Your Bible translation

my bad here, too -- actually Tyndale, the Bishop's Bible, and the Great Bible have 'ester' in this verse.
these all predate the KJV by many years, and the KJV translating body evidently just followed what they had done already here.
although, the Geneva Bible had been around since 1560 and it has "Passover" -- so there was evidently already controversy over what was correct.

Luther's Bible, 1522, in German, has "Ostern" ((Ishtar)) here, also.
there are many German Bibles predating Luther's translation, tho many of them are only preserved in fragments now. the Gothic or Wilfila Bible ((5th century)), for example, doesn't have any known copies that include Acts. the Gutenberg, Mentelin and a few others are accessible online as scanned copies of the pages, but they don't have chapter/verse annotation and it's difficult to parse through looking for this verse.

the history is interesting; i would like to know where the idea of changing Pascha to Ishtar in translation originated: obviously not with the Greek copies, as they all faithfully have "Pascha" and don't use some other word. Luke himself obviously meant to use exactly the same word that means Passover -- there is no doubt. but somewhere along the line, someone decided they'd put Ishtar/Easter here instead. it did not originate with KJV as Tyndale & the earliest Catholic Bibles have it, and KJV seems to have followed suit, but it was not ubiquitous as the Geneva Bible has Passover. but it didn't even originate in English translations, as Luther's Bible, almost 100 years before king James, has the German equivalent of Ishtar instead of Pascha.

did it originate with Luther? we'd need to look at the Germanic Bibles that predate it. which i will have a stab at.

vulgate has "pascha" = "passover":

it seems obvious to me that this was a purposeful choice of interpretation rather than a translation.
but who first thought to change it?

This passage is the very reason the word for Easter, for the Passover is changed from OT to NT. Christ is our Passover.

Well done the board thanks you.

As posthuman has indicated, the reasons and origin for the term Easter rather than Passover is now shrouded by the fog of time. Thankfully the Greek text remains accurate.

Better toss your KJV then, given that it was built from Greek texts translated by a Catholic. No end of corruption there!

Luther used Erasmus' second edition; that's where I would start my search.

Incidentally, because Luther used the second edition rather than the third, German Christians don't have a big issue with 1 John 5:7... because the German Bibles based on Luther's don't include the disputed text.

That makes no sense at all.

It’s signifying that there is a dispensational change in the reference of the Passover. It’s no longer a Jewish Passover but a Christian Passover. The English word Easter was chosen to signify the changed event.

Because of your a priori belief that the KJV has every word accurate, your argument comes across as a backward justification. If Christ is our Passover, then Passover is the celebration that happened in Acts 12. Herod would not have cared what the Christians called it; they were immersed in a Jewish culture. It's exactly the same principle in Daniel 3; you have to consider the speaker's point of view instead of imposing your own... which is the essence of eisegesis.

Yes, Luke was a Christian speaking from a Christian point of view as led by the Spirit.

Herod had executed James and because it pleased the Jews, he arrested Peter also intending to execute him. It is important to remember that both the Jewish and Christian Pascha celebrations were going on in Jerusalem at the time Peter was arrested. Herod would have had no reason to wait until the Passover ended to bring Peter forth as some suggest. Jesus was brought forth to the people during the Passover and the Jews eagerly demanded Him to be crucified. Furthermore, there is no link between the word “pascha” and any pagan God form any era. Herod may or may not have worshipped Ishtar but there is no legitimate justification for translating “pascha” as the name of any pagan God, the link simply does not exist.

Herod planned to bring Peter forth to the people after Easter (The Christian Pascha). Herod decided to wait until after the Christian Pascha (Easter) because of the tradition of releasing one Jewish prisoner during the Passover week. According to Mark 15:6 the tradition was that the Roman governor always released one Jewish prisoner during the Passover week. Furthermore, the prisoner to be released would be chosen by the people. This tradition is recorded in Matthew 27:17 where it says, “Therefore when they were gathered together, Pilate said unto them, Whom will ye that I release unto you? Barabbas, or Jesus which is called Christ?”

Pilate honored the request of the Jews and sent Jesus to be crucified. Likewise, Herod was obliged to release one condemned man from among those being brought forth to be executed. Herod could not take the chance of bringing Peter out to be executed because of the increased number of Jewish Christians in Jerusalem celebrating Christian Pascha. Until the Christian Pascha ended Jerusalem would be populated by an exaggerated number of Christian pilgrims who had come to town to celebrate. Herod planned to wait until the Christian pilgrims had left Jerusalem and returned home so there would be no chance that the crowd would demand Peters release. Thus it was the Christian pascha (Easter) which Herod was waiting to pass, not the Passover. It is my belief that the translators of the KJV rightly discerned this context and properly chose Easter, the only English word they could have used to distinguish between the Jewish and Christian Pascha’s.

then why did Paul say "Pascha" instead of Ishtar?

why did Luke say Pascha instead of saying Ishtar?

you're telling me the reason for using the word Eostare is that Paul did not use it.

thanks Dino


this is a screenshot from the second edition 1519 -



it clearly has Pascha (("Passover"))


i am wondering if maybe this is actually all Luther's doing??
i'd really like to look into earlier German / Dutch translations, of which there are about a dozen.
this isn't easy, as the ones i've been able to find online are scans of manuscripts, without chapter/verse etc, and i can't read German so it's a chore to try and figure out where i am in the scripture when i leaf through the images.
Thankfully Erasmus had chapter designations in the margin

the Bible Historiale was the predominant French translation of the Bible in the middle ages, written in the late 13th century.

it has "pascha" in Acts 12:4 --


in modern French, what English-speakers call Easter is called "Pâques" -- derived from the Hebrew Pascha, not from a word-form of Astarte.

is God's word preserved in French?

Same word new meaning for the Church, the body of Christ. Read post 151.

Faith come by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. I believe the KJV is the word of God.

same word = same word

Pascha

there is no etymological connection.

for the record,

Luther also puts "ostern" ((Eostare)) here -- though in Leviticus 23 and elsewhere, he uses "passah" ((Pascha))