The Gipper shoulda stuck to football...

Slambo:And Easter has been proven to be accurate!

BUUZZ! WRONG!

ON THE CONTRARY:

Easter as we know it didn't exist at that time, and if there happened to be any Ishtar ceremonies occurring at the time(unrecorded in Scripture or secular history) Luke would NOT have called it 'pascha'.

Your problem is a hidden agenda(fueled by pre-concieved notions)against the KJV,and a complete self inflicted ignorance of scripture and history.Why not contact Dr.Gipp and set em straight? Fraid?

First, it's not MY prob; I don't believe any known false doctrines. The believers of such doctrines have the probs.
Second, my agenda isn't hidden at all; my agenda is that I'm against the KJVO myth, loudly and publicly.
Third, I sent Gipp's outfit several emails several years ago & received no reply.

If YOU believe him, whyncha try to set ME straight?

 

Michelle:The previous night was the Last Supper, and the Passover, or the Pashal Lamb was Jesus Christ on the day of his crucifiction, to which is the exact timing/day of when this verse of scripture takes place. John 18: 28 is the day of the crucifiction! Jesus Christ is the Passover lamb. The days of unleavened bread, started the following day, continuing for 7 days.

Michelle, I suggest you read your KJV a little more closely and a history book as well , as you've stuck your foot in your mouth again.

First, the Jews' day began at sunset, so the paschal lamb was eaten at the beginning of the day.(evening) All the other events of the "passion" of Jesus took place during this day, before sunset began the next day. Jesus ate the paschal, THEN was arrested. It was the morning after the paschal evening when the events of John 18:28 occurred. And paschal IS part of the days of Unleavened Bread! Proof? Here ya go, straight from the KJV!

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?

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?

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.

John 18:28 refers to Passover because the Jews called the WHOLE WEEK & the special meals eaten during this week Passover. Don't believe me? Just ask anyone practicing Judaism now!

Maybe YOU shoulda stuck to football! You aint doin' so hot here!

 

Michelle:Actually there was, as the Chaldeans goddess Astarte, to which was one of the titles to Beltis, the Queen of Heaven. Her name in Ninevah was Ishtar (to which is pronounced as Easter) and this is where the name Easter comes from, as well as all the festivities of it. This pagan goddess was worshipped in April which occured around the days of the Jewish Passover.

A devout person such as Luke would NEVER call a pagan observance 'pascha', which was derived from the Hebrew 'pesach', which is Passover. If anyone in Acts 12 was observing any feast of Ishtar, Luke would've said so. Pascha in Scripture should've been rendered passover every time, as that's what it meant in those days. Where do you think the term 'paschal' comes from?

 

Michelle:This is an assumption.

It is?? Then, please show us where GOD authorized the KJV and no other version. YOUR statement is the assumption.


The King James Bible had always been refered to as the The Holy Bible or Authorized Version of the Holy Bible, and you can ask GrannyGumbo about this. You can ask many of the elder people you know and they will tell you.

From the title pages of the AV: "The Holy Bible, Conteyning the Old Testament and the New: Newly Translated out of the Original tongues, with the former Translations diligently compared and revised, by his Majesties speciall commandment. Appointed to be read in the Churches. Imprinted at London by Robert Barker, Printer to the Kings most Excellent Majestie. Anno Dom. 1611."


The New Testament bears a different title: ?The New Testament of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, Newly translated out of the Originall Greeke; and with the former Translations diligently compared and revised, by His majesties speciall Commandment. Imprinted at London by Robert Baker, Printer to the Kings most Excellent Majestie. Anno Dom. 1611. cum Privilegio.?

Read a little history. The titles "AV" & "KJB" was used in KJ's own day, & there's no record he ever objected.

However, this is NOT the issue. The Gipper said GOD authorized it. Where's the Scripture saying this?


Referring to the AV or Holy Bible as KJB has been a recent label attached to it. His using this term is not misleading in the least, as you claim.

You're completely off the issue. I don't dispute one bit that the AV/KJV has borne those titles almost from its inception. Where I disagree with The Gipper is his calling it "God's authorized Bible" as if GOD had directly authorized it & that He has no other Bibles for us.

 

First, the Easter observance did not exist in Herod's time. You may read any encyclopedia, Jewish history, or other reference book you wish, and you will NOT find any observance of Easter in that part of the world at that time! Go ahead...Try to find any!
--------------------------------------------------

Michelle:Actually there was, as the Chaldeans goddess Astarte, to which was one of the titles to Beltis, the Queen of Heaven. Her name in Ninevah was Ishtar (to which is pronounced as Easter) and this is where the name Easter comes from, as well as all the festivities of it. This pagan goddess was worshipped in April which occured around the days of the Jewish Passover.

First... Let's dispel any idea that Luke was referring to any pagan observance. Read any respectable reference material you wish to try and find examples of Ishtar-worship in the Judea area in the times of Luke and Herod.

Use common sense. Would YOU refer to a tailgate party with beer at a football game as "Holy Communion"? Thus, Luke would NOT have referred to an Ishtar feast as the holy 'pascha'.

Next, the AV translators included EASTER in their list of holy days. Just look at that list for yourself.

And the name 'Easter' wasn't applied to Resurrection Day until after C.325 AD when the time for the Christian observance was established as the 1st Sunday after the 1st full moon following the vernal equinox of March 21. This was done to avoid having Easter falling on the same day as the paschal meal of Passover.

Summary: There was NO Christian observance called Easter in Luke's day, nor was there any Ishtar-worship in that place and time. And in no wise would Luke have called any pagan festival "pascha". Therefore, the Gipper's stuff is wrong.

 

Michelle:This is an assumption and not a fact that you can prove.

I see you've apparently never read any of Josephus' writings. He's acclaimed as one of the greatest historians of his time, his treason against his own people notwithstanding. You may take up your argument with those who've compiled & translated Josephus' writings.


The church in Jerusalem would have celebrated the Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ to which is observed after the day of passover.

Again, it's apparent you don't know much history. The few early Christians that observed Resurrection Day used various days, as they didn't know the true date. And NEVER did they call it Easter before the 300s AD.


You stated yourself, that the Sanhedrin had become corrupt. They were against christianity, but NOT against the pagan religions.

Yes, they WERE against pagan religions or anything that clashed with their Old Covenant religion, which by then was mixed with their own rules. That's why they went ballistic when Jesus began introducing His Gospel and allowed men to call Him Son of God. The Jews had been given an exemption from the state religion of Rome, but they couldn't prevent the Romans among them from worshipping as they wished. However, they DID claim authority over all Jews in religious matters.


This was the problem of the Jewish people throughout their entire history in the OT. It was most likely that the jews had no choice in the matter, as Rome was the official government in those times, and there were many Roman soldiers and their families living in Israel, and would have been allowed to, no doubt celebrate and would have celebrated their pagan festivals.

Entirely wrong. The Jews had been granted an exemption from the Roman state religion by Augustus Caesar at the request of Herod The Great) the one who sought baby Jesus' life) who reminded Augustus that the primary cause of Jewish rebellion against the Greeks had been due to the Greeks' interference with their religion. The jews could practice Judaism freely, and enforce its rules outside Roman law. The Romans eventually cracked down some when the number of stonings & other executions of Jews by other Jews began to grow.(shortly after Stephen was stoned)

No Jew who lived among his own people in that area would've participated in a pagan Roman rite, as his fellow Jews would've stoned him.

Acts 12

(notice vs. 4, and mentions both Easter and the soldiers in this very verse)

1. Now 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.

It makes sense that Herod, trying to please all, including his own religion, would have appeased the jews by persecuting and killing the jewish believers (as even the scriptures have told us). This appeased them fine, I am sure. These believers in Jesus, were thier fellow bretheren who they thought betrayed their God and religion, and they hated them. This comes straight from even jewish people today, when they talk about the apostle Paul - they hate him. They have no hatred toward the muslim or the pagans as they do their own people who believe in Jesus Christ. This is a fact.

I don't deny this; in fact, I've SUPPORTED this! This is but one of the reasons Easter is incorrect in Acts 12:4. No one of Jewish faith observed nor observes Easter, either pagan or the later Christian version. And, if you study the history of this particular Herod, you'll see that like Pialte, he was willing to go to great lengths to keep the jews happy and avoid rebellion, which would've led Caesar to have quickly replaced them. It's unknown just which religion Herod followed, if any, but he certainly wouldn't have put off doing something that pleased the Jewish leadership for the sake of some pagan festival. The delay was so that those Jews could observe passover, the whole week.

Again, use common sense. Easter, however it's observed, is only ONE DAY LONG, and it would NOT have been necessary for Herod to have committed so many soldiers to keep Peter prisoner for just one day. Second...I've said this several times...Lule would NEVER have called a PAGAN rite "pascha" any more than you'd call a drunken toga party "Holy Communion".

 

Michelle:The previous night was the Last Supper, and the Passover, or the Pashal Lamb was Jesus Christ on the day of his crucifiction, to which is the exact timing/day of when this verse of scripture takes place. John 18: 28 is the day of the crucifiction! Jesus Christ is the Passover lamb. The days of unleavened bread, started the following day, continuing for 7 days.

You're TOTALLY WRONG!

I just showed you from the KJV that the paschal meal marked the FIRST day of unleavened bread! This time, I'll paste slowly so you won't miss it:

Matthew 26:17Now 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 [/i]passover[/i]?

Luke 22:7Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed.

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?

Slow enuff?

Your credibility is fast bottoming out.

BTW:

You say you're NOT KJVO. So, what other specific version(s) do you recommend along with the KJV?

And where's that paste of the statement I allegedly made?

As I said, your credibility is fast bottoming out.

 

Hank D There is nothing you can do or say.
This is what the KJVO and KJVO wanabees believe.

Some KJVO (wanabees) distance themselves from this man but in my opinion it is obvious that when they defend "easter" in Acts 12:4 they are his disciples.

And that is their unalienable right (at least here in America).

The Gipper was Rucky-mon's student for awhile. Naturally, he's absorbed some of R's bunk.

 

robycop3Wrong is wrong, even if it appears in the King George Bible.

--------------------------------------------------

The word Easter, in Acts 12, in Gods holy word is correct. God has said so throughout the generations of the churches, and in the scriptures right before your very eyes.

No, He HASN'T! The word He caused Luke to use is PASCHA. And when Luke wrote, pascha did NOT mean Easter. Apparently, you just will not or cannot grasp this simple, proven FACT.


Why are you so trying to futilly find error in God's words? You are not going to find it, because HE has provided them perfectly for us. It is so sad that you doubt this.

The error isn't in God's word, but, in this instance, man's translation of it. Pascha may NOW mean either Easter or Passover to a Greek, but in Luke's day it meant PASSOVER ONLY.

This Easter thing has been discussed sundry times, and my intent in this thread is to show DR.GIPP'S reasoning about it incorrect. Michelle, you've done a very poor job supporting the good doctor. I don't think you have any ground to stand on.

Michelle, you say you're not KJVO. What other specific version(s) do you recommend?

Where's your paste of the statement you said I made?

Michelle's credibility..going...going.....

 

Michelle:First of all, I am sorry that I misread your quote. Secondly, I disagree that the KJB was always called this. This has been a recent thing, since the advent of all the modern versions.

First, I suggest you look up some of the archives of the 17th C. Anglican Church. The KJV was called "Authorized version" from the gitgo, because of its title page. "King James Bible" came shortly afterwards, during KJ's lifetime, and it may well have been started by some "Geneva Bible Onlyists".(who were as wrong as today's KJVOs)

And it really doesn't matter WHEN it started. KJV or KJB is the acronyms for its name today. Every publisher places "King James Version, King James Bible, KJV, or KJB somewhere on its cover or title page...with the exception of AV 1611 replicas. This is the distinct title of this particular Bible version, to distinguish it from other versions, same as are NIV, etc. for other versions.


Secondly, if it is God's word of truth, then He must have authorized it, since HE is the AUTHOR of it and has approved of it. Do you doubt this? If you do, argue with the evidence, not me.

Please show us this authorization, and please prove to us this is the ONLY English BV God's authorized. Otherwise, like Slambo, you're not even tilting at windmills, but at those little pinwheels in someone's yard.

 

Thus, how did the KJV translators know that on this one occasion "Easter" didn't mean "Passover?"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Michelle:The same way I know it, and many others know it - understanding the scriptures and believing in the providence of God concerning his words and what was also believed, known and taught in the history of the churches. The church is the Pillar of truth:

Then if you really understand the Scriptures, you should've seen that Luke used the same word, pascha, that he'd used six times earlier in his gospel, in each case, clearly meaning PASSOVER.