The imperfect King James Bible

[prophet]

For the 3rd time : Mar 14:12

12 And the fyrste daye of swete breed when men offer ye pascall lambe his disciples sayd vnto him:where wilt thou that we goo and prepare that thou mayst eate the ester lambe?
(TyndaleBible)

Here is the words: Passover (pascall) and Easter(ester) in the same verse.

They are both used as modifiers, describing the same exact thing: the feast day lamb.

So, yes, Tyndale has Passover.

Yes, TYN has Easter.

Yes, in your haste to demonize Mitex, you got it wrong , again.

Try reading all of the posts, I brought this up, for clarity, on page 12 of this thread.

Anishinabe

 

[Mitex]

Mitex says,

Would you care to enlighten the Gentle Reader when the first time the English word "passover" appeared in the English language? I'll give you a hint: Think Tyndale.

Well lets see. Tyndale does not use the word passover in the version I have.

He has instead the incorrect translation of ester. WRONG

TNT  Acts 12:4 And when he had caught him he put him in preson and delyvered him to .iiii. quaternions of soudiers to be kepte entendynge after ester to brynge him forth to the people. (Act 12:4 TNT)

When you said think Tyndale I thought, no Wycliffe is the first to have the proper word pask which is just  transliterated from the Greek pascha byway of Latin Vulgate pascha.

I asked, "When was the first time the word "passover" was used in the English language? You avoided the question with your NBA spin move. I already gave the quote below (J 6:4) previously, so, I'm persuaded that your actions are a demonstration of deliberate and willful ignorance. Of course there is a possibility that you just can't help yourself. I'll have to give that thought some consideration.

Your interpretation of Tyndale, Coverdale, the Bishops, the AV, etc. is wrong. You aren't just mistaken, you a willfully mistaken, that is to say, deliberately mistaken. You aren't interested in learning anything in this debate, your mind is made up and no amount of facts are going to persuade you. Your refusal to answer the questions that I presented to you is a demonstration of this fact. So, it is out of Christian charity and long-suffering that I even bother responding to you.

Tyndale J 6:4 And ester / a feast of þe Iewes / was nye.

Tyndale and those of his day used the word Easter (ester) to refer to a feast of the Jews (passover in our modern vernacular). The context and use of the word shows this to any honest man not hellbent on getting gotcha points in a debate come Hell or high water. Tyndale was the first one to coin the word "passover" and he did so when he began to translate the Old Testament. He translated the New Testament first and used the English word "ester" which means "passover" in our modern vulgar. FOCUS! "WARNING WILL ROBINSON, DANGER, DANGER, DANGER!" (Lost in Space, circa 1968) Did you notice how I just used the obsolete meaning of "vulgar" in that last sentence? It means, vernacular in that context and not indecent, obscene or lewd no matter what your buddies down at Walmart, I mean Walgreens, think. Now, shall we return to the subject after that little interlude into the obsolete?

Tyndale J 11:55 And the Iewes ester was nye at hand...

Tell us, Tinman, what pray tell did Mr. Tyndale have in mind? What in the world is "the Jews Easter"? Jews were celebrating the resurrection of Christ in John 11 way before the Christ was even crucified? You don't really believe Mr. Tyndale had that in mind despite the feigning on your part.

Tyndale J 18:39 Ye have a custome / that I shuld delyver you one lowsse at ester.

Tell us, Dorothy, with your pretty red shoes, what did Mr. Tyndale have in mind? Do you really think that Mr. Tyndale thought Pilate was referring to the custom of eating little chocolate bunnies or the time when you get all dressed up in your pretty little Easter dress - matching your ruby slippers of course(!) - and marching off to Sunday Mass?

Tyndale J 19:14 It was the Saboth even which falleth in the ester fest / and aboute the sixte houre.

Tell us, Cowardly Lion, what do you think Mr. Tyndale had in mind? Don't be a coward all your life, come right out with it. Do you think they might have had pork chops, roasted ham and baked turkey at that "ester fest"?

Tyndale Acts 12:4 And when he had caught him / he put him in preson / and delyvered him to .iiii. 78.A quaterniōs of soudiers to be kepte / entendynge after ester to brynge him forth to the people.

Tyndale 1Cor 5:7  For Christ oure esterlambe is offered vp for vs.

Tyndale Heb 11:28 Thorow fayth he ordeyned the ester lambe / and the effusion of bloud / lest he that destroyed the fyrst borne / shuld touche them.

Any man with just a sliver of honesty and judicial thinking can see the meaning of Easter (ester) in this context is "passover". On this particular point are there any such men on your side of the debate? I'm beginning to doubt it. Sawbones perhaps? Maybe Ransom when he's not cranky?

Tyndale Ex 12:11 And ye shall eate it in haste, for it is the Lordes 6. passeouer,
Tyndale's Note:  6.The lambe vvas called passeouer that the very name it self shuld put thē in remēbraunce vvhat it signified. for the signes that god ordined ether signified the benefites done, or promyses to come ād vvere not dōme as are the signes of oure domme God the Pope.
(This was the first time that Tyndale used the word "passover" and he attached the above note.)

Tyndale Ex 12:21 And Moses called for the elders off Israel and sayde vnto them: chouse out and take to euery housholde a shepe, ād kyll passeouer.

Tyndale Ex 12;27 Ye shall saye, it is the sacrifiice of the Lordes passeouer which passed ouer the housses of the childern of Israel in Egipte, as he smote the Egiptians and saued oure housses.

Tyndale Ex 12:43 And the Lorde sayde vnto Moses ād Aaron, this is the maner of Passeover there shall no straunger eate there of,

Tyndale Ex 12:48 Yf a straunger dwell amonge you ād wyll holde Passeover vnto the Lorde, let him circūcise all that be males, ād thē let him come and obserue it ād be takē as one that is borne the lōde. No vncircūcised persone shall eate there of.

Tyndale Ex 34:25Thou shalt not offre the bloude of my sacrifyce with leuended bred: nether shall ought of the sacrifyce of the feast of Passeover, be lefte vnto the morninge.

Tyndale Lev 23:5 The xiiij. daye of the first moneth at euē is the Lordes Passeouer

Tyndale Num 9:2 let þe childern of Israel offer Passeouer in his season

Tyndale Num 9:4-6And Moses bade the childern of Ysrael that they shulde offer Passeouer / & they offered Passeouer the .xiiij. daye of the first moneth at euen in the wildernesse of Sinai: and dyd acordinge to all that the Lorde commaunded Moses. And it chaunced that certayne men whyche were defyled with a deed corse that they myghte not offer Passeouer the same daye / came before Moses and Aaron the same daye...

Tyndale Num 9:10,12 Yf any man amonge you or youre childern after you be vncleane by the reason of a cōrse or is in the waye ferre of / then lett hym offer Passeouer vnto þe Lorde...And acordynge to all the ordinaunce of the Passeouer let them offer it.

Tyndale Num 28:16 And the .xiiij. daye of the first moneth shalbe Passeouer vnto the Lorde.

See also Nu 9:14, 33:3, Deut 16:1-2,5-6.

Now, please go back through the entire thread and answer the questions I presented to you. There are some questions concerning the changing of meanings in context, there were also a couple of translation questions since you boldly declared that your beloved mother taught you Greek and Latin, and last but not least - When did "passover" first come into the English language?

 

[prophet]

For the 3rd time : Mar 14:12

12 And the fyrste daye of swete breed when men offer ye pascall lambe his disciples sayd vnto him:where wilt thou that we goo and prepare that thou mayst eate the ester lambe?
(TyndaleBible)

Here is the words: Passover (pascall) and Easter(ester) in the same verse.

They are both used as modifiers, describing the same exact thing: the feast day lamb.

So, yes, Tyndale has Passover.

Yes, TYN has Easter.

Yes, in your haste to demonize Mitex, you got it wrong , again.

Try reading all of the posts, I brought this up, for clarity, on page 12 of this thread.

Anishinabe

4th time

Anishinaabe

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=rsc2a]He completely ignores that one translation uses "copper" and the other "brass". He completely ignores that one translation says "thou shall not kill" and the others say "thou shall not murder". He completely ignores that one translation says "the love of money is the root of all evil" and other say "the love of money is the root of all kinds of evil". [/quote]

*chirruuuup*

 

[Mitex]

[quote author=rsc2a]He completely ignores that one translation uses "copper" and the other "brass". He completely ignores that one translation says "thou shall not kill" and the others say "thou shall not murder". He completely ignores that one translation says "the love of money is the root of all evil" and other say "the love of money is the root of all kinds of evil".

*chirruuuup*
[/quote]

Is your clubhouse meeting ever going to get over? You've been in the tree-house so long you've begun chirping like a bird.

Quote from: rsc2a on December 22, 2013, 11:47:23 AM

    Of course you still haven't addressed that pesky problem where translations are legitimately different...

I wonder what you mean by "legitimately different"? The wild-eyed Any Version Will Do Club (AVWDC), which doesn't believe every word of any translation since they all have errors in them, has insisted for years that, "there are no legitimate differences in translations". They have insisted that any differences (apparently not of the legitimate variety) have no affect on doctrine, and all versions, despite their differences, are sufficient for the man of God when dealing with issues of faith and doctrine. Check with your club members and when you get things hashed out please get back with me.

Some things to consider at your next club meeting:

1. The original language manuscripts are all different (legitimate?).

2. The non-original compilations are different - multiple versions each with multiple editions with differences (legitimate?).

3. There are some major differences (legitimate differences?) in the Gospel accounts of the same events.

4. There are differences (legitimate?) in the 10 Commandments.

5. There are notable differences (legitimate?) in the Scriptures that Jesus read from in the synagogue located in Nazareth (LK 4) and every extant Isaiah in any language including the original language (I added the word "language" here so that FSSL wouldn't get confused).

6. The New Testament authors and Jesus Himself are quoted as saying, "It is written..." and have you noticed the huge differences (legitimate?) in what they said, "Is written..." and what is actually written in every extant copy in any language of their alleged source text?

I understand club meetings have a one hour limit due to concerns about family matters, so, I'll cut the list short for now. Be sure to get back with me when you get it all hashed out.

 

[Mitex]

It's comical to see the continued defense of "Easter" when Mitex didn't use it anyways.

Only Barry could presume that we would use an English word in a Polish Bible. What desperation on FSSL's part. What extremism by Admin to presume that archaic words found in the Scriptures are proof of error.

971 Blickl. Hom. 67 Hælend cwom syx da¼um ær Iudea eastrum.

1398 Trevisa Barth. De P.R. ix. xxxi. (1495) 366 Ester is callyd in Ebrewe Phase, that is passynge other passage.

1563 Homilies ii. Whitsunday i. (1859) 453 Easter, a great, and solemne feast among the Jewes.

1726 Ayliffe Parergon 236 Thus the Lord's Passover, which we commonly call Easter, was order'd by the Canon-Law to be celebrated every year on a Sunday, otherwise stiled the Lord's-Day. 

 

[bgwilkinson]

Mitex says,

Would you care to enlighten the Gentle Reader when the first time the English word "passover" appeared in the English language? I'll give you a hint: Think Tyndale.


Well lets see. Tyndale does not use the word passover in the version I have.

He has instead the incorrect translation of ester. WRONG

TNT  Acts 12:4 And when he had caught him he put him in preson and delyvered him to .iiii. quaternions of soudiers to be kepte entendynge after ester to brynge him forth to the people. (Act 12:4 TNT)


When you said think Tyndale I thought, no Wycliffe is the first to have the proper word pask which is just  transliterated from the Greek pascha byway of Latin Vulgate pascha.



Acts 12:4
Wycliffe(i) 4 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.


Oh look at this.

GNV  Acts 12:4 And when he had caught him, he put him in prison, and deliuered him to foure quaternions of souldiers to be kept, intending after the Passeouer to bring him foorth to the people. (Act 12:4 GNV)

Well the Calvinists in Geneva got it right. How about that.

Oh look at this one by Gregory Martin and his English Roman Catholic translators.

Rheims
Act 12:4  And when he had apprehended him, he cast him into prison, delivering him to four files of soldiers, to be kept, intending, after the pasch, to bring him forth to the people.

That is a few that predate the 1611 version.


Mitex, this is one of the places where you are not clear. Maybe you have a Tyndale version with Passover. I'm checking to see if I can find one by Bede.

So here is the question. What are you trying to say. Or are you just spinning as fast as you can.

You alluded to the Wizard of Oz, do you think of yourself as the little guy behind the curtain?

I thought I had read the word Easter in Bede.

Well here it is in what is widely known by those who study English Catholic Ecclesiastical history as the Paschal controversy.

Bede Book II IV

"For when he understood that the life and profession of the Scots in their aforesaid
country, as well as of the Britons in Britain, was not truly in accordance with the practice
of the Church in many matters, especially that they did not celebrate the festival of Easter
at the due time, but thought that the day of the Resurrection of our Lord ought, as has been
said above, to be observed between the 14th and 20th of the moon; he wrote, jointly with
his fellow bishops, a hortatory epistle, entreating and conjuring them to keep the unity of
peace and Catholic observance with the Church of Christ spread throughout the world."


Well This predates Tyndale by at least 5 centuries. I certainly am not sure this is the first mention of Easter in English Catholic History. Easter and Pascha certainly have been a source of controversy in the Church for hundreds of years.

Easter is not Pascha and Pascha is not Easter.

 

[Mitex]

Mitex says,

Would you care to enlighten the Gentle Reader when the first time the English word "passover" appeared in the English language? I'll give you a hint: Think Tyndale.

Well lets see. Tyndale does not use the word passover in the version I have.

He has instead the incorrect translation of ester. WRONG...

and now...

I thought I had read the word Easter in Bede.

Well here it is in what is widely known by those who study English Catholic Ecclesiastical history as the Paschal controversy.

I asked, "When was the first time the word "passover" was used in the English language?
You are really getting behind in answering questions! See the following:

Post 139 www.fundamentalforums.org/bible-versions/the-imperfect-king-james-bible/139/

And when you fly over to Greece and land at the Athens airport at Easter time and see Πάσχα (pascha) plastered all over the chocolate Easter bunnies, what then? Ever hear of thing called C-O-N-T-E-X-T? Care to take a stab at the questions I presented to you?
Post 112 www.fundamentalforums.org/bible-versions/the-imperfect-king-james-bible/112/

Post 44 Bede was already cited by the Oxford English Dictionary - pay attention, you might learn something.

www.fundamentalforums.org/bible-versions/the-imperfect-king-james-bible/44/

Easter is not Pascha and Pascha is not Easter.

Since you claimed earlier that your beloved mother taught you Greek and Latin, would you care to translate "Happy Easter" into both of those languages?
Greek: Καλό Πάσχα (Kaló Páscha)
Latin: Felix Pascha

Please correct me if I'm mistaken on this point.

 

[biscuit1953]

Let me get this straight.  We have a man who believes that the only “standard” Bible we have today in English is a 400 year old translation written by a Roman Catholic priest who used only a half dozen Greek manuscripts and a little Latin;  and everyone is discussing whether a word should be translated Passover or Easter?

We have a man who believes that the Textus Receptus which is based on a 400 year old translation taken from a half dozen manuscripts and published 13 years after the KJV is the “only basis for any legitimate translation?”

We have a man who parrots Peter Ruckman and defends his teachings on abortion while accusing others who expose him of being “talebarers?”  Was I wrong in leaving Ruckmanism?

 

[Mitex]

Let me get this straight.  We have a man who believes that the only “standard” Bible we have today in English is a 400 year old translation written by a Roman Catholic priest who used only a half dozen Greek manuscripts and a little Latin;  and everyone is discussing whether a word should be translated Passover or Easter?

We have a man who believes that the Textus Receptus which is based on a 400 year old translation taken from a half dozen manuscripts and published 13 years after the KJV is the “only basis for any legitimate translation?”

We have a man who parrots Peter Ruckman and defends his teachings on abortion while accusing others who expose him of being “talebarers?”  Was I wrong in leaving Ruckmanism?

Wow! What clarity, what clearing of yourself, what vehement desire, what  zeal, what a display of reasoning and honesty!

What man believes that the only “standard” Bible we have today in English is a 400 year old translation written by a Roman Catholic priest who used only a half dozen Greek manuscripts and a little Latin?

What 400 year old translation was written by a Roman Catholic priest who used only a half dozen Greek manuscripts and a little Latin?

Who is discussing whether a word should be translated Easter or passover?

• The current discussion is over the arrogance of wanna-be-scholars insisting that the presence of archaic or obsolete words is proof of error and imperfection of the Scriptures. We are also discussing the meaning of Easter as found in the old English translations. The wild-eyed ones of both sides have so much chocolate on their brains they can't see anything in the text but Easter bunnies.

Tell us, pray tell, what man believes that the Textus Receptus is based on a 400 year old translation?

What man parrots Ruckman?

What a fine straw man you have built, what poisoning the well, what guilt by association, ad hominem, etc.

When ever you get your bearings and want to jump back into the fray and address the questions presented, help yourself.

 

[prophet]

Mitex says,

Would you care to enlighten the Gentle Reader when the first time the English word "passover" appeared in the English language? I'll give you a hint: Think Tyndale.


Well lets see. Tyndale does not use the word passover in the version I have.

He has instead the incorrect translation of ester. WRONG

TNT  Acts 12:4 And when he had caught him he put him in preson and delyvered him to .iiii. quaternions of soudiers to be kepte entendynge after ester to brynge him forth to the people. (Act 12:4 TNT)


When you said think Tyndale I thought, no Wycliffe is the first to have the proper word pask which is just  transliterated from the Greek pascha byway of Latin Vulgate pascha.



Acts 12:4
Wycliffe(i) 4 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.


Oh look at this.

GNV  Acts 12:4 And when he had caught him, he put him in prison, and deliuered him to foure quaternions of souldiers to be kept, intending after the Passeouer to bring him foorth to the people. (Act 12:4 GNV)

Well the Calvinists in Geneva got it right. How about that.

Oh look at this one by Gregory Martin and his English Roman Catholic translators.

Rheims
Act 12:4  And when he had apprehended him, he cast him into prison, delivering him to four files of soldiers, to be kept, intending, after the pasch, to bring him forth to the people.

That is a few that predate the 1611 version.


Mitex, this is one of the places where you are not clear. Maybe you have a Tyndale version with Passover. I'm checking to see if I can find one by Bede.

So here is the question. What are you trying to say. Or are you just spinning as fast as you can.

You alluded to the Wizard of Oz, do you think of yourself as the little guy behind the curtain?

I thought I had read the word Easter in Bede.

Well here it is in what is widely known by those who study English Catholic Ecclesiastical history as the Paschal controversy.

Bede Book II IV

"For when he understood that the life and profession of the Scots in their aforesaid
country, as well as of the Britons in Britain, was not truly in accordance with the practice
of the Church in many matters, especially that they did not celebrate the festival of Easter
at the due time, but thought that the day of the Resurrection of our Lord ought, as has been
said above, to be observed between the 14th and 20th of the moon; he wrote, jointly with
his fellow bishops, a hortatory epistle, entreating and conjuring them to keep the unity of
peace and Catholic observance with the Church of Christ spread throughout the world."


Well This predates Tyndale by at least 5 centuries. I certainly am not sure this is the first mention of Easter in English Catholic History. Easter and Pascha certainly have been a source of controversy in the Church for hundreds of years.

Easter is not Pascha and Pascha is not Easter.

Mar 14:12
12 And the fyrste daye of swete breed when men offer ye pascall lambe his disciples sayd vnto him:where wilt thou that we goo and prepare that thou mayst eate the ester lambe?
(TyndaleBible)

Pascall = Ester

To any HONEST scholar.
But to a Jesuit plant, ...



Anishinaabe

 

[Mitex]

Admin wrote:
Semantic anachronism is your fallacy. Your argument demands that Luke understood the 3rd century Christian festival called "Easter."

Why even debate this? You have rejected "Easter" in your own translation/update.

I moved this discussion from the Holiday Greetings thread. Hope you don't mind.

This shows me that you haven't been paying attention - it's not me that's trying to force the word Easter, as it is found in the older English translations and many foreign language translations,  to mean a Christian festival. I have said from the very beginning that the word Easter has an archaic (obsolete) meaning - passover. That's how the early English translators used it, foreign language translators used it and the OED shows how it was previously used. The OED also shows that the word Easter "corresponds to the Jewish passover, the name of which it bears in most of the European langs. (Gr. parv0, ad. Heb. pésa0, L. pascha, Fr. Pâques, It. Pasqua, Sp. Pascua, Du. pask). ." You failed to note the quotation: "1593 Hooker Eccl. Pol. iv. xi, Keeping the feast of Easter on the same day the Jews kept theirs."

Correspond
...
2. to be similar or analogous; be equivalent in function, position, amount, etc. (usually followed by to  ): The U.S. Congress corresponds to the British Parliament.

I've given the citations from Tyndale, Coverdale, Bishops and others as proof. Had you bothered to look them up you would have noticed that it is quite obvious that the early English translators were using Easter to mean passover and had nothing to do with Easter bunnies or the Christian Festival. That is it is obvious to the honest reader.

Semantic anachronism is what you and the other wild-eyed ones are guilty of. Semantic anachronism is when a late or modern use of a word is read back into earlier literature. Semantic anachronism would be interpreting the meaning of a 17th English word by an appeal to the meaning of the twenty-first century English word.  Interpreting the meaning and use of Easter by the opinions of those congregating down at Walmarts, I mean Walgreens, and forcing that meaning into the English Scriptures, i.e. into earlier literature. Your only response was that they are all wrong and you are right! I call that arrogance on your part.

 

[bgwilkinson]

Admin wrote:
Semantic anachronism is your fallacy. Your argument demands that Luke understood the 3rd century Christian festival called "Easter."

Why even debate this? You have rejected "Easter" in your own translation/update.

I moved this discussion from the Holiday Greetings thread. Hope you don't mind.

This shows me that you haven't been paying attention - it's not me that's trying to force the word Easter, as it is found in the older English translations and many foreign language translations,  to mean a Christian festival. I have said from the very beginning that the word Easter has an archaic (obsolete) meaning - passover. That's how the early English translators used it, foreign language translators used it and the OED shows how it was previously used. The OED also shows that the word Easter "corresponds to the Jewish passover, the name of which it bears in most of the European langs. (Gr. parv0, ad. Heb. pésa0, L. pascha, Fr. Pâques, It. Pasqua, Sp. Pascua, Du. pask). ." You failed to note the quotation: "1593 Hooker Eccl. Pol. iv. xi, Keeping the feast of Easter on the same day the Jews kept theirs."

Correspond
...
2. to be similar or analogous; be equivalent in function, position, amount, etc. (usually followed by to  ): The U.S. Congress corresponds to the British Parliament.

I've given the citations from Tyndale, Coverdale, Bishops and others as proof. Had you bothered to look them up you have noticed that it is quite obvious that the early English translators were using Easter to mean passover and had nothing to do with Easter bunnies or the Christian Festival. That is it is obvious to the honest reader.

Semantic anachronism is what you and the other wild-eyed ones are guilty of. Semantic anachronism is when a late or modern use of a word is read back into earlier literature. Semantic anachronism would be interpreting the meaning of a 17th English word by an appeal to the meaning of the twenty-first century English word.  Interpreting the meaning and use of Easter by the opinions of those congregating down at Walmarts, I mean Walgreens, and forcing that meaning into the English Scriptures, i.e. into earlier literature. Your only response was that they are all wrong and you are right! I call that arrogance on your part.

Just keep on spinning. Maybe something you say will be logical.

Mr. Mitex you asked me to go back over the thread and answer your questions.

I will consider answering yours provided you answer the ones I asked you several posts before you asked

me.

You did not respond.


IMHO Pascha is a Jewish religious celebration of the Exodus of the Israelite nation from Egypt, at least

that's what the Jews say.

I guess Christians could have a Pascha lamb too but it is not Easter. No NT writer would have ever heard

of the English Easter. Easter is not Pascha and Pascha is not Easter. They are two completely different

religious observances.


Christians are not commanded to observe Holy days or Holy seasons. That is the invention of Christians

after the NT was completed.


God commanded the nation of Israel to observe Pascha.


As to Easter this was an invention of Christians and took root and bloomed fully in the Roman Catholic

Church.


At Easter Christians are not celebrating an Exodus from Egypt.

They are celebrating the resurrection of the LORD Jesus Christ from the dead.

You do not need Lexicons, dictionaries or religious encyclopedias to figure this out.



Easter is not Pascha.    Pascha is not Easter.  They are two distinctly different things.

One is of Christian origin the other is of Jewish origin.



You have continued to throw dust in the air and squeal like a stuck pig trying to obscure and confuse the

conversation.


You make wild accusations and impugn the motives of other posters. You can not know their motives.


This is my opinion. I do not know your motives, but you come across to the reader as a proud, pompous,

arrogant know it all, excepting Hebrew and Greek, which you say you do not know, while you belittle those

that have studied it.


You wax eloquently into wide intemperate inflammatory hyperbole, just like a KJVO.

You engage in repeated name calling much like Peter Ruckman.

Are you really a KJVO?



IMHO Hebrew and Greek are not that hard to learn, after all you learned Polish.

I may have missed it, but I have never one time in your writing observed the use of IMHO.

Would you call this arrogance or did you just forget?



You sure do come across as the wizard behind the curtain in the magical land of OZ.



Pascha is not Easter.



Easter is not Pascha.



Pascha is the Jewish observance of the Passover and Exodus from Egypt of Israel under Moses.


This whole conversation seems silly since you will not be using Easter in your revised Polish Translation.


You will have to do better than you have up to this point if you expect to convince anyone of the veracity

of your arguments. You are simply obscuring the conversation with all the dust you have thrown in the air.


You are great entertainment. Thanks again for being here.

 

[prophet]

Mitex says,

Would you care to enlighten the Gentle Reader when the first time the English word "passover" appeared in the English language? I'll give you a hint: Think Tyndale.


Well lets see. Tyndale does not use the word passover in the version I have.

He has instead the incorrect translation of ester. WRONG

TNT  Acts 12:4 And when he had caught him he put him in preson and delyvered him to .iiii. quaternions of soudiers to be kepte entendynge after ester to brynge him forth to the people. (Act 12:4 TNT)


When you said think Tyndale I thought, no Wycliffe is the first to have the proper word pask which is just  transliterated from the Greek pascha byway of Latin Vulgate pascha.



Acts 12:4
Wycliffe(i) 4 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.


Oh look at this.

GNV  Acts 12:4 And when he had caught him, he put him in prison, and deliuered him to foure quaternions of souldiers to be kept, intending after the Passeouer to bring him foorth to the people. (Act 12:4 GNV)

Well the Calvinists in Geneva got it right. How about that.

Oh look at this one by Gregory Martin and his English Roman Catholic translators.

Rheims
Act 12:4  And when he had apprehended him, he cast him into prison, delivering him to four files of soldiers, to be kept, intending, after the pasch, to bring him forth to the people.

That is a few that predate the 1611 version.


Mitex, this is one of the places where you are not clear. Maybe you have a Tyndale version with Passover. I'm checking to see if I can find one by Bede.

So here is the question. What are you trying to say. Or are you just spinning as fast as you can.

You alluded to the Wizard of Oz, do you think of yourself as the little guy behind the curtain?

I thought I had read the word Easter in Bede.

Well here it is in what is widely known by those who study English Catholic Ecclesiastical history as the Paschal controversy.

Bede Book II IV

"For when he understood that the life and profession of the Scots in their aforesaid
country, as well as of the Britons in Britain, was not truly in accordance with the practice
of the Church in many matters, especially that they did not celebrate the festival of Easter
at the due time, but thought that the day of the Resurrection of our Lord ought, as has been
said above, to be observed between the 14th and 20th of the moon; he wrote, jointly with
his fellow bishops, a hortatory epistle, entreating and conjuring them to keep the unity of
peace and Catholic observance with the Church of Christ spread throughout the world."


Well This predates Tyndale by at least 5 centuries. I certainly am not sure this is the first mention of Easter in English Catholic History. Easter and Pascha certainly have been a source of controversy in the Church for hundreds of years.

Easter is not Pascha and Pascha is not Easter.

Mar 14:12
12 And the fyrste daye of swete breed when men offer ye pascall lambe his disciples sayd vnto him:where wilt thou that we goo and prepare that thou mayst eate the ester lambe?
(TyndaleBible)

Pascall = Ester

To any HONEST scholar.
But to a Jesuit plant, ...



Anishinaabe

Bumped, for the understanding impaired.

Anishinabe

 

[bgwilkinson]

Admin wrote:
Semantic anachronism is your fallacy. Your argument demands that Luke understood the 3rd century Christian festival called "Easter."

Why even debate this? You have rejected "Easter" in your own translation/update.

I moved this discussion from the Holiday Greetings thread. Hope you don't mind.

This shows me that you haven't been paying attention - it's not me that's trying to force the word Easter, as it is found in the older English translations and many foreign language translations,  to mean a Christian festival. I have said from the very beginning that the word Easter has an archaic (obsolete) meaning - passover. That's how the early English translators used it, foreign language translators used it and the OED shows how it was previously used. The OED also shows that the word Easter "corresponds to the Jewish passover, the name of which it bears in most of the European langs. (Gr. parv0, ad. Heb. pésa0, L. pascha, Fr. Pâques, It. Pasqua, Sp. Pascua, Du. pask). ." You failed to note the quotation: "1593 Hooker Eccl. Pol. iv. xi, Keeping the feast of Easter on the same day the Jews kept theirs."

Correspond
...
2. to be similar or analogous; be equivalent in function, position, amount, etc. (usually followed by to  ): The U.S. Congress corresponds to the British Parliament.

I've given the citations from Tyndale, Coverdale, Bishops and others as proof. Had you bothered to look them up you have noticed that it is quite obvious that the early English translators were using Easter to mean passover and had nothing to do with Easter bunnies or the Christian Festival. That is it is obvious to the honest reader.

Semantic anachronism is what you and the other wild-eyed ones are guilty of. Semantic anachronism is when a late or modern use of a word is read back into earlier literature. Semantic anachronism would be interpreting the meaning of a 17th English word by an appeal to the meaning of the twenty-first century English word.  Interpreting the meaning and use of Easter by the opinions of those congregating down at Walmarts, I mean Walgreens, and forcing that meaning into the English Scriptures, i.e. into earlier literature. Your only response was that they are all wrong and you are right! I call that arrogance on your part.

Just keep on spinning. Maybe something you say will be logical.

Mr. Mitex you asked me to go back over the thread and answer your questions.

I will consider answering yours provided you answer the ones I asked you several posts before you asked

me.

You did not respond.


IMHO Pascha is a Jewish religious celebration of the Exodus of the Israelite nation from Egypt, at least

that's what the Jews say.

I guess Christians could have a Pascha lamb too but it is not Easter. No NT writer would have ever heard

of the English Easter. Easter is not Pascha and Pascha is not Easter. They are two completely different

religious observances.


Christians are not commanded to observe Holy days or Holy seasons. That is the invention of Christians

after the NT was completed.


God commanded the nation of Israel to observe Pascha.


As to Easter this was an invention of Christians and took root and bloomed fully in the Roman Catholic

Church.


At Easter Christians are not celebrating an Exodus from Egypt.

They are celebrating the resurrection of the LORD Jesus Christ from the dead.

You do not need Lexicons, dictionaries or religious encyclopedias to figure this out.



Easter is not Pascha.    Pascha is not Easter.  They are two distinctly different things.

One is of Christian origin the other is of Jewish origin.



You have continued to throw dust in the air and squeal like a stuck pig trying to obscure and confuse the

conversation.


You make wild accusations and impugn the motives of other posters. You can not know their motives.


This is my opinion. I do not know your motives, but you come across to the reader as a proud, pompous,

arrogant know it all, excepting Hebrew and Greek, which you say you do not know, while you belittle those

that have studied it.


You wax eloquently into wide intemperate inflammatory hyperbole, just like a KJVO.

You engage in repeated name calling much like Peter Ruckman.

Are you really a KJVO?



IMHO Hebrew and Greek are not that hard to learn, after all you learned Polish.

I may have missed it, but I have never one time in your writing observed the use of IMHO.

Would you call this arrogance or did you just forget?



You sure do come across as the wizard behind the curtain in the magical land of OZ.



Pascha is not Easter.



Easter is not Pascha.



Pascha is the Jewish observance of the Passover and Exodus from Egypt of Israel under Moses.


This whole conversation seems silly since you will not be using Easter in your revised Polish Translation.


You will have to do better than you have up to this point if you expect to convince anyone of the veracity

of your arguments. You are simply obscuring the conversation with all the dust you have thrown in the air.


You are great entertainment. Thanks again for being here.

Prophet said

"To any HONEST scholar.
But to a Jesuit plant, ..."

Are you intimating that there was a Jesuit plant among the Translators of King James?

Possibly Bancroft?

 

[Mitex]

bgwilkinson wrote, yes, he did!
Easter is not Pascha.    Pascha is not Easter.  They are two distinctly different things.

One is of Christian origin the other is of Jewish origin.

Hey Dorothy, try repeating your phrase a third time while clicking your ruby slippers! If you shout it loud enough and long enough maybe you'll be transported back to Kansas and reality!

pascha
noun
1. the Jewish feast of the Passover [syn: Pasch]
2. the Christian festival of Easter [syn: Pasch]

Easter
1. a. One of the great festivals of the Christian Church, commemorating the resurrection of Christ, and corresponding to the Jewish passover, the name of which it bears in most of the European langs. (Gr. parv0, ad. Heb. pésa0, L. pascha, Fr. Pâques, It. Pasqua, Sp. Pascua, Du. pask).
2.  The Jewish passover. Obs.

Don't worry Auntie Em, she just hit her head during the tornado. She'll come around and recognize the truth sooner or later. We all hope sooner than later, but you never can tell with the wild-eyed ones. They won't submit to all the words in any Bible not even their preferred ones, nor will they take a dictionary definition because the only thing they really believe is their own opinion.

So, Dorothy, you just keep on clicking those shoes. We all hope it works out for you. In the mean time we are going over to Barry's house to go watch Star Trek.

 

[biscuit1953]

The reason I mention Peter Ruckman is obvious.  It isn't just because you will defend the man and his stand on abortion but all your arguments come directly from his teachings.  He contends that “Easter” is a “future revelation” and teaches that the Greek and Hebrew must be corrected with the KJV.  There is no difference in your stand. 

Do the following quotes sound like Peter Ruckman or Mitex?

“To blazes with “THE GREEK TEXT.” It is so inferior to the English text they are not worthy of standing on the same shelf. I put Nestle, Hort, Aland, Metzger, Alford, Souter, Erasmus, Stephanus, Elzevir, and the rest on a shelf below my original edition of the Authorized Version from 1613.” (Ruckman, Peter. The Christian’s Handbook of Biblical Scholarship. Pensacola, Bible Baptist Bookstore, 1988, p. 338)

“If the King James reading is with Beza (where he disagrees with Erasmus) we take Beza. If the King James reading agrees with Erasmus but doesn’t agree with Stephanus, we take Erasmus.
We have a standard of final authority by which we judge Greek manuscripts. It’s a King James 1611 Authorized Version. That is our final authority. That is final. Not even our opinion about it is final. It itself is final. This makes Bible-believing Christians the only Christians in the world, as far as we know, that have a final authority that isn’t just somebody’s opinion. When the King James wasn’t around, then certainly God gave those Christians, in their language, a Book for their final authority; but when you consider the majority of human beings instead of a minority, you can see why He finally gave them a Bible in the universal language of the Twenty and Twenty-first Centuries—English. That’s our final authority. You say, “Which edition?” That is very simple: any edition. You say, “Well, what do you do when the two don’t agree?” They wouldn’t have to agree as long as they didn’t contradict.” (Bible Believers’ Bulletin March 2008, p. 12)

Talk about arrogance!

 

[Mitex]

...
Mr. Mitex you asked me to go back over the thread and answer your questions.

I will consider answering yours provided you answer the ones I asked you several posts before you asked

me.

You did not respond.

Post #46
http://www.fundamentalforums.org/bible-versions/the-imperfect-king-james-bible/46/
No questions, I responded - Thank you for the reminder about "episiotomy" .

Post #61
http://www.fundamentalforums.org/bible-versions/the-imperfect-king-james-bible/60/
You implied that I engage in "blatantly devious deception and illogical flights of fantasy" and other ad hominem. You didn't ask any question, but I did respond. I asked:
1) Now, would you care to weigh in on the current debate?
2) Namely, can a translator accurately and validly translate two word in a source text with one and the same word in the target language?
3)Did not the Apostle himself inform us that Jesus said the same thing despite the presence of two different words in the Greek?
4) Furthermore, would you side with the current antagonist in the assertion that every translator in history "mistranslated" So 7:2? I call that arrogance, how about you?

Post #68
http://www.fundamentalforums.org/bible-versions/the-imperfect-king-james-bible/60/
You mention female circumcision, no questions, I responded - "You are right, I stand corrected." I asked, 5) "Rsc2a accuses all the translators in history of 'deliberately mistranslating' the Hebrew word in question. Do you agree or disagree?"

Post #73
http://www.fundamentalforums.org/bible-versions/the-imperfect-king-james-bible/73/
You chased a rabbit down Galations Lane. You asked a rhetorical question and then answered it yourself.  Your question: "Is it an incorrect rendering?" I'll give the answer you already gave, "No, it is not an incorrect rendering."

Post #76
http://www.fundamentalforums.org/bible-versions/the-imperfect-king-james-bible/70/
You asked, "Gdanska has wielkanocy  How could he change it?" I'm not sure that I didn't answer the idea of this question in other posts, but for charity's sake, here goes; "Wielkanoc" is a Polish word. It literally means, "Great Night". Like the English word "Easter" it has had at least two different meanings in its history of usage - passover and now Easter as in Christian holy day remembering the resurrection of Christ. It could now also include connotations of chocolate Easter bunnies, etc. Personally, I was very reluctant to use another word in its place, but relented to the wishes of other committee members.

You asked, "How do you think that will go over with all those people in Poland who have wielkanocy eggs and wielkanocy bunnies?" Which is exactly the problem with "wielkanoc" it changed or added meanings over time. Wow, just like Easter!

Post #80
http://www.fundamentalforums.org/bible-versions/the-imperfect-king-james-bible/80/
You chased another rabbit trail which had nothing to do with the thread.  I responded to your questions. I'll answer them here:

"Do you know of any NIV onlyists?" I don't recall exactly who, but more than one person on these type of board professed to be a NIV onlyist.
"Do you know of a HCSB onlyist?" No. It is telling.
"How about a NASB onlyist?" No It is telling.

Post #86
http://www.fundamentalforums.org/bible-versions/the-imperfect-king-james-bible/86/
I responded to your post and addressed your concerns by defining archaic, obsolete and giving you the citation from the the premier English dictionary the Oxford English Dictionary, commonly referred to as the OED.  You asked:
* Really?
  I know that Easter in the context of early English Bibles including the AV is archaic, technically obsolete.
* Are you using your own private definition of an English word?  archaic
  I gave the citation from the Standard dictionary.
* What standard English definition are you representing?
  A definition found in the OED. It even cites the early English versions where the translators used the word Easter - meaning passover.
* Are you off in your own closed reality?
  No, you are invited to reality. Would you like to come in out of the fantasy world you live in?

Post #93
http://www.fundamentalforums.org/bible-versions/the-imperfect-king-james-bible/93/
I responded to you post and addressed your concerns. You asked:
* Easter is an obsolete word? Really!
  Yes, in the context of verses found in early English versions including the AV, yes, it is in that context that Easter has an obsolete meaning of Easter. You have been given the quotes time and time again. One should suffice, it won't because you abandon the search for truth long ago, but here goes one more time out of Christian charity:

Coverdale/Tyndale J 6:4 Joh 6:4  And Easter ye feast of the Iewes was nye.

What is the meaning of Easter in this context? Hint: It has nothing to do with Easter bunnies, the resurrection of Christ.  It is in fact, PASSOVER! Which, as I've stated since the very beginning, is an archaic or obsolete meaning of the word; no longer used or understood by the hoodlums down at Walmarts, I mean Walgreens.

* How many people are going to be looking up words in a dictionary during a conversion in a drug store?
  The exact same number of people that would be reading Tyndale, Coverdale, Bishops and the AV. The exact same number that are taken back at the presence of Easter in Acts 12:4

* Archaic? Obsolete? Hardly. Want to try again?
  Yes, archaic and obsolete. I've tried to present the truth to you again and again, but you find it distasteful and reject it outright based upon the opinion of your buddies down at Walgreens.

* Have you bothered to read what Miles Smith said about why they translated Greek word "pascha" with the English word "Easter"?
  I've read the preface to the AV written by Miles Smith many times. He never mentions "pascha" nor does he mention the word "Easter" in the entire preface. You sly fox you.

Post #99
http://www.fundamentalforums.org/bible-versions/the-imperfect-king-james-bible/99/
You make a startling confession in this post: "The whole point of my response is to show that the dictionary definition of words is not important to the plowboy or the Walgreens employee." Hence, they remain just as ignorant as you. Willfully or not I cannot say. You asked:

* What is so difficult to understand about that?
  What is do difficult to understand about Walgreen employees not being aware that Easter as used in earlier English versions is obsolete and archaic? Not difficult to understand at all, most Walgreen employee's are ignorant of such matters, just as you are. Semantic anachronism is fallacy that you apply here. Semantic anachronism is when a late or modern use of a word is read back into earlier literature. Semantic anachronism would be interpreting the meaning of a 17th English word by an appeal to the meaning of the twenty-first century English word.  Interpreting the meaning and use of Easter by the opinions of those congregating down at Walmarts, I mean Walgreens, and forcing that meaning into the English Scriptures, i.e. into earlier literature. Hold tight for a shout-out to Barry, (Admin - FSSL) - Thanks for the technical term!

In this post you gave the Gentle Reader an astounding insight into your thought process! I ask you where Miles Smith mentions Easter or Pascha and you give me a quote from YOUR NOTES!!!

While I will not tell you where it is found in the preface, as I expect you to read it for yourself, I will give you this quote from my notes on the preface.

"...their stated reason for using Easter was that “it may be understood
even of the very vulgar”. They were simply following King James’ Instructions which stated:
“The old ecclesiastical words to be kept; as the word church, not to be translated congregation,
...”..."

Post #108
http://www.fundamentalforums.org/bible-versions/the-imperfect-king-james-bible/108/
A remarkable amount of misinformation in your post with only one question which is baited.
- James ordered the translators to mistranslate church? You presume that "church" is a mistranslation. What history book are you reading?
- Tyndale was strangled for the proper translation of congregation? What goes on in the mind of the wild-ones is anybody's guess.
- The KJV translators had to mistranslate ekklesia as church on pain of death? What can I say? Your memories of dreamland astound me.

Your baited question:
* Do you accept Tyndales evidence on the mistranslation of ekklesia?
  Tyndale gave no evidence that ekklesia was mistranslated.

Post #114
http://www.fundamentalforums.org/bible-versions/the-imperfect-king-james-bible/114/
You took offense at my sarcasm. I apologized. You asked:
* Why are you so mean and surly?
My sarcasm was not meant to be mean nor surly.

Post #123
http://www.fundamentalforums.org/bible-versions/the-imperfect-king-james-bible/123/
I responded to this post addressing your ignorance of my position and answered your questions. I answered and asked:

6) No catch, just the facts. I've been saying this for years, where have you been?
7) Did you have me confused with Barry's strawman or Quijote's windmill?
8) You still haven't answered my questions concerning - different meanings in context! Nor did you tell the Gentle Reader how the club meeting went. Were all the above mentioned differences LEGITIMATE?
9) And what does "legitmate differences" mean in your mind?

Post #135
http://www.fundamentalforums.org/bible-versions/the-imperfect-king-james-bible/130/
In this post you ignored the question I asked you.  "Would you care to enlighten the Gentle Reader when the first time the English word "passover" appeared in the English language? I'll give you a hint: Think Tyndale." You did ask a rather "surly and mean" question:
* You alluded to the Wizard of Oz, do you think of yourself as the little guy behind the curtain?
  Was I supposed to answer this? Or were you being sarcastic? I try not to think about myself. God first, other 2nd and me way down the line.

You asked:
* So here is the question. What are you trying to say. Or are you just spinning as fast as you can.
    That's actually two questioned with erroneous form, but I get the drift. Tyndale is the first person reported to have used the word "passover" and didn't do so until he finished translating the New Testament and started working on the OT where he used "Easter" in place of "pascha" and started translating the Old Testament. I've told you repeatedly that you if you would stop putting quarters in the merry-go-round other would appear to be spinning. Translation: Stop your spinning and deal with the issues and questions you've been presented. What word was used in English for passover, before the word "passover' was ever coined?

Post #137
http://www.fundamentalforums.org/bible-versions/the-imperfect-king-james-bible/137/
In this post you quote biscuit1953 and swallowed his poison-the-well-argument hook line and sinker.
You didn't ask any questions, you just took the bait without any proof and ran with it.

Post #147
http://www.fundamentalforums.org/bible-versions/the-imperfect-king-james-bible/147/
In this post you once again quote me asking the question, "Would you care to enlighten the Gentle Reader when the first time the English word "passover" appeared in the English language?" and then chew up a full page of cyber ink ignoring the question your history of the word "Easter". Irrelevant to the question at hand, unless that was a little Freudian slip on your part.

That about covers it. I'll wait with much long-suffering for your cogent reply. I know that will take great faith on my part, but I'm up for the challenge!

 

[biscuit1953]

Bumped for Mitex unless he missed it on the last page.

The reason I mention Peter Ruckman is obvious.  It isn't just because you will defend the man and his stand on abortion but all your arguments come directly from his teachings.  He contends that “Easter” is a “future revelation” and teaches that the Greek and Hebrew must be corrected with the KJV.  There is no difference in your stand.

Do the following quotes sound like Peter Ruckman or Mitex?

“To blazes with “THE GREEK TEXT.” It is so inferior to the English text they are not worthy of standing on the same shelf. I put Nestle, Hort, Aland, Metzger, Alford, Souter, Erasmus, Stephanus, Elzevir, and the rest on a shelf below my original edition of the Authorized Version from 1613.” (Ruckman, Peter. The Christian’s Handbook of Biblical Scholarship. Pensacola, Bible Baptist Bookstore, 1988, p. 338)

“If the King James reading is with Beza (where he disagrees with Erasmus) we take Beza. If the King James reading agrees with Erasmus but doesn’t agree with Stephanus, we take Erasmus.
We have a standard of final authority by which we judge Greek manuscripts. It’s a King James 1611 Authorized Version. That is our final authority. That is final. Not even our opinion about it is final. It itself is final. This makes Bible-believing Christians the only Christians in the world, as far as we know, that have a final authority that isn’t just somebody’s opinion. When the King James wasn’t around, then certainly God gave those Christians, in their language, a Book for their final authority; but when you consider the majority of human beings instead of a minority, you can see why He finally gave them a Bible in the universal language of the Twenty and Twenty-first Centuries—English. That’s our final authority. You say, “Which edition?” That is very simple: any edition. You say, “Well, what do you do when the two don’t agree?” They wouldn’t have to agree as long as they didn’t contradict.” (Bible Believers’ Bulletin March 2008, p. 12)

Talk about arrogance!

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=rsc2a]He completely ignores that one translation uses "copper" and the other "brass". He completely ignores that one translation says "thou shall not kill" and the others say "thou shall not murder". He completely ignores that one translation says "the love of money is the root of all evil" and other say "the love of money is the root of all kinds of evil".

*chirruuuup*

Is your clubhouse meeting ever going to get over? You've been in the tree-house so long you've begun chirping like a bird. [/quote]

*bump*