KJVO and Pagan Easter.

It is because of the Catholic influence on the KJV translators that this word is used.

The correct word is Passover.

 

The word "pasca" means Passover, not Easter. The word "Easter" in reference to the day had not even come into being yet.

I don't have a Catholic Bible, but I'd be curious as to whether the NAB uses "passover" or "easter".

 

So much for the "Catholic influence" on the KJV as alleged earlier.

 

I could be wrong (but I don't think I am), but I
believe the KJV is the only one that uses the
word, "Easter" for Passover. Someone some
months ago said that this was because
Christians in the time of King James used
the word "Easter" when intending Passsover.
I have checked this out and found absolutely no
legitimate evidence for it. This idea, in my
opinion was a mere rewriting of history in order
to cover up for error.

 

It's not a rewriting of history, your timeframe is just a little late. The word "Easter" was used in earlier English translations of the Bible to refer to Passover. It was a simple matter of linguistic compromise, providing a familiar point of reference for people who knew what Easter was, but not the Hebrew pascha festival.

It was William Tyndale who coined the word "Passover" in the 16th century. If I remember correctly he was happy enough to use "Easter" in the first edition of his New Testament. However, when it came time to translate the Old Testament, he realized that using "Easter" would create a glaring anachronism, so the coining of a new word was in order.

Subsequently the use of the word "Easter" to refer to the Hebrew observance fell out of favour. The fact that it exists exactly once in the King James, to translate a word that is consistently translated "Passover" elsewhere, suggests that it is no more significant than a simple editorial "oops."

 

Odd that anyone would assume that people
were so lacking in intelligence that they could not
learn what a word representing an idea was, so
they thought they had to represent it by a pagan
word. This whole idea reeks. It is a slap in the
face of ordinary intelligence and in the face of
our God who ordained Pesach.

 

The fact that it exists exactly once in the King James, to translate a word that is consistently translated "Passover" elsewhere, suggests that it is no more significant than a simple editorial "oops."

But the KJV must be oops-free if 'KVJO' is a correct doctrine.

 

I am not too worried about Ransom being KJVO.

 

It was William Tyndale who coined the word "Passover" in the 16th century.

That's news to me. I believe English speaking Jews had used the word "Passover" for Pesach before Tyndale or the 1611 KJV.

 

According to the entry for "Passover" at Merriam-Webster Online, it came into use in 1530 - which coincides with Tyndale's translation of the Pentateuch.

IN another post, Abiyah said:

It is a slap in the face of ordinary intelligence and in the face of our God who ordained Pesach.

The English Bible first came to be in a time when most people could not read - including many priests. Moreover, most people had little idea what went on 20 miles from their own home, let alone halfway around the world in the Holy Land.

Tyndale was the first not only to use the word "Passover" to refer to the pesach, but apparently also the first to use the word "Easter." (Earlier Bibles used some transliteration of the Greek pascha.) Remember that Tyndale was motivated by an indignation over the illiteracy of the clergy as well as a desire to make the Scriptures understandable even to ploughboys. They didn't understand pesach. They did get Easter.

It was a justifiable paraphrase for Tyndale's purpose; having later coined the word "Passover" for his Old Testament, no doubt he would later have updated the New, had he lived that long.

 

The Hebrew word pesach means “to pass over”, and would have been known to Enslish speaking Jews of Tyndale's time and prior.

 

To even compare Pesach to Easter is
absolutely ludicrous. Period. An idea
based upon pure, unadulterated ignorance.
The two are totally different concepts. Tthe
first was an idea based upon Scritpure
authorized by our God, and the second was
a pagan holiday. This is like comparing
a lion to an orange, just because someone is
sitting in the zooo, eating an orange.

 

The Hebrew word pesach means “to pass over”, and would have been known to Enslish speaking Jews of Tyndale's time and prior.

The Jews were expelled from England by Edward I in 1290 and weren't allowed to return for 350 years. So they weren't around in Tyndale's time to explain to all the English-speaking Gentile ploughboys what the Hebrew word pesach meant.

[ November 26, 2002, 04:32 PM: Message edited by: Ransom ]

 

Abiyah said:

To even compare Pesach to Easter is
absolutely ludicrous.

Be that as it may, it was done. That is a brute fact of history.

 

A brute fact of history, I can accept. What I
cannnot accept is that people are still doing it
all today and calling it righteous, because
someone, way back in times of ignorance, did it,
"so it must be right."

 

I agree that the the term pascha in Acts 12:4 should be translated in English as "Passover." However, the Christian celebration centering upon that time had long been called Easter by the English, who knew that it was referring to the time also called Passover. A reading of Bede's Ecclesiastical History of the English People , written in the 7th century, demonstrates this fact. Thus I really don't mind if Christians still use the term 'Easter', so long as there is no pagan baggage brought along with it. Perhaps this was the mentality of the KJV translators. I personally think that when it comes to translating the Scriptures, however, the use of the term 'Easter' is inexcusable. Translations should be accurate and set a better example for Christians to follow in their use of language as well.

Pastork

[ November 26, 2002, 07:11 PM: Message edited by: Pastork ]

 

Some folks may be intereseted to know that Tyndale also invented the word "atonement" for his translation.