Is the (AV) Translated from the Textus Receptus (TR)?

I would note you have posted the gist of this several times, on the BB, including Post #48 in this thread.

Do you think there's any real danger of this ever actually getting through?

Ed

 

I noticed Tyndale used Easter for the spots other than Acts 12:4.

But I don't think KJV made a mistake by leaving Easter only in Ac 12:4
They must have at least distinguished it from other verses intentionally because they encountered a problem with the time sequence.

At the moment, I think I explained enough, but I intend to study on Cosmologie der Babylonier and some other sources some day.

 

Eastre was employed in the Anglo-Saxon Gospels many centuries before Luther and Tyndale.

 

Not if you look at it in this respect; as in straining to swallow a gnat but easily swallowing a camel. Much is to be made of what many are doing to belittle those that prefer the KJV.

Yes I know that I have come into this thread a little late (and that it is possible that this has already been discussed) but that quote Dr Bob gave us just (pardon the pun) stuck in my craw.

 

As Eliyahu correctly noted, the erroneous assertion that strain at is a "misprint" was decisively debunked several years ago here.

 

Some of the 'logic' offered and some of the ideas that are sometimes presented in this forum are very hard to swallow, I agree.



Ed

 

Tyndale is also responsible for coining the word "Passover." In his Bible translation, Tyndale used ester/easter in the NT because of its familiarity to readers. Later, when he translated the OT, Tyndale coined and began using the more accurate word Passover.

Maybe this will help, Eliyahu...

Easter wasn't celebrated at the time Acts was written. Therefore, Herod could not have intended to bring Peter out after Easter.

In his article "Acts 12:4 - Passover and Easter" Brian Tegart shows that the Passover Feast and the Feast of Unleavened Bread are one and the same.

Since Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread are one and the same, then the use of Passover in Acts 12:4 is not incorrect.

 

There seems to be no attempt to "belittle those that prefer the KJV." The problem is not with those who prefer one of the KJVs over other Bible translations, but with those who become their own final authority and declare one of the KJVs is the only true word of God in English. There's a BIG difference in preferring one of the KJVs and belittling all other Bible translations, Palatka51.

 

Wrong !

Always in OT when both of them appear in precise terms, they were clearly distinguished.
Passover was 14th Abib, DULB or FULB started from 15th thru 21.


Here are the examples:

Leviticus 23:5-6
5 In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is the LORD'S passover. 6 And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the feast of unleavened bread unto the LORD: seven days ye must eat unleavened bread.

Numbers 28:16-31
16 And in the fourteenth day of the first month is the passover of the LORD. 17 And in the fifteenth day of this month is the feast: seven days shall unleavened bread be eaten.




2 Chronicles 35:1-19
1 Moreover Josiah kept a passover unto the LORD in Jerusalem: and they killed the passover on the fourteenth day of the first month
17 And the children of Israel that were present kept the passover at that time, and the feast of unleavened bread seven days.
18 And there was no passover like to that kept in Israel from the days of Samuel the prophet; neither did all the kings of Israel keep such a passover as Josiah kept, and the priests, and the Levites, and all Judah and Israel that were present, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem.



Ezekiel 45

21 In the first month, in the fourteenth day of the month, ye shall have the passover, then a feast of seven days; unleavened bread shall be eaten


Bible is quoted from Crosswalk.com

 

No, Eliyahu - you're the one who's wrong. You're saying the Passover was to be on the 14th day of the month and ONLY on the 14th day of the month. If your assertion is correct, then how do you explain this instruction from God?

This doesn't sound as if God is inaugurating two separate feasts. This verse indicates one continuous period of time - from the fourteenth day of the month until the twenty-first day of the month.

Deuteronomy 16 reviews 3 feasts: Passover (v. 1-8); the Feast of Weeks (v. 9-12); and the Feast of Tebernacles (v. 13-17). In reviewing the Passover there is no distinction made between Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread.

Ezekiel 45:21 doesn't indicate two separate feasts - just one.

The KJV also indicates in this verse Passover is a feast of seven days.

What translation are you quoting from, Eliyahu? The ERV of 1881, the ASV, the NASB, the NIV, the HCSB, the ESV, the Complete Jewish Bible, the 1587 Geneva Bible and the JPS OT of 1917 found at http://www.studylight.org are all in agreement with the KJV/NKJV reading.

So despite your assertion to the contrary, Eliyahu, we find Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread ARE one and the same. Therefore, as I said before, the use of Passover in Acts 12:4 is not incorrect.

 

When did the passover occur?

When did the Easter occur?

 

Yes! Only 14th Abib was Passover !
Exodus 12:18 says they should eat the Unleavened Bread on Passover, it is absolutely correct! However, it was not called DULB, but called Passover! Therefore it doesn't contradict my assertion at all.

Wrong ! You are very much wrong again !

You are arguing with me without reading my previous post # 55, which explained very well about Ezekiel 45:21

Quote

2) Ezekiel 45:21
As you know the conjunctions are sometimes omitted in Hebrew and it can be translated as follows:

In the first month, in the fourteenth day of the month, ye shall have the passover, then a feast of seven days; unleavened bread shall be eaten

Otherwise, the verse itself contradicts many other verses which says Passover and FULB( Feast of Unleavened Bread, or DULB).

Even the verse 21 itself says fourteenth day of the month ( one day) is the Passover, then how can it be equal to 7 days? As you know, Passover is one day and FULB is 7 days, total 8 days.
Therefore Eze 45:21 does not support your argument that Passover meant the whole feast of Passover and FULB

Unquote


Read the Bible carefully again. All the time Passover is distinguished from DULB ( or FULB, Feast of ULB).
Passover is only one day, 14th Abib, while FULB is 7 days starting from 15th Abib thru 21 Abib.

Deuteronomy 16: 1-8 talks about Passover, it doesn't confuse both of them.

Again Ezekiel 45:21,

In the first month, in the fourteenth day of the month, ye shall have the passover, then a feast of seven days; unleavened bread shall be eaten

I read Hebrew MT directly.

How can 1 day be the same as 7 days?

Read the Bible Lev 23:5-6 too. Clearly it distinuish between 2, Paassover and FULB.
What people often forget is that Jews had to eat ULB even on Passover, but it was not called FULB.

In OT they were clearly distingished when both of them appear.

 

Read the following verse again.

Leviticus 23:5-6
5 In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is the LORD'S passover. -------- Passover !

6 And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the feast of unleavened bread unto the LORD: seven days ye must eat unleavened bread. ---------- FULB !


Isn't it clear?

 

"FULB" ???

Out of curiosity-

What does how any any of the OT Scriptures read (or should read) have to do with whether or not the KJV was translated from what is mistakenly labeled the TR?

Ed

 

Assuming, for the sake of argument, that all the words in black in your quote above are accurately and "literally" translate in the "formal equivalence" mode, does not the addition of this conjunction in red, for the supposed purpose of harmonizing verses that appear elsewhere in Scripture amount to adding to the words of the words of the book, as warned against in Prov. 30:5-6 and Rev. 22:18?

If not, why not?

Was not the Holy Spirit capable of giving the word exactly as He intended to give it?? Why would He need us to add something to it as given, in order to support some alleged time-line in the rendering?

Ed

 

FULB : Abbreviation of Feast of UnLeavened Bread.


Ezekiel 45:21

21 In the first month, in the fourteenth day of the month, ye shall have the passover, then a feast of seven days; unleavened bread shall be eaten


You are not reading the Hebrew MT, but I am interpretting it instead of relying on any English verstion. How can you discern which translation is correct, without knowing how to read the original text in original language?

As I said, Hebrew Conjunction can be added in such case by the translators.

Is the fourteenth day of the month the same as the 7days? Does the fourteenth Day of Abib have 168 hours?

Also, count from 14th thru 21st of the month, then it is 8 days, not 7 days!

It is talking about Passover, then 7 days of FULB, which is separated from Passover.

 

ον και πιασας εθετο εις φυλακην παραδους τεσσαρσιν τετραδιοις στρατιωτων φυλασσειν αυτον βουλομενος μετα το πασχα αναγαγειν αυτον τω λαω

πασχα = Pascha

Which means Passover and there was no such thing as Easter then and any pagan festival was not known by that name. Every Greek text has this word right here in this line. If Luke meant something else, he would have used another word.

 

Eliyahu, you're errantly basing your argument on the mere assumption a word could have been left out of the text. That's ridiculous. Where is your proof that this is the case? We have to rely on what we have - not assumptions that something may have been left out. Is there one shred of evidence to support your claim? Is there one manuscript WITH the Hebrew equivalent?

The verse in question, when you add a word that may or may not have been left out of the original texts, can be bent to say anything you want it to say. The word you add changes the meaning of Ezek. 45:21 entirely.

If you want to argue based on the Bible, Eliyahu, you must not ADD TO Scripture. Go ahead and believe this position if you want - that's between you and God. However, I'll accept what various Bible translations give us, not a reading that could have been.

In a case of Eliyahu against Scripture, I'll stick with Scripture any day! Why do you persist in arguing against Scripture, Eliyahu? It isn't worthwhile to argue with someone who believes they're right and Scripture is wrong, Eliyahu, so I'll not respond further to your ridiculous arguments. Believe what you want to believe...I'll believe Scripture. And I'll pray for you.

 

While the Hebrews were in Egypt.

The Passover was celebrated at the time of Christ's death, burial and resurrection. Easter didn't come until later. Therefore, Acts 12:4 should read Passover as it does in modern translations, not Easter as it does in the KJVs. Easter as a celebration did not exist until later.