, complete and inspired or the English words change and do not mean what they mean.....

By the way...do You use a 1611 version or a MODERN VERSION?

Well, the confusion here arises when folks try to mix "Early Modern English" (1600's English) as being the same thing as "Late Modern English" (Today's English). The two are not the same thing. Yes, in many cases, Early Modern English and Late Modern English can mean the same thing. But not always

 

[Jason0047]

You say it is divinely inspired and perfect...now you say the 1611 English changes and causes confusion with some people...so which is it...perfect, complete and inspired or the English words change and do not mean what they mean.....

By the way...do You use a 1611 version or a MODERN VERSION?

Jesus spoke in parables. Revelation is strong in symbolism. Jesus said things to people that confused them (Because they did not have the spiritual understanding; Nor were they looking for it). So there is no problem with God's Word. God tells us to study to show ourselves approved unto God (2 Timothy 2:15 KJV). That is something the Modern Translation reader may not pick up on or read because his or her Modern Bible may not say that in 2 Timothy 2:15. Hence, why they should read the pure Word (i.e. the KJV) for our day.

 

[dcontroversal]

Jesus spoke in parables. Revelation is strong in symbolism. Jesus said things to people that confused them (Because they did not have the spiritual understanding; Nor were they looking for it). So there is no problem with God's Word. God tells us to study to show ourselves approved unto God (2 Timothy 2:15 KJV). That is something the Modern Translation reader may not pick up on or read because his or her Modern Bible may not say that in 2 Timothy 2:15. Hence, why they should read the pure Word (i.e. the KJV) for our day.

Like many you totally avoided the questions and the point......

So do you use a 1611 version?

 

[RachelBibleStudent]

1 Corinthians 5:7 (KJV)

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:

1 Corinthians 5:8 (KJV)

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.

it says to keep the feast, that is once a year, because of Christs sacrificed for us,

it is commanded

1 corinthians 5:7 is telling -people- that they are to be unleavened...and verse eight mentions 'the leaven of malice and wickedness'...this has nothing to do with literal leavening of bread...so 1 corinthians 5:8 is obviously -not- a command to celebrate old testament passover...

the fact that you can't figure out such an obvious scripture says a lot about the degree to which you are deceived...

 

[RachelBibleStudent]

And there is really only one period of time that can satisfy all the statements: 72 hours.

actually seventy-two hours -doesn't- satisfy all of the statements in the gospel...seventy-two hours is only required by people like you who are ignorant of hebrew culture and biblical timekeeping...and in fact it is definitively -excluded- by acts 10 in which seventy-two hours is called -four- days...

now if you want to worship a 'jesus' who rose on the fourth day...i suppose that is your human right...but don't expect christians to think you are following messiah...

 

[prove-all]

1 corinthians 5:7 is telling -people- that they are to be unleavened...and verse eight mentions 'the leaven of malice and wickedness'...this has nothing to do with literal leavening of bread...so 1 corinthians 5:8 is obviously -not- a command to celebrate old testament passover...

the fact that you can't figure out such an obvious scripture says a lot about the degree to which you are deceived...

sorry that is not what it says, and i am not decieved by this, i know what the only sign was.


the verse says to keep the feast, first day of unleavened bread.

keep the feast means keep a feast day of Gods, a holy day once a year.


next verse tells you how to keep it, not by taking levin from youre home,

but remove the sin from youre heart and body Gods temple.


It is a commandment strait out , because Jesus died for us he says to (keep) the feast.

go ahead and keep the (roman) mass ritual if you want, that has decieves the world,

i will do what God says thank you very much.

 

[RachelBibleStudent]

He even called his religion “Christianity.” But he mixed these “Christian” ideas with his own pagan Babylonian mystery religion! Using the power of Christ’s name, he taught un-Christian doctrines. He turned the doctrine of grace into a license to sin (Jude 4) and aspired to turn his counterfeit religion into a universal faith that would gain political rule over the world!

Simon—the “Pater,” or father, of this counterfeit religion—did not accomplish his goal in his lifetime. But succeeding leaders, with the church’s headquarters moved to Rome, did later gain political control over the Roman Empire and its medieval successor, the “Holy Roman Empire.”

(This empire is again being resurrected in Europe now!)

Even in that first century, Simon’s religion grew rapidly. The Apostle Paul indicated that by the 60s a.d., much of the Middle East had turned from the true gospel to a clever counterfeit! (Galatians 1:6-7).

This “Christian” counterfeit is actually the source of easter, mary worship, the trinity doctrine and others!

none of what you say about simon the sorcerer in this post comes from scripture...scripture doesn't say he had a 'babylonian mystery religion'...scripture doesn't say he taught any doctrines after his encounter with peter...scripture doesn't say he 'turned the doctrine of grace into a license to sin'...and scripture doesn't say he started a religion...or that he wanted his religion to 'gain political rule over the world'

all of this is stuff you -added- to scripture...

 

[RachelBibleStudent]

Yes, but this particular phrase was not a Hebrew idiom...

Mat 12:40 For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

and Christ knew exactly how long a day and a night were (He created them)...

Joh 11:9 Jesus answered, "Are there not twelve hours in the day? If anyone walks in the day, he does not stumble, because he sees the light of this world.
Joh 11:10 But if one walks in the night, he stumbles, because the light is not in him."

anyone knows that the day is not always twelve hours long...jesus was making a generic statement...he was not specifying a timekeeping standard...

because if he -was- specifying a timekeeping standard as you claim...then you are also claiming that jesus was ignorant of the variation in the lengths of the days that he created...

i suppose if you want to worship an ignorant 'jesus' who makes obvious errors of basic fact then that is your human right...but don't expect any christians to believe you are actually following messiah...

 

[RachelBibleStudent]

every church buildings today, pews are facing the early sun rise, why ?

the leaders have there backs to God, and worshiping the sun , not the creater.

the judge stars at the pastors first , and more harsh.

in the church i go to the seats all face north...

but i am long past expecting people like you to do much other than -make stuff up-

 

[RachelBibleStudent]

next verse tells you how to keep it, not by taking levin from youre home,

but remove the sin from youre heart and body Gods temple.

so you only remove sin from your heart and body 'once a year'?

because that would explain a lot...

 

[Jason0047]

Like many you totally avoided the questions and the point......

So do you use a 1611 version?

Well, this thread is not about the KJV. But to reply to your concern: If you were to actually look at a 1769 KJV, it says it is from the 1611. The 1769 is not claiming to be an entirely different translation that is different from the 1611. It uses a standardization of spelling, fixes printing errors, and does not use the 1600's font type. Nor does it have the Apocrypha. I believe the 1769 (1611) is the final finished product God had intended. In fact, the 1769 is the update or revision most people read today (Which is the 1769 (1611) version).

Now, if you believe God's Word was only perfect in the Hebrew and Greek: Well, was God confined to communicating to people in just Hebrew and Greek at Pentecost? Or did God allow everyone to understand each other in their own language? Did God change from Pentecost? What doth thou sayest to that, my friend?

 

[dcontroversal]

Well, this thread is not about the KJV. But to reply to your concern,: If you were to actually look at a 1769 KJV, it says it is from the 1611. The 1769 is not claiming to be an entirely different translation that is different from the 1611. It uses a standardization of spelling, fixes printing errors, and does not use the 1600's font type. Nor does it have the Apocrypha. I believe the 1769 (1611) is the final finished product God had intended. In fact, the 1769 is the version most people read today (Which is the 1769 (1611) version).

Now, if you believe God's Word was only perfect in the Hebrew and Greek: Well, was God confined to communicating to people in just Hebrew and Greek at Pentecost? Or did God allow everyone to understand each other in their own language? Did God change from Pentecost?

So you don't use a 1611 version and this just proves the fallacy of your stand! I guess the original version wasn't PERFECT....so who fixed it.......?

Let me get this straight....you claim God inspired the 1611 translators, but it needed to be upgraded in 1769 and some ERRORS fixed such as spelling, printing and font type.......

Do you not see the fallacy of your argument and or stance.....

The king James is nothing more than a translation/transliteration period......

In their own preface that state clearly that they COMPARED their VERSION with an ENGLISH version already in circulation...HOW does this jive with inspiration....? DID the writers of the bible have to compare what GOD inspired them to write to check the validity of what they were inspired to write?

It has words that have not been translated, but rather they have been transliterated......

It has words that have been translated the same and yet in the Hebrew and or Greek they are different words...

It has added statements and phrases to emphasize certain doctrinal beliefs held by the Episcopalian Priests who translated/transliterated it

Your view of it being inspired contradicts what God says and teaches about inspiration as it was HOLY MEN that God inspired

Do you believe Episcopalian Priests had the truth and were HOLY MEN seeing how they teach a gospel that does not JIVE with the gospel of the BIBLE?

Show me where God used false teachers and inspired false teachers to give his word......

No offence, but your view does not stand up Jason!

 

[kennethcadwell]

sorry that is not what it says, and i am not decieved by this, i know what the only sign was.


the verse says to keep the feast, first day of unleavened bread.

keep the feast means keep a feast day of Gods, a holy day once a year.


next verse tells you how to keep it, not by taking levin from youre home,

but remove the sin from youre heart and body Gods temple.


It is a commandment strait out , because Jesus died for us he says to (keep) the feast.

go ahead and keep the (roman) mass ritual if you want, that has decieves the world,

i will do what God says thank you very much.

The context of the whole chapter of 1 Corinthians 5 is about keeping the body of believers in a church pure, and not let them get defiled by those who walk an impure lifestyle.

It is stating that if you allow those who continue in willful sins and do not want to give them up to be part of the congregation, then others will see there actions and believe them to be acceptable in the church and in turn walk the same way. That leaven of ones wrong doing will leaven others in the church to do the same.
It says to cast them out of the church, and hand them over to the sinful world that is lead by the prince of this world satan; Hince hand them over to satan for the destruction of the flesh. If you cast them out it would hopefully lead them to see there wrong more clearly and come back in repentance.....

 

[prove-all]

8Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after (the tradition of men),
after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

16Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday,
or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

17Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body (is) of Christ.

notice first in this verse above the (is) was added and should not be in here.

second this says Gods holy days is a shodow of things to come, not some past event.

now Christ is in heaven when this said, is not talking about his death, but things to come.

Gods Holy convocations shows man Gods plain for the worlds redemption.

this verse should read, don't let anyone tell you about holydays, (but) the body of Christ.
Christ tells us to keep the feast, not follow mans tradations, like following romans ways.

18Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels,
intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,

God never tells us to celebrate his resurcetion, but tells us to celebrate his death, on U.L.B

 

[kennethcadwell]

So you don't use a 1611 version and this just proves the fallacy of your stand! I guess the original version wasn't PERFECT....so who fixed it.......?

Let me get this straight....you claim God inspired the 1611 translators, but it needed to be upgraded in 1769 and some ERRORS fixed such as spelling, printing and font type.......

Do you not see the fallacy of your argument and or stance.....

The king James is nothing more than a translation/transliteration period......

In their own preface that state clearly that they COMPARED their VERSION with an ENGLISH version already in circulation...HOW does this jive with inspiration....? DID the writers of the bible have to compare what GOD inspired them to write to check the validity of what they were inspired to write?

It has words that have not been translated, but rather they have been transliterated......

It has words that have been translated the same and yet in the Hebrew and or Greek they are different words...

It has added statements and phrases to emphasize certain doctrinal beliefs held by the Episcopalian Priests who translated/transliterated it

Your view of it being inspired contradicts what God says and teaches about inspiration as it was HOLY MEN that God inspired

Do you believe Episcopalian Priests had the truth and were HOLY MEN seeing how they teach a gospel that does not JIVE with the gospel of the BIBLE?

Show me where God used false teachers and inspired false teachers to give his word......

No offence, but your view does not stand up Jason!

Where do you get that there were other English versions out in circulation to the public before the KJV ???

There were only a couple of English versions before the KJV was written, and they were fought and kept from the public. The KJV was the first that was mass distributed to the public for circulation. Yes I do agree the KJV did have its translation errors as well, but it did not change the gospel message. But what I do not agree with is that they compared it to and translated it from other English versions. The following shows how and by what it was translated from;


First printed by the King's Printer Robert Barker, this was the third translation into English to be approved by the English Church authorities. The first was the Great Bible commissioned in the reign of King Henry VIII (1535), and the second was the Bishops' Bible of 1568.[SUP][3][/SUP] In January 1604, King James I convened the Hampton Court Conference where a new English version was conceived in response to the perceived problems of the earlier translations as detected by the Puritans,[SUP][4][/SUP] a faction within the Church of England.[SUP][5][/SUP] The translation is considered a towering achievement in English literature, as both beautiful and scholarly.
James gave the translators instructions intended to guarantee that the new version would conform to the ecclesiology and reflect the episcopal structure of the Church of England and its belief in an ordained clergy.[SUP][6][/SUP] The translation was done by 47 scholars, all of whom were members of the Church of England.[SUP][7][/SUP] In common with most other translations of the period, the New Testament was translated from Greek, the Old Testament was translated from Hebrew and Aramaic text, while the Apocryphawere translated from the Greek and Latin.

 

[Jason0047]

So you don't use a 1611 version and this just proves the fallacy of your stand! I guess the original version wasn't PERFECT....so who fixed it.......?

Let me get this straight....you claim God inspired the 1611 translators, but it needed to be upgraded in 1769 and some ERRORS fixed such as spelling, printing and font type.......

Do you not see the fallacy of your argument and or stance.....

The king James is nothing more than a translation/transliteration period......

In their own preface that state clearly that they COMPARED their VERSION with an ENGLISH version already in circulation...HOW does this jive with inspiration....? DID the writers of the bible have to compare what GOD inspired them to write to check the validity of what they were inspired to write?

It has words that have not been translated, but rather they have been transliterated......

It has words that have been translated the same and yet in the Hebrew and or Greek they are different words...

It has added statements and phrases to emphasize certain doctrinal beliefs held by the Episcopalian Priests who translated/transliterated it

Your view of it being inspired contradicts what God says and teaches about inspiration as it was HOLY MEN that God inspired

Do you believe Episcopalian Priests had the truth and were HOLY MEN seeing how they teach a gospel that does not JIVE with the gospel of the BIBLE?

Show me where God used false teachers and inspired false teachers to give his word......

No offence, but your view does not stand up Jason!

I am not here to convince you. God's Word will convict you on this point (If you let it). But let's please try and stay on topic. We are talking about the word "Easter" vs. "Resurrection Sunday" here and not the KJV.

 

[kennethcadwell]

8Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after (the tradition of men),
after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

16Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday,
or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

17Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body (is) of Christ.

notice first in this verse above the (is) was added and should not be in here.

second this says Gods holy days is a shodow of things to come, not some past event.

now Christ is in heaven when this said, is not talking about his death, but things to come.

Gods Holy convocations shows man Gods plain for the worlds redemption.

this verse should read, don't let anyone tell you about holydays, (but) the body of Christ.
Christ tells us to keep the feast, not follow mans tradations, like following romans ways.

18Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels,
intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,

God never tells us to celebrate his resurcetion, but tells us to celebrate his death, on U.L.B

I see where you are coming from as the bible does not say it is wrong to keep and celebrate those feast days, but yet it also shows that we do not have to keep them for salvation. Therefore we are not to judge others rather they do or not, and we are not to force others to keep them as well.