The Easter Parade, or, The Gipper Shoulda Stuck to Football...

[robycop3]

  Here's an article I wrote in the 1990s for a KJVO who was trying to defend Dr. Sam Gipp's defense of the KJV's "Easter" goof in Acts 12:4...
                              THE GIPPER SHOULDA STUCK TO FOOTBALL! (part 1)

Let's tear apart The Gipper's "research" right now with some FACTS. The Gipper has an agenda to push, and some books to sell, & he doesn't mind embellishing his "facts" with imagination to make either point.

Feel free to look up the facts I'm presenting, in any reputable reference book on earth. In fact, I encourage you to do so since I'm an unknown & you don't have any reason to believe me.

  The following is from Dr. Gipp's "Wrong Answer Book":

First, Dr. Gipp writes,"Coming to the word 'Easter' in God's authorized Bible,...'

The AV was authorized by KING JAMES. Nowhere does it say GOD authorized it. So Gipp's misleading people from the gitgo.

Dr. Gipp wrote:"Coming to the word "Easter" in God's Authorized Bible, they seize upon it imagining that they have found proof that the Bible is not perfect. Fortunately for lovers of the word of God, they are wrong. Easter, as we know it, comes from the ancient pagan festival of Astarte. Also known as Ishtar (pronounced "Easter"). This festival has always been held late in the month of April. It was, in its original form, a celebration of the earth "regenerating" itself after the winter season. The festival involved a celebration of reproduction. For this reason the common symbols of Easter festivities were the rabbit (the same symbol as "Playboy" magazine), and the egg. Both are known for their reproductive abilities. At the center of attention was Astarte, the female deity. She is known in the Bible as the "queen of heaven" (Jeremiah 7:18; 44:17-25). She is the mother of Tammuz (Ezekiel 8:14) who was also her husband! These perverted rituals would take place at sunrise on Easter morning (Ezekiel 8:13-16). From the references in Jeremiah and Ezekiel, we can see that the true Easter has never had any association with Jesus Christ."

  We see Dr. Gipp believes the false idea of Alexander Hislop in his 1853 book, "The Two Babylons". Actually, easter as we know it was invented by the RCC in the 300s AD. IT DID NOT EXIST WHEN LUKE WROTE "ACTS"!

  Also, SEMIRAMIS was the mother of Tammuz,(who was illegitimate) and NIMROD was her hubby. Look that up in any world history work!

Dr. Gipp:It must also be noted that whenever the passover is mentioned in the N.T., the reference is always to the meal, to be eaten on the night of April 14th not the entire week. The days of unleavened bread are NEVER referred to as the passover. (It must be remembered that the angel of the Lord passed over Egypt on one night, not seven nights in a row.)

THIS IS GROSSLY INCORRECT! THE GIPPER COULDN'T BE MORE WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I shall PROVE it to you, straight from the KJV! Ezekiel 45:21 - " 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."

  Ezekiel was quoting GOD HIMSELF! THAT SHOULD END ALL CONTROVERSY ABOUT THE LENGTH OF THE PASSOVER OBSERVANCE!

John 18:28, KJV - "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."

Now, we know Jesus had eaten the paschal lamb w/his disciples THE PREVIOUS EVENING, as the law required - AS EVERY OTHER JEW HAD DONE! There weren't TWO paschal meals, so John can ONLY be referring to a meal with unleavened bread which was part of the Passover observance.

JUST ASK ANY RABBI or other person knowledgeable about Judaism if the WHOLE WEEK is called Passover or not!

Who do you believe? - Gipp?....or SCRIPTURE.......along with those to whom God gave the Passover?(End part 1)

 

[robycop3]

(Part 2)
  This alone proves The Gipper's "research" wrong. But let's look deeper.

Dr. Gipp:But the pagan holiday of Easter was just a few days away. Remember! Herod was a pagan Roman who worshipped the "queen of heaven." He was NOT a Jew. He had no reason to keep the Jewish passover. Some might argue that he wanted to wait until after the passover for fear of upsetting the Jews. There are two grievous faults in this line of thinkings."

Yes, there ARE two grievous lines of thinking here-AND GIPP IS THE "THINKER" OF BOTH OF THEM!

First, the Easter observance did not exist in Herod's time. You may read any encyclopedia, Jewish history, or other reference book you wish, and you will NOT find any observance of Easter in that part of the world at that time! Go ahead...Try to find any! 

AND IF THE ANNIVERSARY OF jESUS' RESURRECTION WAS THEN OBSERVED THEN, NEITHER HEROD NOR THE jEWS WOULD'VE OBSERVED IT ! !

Again...If there were some pagan rite called Easter being observed in that time/place, Luke certainly would NOT have called it pascha!

The line of Herods began with Antipater, a friend of Julius Caesar, of Babylonian or possibly of Idumean(Edomite) descent. His grandson was Herod the Great, the one who sought Jesus' life. He wisely persuaded Augustus Caesar to grant the Jews freedom from the state religion, thus pleasing the Jews greatly enough that they overlooked some of his "little murders" of Jews-and pleased Augustus, who didn't hafta worry about any rebellion in the district. To further please the Jews, he had the temple rebuilt into the most magnificent structure in Jerusalem, & reinstated the Sanhedrin (thus relieving himself of the everyday ruling duties)...and it worked! The Jews obeyed him & paid their taxes without much dissent!

However, Herod became a madman, murdering most of his own family, including a son named Aristobulus. This was of little concern to the Jews, however. And...during this time he'd caused the Temple heirarchy to become very corrupt, leading to their having the Romans crucify Jesus.

His son Archelaus was detested by the Jews, & Augustus replaced him with his brother Herod Antipas, the Herod who executed John The Baptist, and was called "that fox" by Jesus. Antipas was banished in 39 AD by Caligula, who replaced him with Aristobulus' son Herod Agrippa I.

This is the Herod who slew James & arrested Peter! And by every account, especially by that of Josephus, he sought to PLEASE THE JEWS, especially the popular but corrupt temple leadership, the Sanhedrin, and the Pharisees. If this man practiced anything but the state religion of the worship of Caesar, it would've been the worship of the Hellenistic pantheon of gods...but he was well-acquainted with the Jewish law! He absolutely did NOT observe any pagan nor Christian holy days, at least openly, as this would've destroyed his popularity with the Jews. You may search any library on earth to try to prove this wrong!

He was the same Herod smitten by God with worms in his innards, killing him in 44 AD, age 54, in the 7th year of his reign.

Sometimes Scripture calls him Herod; at other places it calls him Agrippa - but there's no doubt of his identity.

His son Herod Agrippa II was the Agrippa before whom Paul appeared.

Thus, you see once again how faulty Gipp's "research" is!

Dr. Gipp:First,Peter was no longer considered a Jew. He had repudiated Judaism. The Jews would have no reason to be upset by Herod's actions.

Totally irrelevant! In fact, the Jews had to have been pleased, although Scripture doesn't mention it. PLEASING THOSE JEWS WAS HEROD'S WHOLE REASON FOR BUSTING PETER!

The Jewish leadership DETESTED Christians! They considered Peter one of the worst HERETICS of all time! Only Roman rule prevented their killing him sooner! (The Romans had cracked down on Jew killing Jew after Stephen was killed without a trial)

If Herod had simply whacked Peter as he'd done James, the Jewish religious leaders would've been pleased. But Herod wanted THEM to do it, for their greater satisfaction. But the Jews themselves would NOT have fooled with Peter during Passover.

Dr. Gipp:Second, he could not have been waiting until after the Passover because he thought the Jews would not kill a man during a religious holiday. They had killed Jesus during passover (Matt. 26:17-19, 47). They were also excited about Herod's murder of James. Anyone knows that a mob possesses the courage to do violent acts during religious festivities, not after.

Again, totally irrelevant. Jesus was crucified at the instigation of the Jewish religious leadership, BUT BY THE ROMANS,while Herod killed James by his own will. He wanted to deliver Peter to the Jews, for them to do with him as they wished, while it was the Jews who delivered Jesus to the Romans & had them crucify Him.(They did NOT kill Him; He gave up His life of his own accord when all had been fulfilled. Thus, no one person or group can be "blamed" for Jesus' death, but certainly for trying to kill Him.)

Dr.Gipp:The days of unleavened bread would end on the 21 st of April. Shortly after that would come Herod's celebration of pagan Easter. Herod had not killed Peter during the days of unleavneed bread simply because he wanted to wait until EAster.

There's not one scintilla of Scriptural or historical evidence that this Herod observed ANYTHING called Easter! Before the time of Jesus, Ishtar/Asherah had become APHRODITE of the Greex & VENUS of the Romans. Hislop's stupid idea came about because of the similarity of pronunciation between ishtar & Easter. And, if Luke were writing about a fest for that "goddess", he woulda used either Aphrodite or Venus as "her" name.

Anyone not believing what I've written here, please check it out for yourself before you dismiss my writing as incorrect. Unlike The Gipper, I deal in FACT, not imagination, opinion, or guesswork!

 

[prophet]

Why would anyone need to analyze anything Sam Gipp writes?
He's obviously mentally unstable and borderline illiterate, to boot.

Easter is just a translation of Paschal.

Tyndale didn't coin the phrase "passover", until his translation of the Law of Moses.

Here is a quote from Tyndale's translation of Mark:

Mark 14:12
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?

Let the record show that you believe the same myth that Gipp does, and not the "facts" you claim to represent...namely, that Easter is a pagan holiday, and not just the original English translation of Paschal...
But do continue to entertain us.

Sent from my H1611 using Tapatalk

 

[robycop3]

  You're simply WRONG.

  I do NOT believe Easter was a pagan holiday. You read what I said about its origin. But one thing's sure: EASTER DIDN'T EXIST when Luke wrote what became the Book of Acts. In that day, pascha meant only PASSOVER. it's the same word JESUS is recorded as using for passover. So, unless you believe Jesus observed Easter, you might wanna back up 17 yards & punt.

    It was quite some time AFTER Luke before pascha could mean either passover or Easter, depending upon the context. And the translations of Luke's writings are supposed to reflect LUKE'S  words & thoughts, not those of the translators.

  Verse 12:3 makes it plain that PASSOVER was then ongoing, so Herod was intending to wait til it was finished before turning Peter over to the Jews. Pretty simple when one does a reality check!

 

[logos1560]

The immediate context of Acts 12:4 demonstrated that king Herod was aware that his earlier action of vexing certain of the church ?pleased the Jews? (Acts 12:3).  The context also revealed that Herod ?proceeded further? to take another action that he thought would please the Jews.
Would Herod be continuing to please the Jews if he supposedly waited to observe a pagan holiday or festival?  Would the celebrations and practices associated with a pagan festival please or offend the Jews?  Does the context actually maintain that Herod in proceeding further to take Peter would then do something contradictory to this action intended to please the Jews?  It was actually Luke that used the Greek word pascha for the time for which Herod was waiting since this verse gives no indication that Herod was being directly quoted.  The Bible verse or context does not directly say that Herod was keeping or observing pascha.  ?The people? of Acts 12:4 could be referring to or would be including the Jews mentioned in verse 3.  In Acts 12:11, it refers to ?the expectation of the people of the Jews.?  Therefore according to the context, the Jews were clearly the people that Herod wanted to please again by his further action.  Therefore, nothing in the verse and context proves that Herod could not have been waiting for the Jews to finish keeping their pascha so that he could bring Peter forth and please the Jews again.  In other words, the context indicates that Herod did not want to risk displeasing the Jews by executing Peter during their Jewish pascha and may not indicate whether Herod personally had any scruples or principles against executing Peter during a festival.  Herod also would have no reason to seek to displease the Jews and to honor and respect the church that he was vexing by waiting until after any claimed church celebration.  Therefore, the clear evidence from the context clearly supports the understanding that the Jews would be the ones keeping the pascha [also called the feast of unleavened bread in Luke 22:1] instead of the assertion that Herod had to be the one keeping it.  If Herod was also keeping it, the context indicates that it was the Jewish pascha that he would be keeping and not some pagan festival nor any Christian celebration.

    Moved by the Holy Spirit, Luke could definitely have used the Greek word in the same sense as he did in Luke 22:1.  Comparing Scripture with Scripture, the context of Acts 12:3-4 is in agreement with the understanding that this Greek word was used in the same sense as in Luke 22:1.  KJV-only author Floyd Jones asserted that ?the context is the decisive factor for determining the final connotation of any word or phrase? (Which Version, p. 14).  If there remains any uncertainty concerning how the word pascha was used at Acts 12:4, it should be translated and interpreted by the light of what is plain, clear, and certain as in Luke 22:1.  Is it not sound reasoning to consider Luke and the Holy Spirit competent and credible witnesses as to the sense in which the Holy Spirit used the word pascha at Luke 22:1 and Acts 12:4?

 

[robycop3]

  Yes, herod was under Caesar's order to PLEASE the Jews. Caesar hade lots of tax denarii from the jews, plus, he didn't wanna tie up too many soldiers to put down a Jewish rebellion, so he told herod to keep'em happy.

  Herod knew that  any interference with the Jews' religion would set them off quicker than anything, so he decided to help them by removing people whom those Jews considered to be heretics. He saw that killing James pleased them, so he thought he'd please them even more by allowing them to dispose of Peter themselves.  He had Peter detained, as he knew Peter was itinerant, & might soon leave his bailiwick, & that passover was then ongoing & the Jews wouldn't so much as touch a heretic during that observance lest they become ceremonially defiled & unable to participate in passover.

  Had Herod been observing any pagan fest, he wouldn'ta  had Peter busted;  nor would have done so had he been observing passover himself. the simple context of the first part of Acts 12 is that Herod intended to hold Peter til passover was finished, then, turn him over to the Jewish religious leadership. It had nothing to do with Easter or any other Christian observance!

 

[Ransom]

I'm sure this has been addressed in some detail before, regarding the KJV-onlyists' linguistic shenanigans about the term "Easter," but it bears rehashing now and then. Thanks for this.

Gipp says:

Easter, as we know it, comes from the ancient pagan festival of Astarte. Also known as Ishtar (pronounced "Easter").

The popularly accepted etymology of "Easter" is that it is derived frkm a Germanic goddess named Eostre or Ostara. The equivalent to the month of April was named "Eostermona?" (Eostre's month) and feasts were held in her honour. This explanation comes solely from the writings of the eighth-century English theologian Bede. Until the 19th century, it was widely assumed he had simply made up the whole thing. However, it seems there is some linguistic evidence for it, so it probably shouldn't be dismissed out of hand. Bede lived about a century after the conversion of the British Isles, so the old paganism was likely still familiar.

What probably happened was that the British, newly Christianized, kept the name of the old observances when they adopted the new, and the name stuck.

Of course, here's no reason whatever to equate a Germanic dawn goddess with a Babylonian deity. They were a dozen centuries and half a world away from each other, in an era when most people never ventured more than 20 miles from their home. That is, as you point out, Hislop's nonsense, which has no credibility.

More from Gipp:

But the pagan holiday of Easter was just a few days away. Remember! Herod was a pagan Roman who worshipped the "queen of heaven." He was NOT a Jew. He had no reason to keep the Jewish passover.

Where does he get this guff? It's true Herod was not an ethnic Jew, at least not fully, but he was no pagan Roman, either. He was an Idumean (Edomite). His family religion was Judaism. John Hyrcanos had conquered the Idumean kingdom in the second century BC, and forcibly converted its people to Judaism. It's irrelevant whether he, himself, observed Passover; the point is, if he wanted to ingratiate himself with the Jewish religious leaders, he would have respected their customs.

And why would a Roman worship a Babylonian goddess, anyway? The Romans had their own pantheon.

English Bibles up to Tyndale referred to Resurrection Sunday and the Passover either as "Easter" (Old English) or "Paschal" (Latin). It provided a useful frame of reference for people who had never traveled overseas and would have no familiarity with Hebrew customs, but knew about the English ones. Tyndale himself used "Easter" in his New Testament, until he came to translate the Old and realized what an anachronism "Easter" would be in Exodus. Hence he coined "Passover." Had he lived long enough, he probably would have revised his New Testament as well to use his new coinage.

 

[robycop3]

  Scott, the 2nd quote attributed to me is my quoting Dr. Gipp.  far as Herod observing passover, if he had been, he wouldn't have had his men bust Peter during passover.  I believe that, to please the Jews, he at least made the motions of following their rites & observances, while he likely worshipped the Roman pantheon. After all, it was the Romans who gave him power.

  And, of course, Herod was familiar with Jewish customs, so he knew they wouldn't physically touch Peter during passover, as they believed he was a supreme heretic & they didn't wanna "defile" themselves by handling him. The context of the chapter shows Herod was waiting for PASSOVER to end.

 

[Ransom]

  Scott, the 2nd quote attributed to me is my quoting Dr. Gipp.

I've added an additional header to make that clear. It was always my intention to interact with Gipp's claims, so I hope that avoids unnecessary confusion.

far as Herod observing passover, if he had been, he wouldn't have had his men bust Peter during passover.

That isn't entirely impossible, as Agrippa I (the Herod who had James executed) was raised in Rome and was a personal friend of Tiberius, Claudius, and Caligula. But it seems unlikely to me. Judaism was a legal religion in the Empire from the time of Julius Caesar. The Romans called Herod the Great (Agrippa I's grandfather "King of the Jews," which irritated the Jews, who did not recognize the Romans' right to choose their king. (That didn't stop the Jewish authorities from using that title to play politics and pit Jesus against Herod - Antipas, Agrippa's uncle - at his trial, however.)

I believe the Jews regarded Agrippa more favourably, recognizing him as a fellow Jew. Nonetheless, he was still the client king of the hated Romans, and so he made efforts to stay in their good graces.

 

[ObadiahHaidabo]

Gipp has a video on this very topic as part of his "What's the Big Deal about the KJV" series.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCs4Y0kbdWM&list=PLdD7_B3zweu0qi_gUHA9W_0JxSM_jT0zj&index=7

 

[illinoisguy]

I would not put any credence in any conclusions by Sam "Gyp the People" or anyone else quoting from Alexander Hislop's "The Two Babylons," a book that has been thoroughly discredited as a source of reliable information.  In recent times the main proponent of Hislop's book was Evangelist Ralph Woodrow, whose book "Babylon Mystery Religion" popularized Hislop's teachings.  Woodrow came to realize that Hislop's book was based on false conclusions.  He withdrew his own book from publication and sale, and repudiated Hislop's teachings in his more recent books "The Babylon Connection?" and "Easter - Is It Pagan?"  Evangelist Woodrow is a friend of mine and we have discussed these things in person.

 

[robycop3]

Same ole, same ole.

  The Gipper just can't get past the FACT that, in all 29 appreaances of "pascha" in the New testament, it refers to PASSOVER. It's the same word JESUS used for passover.(Unless one thinks Jesus observed Easter!LOL) Pascha COULDN'T'VE been referring to Easter back then cuz Easter didn't then exist !

  Just face it, KJVOs; "Easter" in acts 12:4 is a GOOF !

 

 

[prophet]

Mark 14:1 (Tyndale Bible)
? After two dayes folowed ester and the dayes of swete breed. And the hye prestes and the Scrybes sought meanes how they myght take hym by crafte and put him to deeth.

Mark 14:12 (Tyndale Bible)
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?

Mark 14:14 (Tyndale Bible)
And whither soever he goeth in saye ye to ye good man of ye housse: the master axeth where is the geest chambre where I shall eate ye ester lambe with my disciples.

Mark 14:16 (Tyndale Bible)
And his disciples went forth and came to the cyte and founde as he had sayd vnto them: and made ready the ester lambe.

Matthew 26:2 (Tyndale Bible)
Ye knowe that after ii. dayes shalbe ester and the sonne of man shalbe delyvered to be crucified.

Luke 22:8 (Tyndale Bible)
And he sent Peter and Iohn sayinge: Goo and prepare vs the ester lambe that we maye eate.

Luke 22:1 (Tyndale Bible)
? The feaste of swete breed drue nye whiche is called ester


John 6:4 (Tyndale Bible)
And ester a feast of ye Iewes was nye.

John 11:55 (Tyndale Bible)
And the Iewes ester was nye at hand and many went out of the countre vp to Ierusalem before the ester to purify them selves.

John 18:39 (Tyndale Bible)
Ye have a custome that I shuld delyver you one lowsse at ester. Will ye that I lowse vnto you the kynge of ye Iewes.

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


Nah, standard translation.

Sent from my moto g(6) (XT1925DL) using Tapatalk

 

[Ransom]

Imagine that. Tyndale didn't use the word "Passover," almost a decade before he coined the word "Passover."

 

[prophet]

Imagine that. Tyndale didn't use the word "Passover," almost a decade before he coined the word "Passover."

Right.
Prior to his coining "passover", Paschal was translated as "Easter".
So Easter isn't a poor translation, it's the normal translation.

Mark 14:12 (Wycliffe Bible)
And the firste dai of therf looues, whanne thei offriden pask, the disciplis seyn to hym, Whidir `wilt thou that we go, and make redi to thee, that thou ete the pask?

Mark 14:12 (Tyndale Bible)
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?



Sent from my moto g(6) (XT1925DL) using Tapatalk

 

[Ransom]

Prior to his coining "passover", Paschal was translated as "Easter".
So Easter isn't a poor translation, it's the normal translation.

Was the normal translation. For people who most likely never travelled more than a few miles from their own home, much less to the Holy Land, it provided an appropriate, albeit anachronistic, frame of reference. Tyndale coined "Passover" when he began translating the Old Testament and realized that continuing to use "Easter" would be inappropriately anachronistic.

And now that he had coined a perfectly adequate and descriptive English word for the Jewish feast day, there was no need to continue to call it "Easter," and no excuse for the KJV translators to have done so, except for an editorial mistake.

 

[prophet]

Prior to his coining "passover", Paschal was translated as "Easter".
So Easter isn't a poor translation, it's the normal translation.

Was the normal translation. For people who most likely never travelled more than a few miles from their own home, much less to the Holy Land, it provided an appropriate, albeit anachronistic, frame of reference. Tyndale coined "Passover" when he began translating the Old Testament and realized that continuing to use "Easter" would be inappropriately anachronistic.

And now that he had coined a perfectly adequate and descriptive English word for the Jewish feast day, there was no need to continue to call it "Easter," and no excuse for the KJV translators to have done so, except for an editorial mistake.

"was no reason that Ransom can see easily" isn't tantamount to "mistake".

If any of the translators addressed this choice, I'd love to read it in their words.

I'm as curious as I assume you are, about several choices....like "church" over "congregation" or "assembly"...but, I've yet to find anything in the KJV that obscures the meaning of the passage, including Easter in Acts...
Since I know it refers to a feast of passover, and not the entire holiday.

Sent from my moto g(6) (XT1925DL) using Tapatalk

 

[Ransom]

"was no reason that Ransom can see easily" isn't tantamount to "mistake".

If you know of a reason to prefer "Easter" over "Passover" in this single place in the entire Bible, that doesn't just come down to you imagining you are reading their minds, then by all means present that reason.

I'm as curious as I assume you are, about several choices....like "church" over "congregation" or "assembly"...

Indifferent, as they all basically mean the same thing, with the caveat that "church" tends now to refer to the church building rather than its membership, though it bears both meanings.

Such is not the case with "Easter" vs. "Passover," where 500 years of usage has established that the former is the Christian holiday celebrating the resurrection, while the latter is the Jewish holiday commemorating the Exodus, and apart from very old Bibles, they are never used interchangeably.

 

[prophet]

"was no reason that Ransom can see easily" isn't tantamount to "mistake".

If you know of a reason to prefer "Easter" over "Passover" in this single place in the entire Bible, that doesn't just come down to you imagining you are reading their minds, then by all means present that reason.

I'm as curious as I assume you are, about several choices....like "church" over "congregation" or "assembly"...

Indifferent, as they all basically mean the same thing, with the caveat that "church" tends now to refer to the church building rather than its membership, though it bears both meanings.

Such is not the case with "Easter" vs. "Passover," where 500 years of usage has established that the former is the Christian holiday celebrating the resurrection, while the latter is the Jewish holiday commemorating the Exodus, and apart from very old Bibles, they are never used interchangeably.

Good old intellectual dishonesty.

Good thing you're not prejudiced against the KJV.

Sent from my moto g(6) (XT1925DL) using Tapatalk

 

[Ransom]

Good old intellectual dishonesty.

If you say so. *yawn*