Hip and Thigh: Smiting Theological Philistines with a Great Slaughter. Judges 15:8

Monday, October 10, 2005

The Six Arguments in Defense of King James Onlyism

Before launching into addressing the various elements of King James Onlyism, I thought I would begin by first providing an outline of what I believe are the 6 key arguments King James only (KJVO) advocates use to defend their view point that the King James Version, originally published in 1611, is the only Bible that contains the pure, infallible, and inerrant Word of God. These arguments may not be a complete list, but I know I would incorporate these in my apologetics defending KJV onlyism.

I. The Exclusivity Argument:

KJVO advocates begin with the presupposition: The Word of God Alone = The KJV Alone
If this presupposition is true, the reverse will be true as well: the KJV alone can only be God’s Word alone.

God has given us only one Bible, they claim, not a multitude of Bibles. Only the KJV represents God’s Word, thus, any other translation that will alter the reading of the KJV in either updating its language or producing translational revision is in essence changing the Word of God.

II. The Promise Argument:

KJVO advocates claim God has made clear promises to preserve His Word for ever. This promise of preservation is seen in such passages as Psalm 12:7 and Matthew 5:17,18.

This promise of preservation goes beyond just the general message of the scriptures to the very words. God did not promise He will preserve His Word (singular), but His Words (plural). If not every word God breathed out is preserved, then we cannot say with certainty that the scriptures are pure and inerrant.

III. The Textual Argument:

KJVO advocates make the claim that the King James Bible is translated from the best original manuscripts.

The KJV translators used the 1525 Daniel Bomberg, 2nd edition of the Jacob Ben-Chayyim Masoretic text for the Old Testament and the Received Text, originally published by Roman Catholic scholar Desiderius Erasmus, for the New Testament.

These are considered the best original language texts for the following reasons:

1). They represent the majority of ancient, manuscript witnesses.

2). These ancient manuscripts were used consistently and with out interruption by God’s believing people.

3). These ancient manuscripts were never lost to the “sea of time” or ever laid aside by God’s people. They were continually copied and re-copied and show signs of being worn out from use, thus indicating the confidence God’s people placed in them as being God’s holy Word.

Yet, on the other hand, the original language texts used to translate modern versions must be rejected for the following reasons:

1). The manuscripts utilized by modern translations are few and represent the minority of witnesses

2). These manuscripts have their origin in and around Alexandria, Egypt, an area known for false teaching.

3). The manuscripts utilized by modern translations are in pristine condition, indicating they were never used by God’s people.

4). These manuscripts give the appearance they were altered or corrupted by heretical men who desired to undermine Christian doctrine.

IV. The Purity Argument:

God’s Word, based upon Psalm 12:6,7, has gone through a seven-fold purification process in the English language. Beginning with Wycliff’s Lollard translations, then the Tyndale’s Bible, the Coverdale Bible, Matthew’s Bible, the Geneva Bible, the Bishop’s Bible and then the King James Bible. This providentially guided process certified the purity of God’s Word as He divinely guided the translators to burn off any dross by their continual translation. The King James represents the culmination of purity. (It should be noted that the “seven-fold” list is not standard and differs among KJVO advocates).

V. The Scholarship Argument:

The King James was translated by the greatest textual scholars in all of Church History. All of the men who helped to translate the King James Bible were the world’s experts in the fields of biblical languages and theology. God specifically directed these men by divine providence to use their expertise so as to provide His people with the best translation that represents His holy Word.

VI. The Historical Argument:

The King James Bible demonstrates God's hand of blessing by how it has impacted world history.

1). The forerunner English translations (along with the original language texts used in translating the KJV) where all instrumental in the shaping of the Reformation led by Martin Luther, John Calvin, and John Knox.

2). It was the translation carried to the new world by the Pilgrims and Puritans

3). It was the translation utilized in the preaching of the two Great Awakenings in America. Both Jonathan Edwards and George Whitfield used the KJV when they preached.

4). It was the translation carried around the world in the great missionary endeavors of the 18th and 19th centuries.

5). All of the wonderful Christian literature published in the 1600s by the Puritans and Baptists used the KJV.

Now as my series progresses, I hope to draw my posts around the claims put forth in these 6 arguments. They will help us frame the discussion in a more cohesive manner.

When I presented my KJV series in spoken format, I wedged an historical overview of the development of KJV onlyism in between my testimony and the introduction to these arguments. To save a little time, I would encourage readers to take a look at Doug Kutilek's article, The Unlearned Men, that provides a good summary background to the origins of KJV onlyism being founded upon the writings of a 7th Day Adventist by the name of Benjamin Wilkinson. Wilkinson did not like the new Revised Version because it changed some of his pet, Adventist verses and so he responded by writing one of the first ever books defending the idea the King James Bible was God's final authority. He was also the first person to libel the character of Westcott and Hort as being liberal, Bible correcting heretics.

The next time, I will start with argument number one, the Exclusivity argument.



Blogger Daniel said...

I look forward to the series.

11:57 PM, October 11, 2005  
Blogger BlackCalvinist said...

Looks real good. I'm looking forward too.

11:24 AM, October 12, 2005  
Blogger P. Cranston Roby said...

Hi, Fred...Remember me?

I have repeatedly asked many KJVOs to provide evidence that the current KJVO myth was practiced before 1930, and all I've ever received are excuses and spin. the evidence is quite plain that the myth did NOT start before 1930, and wasn't really apread to the public before 1955, and wasn't big-time until after 1970. it is a new doctrine spread by dishonest authors who try to post their imaginations before the public in order to keep themselves livin' large. their interese is NOT in God's words no matter how sincere they sound.

You have expounded upon an argument I've used for many years against the KJVO myth...IT HAS ABSOLUTELY NO SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT WHATSOEVER! Nowhere in the KJV are there any exhortations to use only the KJV...Not even a HINT, using the broadest of implication. In fact, the AV translators themselves DENY onlyism; they say that even the meanest(poorest) of translations IS the word of God.

The KJVOs argue that we Freedom readers are attacking the KJV. That is one of the poorest of their arguments. But we must remember that they have no VIABLE evidence supporting their myth, and half their worship experience consists of inventing arguments trying to support their man-made false doctrine, a doctrine they've tried to ADD to the pantheon of doctrines provided by GOD. That pantheon was finalized and closed when John received the Revelation, but man has tried to add to it from Day One, and KJVO is just another of these attempts at addition.

I,too, am looking forward to your series, and will add my commentary to the mix, and assist as requested.

In Chrost,

8:46 AM, October 17, 2005  
Blogger Fred Butler said...

Yes, Roby my friend, I do remember you quite well. I think you had some of the best stuff against Will Kinney and his pals back on the KJV only discussion board from about 2 years ago. I look forward to your imput as I plod along.


9:06 AM, October 17, 2005  
Blogger P. Cranston Roby said...

First thing I'm gonna hafta do is proofread a little better. I spelled "Christ" as "Chrost" in my closing earlier!

Mr. Kinney won't remain too long where his views are challenged. For the other readers, his game is to compare various Bible versions, using the KJV as the standard, pointing out where they differ from the KJV, and from this, to state the other versions are wrong. In reality, the Hebrew and Greek sources from which the KJV was made often reveal that the other version(s) often have the BETTER English rendering. Not to mention that the original KJV, the AV 1611, often proves Mr. Kinney's statements wrong. A clear example of this is his argument against other versions' use of 'morning star' in isaiah 14:12. The AV 1611 has this marginal note for"Lucifer" in this verse..."or, O day starre".

Mr. Kinney's usual handle is "Brandplucked" where he doesn't use his name Will Kinney.

In Christ,


11:20 AM, October 17, 2005  
Blogger P. Cranston Roby said...

please observe as a KJVO melts down as his very orn fave Bible version proves him wrong:

Time to put the "Easter" issue in Acts 12:4 in the KJV to rest once and for all. It is at best an anomaly, at worst a careless error, but in any case, incorrect. The main proof I shall use is by proving from KJV Scripture that the entire seven days of unleavened bread are Passover, and not just the paschal lamb meal that opens Passover week. That's the view of today's Jews as well as those of Jesus' day, a view founded upon GOD'S CLEAR COMMANDS concerning Passover. We shall see the KJV's rendering of these commands. -- Cranston Roby


________'s remarks...**
roby's new remarks...[[ ]]

** The view of men, Jews or not, is just that, the personal opinions of fallible man. The Word of God proves that the Passover is the first of seven distinct "feasts of the LORD" (Lev 23:4). Passover is just one day, on the 14th of the first Jewish month (Lev 23:5). Passover is separate and distinct from the seven day "feast of unleavened bread unto the LORD" that begins on the 15th (Lev 23:6). It is important to keep in mind that a Biblical day begins and ends at sunset. -- _______

[[Actually, they're one & the same observance, with various actions to be performed in various days.]]

First, let's see some historical backgrounds. Luke wrote Acts no earlier than AD 62, as Paul was sent to Rome in 60 AD and Luke mentions Paul's ministering for 2 years while under house arrest in Rome, and as the results of Paul's hearing before Caesar aren't mentioned, it wasn't written too long after that time, either...almost certainly it was written before AD 68, the end of Nero's reign. It's important to establish the approximate date of the writing of Acts because Easter did not exist any earlier than C.155 AD and certainly didn't exist when Acts was written. -- Cranston Roby

** The date of the writing of Acts is irrelevant to this discussion, because we are not necessarily saying that this was the exact name of the goddess being venerated and worshipped in Acts 12. -- _________

[[That's because there was no goddess at all being worshipped in Acts 12. This notion is based upon the guesswork of several"KJVOs" trying to justify the use of the word "Easter" in 12:4. There's not a quark of evidence, Scriptural or secular, that Herod was observing a pagan ceremony when ha had Peter arrested. As for what Herod may have worshipped at other times is irrelevant.]]

The theory that Luke was referring to a feast of Ishtar that Herod was observing is pure imagination. There's not a shred of Scriptural nor secular historical evidence that Herod or anyone else in that area worshipped Ishtar at that time. Besides that, Ishtar was then known as PALLAS ATHENE among the Greeks and the QUEEN OF HEAVEN among the Jews. The Greek word 'pascha' was NEVER a name for Ishtar or any ceremony associated with it. -- Cranston Roby

** Neither are we saying that Herod was an Easter worshiper, although he may have been, but he did have subjects in his kingdom (Syria [Phoenicia], Abilene, Galilee, Judaea [Palestine], Samaria) that were, and just as he wanted to please the Jews, he likewise wanted to please the pagans of his kingdom.

[[But at the time, he was dealing with JEWS, and nothing woulda displeased them more than Herod's worshipping an idol.There's simply no religious tie between what Herod did in Judea & what he may have done in Phoenicia.]]

As a politician Agrippa please the Jews using the pretense of their religion, while at the same time taking part in pagan festivities in the Gentile areas of his realm. It was his political expertizes, not Judaism, that led him to "... vex certain of the church ... [and] to take Peter..." (Acts 12:1-3). It was "because he saw it pleased the Jews" (Acts 12:3).

[[But why didn't Herod immediately hand Peter over to them? It was because the Jews were observing passover as Luke wrote. If Herod had been observing something too sacred to him for him to have handed Peter over to the Jewish leadership, it woulda been too sacred for him to have arrested Peter to begin with. It was because the Jews were in the midst of Passover Week.]]

The Herod of Acts 12 is Herod Agrippa I. Agrippa's grandfather was Herod the Great who killed the children after the birth of the Lord Jesus. Herod the Great also built a temple and idols for Caesar Augustus in Caesarea (this is where Agrippa retreated after Peter escaped). The idols were of Zeus and Hera , the queen of heaven. Alfred Edersheim says, "... Herod the Great and his immediate successors built a number of towns, which were inhabited chiefly by Gentiles, and had independent constitutions, like those of the Hellenic cities. Thus, Herod himself built ... Caesarea in the west, commanding the sea-coast ... (Josephus, Ant. xiii. 15. 1; War i. 21. 8.) .... [D]espite his profession of Judaism, he reared magnificent heathen temples .... Although each of these towns and districts had its special deities and rites, some being determined by local traditions, their prevailing character may be described as a mixture of Greek and Syrian worship, the former preponderating .... [In] the temple which Herod built to Augustus in Caesarea, there were statues of the Emperor as Olympian Zeus, and of Rome as Hera . [Josephus, Ant. xv. 9. 6; War i. 21. 5-8.] He was wont to excuse this conformity to heathenism before his own people on the ground of political necessity. Yet, even if his religious inclinations had not been in that direction, he would have earnestly striven to Grecianise the people. Not only in Caesarea, but even in Jerusalem ..." (The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, Book I, Chap. VII, pp. 88-89, Alfred Edersheim, 1886). Ashtoreth / Baal corresponding to Ishtar / Tammuz, and Zeus / Hera were all venerated in Herod's kingdom. Even if they were not Herod's gods, as a politically minded pagan would not want to offend those who honored this goddess.
Evidence of the worship of Tammuz / Ishtar in that area follows: "The forty days' abstinence of Lent was directly borrowed from the worshippers of the Babylonian goddess. ... Among the Pagans this Lent seems to have been an indispensable preliminary to the great annual festival in commemoration of the death and resurrection of Tammuz , which was celebrated by alternate weeping and rejoicing, and which, in many countries, was considerably later than the Christian festival,being observed in Palestine and Assyria in June, therefore called the 'month of Tammuz'; in Egypt, about the middle of May, and in Britain, some time in April. To conciliate the Pagans to nominal Christianity, Rome, pursuing its usual policy, took measures to get the Christian and Pagan festivals amalgamated, and, by a complicated but skilful adjustment of the calendar, it was found no difficult matter, in general, to get Paganism and Christianity--now far sunk in idolatry--in this as in so many other things, to shake hands." (The Two Babylons, Hislop, pp.104-105) Just who was Tammuz? He was "... Dumuzi, the Accadian sun-god (the Adonis of the Greeks), the husband of the goddess Ishtar. In the Chaldean calendar there was a month set apart in honor of this god, the month of June to July, the beginning of the summer solstice. At this festival, which lasted six days, the worshippers, with loud lamentations, bewailed the funeral of the god, they sat 'weeping for Tammuz' (Ezek. 8:14)." (Easton's1897 Bible Dictionary) "[Tammuz] was loved by the fertility goddess Ishtar (mother goddess and goddess of love), who, according to one legend, was so grief-stricken at his death that she contrived to enter the underworld to get him back. ... [His] festival, commemorating the yearly death and rebirth of vegetation, corresponded to the festivals of the Phoenician and Greek Adonis and of the Phrygian Attis. The Sumerian name of Tammuz was Dumuzi. In the Bible his disappearance is mourned by the women of Jerusalem (Ezek. 8.14). (Columbia Encyclopedia) It should be noted that Herod was King over Palestine, Phoenician and Jerusalem. -- ________

[[Thank you for the fairly-extensive history you posted, but I already knew it, having read the works of Flavius Josephus, & having access to several authoritative references such as "Encyclopedia Britannica".

But again, there's not one quark of evidence that Herod was observing any of these at the time of Peter's arrest, but Scripture plainly states Passover Week was underway.]]

Everywhere else the Greek word 'pascha' appears in Scripture, it's translated 'Passover'. This word is the Greek form of the Hebrew 'pesach', which means 'Passover' and nothing else. There's simply no valid reason for the AV translators to have rendered this word 'Easter' in this one case.(Tyndale coined the word "Passover" in the 1530s when he made his translation of the New testament. Most earlier English translations simply said, "paska, paschal, pask", etc. or left the word untranslated.) -- Cranston Roby

** The evidence that God had it rendered "Easter" only in Acts 12 is at least twofold, 1) it could not have been the Lord's Passover as they were already in the second feast, Unleavened Bread,

[[but here's where you err; the whole week was passover.]]

2) the typology seen between 1 Kings 18 and Acts 12 demonstrates the fact. -- ________

[[1 kings 18 is about Elijah's return to face Ahab; there's no mention of Passover made there. Now, go ahead and say I'm "spiritually blind" for not seeing your point, and I'll say you're ADDING TO SCRIPTURE...not words, but THOUGHTS that are mere guesswork.]]

But is this enough to establish that Easter in the KJV's Acts 12:4 is wrong. No. So, let's let the KJV itself uncover its own goof. -- Cranston Roby

** The goof is yours. You have proven nothing, sir. -- _______

[[Actually, I HAVE...Some people just refuse to accept truth.]]

First, let's see God's rules He gave when He established Passover. (I shall leave out verses not pertinent to this study.) (The month referred to is Nisan, or Abib, in the Jewish calendar, their first month of the year, roughly corresponding to April on the Gregorian calendar.)
Exodus 12: 1And the LORD spake unto Moses and Aaron in the land of Egypt saying 2This month shall be unto you the beginning of months: it shall be the first month of the year to you. 3Speak ye unto all the congregation of Israel, saying, In the tenth day of this month they shall take to them every man a lamb, according to the house of their fathers, a lamb for an house: 6And ye shall keep it up until the fourteenth day of the same month: and the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it in the evening. 14And this day shall be unto you for a memorial; and ye shall keep it a feast to the LORD throughout your generations; ye shall keep it a feast by an ordinance for ever. 15Seven days shall ye eat unleavened bread; even the first day ye shall put away leaven out of your houses: for whosoever eateth leavened bread from the first day until the seventh day, that soul shall be cut off from Israel. 16And in the first day there shall be an holy convocation, and in the seventh day there shall be an holy convocation to you; no manner of work shall be done in them, save that which every man must eat, that only may be done of you. 17And ye shall observe the feast of unleavened bread; for in this selfsame day have I brought your armies out of the land of Egypt: therefore shall ye observe this day in your generations by an ordinance for ever. 18In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at even, ye shall eat unleavened bread, until the one and twentieth day of the month at even.
Here, God establishes the exact dates, starting time, and ending time for the entire observance...and in V.18,He establishes that the people are to eat only unleavened bread from the time of the paschal meal until the end of the observance. (It's a gimme that the people could eat other foods long as they were unleavened also, as the LAMB certainly isn't bread!) Please keep in mind the time of the first holy convocation in V.16 as I'll be referring to it later.
Next...Did Passover consist ONLY of the paschal meal, with the rest of the week, the days of Unleavened Bread, being considered a separate observance? NOT ACCORDING TO GOD! Here's what God said to Ezekiel.(His writings began in the 30th year of the Jews' exile in Babylon.) Ezekiel 45:21 In the first month, in the fourteenth day of the month, ye shall have the passover (Hebrew pesach), a feast of seven days; unleavened bread shall be eaten. -- Cranston Roby

** This is faulty interpretation. First, Exodus 12 speaks of Passover from verse 1 to verse 14; then from verse 15 to 17 it speaks of Unleavened Bread. They are two distinct feasts.

[[ No, they're NOT...GOD established the whole observance at once. It is a dual observance...first, to commemorate the death angel's PASSING OVER the homes of the Israelis who obeyed God's command through Moses, and to mark the Israelis' rapid flight from Egypt. I'm sure you know it takes several hours for leavening to make bread rise, and that it must be kept undisturbed during that time. The Israelis didn't have time to wait for the bread to rise, as God wanted them to leave Egypt AT ONCE, and by His power He caused that mass of people to make a fairly orderly evacuation. Thus, God wanted them to commemorate both the passing of the destroyer and the rapid evacuation, as one event led to the other, in one celebration. Obviously the paschal meal is the first part(Remember...Unleavened bread was to be eaten at this meal also!) and the days of unleavened bread the second part, as the 'pass over' caused the Egyptians to want Israel outta their land ASAP.]]

Now for Ezekiel 45:21: the comma after the word "passover" divides the two feasts. How do we know? Look at Exodus 12:18 again. It speaks of "the fourteenth day of the month ... until the one and twentieth day of the month." Count them: 1) the 14th, 2) the 15th, 3) the 16th, 4) the 17th, 5) the 18th, 6) the 19th, 7) the 20th, 8) the 21th. That's eight days, not seven. This is further verified by looking at these passages.
Leviticus 23:4-8: "These are the feasts of the LORD, even holy convocations, which ye shall proclaim in their seasons. In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is the LORD’S passover. And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the feast of unleavened bread unto the LORD: seven days ye must eat unleavened bread. In the first day ye shall have an holy convocation: ye shall do no servile work therein. But ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD seven days: in the seventh day is an holy convocation: ye shall do no servile work therein.
Numbers 28:16-17: "And in the fourteenth day of the first month is the passover of the LORD. And in the fifteenth day of this month is the feast: seven days shall unleavened bread be eaten."
Numbers 33:3: "And they departed from Rameses in the first month, on the fifteenth day of the first month; on the morrow after the passover the children of Israel went out with an high hand in the sight of all the Egyptians."
Numbers 33:3 indicates that the passover was over the next day. These facts are further verified when we look at John 19:31: "The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away." First of all, don't forget the Jewish days run from evening to evening (Gen 1:5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 31), not from midnight to midnight like we are accustomed to counting. It was still the day of Passover, the 14th, after the previous evening Passover meal had already been eaten when the Lord was nailed to the cross. The "preparation of the passover" (John 19:14) is speaking not of the normal Passover meal, but of Christ Jesus, "the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world" (John 1:29). God even prepared an artificial darkness to fulfill the requirement to "kill [the lamb] in the evening" (Ex 12:13). The prophetic type of Passover was being fulfilled. The next day was "the fifteenth ... the feast of unleavened bread unto the LORD" (Lev 23:6) in which "no servile work [was to be done] therein" (Lev 23:7). That means it was a "Sabbath day" (John 19:31). That is what Sabbath means: a day of rest. Furthermore, the first day of "the feast of unleavened bread" was "an holy convocation" (Lev 23:7). That makes it "an high day" (John 19:31). As Christ, "the Lamb of God," hung on the cross "it was the preparation" (John 19:31) to prepare for the first day of "the feast of unleavened bread unto the LORD ... an holy convocation ... [in the which they did] no servile work therein" (Lev 23:6-7). The Passover was ending and when the sun went down "the feast of unleavened bread" would begin. -- ______

[[Perhaps I shouldn't have stopped with just the one verse from Ezekiel. But first, if in English we remove the comma from the verse, it would read quite awkwardly, same as if I removed the commas from this sentence.

Eze.45:21, KJV...In the first month, in the fourteenth day of the month, ye shall have the passover, a feast of seven days; unleavened bread shall be eaten.22And upon that day shall the prince prepare for himself and for all the people of the land a bullock for a sin offering.23And seven days of the feast he shall prepare a burnt offering to the LORD, seven bullocks and seven rams without blemish daily the seven days; and a kid of the goats daily for a sin offering.

You can plainly see that GOD has tied the paschal meal and the days of unleavened bread together. Ifyou have questions about the comma, just ask any Hebrew-language expert.The comma is an ENGLISH punctuation mark, here serving in the stead of "which is". If God considered them separate observances He woulda said, "passover AND a feast...".]]

I don't believe God could have been any plainer. According to Him, the ENTIRE WEEK of unleavened bread is Passover, NOT just the paschal meal. And it is GOD'S Passover, not Israel's! God could have called it anything He chose, and He chose pesach/pascha.And He established its beginning and ending times, and the specific acts within the observance to be performed by the people, as He chose, as He set forth to Moses, whose writings of these commands of God became our Exodus 12. -- Cranston Roby

** Wrong. No where in Scripture is Unleavened Bread called Passover. Although Passover is called "the [singular] day of unleavened bread."
-- _____

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

[[But GOD has plainly tied the two parts of the observance together, same as the events of the Exodus are tied together.]]

We see this command obeyed in the New Testament, although many Jews by then had begun to come to Jerusalem to observe the paschal meal, instead of observing it in their homes. Obviously God permitted this because Joseph & Mary, & JESUS HIMSELF followed that practice. -- Cranston Roby

The New Testament Scriptures clearly establish that Passover and the days of unleavened bread are synonymous:
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 14:1 After two days was the feast of the passover, and of unleavened bread: and the chief priests and the scribes sought how they might take him by craft, and put him to death.
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. -- Cranston Roby

** No, Cranston Roby falsely establish them as synonymous. The one day Passover is a feast of unleavened bread, just as the seven day Feast Of Unleavened Bread is. -- _______

[[ NO, ____; YOU are wrong. What part of Matthew 26:17 Now the FIRST DAY of the FEAST OF UNLEAVENED BREAD..." is over your head? And if your supposition were correct, then the resta the verse is incorrect!"...the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to EAT THE PASSOVER?" By your premise, they woulda been a day late!

I'll take plain SCRIPTURE over your guesswork any day!]]

Luke was a gentile, but remember, a gentile could observe passover long as he/she followed the same rules as the Israelis did. Definitely, Luke observed the paschal meal with Jesus. -- Cranston Roby

** Where in the Word of God does it say that Luke even ever met Jesus when He was on earth? -- ______

[[Luke didn't just make up his intimate knowledge of the life of Jesus. It's EXTREMELY likely that he did meet Him. But otherwise, his info musta come from the Holy Spirit.]]

Now, how did the Jews who arrested Jesus that night view the entire observation? Remember, those Jews were highly-legalistic men who believed Jesus was rebelling against the law as given to Moses. They were so absorbed with this that they missed all the prophecies about Messiah that Jesus fulfilled. They saw the gnat but missed the camel. Let's see:
John 18:28 Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment: and it was early; and they themselves went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the passover. -- Cranston Roby

Now we know Jesus had eaten the paschal meal the previous evening before he was arrested & taken before Annas & Caiaphas. After He was seen by Caiaphas, the events of the above verse occurred. Knowing the paschal meal had already happened, to what was John referring when he said, "eat the passover"? Why, the special meals consisting entirely of unleavened bread and other unleavened foods, of course. He had hearkened to God when He had said the ENTIRE WEEK was Passover.
Now, there are some who say there were TWO DATES for observing the paschal meal, and that John was referring to the second one in Ch. 18 & 19, but this is entirely without foundation & entirely against God's commands in Exodus 12. Remember, John had eaten the paschal meal with JESUS the evening previous to the events about which he wrote in Ch.18-19 and he knew exactly what the correct time for the paschal meal was. And those legalistic Jews who'd arrested Jesus certainly wouldn't have observed Passover contrary to God's commands! They knew not to defile themselves by not entering a gentile govt. building, so it's a gimme that they knew all the other Passover commands. -- Cranston Roby

** Who knows why they thought they could eat at that late hour.

[[VERY SIMPLE, _____...They knew passover was the WHOLE WEEK, & every meal that whole week was special, made w/o leavening whatsoever. They were referring to the first meal eaten on the day of Holy Convocation, which would begin at sunset.]]

But in any case they were still in the Passover day, and the separate Feast Of Unleavened Bread was still many hours away. -- _____

[[And they were still in the passover WEEK.]]

Even the Roman Pilate believe this! Pilate also knew the paschal meal was over. However, he said:
John 18:39 But ye have a custom, that I should release unto you one at the passover: will ye therefore that I release unto you the King of the Jews?
Even Pilate called the whole observance Passover! -- Cranston Roby

** He did no such thing. It was Passover till evening, and then the special Sabbath and high day of Feast of Unleavened Bread would begin.
-- _______

[[...Yes, the 2nd day of Passover WEEK.]]

Did John contradict himself when he wrote: John 19:14 "And it was the preparation of the passover, and about the sixth hour: and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King!"? -- Cranston Roby

** This has already been addressed. The preparation and eating of the symbolic type had been done on the previous evening. John 19:14 is clearly speaking of the fulfillment of the type. It was the preparation of "the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world" (John 1:29). The next reference to the Lord's Passover in the Bible, and Easter is not the Lord's, is in 1 Corinthians 5:7: "... Christ our passover is sacrificed for us."
-- _______

[[Now, you're adding a thought to Scripture that's simply not there. There's not a quark of evidence that John was referring to anything but the ongoing week-long passover observance. And that verse refers to events that occurred BEFORE Jesus was sacrificed, so it COULDN'T bew referring to anything else.]]

Of course not. This is simply more proof that Passover consists of the ENTIRE WEEK OF UNLEAVENED BREAD. But for what part of Passover were the Jews preparing? Why, the HOLY CONVOCATION DECREED BY GOD IN EXODUS 12:16, OF COURSE! This convocation was a HIGH SABBATH (John 19:31), in which all the rules of the regular weekly Sabbath were observed, plus the special rules for that particular holy day. Therefore on Preparation Day the Jews were doing all the mundane work ahead of time that they could. They washed all their clothes and themselves, thoroughly cleaned their homes, prepared their meals for the next day as far as they could, made sure to have enough fuels for the next day, etc.(Feel free to ask any Jew what a High Sabbath is. It is any special Holy day, whether it falls upon a regular weekly sabbath or not.) -- Cranston Roby

** What lack of spiritual discernment. -- ______

[[The above is a catchall phrase which REALLY means, "I am clueless". It shows you have no answer for the truths taken from your very own fave Bible version.]]

I believe the Scriptures as found in the KJV establish beyond a doubt that the entire week of unleavened bread is Passover. GOD HIMSELF said as much to Ezekiel, and the Jews were following this decree in the time of Jesus, Luke, and John. IT WAS GOD WHO ESTABLISHED PASSOVER TO BEGIN WITH, AND WHO DECREED THE WHOLE WEEK OF UNLEAVENED BREAD TO BE PASSOVER! -- Cranston Roby

** Totally wrong. -- ________

[[Actually, your favorite Bible version proves YOU wrong.I presented SCRIPTURE, you presented GUESSWORK AND OPINION.]]

This brings us to the actual boo-boo in Acts 12. Here's Verse 3: And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.) -- Cranston Roby

** There is no boo-boo in Acts 12 of the KJV or anywhere else. -- ____

[[It's been proven before, & we're gonna prove it again, right here.]]

Plainly, the events of Acts 12:1-19 occurred during a Passover week. -- Cranston Roby

** Scripturally there is no such thing as passover week. It is just the 24 hours of the 14th of Abib from one evening to the next. -- ____

[[I just showed you that Scripturally passover IS one week long. If ya don't wanna believe your own Bible, I cannot help you.]]

In the KJV, the words "then were the days" do NOT mean the days of UB FOLLOWED the events narrated in these verses. Please check the GREEK to see it was DURING these days. The sentence could easily have read, "The days of unleavened bread were then." At any rate, the days of unleavened bread here referenced were PASSOVER. -- Cranston Roby

** The phrase "Then were the days of unleavened bread" (Acts 12:3) was put there for a very special purpose: They were to show that the Lord's Passover had already passed. Therefore, Herod could not have been waiting for it. So he must have been waiting for something else. He was waiting for the pagan passover. -- ____

[[Total guesswork. If Herod had been waiting for anything like that, he would NOT have arrested Peter at that time. And I told you once that there's not the smallest blip of historical evidence suggesting Herod was planning to hold Peter until some pagan party was over. He was holding Peter until PASSOVER WEEK was over. If anything Herod mighta been observing was too sacred for Herod to give Peter to the Jews, it woulda been too sacred for him to have arrested Peter in the first place. Common sense.

And I believe you know there's not a hint of SCRIPTURE saying Herod was observing a pagan ceremony at the time.

Your two sources for the facts...Scripture and secular history...make no mention of Herod's keeping Peter until a pagan feast had passed, so that only leaves you with GUESSWORK...a guesswork not supported with any EVIDENCE whatsoever.]]

Therefore Verse 4 has to be referring to PASSOVER, as the events took place during the days of unleavened bread, which was Passover, Easter didn't then exist, & the Greek word pascha then meant ONLY Passover & nothing else. Rendering 'pascha' as 'Easter' here is clearly incorrect. Everywhere else 'pascha' appears in the Greek, the AV men(and every translator who followed) rendered it "Passover". If Luke had been referring to anything else, he would have used another word or words besides 'pascha'. -- Cranston Roby

** Acts 12.4 is the only place in the Word of God that "Easter" can rightly be uses to translate the Hebrew word, pesach (or Greek: pascha ). Passover would not be wrong, but Easter in this one place is better, as the context shows that it was not the Lord's Passover (Ex 12:11, 27; Lev 23:5).

[[_____, it cannot be rightly used in any Bible at all! Easter did NOT exist until C. 155 AD, and even then it wasn't called Easter until Constantine's time over 200 years later! Luke wrote 'pascha' because it was the time of the PASSOVER, the *ONLY* meaning 'pascha' had in Luke's day!]]

The Holy Spirit signified this by saying, "Then were the days of unleavened bread" (Acts 12:3). These seven feast days of unleavened bread are separate and distinct from the one day of Passover and they come after Passover. Therefore, Passover had already passed.

{{No, only an unknown number of the days of Passover Week had passed.]]

Acts 12:4 was not the Lord's Passover, but rather was a pagan Easter passover as signified by the name used to translate pascha .

[[There was no other translation possible for pascha when Luke used it here.]]

I Kings 18 presents a prophetic picture in type of the Easter of Acts 12 (i.e. "the prophets of the groves " [1 Kings 18:19]; "groves" = Asherah were tree idols to "Ashtoreth the goddess of the Zidonians" [1 Kings 11:33]. Ashtoreth, Ishtar, Astarte, Easter all mean star and are the same false goddess. "And [the prophets of Ashtoreth] leaped [pacach ] upon the altar which was made" [1 Kings 18:26]; "pacach" meaning "pass over" [Ex 12:13, 23] is the root word for pesach = Passover. cf. 1 Kings 18:17- 29).

[[ Your imagination is taking over, _____, as once again you're adding your guesswork to Scripture. There are absolutely **NO** ties between the two sets of events! If a Hebrew speaker were to say, "At noon, a plane will PASS OVER", he would use that same word. It is NOT tied ONLY to the passover observance as pascha is.]]

Passover of the Old and New testaments pertains to the sacrificial death and the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ. Easter of Acts12 pertains to useless sacrifices to Ashtoreth the goddess of the Zidonians who is the same as Ishtar of the Babylonians, and Easter the goddess of the Druids.

[[Total guesswork, not supported by the slightest evidence.]]

The prophetic type in 1 Kings 18 helps us see the truth of the Acts 12 Easter. Both 1 Kings 18 and Acts 12 have: 1) Pagan kings against God's man, 2) for their own political ambition. 3) The people are against God's man. 4) Both have to do with the worship of a Zidonian goddess called Ashtoreth (or Easter in English), 5) with a false "pacach" (The word's use here not insignificant, as it only occurs 7 times in the Bible and two of them in this passage). 6) The false god's in both chapters seem to be sleeping or on a long trip as they do not help the kings or people. 7) God's man is triumphant in both chapters. 8) In both cases the proponent of Ashtoreth / Easter found great disapproval in the eyes of the people or king. 9) The location of Herod's retreat, to Caesarea, was only about 20 miles from Mount Carmel where the false prophets conducted their leaping pacach to their gods. Put another way: Both passages have 1) a pagan king, 2) a prophet of God, 3) Zidon / Sidon, 4) Ashtoreth / Easter, 5) pacach / pascha, etc. If you do not accept sound methods of Bible interpretation (typology), then I can not help you, ____. But it is there. -- _____

[[There's no sound method in your "exegesis", which is actually EISEGESIS, based upon pure guesswork.]]

Conclusion: "Easter" in the KJV's Acts 12:4 is incorrect. -- Cranston Roby

** Conclusion: "Easter" in the KJV's Acts 12:4 is correct. -- ______

[[I used Scripture from your own fave Bible version, while you fished, guessed, wished, and conjectured. WHOM DO YOU BELIEVE, READERS?...Scriptural fact, or guesswork, points not found in Scripture at all? The guesswork about herod and some pagan Raster is total baloney. WHERE'S ANY EVIDENCE SUPPORTING IT? NOT IN SCRIPTURE! Nor is it in secular history! That leaves only GUESSWORK.

As always, I encourage everyone to read the verses surrounding those which I quoted, and to verify the history which I stated from any good encyclopedia. -- Cranston Roby

** I did and ever better than that I checked your erroneous teaching against the Bible. -- ______

[[Actually, you departed from your very own fave Bible version numerous times with a whole blish of guesswork not found in the KJV or any other valid Bible version.]]

8:39 AM, January 03, 2006  

Post a Comment

<< Home