Easter has nothing to do with Passover nor any pagan nonsense. Which is why it’s in God’s book.
The devil is just a trouble maker and it’s amazing how people go along with his false assertions.
KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE VS. MODERN ENGLISH BIBLES
- Thread starter KingJamesVersionBibleOnly
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
The devil is just a trouble maker and it’s amazing how people go along with his false assertions.
I finally figured out why the KJV translators used Easter. 
The following shows how Wycliffe, Luther, Tyndale and the KJV refer to the Passover AFTER the resurrection.
Wycliffe transliterated as pask.
Luther used the German word "Oster" which means rising sun.
Tyndale used Ester which means east or to shine.
Below comes from Answers In Genesis and I would urge all who condemn the word Easter to check it out.
Acts 12:4—This passage refers to a Passover festival after the Resurrection, using pascha(πάσχα).
The following shows how Wycliffe, Luther, Tyndale and the KJV refer to the Passover AFTER the resurrection.
Wycliffe transliterated as pask.
Luther used the German word "Oster" which means rising sun.
Tyndale used Ester which means east or to shine.
Below comes from Answers In Genesis and I would urge all who condemn the word Easter to check it out.
Acts 12:4—This passage refers to a Passover festival after the Resurrection, using pascha(πάσχα).
Wycliffe—And whanne he hadde cauyte Petre, he sente hym in to prisoun; and bitook to foure quaternyouns of knyytis, to kepe hym, and wolde aftir pask bringe hym forth to the puple.
Luther—Da er ihn nun griff, legte er ihn ins Gefängnis und überantwortete ihn vier Rotten, je von vier Kriegsknechten, ihn zu bewahren, und gedachte, ihn nach Oster dem Volk vorzustellen.
Tyndale—And when he had caught him he put him in preson and delyvered him to .iiii. quaternios of soudiers to be kepte entendynge after ester to brynge him forth to the people.
KJV—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.
Luther—Da er ihn nun griff, legte er ihn ins Gefängnis und überantwortete ihn vier Rotten, je von vier Kriegsknechten, ihn zu bewahren, und gedachte, ihn nach Oster dem Volk vorzustellen.
Tyndale—And when he had caught him he put him in preson and delyvered him to .iiii. quaternios of soudiers to be kepte entendynge after ester to brynge him forth to the people.
KJV—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.
Yes, I've being doing a study on this the past 24 hrs. I'll report back when I'm finished and have time. Here are some initial findings:
There are two very different views among King James Bible believers concerning the meaning and significance of the word Easter as found in Acts 12:4. One view is that Easter was in fact the name of the Anglo-Saxon pagan goddess of spring and that Herod was waiting till after this pagan holiday was over before he was going to have Peter killed. There are however many serious problems with this view. Number one is the fact that the pagan goddess was named Eoestre or Eastre or some say Ishtar or Astarte (all different gods and goddesses), but the name is not Easter.
The King James Bible translators did not have some sort of a collective "senior moment", and though they translated the Greek word paska as Passover some 28 times, suddenly they had some sort of a memory slip and make it Easter this one time in Acts 12:4. And they also knew how to spell English words correctly. There is no way that they really meant to say Eostre instead of Easter.
If the King James Bible had read: "intending after Ishtar" or "intending after Eoestre", they might have a case for their argument. But it clearly does not read that way. It says: "intending after EASTER to bring him forth to the people."
Let's look at it from the Greek side of things. The Greek word used here is clearly πάσχα or paska. There is NO way on God's green earth that the Greek word πάσχα can possibly mean anything remotely like "Eoestre" or "Ishtar". The King James Bible translators were not morons. They knew exactly what this word means and it means EASTER, particularly when it applies to the yearly celebration of the Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, and that is what they wrote. The second major problem with this view is that Herod was an Edomite and probably a Roman citizen, but by no stretch of the imagination was he an Anglo-Saxon.
The term Anglo-Saxon designates the population in Britain partly descended from the Germanic tribes who migrated from Europe and settled the south and east of the island beginning in the early 5th century, and the period after their initial settlement through their creation of the English nation up to the Norman conquest. The Anglo-Saxon era denotes the period of English history between about 550 and 1066. The term can be used for the language, also known as Old English, that was spoken and written by the Anglo-Saxons in England (and parts of south-eastern Scotland) between at least the mid-5th century and the mid-12th century, after which it is known as Middle English.
So it would be more than a little difficult to have a Roman/Edomite king in the first century celebrating an Anglo-Saxon pagan goddess who was never acknowledged among the Romans and in fact did not even exist until some 4 to 5 centuries later.
About the only thing the term Easter and the Anglo-Saxon Eoestre could possibly have in common is that they are both derived from the Middle English word "east" meaning simply the East. Aside from that, it's a theory totally devoid of and contrary to all known historical facts.
More from the Answers in Genesis site.
Could There Be Another Origin of the Name Easter?
Contrary to suggesting a connection to a Saxon goddess, some have suggested Easter finds its root in the German word for resurrection—auferstehung.
In a footnote to his translation of the work of Eusebius, Christian F. Cruse defended the usage of the word Easter:
Could There Be Another Origin of the Name Easter?
Contrary to suggesting a connection to a Saxon goddess, some have suggested Easter finds its root in the German word for resurrection—auferstehung.
In a footnote to his translation of the work of Eusebius, Christian F. Cruse defended the usage of the word Easter:
Our English word Passover, happily, in sound and sense, almost corresponds to the Hebrew [pesach], of which is a translation. Exod. Xii. 27. The Greek pascha, formed from the Hebrew, is the name of the Jewish festival, applied invariably in the primitive church to designate the festival of the Lord’s resurrection, which took place at the time of the passover.Our word Easter is of Saxon origin, and of precisely the same import with its German cognate Ostern. The latter is derived from the old Teutonic form of auferstehn, Auferstehung, i. e. resurrection. The name Easter is undoubtedly preferable to pascha or passover, but the latter was the primitive name.6
It is Christian. No Christian celebrates unknown pagan nonsense. And it’s proven by them that dig up useless trivia that no one has any interest in, but is useful for troubling the conscience of some who are weak in faith.
No kidding!!??!!!!!
The problem for you is that the word used is still "πάσχα " which means "Passover"....
You are trying to second guess as usual!
Our calendar makes it obvious that it does vary with the variation of the moon.
Whereas, moon calendars hide the variation somewhat.
Your studying ancient pagan religions that are unrelated to true Christianity. It’s a useless, off topic, trivial pursuit engaged in to try a involve Christianity in pagan nonsense.
Utterly meaningless.
Of course heathens probably do study silly subjects.
Not unless you want to do what The Lord God expressly asked us NOT to do. He asked his people not to worship him in the same way as the heathen nations. A simple request isn't it? Why? because the practices of the pagans are detestable to The Lord. And bad for us. Non-compliance lead Israel to destruction. It's spiritual adultery.
I don't condemn you but that is how I feel about it. My conscience isn't clear if I religiously celebrate Easter (Ishtar-the Babylonian religion) alongside The Lord God YHVH of Israel. It's one of the main reasons I left Catholicism. If we must have religious festivals I want them to be as close to Godly as we can get them.
If they've used "Easter" in the KJV then they were wrong. Sorry but it contradicts too many other scriptures. I didn't even remember that they had used "Easter" because I haven't read it at length in years. I left it behind with the Catholic stuff.
I'm not second guessing anything, I know what's going on and I'm trying to help you so that you will stop blaspheming God's word.
I found this interesting and informative. Thanks.The full moon at the time of Jesus' crucifixion/death also means that non-believers cannot claim that it was a solar eclipse that caused three hours of darkness, from around noon ("the sixth hour") until 3 o'clock ("the ninth hour"), for a solar eclipse during a full moon is a cosmological impossibility
Joseppi you are the obvious cut and paste merchant here. It shows in many of your posts. You don't speak as if English is your first language. And you parrot the shibboleths of the cult which has indoctrinated you. You have become your own most oft repeated word, Corrupted.
A tiresome cop out argument, seems to me, since, the burden of proof is every truth seeker’s responsibility.
As the scripture says...
1 Thessalonians 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
Why then, are you found guilt tripping people? Romans 14 teaches you that others serve the Lord differently that you do. It is a dangerous thing to be hurting consciences.
How do you have the bare-faced cheek to accuse someone else of this? You who are continuously condemning Bible translators and Christians who study. Sheer hypocrisy.
The irony!
You are imagining fertility rites where there are none.
If you would treat the Holy Bible as a legal document you wouldn’t casually accept modern perversions of scripture so humbly.