Christian definitives for older words and their definitions

You play nice now!!!:laugh:

 

Matthew 26:2 Ye know that after two days is the feast of the passover and the Son of man is betrayed to be crucified.

Matthew 26:17 Now the first day of the feast of unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover?
Matthew 26:18 And he said, Go into the city to such a man, and say unto him, The Master saith, My time is at hand; I will keep the passover at thy house with my disciples.
Matthew 26:19 And the disciples did as Jesus had appointed them; and they made ready the passover.

Mark 14:1 After two days was the feast of the passover, and of unleavened bread: and the chief priests and the scribes sought how they might take him by craft, and put him to death.

Mark 14:12 And the first day of unleavened bread, when they killed the passover, his disciples said unto him, Where wilt thou that we go and prepare that thou mayest eat the passover?

Mark 14:14 And wheresoever he shall go in, say ye to the goodman of the house, The Master saith, Where is the guestchamber, where I shall eat the passover with my disciples?

Mark 14:16 And his disciples went forth, and came into the city, and found as he had said unto them: and they made ready the passover.

Luke 2:41 Now his parents went to Jerusalem every year at the feast of the passover.

Luke 22:1 Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover.

Luke 22:7 Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed.
Luke 22:8 And he sent Peter and John, saying, Go and prepare us the passover, that we may eat.

Luke 22:11 And ye shall say unto the goodman of the house, The Master saith unto thee, Where is the guestchamber, where I shall eat the passover with my disciples?

Luke 22:13 And they went, and found as he had said unto them: and they made ready the passover.

Luke 22:15 And he said unto them, With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer:

John 2:13 And the Jews' passover was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem,

John 2:23 Now when he was in Jerusalem at the passover, in the feast day, many believed in his name, when they saw the miracles which he did.

John 6:4 And the passover, a feast of the Jews, was nigh.

John 11:55 And the Jews' passover was nigh at hand: and many went out of the country up to Jerusalem before the passover, to purify themselves.

John 12:1 Then Jesus six days before the passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus was which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead.

John 13:1 Now before the feast of the passover, when Jesus knew that his hour was come that he should depart out of this world unto the Father, having loved his own which were in the world, he loved them unto the end.

John 18:28 Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment: and it was early; and they themselves went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the passover.

John 18:39 But ye have a custom, that I should release unto you one at the passover: will ye therefore that I release unto you the King of the Jews?

John 19:14 And it was the preparation of the passover, and about the sixth hour: and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King!

1 Corinthians 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:

Hebrews 11:28 Through faith he kept the passover, and the sprinkling of blood, lest he that destroyed the firstborn should touch them.

Okay Harold. In all of the above references you will find the word "passover" mentioned a total of 28 times. Each time the Greek word is "pascha," the same word that is used in Acts 12:4, the only other time it is used. This is Biblical exposition. Now show through these other 28 times that this word "passover" should be translated "Easter" or "Resurrection" and does indeed refer to the resurrection of Christ.
I will be waiting.

 

With all due respect, all of the modern day sources have taught me not to just take your word for it.

A.F.

 

What modern day sources? I took those references right out of a Greek-English Lexicon. If you want to check my work, go to a Greek NT. You can verify it. Do you think I would post it on the internet if I didn't think it was reliable. Demonstrate that what I have posted is wrong; not just make foolish accusations.

 

Ok, we can see that Tyndale's translation routinely used "Ester" for pascha throughout the New Testament.

For example Matt.26:2:

Ye knowe that after ii. dayes shalbe ester and the sonne of man shalbe delyvered to be crucified.

In the Old Testament Tyndale has Passeover. For example Exodus 12:21:
And Moses called for the elders off Israel and sayde vnto them: chouse out and take to euery housholde a shepe, ad kyll passeouer.

from: http://wesley.nnu.edu/biblical_studies/tyndale/Tyndale.pdf

This demonstrates that Easter was, in fact, considered at that time to be equal to Passover.

This persists until the Bishop's Bible where in John 11:55 we have:
And the Iewes Easter was nye at hande, and many went out of the countrey vp to Hierusale before the Easter, to purifie them selues.

from: www.studylight.org

The Bishop's Bible search only shows Easter used here and in Acts 12:4. Passover is used elsewhere.

This demonstrates that, in English, Passover and Easter were originally considered to be synonyms.

It was the KJV translators who seem to be making a distinction between Easter and Passover by using Passover as the translation for pascha in all instances except the one case which directly refers to a time after Christ's resurrection. That directly results in the distinction that we make today between the Christian Easter and the Jewish Passover.

Now, maybe some of you don't like the way the KJV handled this. That doesn't make it wrong though. It is just an occasion for you to second guess them.

A.F.


​

 

Not necessarily wrong. Many times - incomplete.

There is no accusation in my comment. In no way do I doubt your good intentions in all things.

A.F.

 

It has nothing to do with not liking it. The translators screwed up in this point, as did Tyndale and the others.

Did Easter exist when Luke wrote it? No, it did not. Had Luke meant to refer to the date of the resurrection I am sure he was more than articulate enough to have done so. Luke used pascha because he was referring to the Passover. The NKJV didn't make the same mistake, even though the translators used the same source materials:
So when he had arrested him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four squads of soldiers to keep him, intending to bring him before the people after Passover.
(Act 12:4, NKJV)

Barnes has an interesting comment about the use of Easter in the verse:

Clarke also has something to say:

Similarly, Gill, Wesley, Scofield, Robertson's Word Pictures, Vincent's Word Studies, and The Treasury of Scriptural knowledge all agree that it should be translated as passover. In fact, Robertson explains why Herod decided to hold Peter over until after pasca:

 

To the Anglicans of 1611 Easter meant a celebration of the Resurrection of Christ, although to those people living ca. 900 A.D. it was a pagan festival that was instituted at that time. Before 900 A.D Easter was unknown. It was unknown in the Apostles' time. They could not insert a pagan festival or a substitute for a pagan festival into the NT. It is an impossibility.

This demonstrates nothing but that you are wrong. Again look at Mat.26:2.

Matthew 26:2 Ye know that after two days is the feast of the passover, and the Son of man is betrayed to be crucified.

If this was Easter (the resurrection of Christ) it would be the third day after his death. Here the verse says "After two days is the feast of the passover and the Son of man is betrayed to be crucified." How can it refer to the resurrection when he hasn't even been crucified yet? The resurrection (Easter) hasn't even come into the picture yet. The passover always pictured the death of Christ, never the resurrection.

Again, nothing but error is found here. Look at the verse carefully.

John 11:55 And the Jews' passover was nigh at hand: and many went out of the country up to Jerusalem before the passover, to purify themselves.
--Here the word "passover" is used twice (the word "pascha"). What does it refer to? It refers to the passover (not Easter) for the Resurrection had not taken place yet. The Jews were going up to the Temple at Jerusalem to purify themselves for the feast of the Passover--a feast which would come to symbolize the death of Christ, not the resurrection. Christ was still alive. He had not died; he had not risen from the dead. The word Easter as signifying resurrection is a horribly wrong translation.

No it doesn't. It shows that the translators wrongly translated the word pascha in their time. It doesn't say anything about what the word originally meant, only the incompetency of the translators of the Bishop's Bible.

They got it right in 28 times out of 29. Thus we can show that the KJV is not infallible as some claim it to be. This is a glaring mistake in Acts 12:4. However as you demonstrated they did better than the translations that went before them.

It shows that they were fallible men who made fallible mistakes, and the only perfect MSS of God's Word is the original MSS that God himself inspired; the original MSS that the prophets and apostles penned--not the KJV.




​

 

It seems to me that usage was refined by the translators of the KJV so that the word Passover was used exclusively for the Jewish observance where Easter is for the Christian. Though related, the two are distinct.

I would not suggest that we revert to Tyndale's translation.

A.F.

 

Prove that there was no Christian Easter before 900A.D.. Prove that Easter started as a pagan festival.

Is it your suggestion that Christians didn't recognize Passover or commemorate the Resurrection before 900A.D.?


A.F.

 

Since words change meanings over time, I have already given you references to show what you ask for, but then you ask for references that ONLY show your limited view of the term.

Your type DEMANDS a current Bible in today's language, but when it's something you use to attack the KJV you deny the very thing you DEMAND.

The term Pascha refers to a dead practice due to the Resurrection of Christ.

Keep doing CPR on the old Jewish feast and keep looking at a borrowed and empty tomb.

easter today is NOT what you want it to mean 2000 years ago.

You have to twist the meaning of Easter to even make it relate to the pagan worship it MAY have meant too far back for it to have any consequence this day and time.

You've tried your best to validate an antiquated term and make it relevent to today. It just don't work.

Of course if you wish to hold to an anitchristian term by observing something limited solely to Judaism
then be my guest, but that is between you and the Lord.:sleep:

 

Every reference you gave was BEFORE The Resurrection except this one:

This one refers to Christ as the paschal lamb and doesn't even refer to a place in time as in Acts 12:4.

And YOU try to teach me hermanuetics?:laugh:

 

AF, I can only wish others to have the same brain capacity you demonstrate.:thumbsup:

This is exactly what I've been saying all along.

 

I remember writing about "willful ignorance" here a long while ago. It looks like it is still going strong...

 

To attack the translators as you have seems to be lower than your before expressed abilities until now.

Acts is a transitional book and the KJV translators used very highly and estimable scrutiny in using Easter in Acts 12:4 to show this transition and the importance of it.

To use the term "passover" as referencing
the O.T. practice goes directly against everything called "Christ".


This use is exactly why the KJV has proven to be the best translation of the Bible in English.:sleep:

 

Maybe you should stop practicing it then.:sleep::laugh: