Replies

<< What has humored me is the fact that the greek word pascha is incorrectly translated as "Easter" instead of the correct word "Passover". Without going into the history of Easter I believe most of you will agree that it didn't exist as a holiday until much later in Christian history. I haven't seen that translation used in any other Bible and the NKJV has removed the Easter reference and replaced it with Passover. >>

I've got so much stuff defending the use of the word "easter" that you wouldn't have time to read it.

First of all, most of the pre-1611 English Bibles DID use easter, rather than passover. The English Bibles before the KJV also used the word Easter, so it is not a mistake of the KJV. In fact, the word Passover was invented by William Tyndale. If Passover was the proper word here, the guy who invented it would be the top authority on that - and Tyndale used Easter in this passage!

Second, passover proper is the first day of the celebration, the rest of the week is called the days of unleavened bread (although rarely the entire feast was referred to as pascha). But using the predominant scriptural definition, in this verse the passover had ALREADY HAPPENED (they were already in the days of unleavened bread), so if Herod was going to wait until "after pascha", he was going to have to wait a long time.

Third, easter was a reference to a pagan holiday, not the OT passover or the NT easter. Herod would have been more likely to be concerned about a pagan holiday than a biblical one. Easter was not originally a Christian holiday - it was a pagan holiday celebrating the goddess of fertility and the rites of spring, also called Astarte, Asteroth, Oester, and Ishtar. The Jews were pleased to see the Christians (James) killed. Herod would have had no reason to wait for a Jewish holiday - they killed Jesus during a Jewish holiday! He might have waited till after his own pagan holiday, however.

Fourth, ask any living Greek to wish you a happy easter, and they will respond "Kalee Pascha!"

Fifth, it is entirely possible that the early Christians did indeeed already celebrate the easter resurrection. A good article asserting that claim is at http://www.lamblion.net/Articles/ScottJones/easter_or_passover1.htm

Easter is not a mistake, it's the correct word.

Con, Thanks for your reply. This little discussion is helping me to get a better understanding of this controversy. However, I still have many questions regarding your points.

If I understand the reasoning behind your points you are basically saying that;

1. During the 1500's the term "Easter" was commonly used in place of the term "Passover" simply because the term "Passover" didn't exist. The term "Easter" was the best available english word to use at that time. To counter this problem, Tyndale, invented the term "Passover" to differentiate between the Christian celebration of Easter and the Jewish celebration of Passover.

2. Tyndale and the translators of the KJV used the term "Easter" as the proper translation of "pascha" in Acts 12:4 because they understood that the newly created term "Passover" (pascha) referred to the first day of the feast of unleaved bread that had already passed. Hence, they decided, "pascha" must be refering to the pagan celebration of "Easter" which was celebrated by Herod.

Please correct me if I am wrong, but, I believe those two points sum up the bulk of your argument in defence of the pascha / Easter translation. They are interesting points, but, I am not sold yet.

First, I have to question the strong reliance on Tyndale when, even though he invented the term "Passover", he used the term "Easter" in his version of the NT in nearly every occurance of the term "pascha". If he was the one who would be the top authority why doesn't he use the term "Passover" in his own translation when the context is very clear that it is refering to the Jewish celebration. Also, if he was such an authority, why did the translators of the KJV disagree with him on all but one occurance of the term.

Secondly, I would have to question limiting the term "pascha" to meaning the first day of unleavened bread. I did a very quick check and found that the term "pascha" or "pesach" (the Hebrew word) could refer to the passover meal, the sacrificial lamb, the Holy Day itself, or even the seven day period that makes up the "days of unleavened bread" which are refered to in Acts 12:4. Ezekiel 45:21 (attached below) makes that clear.

Eze 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.

I also have a hard time accepting the position that "pascha" here refers to the pagan Easter celebration. What we do know from the context is that Herod was interested in vexing the church. To accomplish this end he had James the brother of John killed. When he saw how it pleased the Jews he, in an effort to gain further Jewish support, seized Peter with the intent of killing him also. However, this was during the days of the unleavened bread and it might not have pleased the Jews to have a killing during this time. During this time it was typical for the Romans to release a prisoner as a show of good will (remember Barabas). It wouldn't be consistent with the spirit of holy day to kill someone. So Herod decided to wait till the Jewish Holy Days were over and he could safely kill Peter and win the support he desired.

The term Passover was commonly used to refer to the entire seven day period and the use of pascha (Passover) in this context is very appropriate. I do find it a bit to speculative to some how try to bring the pagan Easter into this narrative. I find it quite odd that it would be asserted that Herod, whose livelihood rested on keeping his subjects happy and peaceful, would delay giving his special prize (the killing of Peter) to the Jews because he was so devout that he had to celebrate the pagan Easter first.

Anyway, I appreciate your time in discussing this with me. Any further information you have is greatly appreciated as I sort through this issue.