The Error of KJV-Onlyism

Check what I have said on this subject and kindly don’t confuse me with others.

No translation is perfect! Even the earliest source documents differ from each other. When a person reads the Bible, God will show that person what He wants them to understand (via the Holy Spirit).

Post #2942 are your words.

You quoted me, but I don’t see how you would conclude from my post that I have anything against scholarship. Perhaps you could explain.

KJV Debate is happening live now on YouTube:

https://www.youtube.com/live/L3n62tfKt2o?si=ShxAJnqF4GvR3ric

By the way, the video debate talks about the Passover.

Thank you for the link

They should make it interesting and just have a boxing match!

You’re welcome. Will Kinney, and Nick Sayers have debated on the KJV issue before on the “Standing For Truth” YouTube Channel.
I do not always agree with the KJB apologetics by Sayers or Kinney, and yet do offer some good stuff.

Michael Holner (KJVDebate.com), and Mike Fernando are going to defend 1 John 5:7 in the KJV against James Snapp (who doesn't believe in the legitimacy of this verse) on this channel in April. They invited Snapp to bring a partner, but he decided to go solo.

It's ironic. In this KJV debate video, they discuss Acts 12:4. I agree with TerritanFan (TF) on his point on Easter and Passover (involving their origins). Easter is just a synomn for Passover. However, I do not obviously agree with TF's rejection of a perfect Bible that we can hold in our hands.

Perplexity is just like Google. It is just going off the data on the internet. No search engine is perfect. I did look at the different Wycliffe editions and there is no word "Easter" in Acts 12:4. So my apologies. I will admit when I am wrong.

However, that does not mean my overall argument is wrong here. Acts 12:4 is still referring to the fact that Easter is just another word for Passover. Here is a snapshot from the book "Don't Passover Easter":



I was just watching the KJV debate that was live last night and they coincidentally bring up Acts 12:4.

https://www.youtube.com/live/L3n62tfKt2o?si=ShxAJnqF4GvR3ric

TerritanFan who is against the KJV being the perfect Word of God states the same thing I have stated in that the English word "Passover" was invented by William Tyndale. The point here is that before that time, the word "Easter" was a reference sometimes to Passover. Yes, Wycliffee used pask, but others also understood Easter as Passover, too. This is evident by the Middle English Dictionary (as shown in the screencap above).

BTW ~ You were not right on your other facts. You got some things wrong, too. You made a mistake on the end destination of Paul in Acts 16:11. We all make mistakes from time to time when we jump the gun. But it takes a man to admit when they are wrong. In either case, may God bless you (even if we disagree on this important Bible topic).

See my post #2971.

BTW ~ I could have laughed when you got your facts wrong like on Acts 16:11 involving the end destination, but I did not do that. Lets please be mature about this kind of discussion.

I don’t believe Christians are called to violence in the New Covenant. Granted, when Jesus returns, His saints will follow Him into battle, but these are disembodied saints who already lived out their faith.

I would agree that Bible colleges are really bad today. They have led others to fall away from the faith.
As you know, I am also against Calvinism, as well.

And you are portraying the bad attitude of certain Calvinists I have run into on forums in the past before.
Instead of desiring to fact-check something you simply mock and laugh. This is not Christ-like.

Are you fresh out of high school? You sound very immature. Any mature truth seeker is going to want to look into the truth of things. You just mock and assume wrong things about people (Including me). In fact, when you assumed wrongfully about me, you did not apologize. If you keep up the childish behavior and wrong assumptions and you have no desire to actually fact-check anything, then I will have a legitimate reason to not address you posts any further because they have no meaningful content. While I may not agree with poster “posthuman,” or even his attitude at times, he at least is addressing my points. I appreciate that about him. He is actually engaging my points I brought up.

When you look at the context, the use of "Easter" covers both the Feast of Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread.
1Now about that time Herod the king stretched forth his hands to vex certain of the church.2 And he killed James the brother of John with the sword. 3 And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.) 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. (Acts 12)

The translators could have inserted "Pascha" ( πάσχα = pascha) but for English readers they provided the equivalent (which had been a Christian festival for many centuries). Easter has always coincided or overlapped with the feasts of Passover (called Pesach פֶּסַח in Hebrew).and Unleavened Bread.

Yes, I have heard this apologetic before. It’s a possibility, but it is not something I am 100% convinced by. There could simply be another reason why the synonym "Easter" was used by the KJV translators in Acts 12:4. There are many reasons why synonyms may be employed. But I don't see it as a problem, nor do we always have to have an answer for everything when the critics attack the KJV. Most often, the critics are not going to be convinced even if we do have good explanations in defense of the KJV. But thank you for the comment nonetheless (even though I was aware of it).

Blessings be unto you and your family in the Lord.

After the cross, the Passover has been fulfilled. The word Easter points to Christ as our Passover Lamb.

that's... not entirely accurate.

there has been controversy since pre-Nicene times about when to celebrate the resurrection. many in the church, having been persecuted constantly by the Jews, wanted to distance themselves from the actual feast on which our Lord gave Himself and rose - that being Pesach and the day of firstfruits.

these days are calculated by the lunar calendar, per Leviticus. but some instead calculated by the vernal equinox, and eventually started forcing the day of celebrating His resurrection to land on a sunday - owing most likely to the Christian habit of meeting on the first of the week rather than the 7th, because that resurrection took place on firstfruits, which is always a sunday.

so, eos-tare wasn't a Pesach replacement but a firstfruits replacement.

since eostare isn't marked by the lunar calendar but the equinox, it can be as much as a month apart from Pesach - in fact in the time period of Acts 12 when absolutely no one was celebrating firstfruits by an entirely different calendar, it was probably 30 days different than unleavened bread.

also, since the word ostern doesn't appear in Bible translations until the 1400s, it seems unlikely to be the case that 'centuries' people were celebrating astarte-day by 1500. what they were doing was purposely celebrating firstfruits (part of the paschal week) on totally the wrong day, so that they wouldn't be conflated with Jews by those outside the church.

it seems clear from history that Eos-tar is something added/changed a thousand plus years after Acts 12... so it's not an accurate word in kj translation. it's there because of a human tradition of distancing the church from the actual Jewish feasts that got held over into the text, specifically because the translators were influenced by the whole Luther/Tyndale line of previous work.

From the hearing of His word, not by the hearing of "a specific version of His word written down at a specific time, in a specific language". Your twisting scripture here to fit your view, this is backwards of how we should read scripture. We should take out of, not read into. NOTHING in scripture supports what you try so hard to sell. You've been deceived and are in error in this regard. No matter how much lipstick you slather on this pig it's just not supported at all. No matter how many walls of text you post claiming it does. You claim the gates of hell have done nothing but prevail over His word, save 1 version. I reject that and think it's honestly one of the most unthoughtful positions I've ever seen people this defensive over.