Nondenominational Christianity

[CoreIssue]

As i already showed you, the different languages PROVE my point.
Paques, Pasche, Pascua, Passcha, etc. are ALL names for Easrer in other languages.

That proves nothing.

It is like Muslims arguing over the word peace in different languages to try to prove their theology.

 

[gadar perets]

As i already showed you, the different languages PROVE my point.
Paques, Pasche, Pascua, Passcha, etc. are ALL names for Easrer in other languages.

And I showed you that "pascha" in Greek means "Passover", not "Easter" throughout the Septuagint and the NT. I could care less what Latin, French, or any other language means.

 

[Hidden In Him]

I don't know what kind of past history you have with CoreIssue that you reply to him so rudely, but please do not project your rudeness on me as well.

If "Christ is our PASCHAL LAMB", that means he is our "Passover Lamb" (slain on Passover). "Easter" refers to resurrection day by those who use the word "Easter". Therefore, Passover and Easter refer to two DIFFERENT days (death day and resurrection day). So for the KJV to use "Easter" leads one to believe that Herod would release Peter after the day Christians supposedly celebrated the resurrection. However, the truth is that Herod intended to release Peter after the anniversary of Yeshua's death, not his resurrection. The KJV is WRONG.

As i already showed you, the different languages PROVE my point.
Paques, Pasche, Pascua, Passcha, etc. are ALL names for Easrer in other languages.

@BreadOfLife, if I can disagree with you peaceably here, I honestly think the translation of "Easter" is reading into the text with 16th century eyes. The context is clearly the Jewish holidays, not anything having to do with the Christians. Look again at the text in context (from even the KJV):

1. Now about that time Herod the king stretched forth his hands to vex certain of the church. 2 And he killed James the brother of John with the sword. 3 And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.) 4 And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people. (Acts 12:1-4, KJV)

Why would Herod have waited until after "Easter" to bring Peter out when the Jews weren't even honoring that day? It meant nothing to them.

 

[CoreIssue]

@BreadOfLife, if I can disagree with you peaceably here, I honestly think the translation of "Easter" is reading into the text with 16th century eyes. The context is clearly the Jewish holidays, not anything having to do with the Christians. Look again at the text in context (from even the KJV):

1. Now about that time Herod the king stretched forth his hands to vex certain of the church. 2 And he killed James the brother of John with the sword. 3 And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.) 4 And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people. (Acts 12:1-4, KJV)

Why would Herod have waited until after "Easter" to bring Peter out when the Jews weren't even honoring that day? It meant nothing to them.

Yet another KJV error we can thank the Catholics for.

Acts 12:4 New International Version (NIV)
4 After arresting him, he put him in prison, handing him over to be guarded by four squads of four soldiers each. Herod intended to bring him out for public trial after the Passover.

Acts 12:4 New Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (NRSVCE)
4 When he had seized him, he put him in prison and handed him over to four squads of soldiers to guard him, intending to bring him out to the people after the Passover.

 

[Enoch111]

And I showed you that "pascha" in Greek means "Passover", not "Easter" throughout the Septuagint and the NT.

Technically Pascha means Passover + Unleavened Bread.

Thayer's Greek Lexicon
STRONGS NT 3957: πάσχα (pascha)

4. the paschal festival, the feast of Passover,extending from the fourteenth to the twentieth day of the month Nisan

Easter is an interpretation no doubt, because the Christian Easter season (which was in effect for over 1200 years) coincided with this period. For Christians in the 17th century *Easter* would be more meaningful, since Jews were small minorities throughout Europe, and Passover may not even have been significant or well known.

By the same token modern versions are chock-full of interpretations and paraphrases, yet the enemies of the KJV have no concern about these violations of strict translations. Just goes not show that the only accusations against the KJV are TRIVIA.

 

[Enoch111]

Yet another KJV error we can thank the Catholics for.

More nonsense from someone who has a superficial knowledge of the Bible version issues, as well as some serious doctrinal issues.

 

[CoreIssue]

More nonsense from someone who has a superficial knowledge of the Bible version issues, as well as some serious doctrinal issues.

I think after 57 my knowledge is more than superficial.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Acts 12:4 New Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (NRSVCE)
4 When he had seized him, he put him in prison and handed him over to four squads of soldiers to guard him, intending to bring him out to the people after the Passover.

Never heard of the NRSVCE before, but good for them. It was transference by association rather than strict translation, and that can lead to error.

 

[gadar perets]

Technically Pascha means Passover + Unleavened Bread.

Thayer's Greek Lexicon
STRONGS NT 3957: πάσχα (pascha)

4. the paschal festival, the feast of Passover,extending from the fourteenth to the twentieth day of the month Nisan

Easter is an interpretation no doubt, because the Christian Easter season (which was in effect for over 1200 years) coincided with this period. For Christians in the 17th century *Easter* would be more meaningful, since Jews were small minorities throughout Europe, and Passover may not even have been significant or well known.

Easter sometimes coincides with Passover and it is sometimes an entire month off.

By the same token modern versions are chock-full of interpretations and paraphrases, yet the enemies of the KJV have no concern about these violations of strict translations. Just goes not show that the only accusations against the KJV are TRIVIA.

I have a MAJOR accusation against the KJV as well. That is, their blatant, man made substitution of "the LORD" in place of the Tetragrammaton throughout the OT.

 

[FHII]

This post is filled with so much ignorance it’s difficult to know just where to begin . . .

Let’s start with this “Easter/Ishtar” manure. It is based on the uneducated and idiotic rantings of Alexander Hislop, whose Book “The Two Babylons” has been debunked and exposed by Catholic as well as Protestant scholars. As a matter of fact – one of Hislop’s staunchest adherents, Ralph Woodrow wrote his own book based on his mentor’s rubbish called “The Babylon connection”. When doing some actual research for a follow-up book, he discovered to his horror that Hislop was a fraud and made up MOST of what he wrote because of his hatred of the Catholic Church – and NOTHING else.
Woodrow now runs a website apologizing for having written his book and sets the record straight.

I guess the easiest way to begin the debunking of this nonsense is to destroy the imbecilic notion that English is the main language of EVERY culture. Let me assure you – it is NOT. “Easter” is an English word, whereas, other cultures base their word for that day on the LATIN word “Pascha.” In Greek, it is “Pascha”, in French, it is “Pâques”, in Spanish, “Pascua” and so on.

According to historian Nicholas Sayers from his article “Why We Should Not Passover Easter”, he states:
“Our word Easter is of Saxon origin and of precisely the same import with its German cognate Ostern. The latter is derived from the old Teutonic form of auferstehen / auferstehung, that is - RESURRECTION.”

So, next time – do your LINGUISTIC HOMEWORK instead of embarrassing yourself any further with these inane accusations . . .

As to your use of the word “Apocrypha” when referring to the Deuterocanonical Books in the original KJV – the 7 Deuterocanonical Books, along with portions of Daniel and Esther were in the OPEN Jewish Canon of Scripture that Jesus and the NT writers studied from. In fact – there are some 200 quotes, references and allusions to these Books on the pages of the New Testament. They weren’t removed until LONG AFTER Jesus ascended to the Father and the Temple was destroyed.

So – the OT Canon that YOU adhere to is a POST-Christ, POST-Temple canon of Scripture that was heavily-edited by the very people who rejected Him.
Congratulations . . .

Well, I have a few problems wih this. First off... Who is Nicholas Sayers? I did a google search on him and no one popped up as any kind of historian. Not meaning to throw any shade on him.... But who is he that I should listen to him?

Second, when you search on the origin of the word "easter", Alexander Hislop isn't the name that first pops up. In fact, you have to refine the search to force it to come up.

Who's name DOES come up is some guy named Bede. Bede was a Catholic SAINT who lived in modern day Britian around 700 AD. Hislop lived in the 1800's. Bede was the one who first claimed Easter comes from a germanic Goddes named "oestre" or whatever...

Third... Every word origin I've seen comes up with something other than "resurrection". Dawn... Spring... Even sunrise. But not resurrection.

I've actually read Hislop.... Not recently, ao I don't remember... It would be interedting to see if Hislop references Bebe.

So if Hislop is idiotic and moronic, what do we make of this Catholic Saint Bede who actually said it first?

P.S. i found the Sayers article. He goes by "Nick Sayers". Its important to properly quote the author. I don't fault BOL for this oversight... But I couldn't find that quote BOL mentioned. It may be there, but I couldn't find it.

I still wonder who Nick Sayers is. Ultimately it matters only if its true, not his credentials.... UNLESS you like to hype credentials.

In Sayers long article, I never see one reference to Saint Bede. He takes great care to try to injure Hislop, but never mentions the earliest reference (being the Catholic Saint Bede).

His route to showing that Easter means ressurection in German ia like going from Los Angeles to San Francisco via Pheonix, Dallas, Memphis, Atlanta, Chicago, Denver, Salt Lake City and then San Fran.... I read the article... I am sorry and I mean no disrespect, but I can't take it seriously.

Here is the article.... Maybe some others can take it seriously:

Why we should not Passover Easter

 

[FHII]

Ēostre - Wikipedia

No, I don't like quoting Wikipedia. I don't consider it a reliable source. But read the first few paragraphs and use it as a springboard for further study.

 

[BreadOfLife]

The KJV is based on Catholic documents and I do not use it.

THANK YOU for acknowledging that the NT writers were ALL Catholic.
The KJV was written from GREEK manuscripts and NO assistance from the Catholic Church.

 

[CoreIssue]

THANK YOU for acknowledging that the NT writers were ALL Catholic.
The KJV was written from GREEK manuscripts and NO assistance from the Catholic Church.

I never said that and they were not.

The main source for the KJV was prior Bibles. The manuscripts they did use were all printed, not handwritten like the originals in the old manuscripts.

The 1500s was a long time after the last authors of the Bible.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Well, I have a few problems wih this. First off... Who is Nicholas Sayers? I did a google search on him and no one popped up as any kind of historian. Not meaning to throw any shade on him.... But who is he that I should listen to him?

Second, when you search on the origin of the word "easter", Alexander Hislop isn't the name that first pops up. In fact, you have to refine the search to force it to come up.

Who's name DOES come up is some guy named Bede. Bede was a Catholic SAINT who lived in modern day Britian around 700 AD. Hislop lived in the 1800's. Bede was the one who first claimed Easter comes from a germanic Goddes named "oestre" or whatever...

Third... Every word origin I've seen comes up with something other than "resurrection". Dawn... Spring... Even sunrise. But not resurrection.

I've actually read Hislop.... Not recently, ao I don't remember... It would be interedting to see if Hislop references Bebe.

So if Hislop is idiotic and moronic, what do we make of this Catholic Saint Bede who actually said it first?

P.S. i found the Sayers article. He goes by "Nick Sayers". Its important to properly quote the author. I don't fault BOL for this oversight... But I couldn't find that quote BOL mentioned. It may be there, but I couldn't find it.

I still wonder who Nick Sayers is. Ultimately it matters only if its true, not his credentials.... UNLESS you like to hype credentials.

In Sayers long article, I never see one reference to Saint Bede. He takes great care to try to injure Hislop, but never mentions the earliest reference (being the Catholic Saint Bede).

His route to showing that Easter means ressurection in German ia like going from Los Angeles to San Francisco via Pheonix, Dallas, Memphis, Atlanta, Chicago, Denver, Salt Lake City and then San Fran.... I read the article... I am sorry and I mean no disrespect, but I can't take it seriously.

Here is the article.... Maybe some others can take it seriously:

Why we should not Passover Easter

Whether YOU believe Mr. Sayer is completely irrelevant. The linguistic FACTS are true.

Auferstehen/Auferstehung DOES mean “Resurrection”.

"Christ ist erstanden" (Christ is risen) is a German Easter hymn, and is possibly the oldest Christian liturgical German song. (Wikipedia)

And as for Alexander Hislop’s shoddy “history” – don’t listen to ME. I gave you information about one of his greatest disciples, Ralph Woodrow, who wrote a book based on Hislop’s manure. I showed you that Woodrow now runs a website apologizing for that book – which he pulled from print.

Ralph Woodrow Evangelistic Association

Hislop has been proven wrong by every credible PROTESTANT scholar as well as Catholic.

Finally - just because a saint made a claim - doesn't mean he was ALWAYS right.
He wasn't infallible.

 

[BreadOfLife]

I never said that and they were not.

The main source for the KJV was prior Bibles. The manuscripts they did use were all printed, not handwritten like the originals in the old manuscripts.

The 1500s was a long time after the last authors of the Bible.

And ONCE again - YOU'RE the only one making the claim that the KJV is based on Catholic scholarship. Besides - the word "Easter" isn't in the Greek manuscripts - even ones copied by early Catholic scribes.
There's not a single Protestant historian who would agree with you.

 

[gadar perets]

Finally - just because a saint made a claim - doesn't mean he was ALWAYS right.
He wasn't infallible.

Neither were the KJV translators.

 

[BreadOfLife]

More nonsense from someone who has a superficial knowledge of the Bible version issues, as well as some serious doctrinal issues.

And a less-than-superficial knowledge of ling

Neither were the KJV translators.

I wholeheartedly agree on that point.
I am NOT a fan of the KJV.

 

[FHII]

Whether YOU believe Mr. Sayer is completely irrelevant. The linguistic FACTS are true.

Again, who is he? What are his credentials? I've read his article. They cannot be considered facts fact. Only theory.

What I notice is that Bede, Hislop and Grimm are citing a word origin completely different that Sayer and Woodrow. So what you are calling true facts is nothing more than a rival hypothesis.

Auferstehen/Auferstehung DOES mean “Resurrection”.

Im sorry. Even though I read the article... I fail to see "Auferstehen" as a stronger cognate to Easter than Oestre is.

And as for Alexander Hislop’s shoddy “history”

Yea... About that. About his "shoddy" history. Why the bias? Why do you rail on Hislop yet simply refer totthe Catholic Saint Bede as "not always right ". I don't see you using the same hateful adjectives for The Catholic Saint Bede.

As for Ralph Woodrow... I read his work recently on Easter. Frankly... I am not impressed with his article.

Here's his line of thinking: he cannot successfully prove that "Easter" comes from Auferstepen or whatever... And cannot successfully deny that Oestre is a plausible theory. So he then claims erroneously that no modern scholar can trace it to Oestre. (That's a stupid ararguement. If you disagree then prove Jesus rose from the dead with work independent from the ggospels and solely with "modern discovery")

Woodrow then says, "so what if it is of pagan origin"? [Paraphrasing]. He rhen goes on to point out that "janitor" comes from Janus... So that makes it ok. Yea... Sure.

TWO QUESTIONS:
1. Who is Nick Sayers?
2. Why is Hislop and his work shoddy, ignorant and so terrible yet the CATHOLIC SAINT Bede simply not always rright? Why the bias?

 

[BreadOfLife]

Again, who is he? What are his credentials? I've read his article. They cannot be considered facts fact. Only theory.

What I notice is that Bede, Hislop and Grimm are citing a word origin completely different that Sayer and Woodrow. So what you are calling true facts is nothing more than a rival hypothesis.

Im sorry. Even though I read the article... I fail to see "Auferstehen" as a stronger cognate to Easter than Oestre is.

Yea... About that. About his "shoddy" history. Why the bias? Why do you rail on Hislop yet simply refer totthe Catholic Saint Bede as "not always right ". I don't see you using the same hateful adjectives for The Catholic Saint Bede.

As for Ralph Woodrow... I read his work recently on Easter. Frankly... I am not impressed with his article.

Here's his line of thinking: he cannot successfully prove that "Easter" comes from Auferstepen or whatever... And cannot successfully deny that Oestre is a plausible theory. So he then claims erroneously that no modern scholar can trace it to Oestre. (That's a stupid ararguement. If you disagree then prove Jesus rose from the dead with work independent from the ggospels and solely with "modern discovery")

Woodrow then says, "so what if it is of pagan origin"? [Paraphrasing]. He rhen goes on to point out that "janitor" comes from Janus... So that makes it ok. Yea... Sure.

TWO QUESTIONS:
1. Who is Nick Sayers?
2. Why is Hislop and his work shoddy, ignorant and so terrible yet the CATHOLIC SAINT Bede simply not always rright? Why the bias?

Alexander Hislop’s “The Two Babylons” piece of shoddy history and angry opinions.
Let’s start with Wikipedia’s review . . .

The book has been severely criticized for its lack of evidence, and in many cases its contradiction of the existing evidence: for instance, the Roman state religion before Christianity did not worship a central Mother Goddess, and Jupiter was never called "Jupiter-Puer."

Likewise, Semiramis lived centuries after Nimrod, and could neither have been his mother, nor married him. Hislop also makes unacceptable linguistic connections and fanciful word plays, e.g. the letters IHS on Catholic Holy Communion wafers are alleged to stand for Egyptian deities Isis, Horus and Seth, but in reality they are an abbreviation for Ihsous, the Latin spelling of Jesus's name in Greek (Ιησους), although popularly, they stand for the Latin Iesus Hominum Salvator meaning Jesus, Savior of Mankind (which also fits the teaching of Transubstantiation, where the wafer and wine are said to become the body and blood of Christ).” (Source: Wikipedia article, Alexander Hislop. Alexander Hislop - Wikipedia)


Regarding the etymology of “Easter” from the SAME Wikipedia page - in contrast with Hislop’s version:
The claim that Easter is derived from Ishtar has been questioned.[11] Modern etymologists derive the word Easter from the Proto-Indo-European root *aus-, meaning "dawn,"[12] potentially by way of *h₂ewsṓs.[13] Ishtar is a Semitic name of uncertain etymology, possibly taken from the same root as Assyria, or from a semitic word meaning "to irrigate."[14]


From Conservapedia:
https://www.conservapedia.com/%27%27The_Two_Babylons%27%27
The work has been completely discredited by painstaking professional historical research, and thoroughly rebutted and refuted by strongly evangelical former supporters who did follow-up research of their own.

Historians who have carefully researched the historical claims made in this book, and the source materials that author Hislop relied on, have determined that he is unreliable as an historian. Almost all of his "facts" are shown to be false, and his reasoning from superficial similarities of appearances and ritual actions is demonstrated to be completely unsound and without merit as "proofs" of pagan origins. This has demolished his credibility. 16th–19th century anthropologists who were contemporaries of the authors of his source materials have also shown that even among historians in the 16th–19th centuries most of his sources had no reliable historical credibility as researchers.

Impartial and objective evaluations by non-Catholic reviewers of this book have also determined that it is simply a calumny against the Catholic religion. This has refuted his Christian integrity as a writer. This does not prove that Alexander Hislop was a liar, but only that his book is full of falsehoods. There is a difference. He may indeed have been sincere in his belief. His methology was entirely wrong. His conclusions are errors.

From the Christian Research Institute:
https://www.equip.org/article/the-two-babylons/
The subtitle for Hislop’s book is “The Papal Worship Proved to Be the Worship of Nimrod and His Wife.” Yet when I went to reference works such as the Encyclopedia Britannica, The Americana, The Jewish Encyclopedia, The Catholic Encyclopedia, The Worldbook Encyclopedia – carefully reading their articles on “Nimrod” and “Semiramis” — not one said anything about Nimrod and Semiramis being husband and wife. They did not even live in the same century. Nor is there any basis for Semiramis being the mother of Tammuz. I realized these ideas were all Hislop’s inventions.

The fact that you don’t believe Ralph Woodrow is YOUR problem. He was FAR more familiar with Hislop’s work that YOU. – and the weight of scholarship is on HIS side . . .

 

[CoreIssue]

Alexander Hislop’s “The Two Babylons” piece of shoddy history and angry opinions.
Let’s start with Wikipedia’s review . . .

The book has been severely criticized for its lack of evidence, and in many cases its contradiction of the existing evidence: for instance, the Roman state religion before Christianity did not worship a central Mother Goddess, and Jupiter was never called "Jupiter-Puer."

Likewise, Semiramis lived centuries after Nimrod, and could neither have been his mother, nor married him. Hislop also makes unacceptable linguistic connections and fanciful word plays, e.g. the letters IHS on Catholic Holy Communion wafers are alleged to stand for Egyptian deities Isis, Horus and Seth, but in reality they are an abbreviation for Ihsous, the Latin spelling of Jesus's name in Greek (Ιησους), although popularly, they stand for the Latin Iesus Hominum Salvator meaning Jesus, Savior of Mankind (which also fits the teaching of Transubstantiation, where the wafer and wine are said to become the body and blood of Christ).” (Source: Wikipedia article, Alexander Hislop. Alexander Hislop - Wikipedia)


Regarding the etymology of “Easter” from the SAME Wikipedia page - in contrast with Hislop’s version:
The claim that Easter is derived from Ishtar has been questioned.[11] Modern etymologists derive the word Easter from the Proto-Indo-European root *aus-, meaning "dawn,"[12] potentially by way of *h₂ewsṓs.[13] Ishtar is a Semitic name of uncertain etymology, possibly taken from the same root as Assyria, or from a semitic word meaning "to irrigate."[14]


From Conservapedia:
https://www.conservapedia.com/%27%27The_Two_Babylons%27%27
The work has been completely discredited by painstaking professional historical research, and thoroughly rebutted and refuted by strongly evangelical former supporters who did follow-up research of their own.

Historians who have carefully researched the historical claims made in this book, and the source materials that author Hislop relied on, have determined that he is unreliable as an historian. Almost all of his "facts" are shown to be false, and his reasoning from superficial similarities of appearances and ritual actions is demonstrated to be completely unsound and without merit as "proofs" of pagan origins. This has demolished his credibility. 16th–19th century anthropologists who were contemporaries of the authors of his source materials have also shown that even among historians in the 16th–19th centuries most of his sources had no reliable historical credibility as researchers.

Impartial and objective evaluations by non-Catholic reviewers of this book have also determined that it is simply a calumny against the Catholic religion. This has refuted his Christian integrity as a writer. This does not prove that Alexander Hislop was a liar, but only that his book is full of falsehoods. There is a difference. He may indeed have been sincere in his belief. His methology was entirely wrong. His conclusions are errors.

From the Christian Research Institute:
https://www.equip.org/article/the-two-babylons/
The subtitle for Hislop’s book is “The Papal Worship Proved to Be the Worship of Nimrod and His Wife.” Yet when I went to reference works such as the Encyclopedia Britannica, The Americana, The Jewish Encyclopedia, The Catholic Encyclopedia, The Worldbook Encyclopedia – carefully reading their articles on “Nimrod” and “Semiramis” — not one said anything about Nimrod and Semiramis being husband and wife. They did not even live in the same century. Nor is there any basis for Semiramis being the mother of Tammuz. I realized these ideas were all Hislop’s inventions.

The fact that you don’t believe Ralph Woodrow is YOUR problem. He was FAR more familiar with Hislop’s work that YOU. – and the weight of scholarship is on HIS side . . .

Acca Larentia is a Roman Goddess who is most famous for being the foster-mother of the mythical twins Romulus and Remus.

Jupiter-puer explained

Who was Ishtar, and is there any connection between Ishtar and Easter?

Finally, anyone who does serious historical study sees that the Roman Roman Catholicism is the adaption of pagan Roman religion by the early Catholics.