HI friend, I was reading along, enjoying the banter, but you said God didn't approve of the New Covenant in Greek. I prayed and was told by God that any translation that people can understand, that spreads the gospel and the doctrines of faith by the Apostle Paul and Glorifies His name, was good. That's all.
Good point! I believe if God had his choice, he would have the New Testament written in Hebrew. Because it connects culturally and theologically much easier than the Greek.
I believe John 8:6 made the connection with Jesus' writing "with His finger" in Exodus 31:18 -When He had finished speaking with him upon Mount Sinai, He gave Moses the two tablets of the testimony, tablets of stone, written by the finger of God.
He could have or he could have reminded them of the 7th commandment.
Since the crowd left one by one, they must have seen their names on the ground next to the 7th commandment, to be convicted by their conscience. Just a guess.
I often wonder whether her companion was in that crowd? Or his name was written on the ground.
Deuteronomy 22:22 says both the man and woman shall die, so the crowd broke the law arresting just the woman. So, the man was gone or got away. Or maybe talking to his wife trying to explain something she might hear later.
Of course, you do recognize "pascha" as referring to Passover as in "paschal" lamb, yes?Okay.... but here I just found ....... and yes, salvation is of the Jews... Not Greeks or Gentiles....I agree after all @jeremiah1five has spent months convincing me of this. Now there are 2. And you are told in Matt that if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing ...... So after you read this following I wont bother you again.
Which Bibles translated from Greek used “Easter”?
King James Version (1611) – English, translated from Greek
This is the only major Greek-to-English Bible that ever translated pascha as Easter in the text.
- Acts 12:4 → uses “Easter”
- Greek word: πάσχα (pascha)
- KJV: “…intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.”
All of these were based on the Greek New Testament:
These all translated Greek pascha as Easter in Acts 12:4.
Translation Date Language Used “Easter”? Tyndale NT 1526 English Coverdale Bible 1535 English Great Bible 1539 English Bishops’ Bible 1568 English King James Version 1611 English
Every Greek manuscript and printed Greek New Testament says:
Greek Bibles themselves never use “Easter”
No ancient or modern Greek Bible uses a different word meaning “Easter” there — because the text itself is already Greek.
So:
- Greek → Greek: always πάσχα
- Greek → English:
- KJV & early English Bibles = Easter
- Modern English Bibles = Passover
Bottom Line
Only English translations from Greek ever inserted “Easter.”
The Greek text itself never did.
That’s why Acts 12:4 is such a powerful example of tradition overriding translation —
ONLY IF you understand that the "global proclamation" you mentioned was in accordance to the Hebrew Scripture and was the fulfillment of Jesus instruction to His eleven disciples to "go [into] Gentile lands because that's where the majority of all living Jews and mixed-race Jews lived. The so-called "Great Commission" was instruction to the twelve and then the eleven to go into Gentile lands where the majority of Jews and mixed-race Jews live and that their message was to herald the arrival - and departure - and the coming again of Israel's Messiah, that Israel's King came and that the God of Abraham has KEPT HIS PROMISES.
Back to ignore.
Isn't it great that those in whom they claim the Holy Spirit resides in them have the power and ability to reject Christ the Holy Spirit in another believer? That they can say to another believer in so many words that 'because you are not the eye you are not part of my body which is in Christ also? Swing that axe "@FreeInChrist." Swing that axe! Chop up the body of Christ the Holy Spirit! That's right. Swing away!
She has done nothing wrong. She is only expressing her opinion like others on here.
Thank you. He has been on me for weeks and when I do ignore him I get the same old comments.
Somehow Paul never got your memo.
1 Peter 1-2 uses the word Elect to refer to the Greek-speaking Jewish Diaspora dispersed throughout the provinces in Asia Minor (Eastern Roman Empire). Armed with the Greek OT, the Greek-speaking Jewish Christian converts proved to be a formidable force in the spread of the Gospel to the Greek-speaking Eastern Roman Empire. In other words, God elected the Greek-speaking Jewish Diaspora throughout the Roman Empire to serve in the rapid spreading of the Gospel to the rest of the Greek-speaking Eastern Roman lands.
In what way did "Jewish Rabbinical theologians and Sages influence the Covenant Scriptures"?We are not going anywhere. All Jewishbelievers recognizes their faith and trust in Yeshua despite the Greek language mis interpretations of the New Covenant Scriptures. We don't recognize the so called Greek Apostolic and Patristic Fathers anymore than you recognize the great Jewish Rabbinical theologians and Sages that influenced the Covenant Scriptures.
Shalom
You might think of going back to.the pagan 3rd world country of Greece.
You're barking up the wrong tree. Greek uses the word Pascha, not Easter.
Did God personally tell you that He "didn't approve of the New Testament in Greek"?
We must ALL see the same Jesus. We must ALL say the same thing as God. to do otherwise is to oppose Him.
They were not non-Hebrew. They were mixed-race Jews of Gentile descent and ancestry. They were God's people scattered among Gentiles because there was nowhere else to go. But Jews who were heavily influenced by Gentile and Greek culture were not harmed. Once the Jews were scattered from out of Israel it was these very mixed-race Jews who were left in charge of the Jerusalem Church. This was when Gentile inclusion began. That's all these mixed-race Jews knew. They were strangers to the covenants of promise and aliens to the commonwealth of Israel. What did they know of Hebrew/Jewish culture?
Your comments expose your profound ignorance of Jewish history: the OT strongly opposed intermarriage precisely because covenant identity cannot be not casually “mixed” or diluted (Ezra 9–10; Neh 13). That makes your appeal to “mixed-race Jews” an anachronistic projection rather than a historical reality. By reducing Jewish identity to a vague hybrid category and imputing covenantal ignorance to those outside Judea, you demonstrate unfamiliarity with how Jews themselves understood lineage, Torah, and communal continuity—so much so that one reasonably doubts if you are speaking from within Jewish tradition at all. In any case, Scripture decisively affirms that the covenant is not transmitted by blood purity but by God’s calling and instruction, and Gentile believers were never intruders but intentional heirs by faith, while Jewish believers—whether in Jerusalem or Rome—remained Jews, not racial composites invented to prop up a theory the text and history simply do not support.
