30 Reasons why the KJV is the Divine and Pure Word of God for Today (Update: KJVO Posters Only)

[Bible Highlighter]

Which is true of you too.

Evidence 1: where in the KJV does it say that the KJV alone is the perfect word of God? Nowhere - therefore it's not Scriptural.
Evidence 2: Compare certain verses in the Greek with both the KJV, the NIV and others; this will show if the KJV is closest to the original. Challenge not accepted; OP not willing to show that he KJV is identical, or closest, to the Greek.

You can prove me wrong by doing one, or both, of these things, so logic says that it should be easy to prove me wrong - yet you can't.

You can be led to porn being wrong in the Bible without there being a command that says, "Thou shalt not commit porn."

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Still, you're depending on scholars, same as I. You're just trying to play the game, MAH skoller kin whup YOU skoller", & when the game goes against you, you try to move the goal posts by changing the subject. You have NOT tried to get by the proven goofs in the KJV.

If that is what you call trusting the Bible or God's Holy Word, then by all means. Go right ahead.

 

[JSRG]

Each branch of Islam has its own Q'ran. The Sunni, Shiites, Sufis, & Wahabis each have their own version, & have killed each other over it. While I have read only a Sunni edition long ago, I understand there are significant differences between versions, much more than there are between legitimate Bible versions.

Wave that fact in the face of any Moslem who tries to "preach' to you !

I know this was from a while ago, but I was looking through some older posts and saw this. This is actually rather interesting. Do you know of where I can find some more information about this?

 

[Strong in Him]

Problem is that I have already discussed this topic with you in another thread.
Logic dictates that if somebody is not open after some debate or discussion there and here, it is time to move on.

Yes, we have discussed it before.
But if you write another thread repeating all the same arguments, then you shouldn't be surprised that people enter the discussion again - especially as you cannot answer the basic questions you have been asked, or provide the simple evidences that would disprove our position. The trouble is that this isn't even a debate - you have made your position abundantly clear, and everyone who disagrees is wrong. Not only that, but if they use modern translations, they don't have the word of God anyway.
You are not debating this issue - you are telling us how it is and why we are wrong if we disagree.

It's really very simple.
You have shown countless verses in the KJV which are not the same in the NIV (for example), and offer these as PROOF that the NIV is at fault. If you show those verses in the Greek, and it turns out that the KJV agrees perfectly with it while the NIV has added/left out words, then I'll agree that you have a point - there'll be no argument, I'll be able to see for myself how the NIV and KJV compare with the original.
Yet you can't do that.
You have offered a, rather convoluted, reason why you can't do that - apparently the original Greek is a "dead" language, and to be able to understand it we have to rely on scholars, who are all biased in their translations. Well I'm sorry, but that sounds like an excuse. Because if you DID provide Greek verses and it turned out that the KJV agreed with, or was closest to, them; I am pretty sure that you would shout it from the roof tops. You would be delighted that I was wrong and that even the ancient languages proved that the KJV was correct and utterly reliable.

Until you can do this, and show verses in Scripture which say that the KJV ALONE is perfect, you are going to get the same challenges, questions and outright contradictions to your position.

 

[Strong in Him]

You can be led to porn being wrong in the Bible without there being a command that says, "Thou shalt not commit porn."

Not the same thing at all.

I am pretty sure it was you who said, in another thread, that Christians should always back up their beliefs with Scripture. To which I said that as you have a belief that the KJV is perfect and the ONLY word of God, you should show us the Scripture which says so.
You can't do this.
The only thing you have come up with is that as the KJV was "refined" 7 times before reaching its final perfect state, this agrees with Psalms 12:6. But this verse does not say that the KJV is perfect and the only word of God.

Many, many people were Christians before the KJV was even thought of.
Many have become Christians since - maybe without even reading the KJV.

 

[robycop3]

I know this was from a while ago, but I was looking through some older posts and saw this. This is actually rather interesting. Do you know of where I can find some more information about this?

I googled "Koran" & "branches of islam".

 

[robycop3]

If that is what you call trusting the Bible or God's Holy Word, then by all means. Go right ahead.

I will.

The KJVO myth is definitely man-made & therefore false, as only GOD can make true doctrines of faith/worship.

 

[JulieB67]

No translation is "perfect"

I use the KJV because it can be translated back to the Hebrew/Greek but there are mistakes as others have said.

Easter is a big one for me. It should be 3957 Pascha -passover. And since Christ became our passover we should be celebrating the Passover (14 days after the spring equinox) in his name by taking the Lord's supper in rememberance of him. Today's "Easter" has just taken off in so many directions that many young children are waiting on the easter bunny, etc.

But having said that I can't recommend any modern translation that has changed words and can't at least be translated back to the manuscripts that were/are available. Because one word can make a huge difference in changing the meaning of a single verse. And omitting words will have the same effect, because you lose the word that can be translated back.

For example the KJV uses the word "taken" in many verses. But when you look up the word in the Hebrew/Greek as it applies to the verse it's in, there are different words/meanings.

Here are just two verses in the NT

Matthew 24:40 "Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken and the other left."

Matthew 9:15 "And Jesus said unto them, "Can the children of the bride chamber mourn, as long as the bridegroom is with them? but the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken from them, and then shall they fast."

The word taken in 24:40 is Greek 3880 paralambano, meaning to receive near, ie associate oneselves with.

The word taken in Matthew 9:15 -Greek 522-apairo -to lift off, ie remove, take (away)

Anyone reading a version that just had the word "taken" in it in the Matthew 24:40 verse might believe that meant literally removed from this earth without having the resource to be able to translate it back.

Something like at times can change a entire person's belief system.

Even in Genesis 1,

Genesis 1:2 "And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep."

was
1961 hayah
hayah (haw-yaw); a primitive root [compare OT:1933]; to exist, i.e. be or become, come to pass (always emphatic, and not a mere copula or auxiliary):KJV - beacon, altogether, be (-come), accomplished, committed, like), break, cause, come (to pass), do, faint, fall, follow, happen, have, last, pertain, quit (oneself-), require, use.

But this is an interesting thread with info from both sides, thanks!

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Sir, YOU are trusting in scholars, same as any other Christian, if you can't read ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, & Koine Greek. I don't read them, so I depend upon having God's word in my own English.

I'm no genius, but I could read Chaucer's works in their original language & spellings when I was a teen, and, for a class project, I translated beowulf into our English, as well as read many of the "Round Table" knighthood tales in their original language so the KJV's English was no challenge for me. However, it IS a challenge for many to whom I witness, so I present God's word to them in OUR English.

And YOU have no perfect Bible version, either, as the KJV is FAR-from-perfect, as you've been shown here.

Translating Beowulf is not going to effect a person's status with God. Messing with God's Word can effect a person's status with God (See: Revelation 22:18-19). Many think this warning only applies to the book of Revelation. Certain men who have made Modern Translations have received the frog in your throat plague (Which is a plague from another part of the Bible). Multiple coincidences? Remember that whole Muslim thing that you believed was a coincidence? There has to be a point where these coincidences are no longer coincidences. Besides, Modern Translations have changed the words in the book of Revelation, too.

I know. You don't see what Westcott and Hort as a change to the Bible. But it was. They departed from the Received Text and this can be easily seen by the watering down of major doctrines, change of certain doctrines, change of some of God's commands, etc.; This is the proof (even if you refuse to see it). Modern Translations making Jesus appear to sin, and the adding of the devil's name where it does not belong should make this obvious to a person.

So you can shout “KJVO-myth” and “KJV gets easter wrong,” until your ears bleed, but it will not change the truth of what I have already shown that you cannot adequately account for with a rational explanation.

In any event, we should agree to disagree in love and respect.
I don't believe we are going to see eye to eye on this issue.
The line in the sand has been drawn, and we are each standing on two opposing sides.
One is the Alexandrian Westcott and Hort side, and the other is the Received Text side.
Just know we would not even be having this argument if we lived before Westcott and Hort's discovery of the Alexandrian texts. I look in history and there is nothing that I admire about their discovery and their thinking and the way that translation came about (unlike with the KJV).

You have to ask yourself the real reason why you hate the KJVO belief.
What is the real reason?

I can tell you with confidence that if what you said was true, I would most likely no longer be a believer.
Is that what you want? Do you want me to abandon my faith in God's Word?
It does not make sense that God failed to keep His promise on preserving His Word (Psalms 12:7).
I know. You think Psalms 12:7 says something different than what is rendered in the KJV.
But... if you lived before Westcott and Hort's discovery, you would not know any better. You would have then no choice but to believe Psalms 12:7 in the KJV. What if you died before Westcott and Hort's discovery? Would you have been believing a lie? Surely not.
Faithful fruit came about from men of God believing the KJV. John Wesley and his followers proves that good fruit can come out of such a beloved Bible. But go ahead, and shout “KJVO myth” and see where that gets you in your Christian walk with God. I don't believe shouting such words will lead to good fruit, brother. I believe God's Word. For faith comes by hearing and hearing the Word of God (Romans 10:17). It's not, “faith comes by hearing and hearing the scholar.”

 

[Bible Highlighter]

No translation is "perfect"

I use the KJV because it can be translated back to the Hebrew/Greek but there are mistakes as others have said.

Easter is a big one for me. It should be 3957 Pascha -passover. And since Christ became our passover we should be celebrating the Passover (14 days after the spring equinox) in his name by taking the Lord's supper in rememberance of him. Today's "Easter" has just taken off in so many directions that many young children are waiting on the easter bunny, etc.

But in saying that I can't recommend any modern translation that has changed words and can't at least can't be translated back to the manuscripts that were/are available. Because one word can make a huge difference in changing the meaning of a single verse.

For example the KJV uses the word "taken" in many verses. But when you look up the word in the Hebrew/Greek as it applies to the verse it's in, there are different words/meanings.

Here are just two verses in the NT

Matthew 24:40 "Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken and the other left."

Matthew 9:15 "And Jesus said unto them, "Can the children of the bride chamber mourn, as long as the bridegroom is with them? but the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken from them, and then shall they fast."

The word taken in 24:40 is Greek 3880 paralambano, meaning to receive near, ie associate oneselves with.

The word taken in Matthew 9:15 -Greek 522-apairo -to lift off, ie remove, take (away)

Anyone reading a version that just had the word "taken" in it in the Matthew 24:40 verse might believe that meant literally removed from this earth without having the resource to be able to translate it back.

Something like at times can change a entire person's belief system.

Even in Genesis 1,

Genesis 1:2 "And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep."

was
1961 hayah
hayah (haw-yaw); a primitive root [compare OT:1933]; to exist, i.e. be or become, come to pass (always emphatic, and not a mere copula or auxiliary):KJV - beacon, altogether, be (-come), accomplished, committed, like), break, cause, come (to pass), do, faint, fall, follow, happen, have, last, pertain, quit (oneself-), require, use.

But this is an interesting thread with info from both sides, thanks!

Supposed Contradiction:
Is the KJV wrong for rendering "Pascha" as the English word "Easter" in Acts of the Apostles 12:4?

No. Although "Pascha" was originally a Hebrew word ("פּסח (pesach)"), Greek, being the language of a predominantly Christian nation, had appropriated the Jewish word and gave it the Christian meaning of "Easter". That is why in modern Greek, the primary meaning of "Πάσχα" is Easter and Passover is actually the secondary meaning when "Πάσχα" is qualified as the "εβραϊκό Πάσχα (Hebrew Pascha)" or the "Πάσχα των ιουδαίων (Pascha of the Jews)". Many other languages of Christendom are like modern Greek in making Easter the primary meaning of the transliteration of "Pascha":

By our modern culture we may think the word is pagan to our own way of thinking, but that is not the truth. Truth is not always what we think is true. We have to remember that the heart is deceitful. Our trust should be in God's Word and not in our own way of thinking.

See the entire article here:
“Easter” or “Passover” in Acts 12:4? - King James Version Today

In addition, I have addressed other supposed contradictions in the KJV in this thread here:

https://www.christianforums.com/thr...t-supposed-contradictions-in-the-kjv.8035969/

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I googled "Koran" & "branches of islam".

As I said to you before, those in the Muslim religion will use the Modern Translation Bible excuse as a way to convert new Christians (who were ex Muslims) back to their religion. They will say that our God offers us many different bibles that they all say different things, and our own Bible says God is not the author of confusion. You wrote this off as coincidence. But others have stood against these Muslims strong by their belief in the King James Bible. What are you standing upon? Gobbledygook Biblical Hebrew and Biblical Greek that you don't know?

 

[Isilwen]

Certain men who have made Modern Translations have received the frog in your throat plague (Which is a plague from another part of the Bible).

Source?

I did search for that and found no evidence. Not saying it's not there, but I couldn't find it.

Edit: The source cannot be pro-KJVO. I am looking for a non-biased source of this information.

 

[JSRG]

Easter is a big one for me. It should be 3957 Pascha -passover. And since Christ became our passover we should be celebrating the Passover (14 days after the spring equinox) in his name by taking the Lord's supper in rememberance of him. Today's "Easter" has just taken off in so many directions that many young children are waiting on the easter bunny, etc.

Passover isn’t 14 days after the Spring Equinox. Without getting too far into the intricacies of the Hebrew calendar, Passover is supposed to be the first full moon in spring, so it would be the first full moon after the Spring Equinox (which could be 1-29 days afterwards). Or at least, that's when it's supposed to be--the calculations for the Hebrew Calendar have been off for centuries which gradually adds up. The Hebrew Calendar, like our own, has "leap years", but instead of adding a day it adds a month. But due to an error in computation, you get more leap years than are necessary, so Passover is gradually moving forward in the year, and if left unchecked, it will actually be celebrated after the summer equinox. Okay, it'll take thousands of years for it to get that extreme, but it will eventually.

Incidentally, this is why Passover and Easter can be so far away from each other in some years. Easter is set to be the Sunday after when Passover is supposed to be (again, Passover is supposed to be the first full moon after the spring equinox), but in some years due to the error Passover isn't on the day it's supposed to be, and in fact is a month later.

As for the Easter Bunny (which didn't come about until the 17th century), I agree that it distracts from the actual meaning of Easter, though I should note that its usage varies from country to country. For example, Switzerland actually utilizes a cuckoo instead, which admittedly I suppose isn't really solving the problem. But some countries don't have any animals associated with the holiday.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Source?

I did search for that and found no evidence. Not saying it's not there, but I couldn't find it.

Edit: The source cannot be pro-KJVO. I am looking for a non-biased source of this information.

If you were to have truly read through my 30 points as you claimed to before, you would have known about these sources. The sources are mentioned already in point #5.

#5. Certain men who worked on Modern Translations have mysteriously received the frog in the throat plague from the Bible

This was a warning to those not to add to God's Word in Revelation; Note: This plague was not a plague from Revelation. See the following links:

Bible Corrector Loses Voice on Ankerberg Show
Bible Correctors lose Voice

 

[Isilwen]

If you were to have truly read through my 30 points as you claimed to before, you would have known about these sources. The sources are mentioned already in point #5.

#5. Certain men who worked on Modern Translations have mysteriously received the frog in the throat plague from the Bible

This was a warning to those not to add to God's Word in Revelation; Note: This plague was not a plague from Revelation. See the following links:

Bible Corrector Loses Voice on Ankerberg Show
Bible Correctors lose Voice

These are biased sources. This is the reason I have dismissed this point.

Got some that aren't as I asked?

There is more credibility when the source isn't biased.

 

[Strong in Him]

Translating Beowulf is not going to effect a person's status with God. Messing with God's Word can effect a person's status with God

No it can't.
The Gospel is still the same, and people can be, and are, saved through any translation. Jesus who was God was born, lived, taught, died, was raised again, ascended and will return again one day. He is God the Son, the 2nd person of the Trinity, the author and perfector of our faith and giver of eternal life. He is the only Saviour and only way to the Father. We have every spiritual blessing in Christ and the Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance, gives us gifts and produces fruit in us.
Read the KJV, NIV or Message - it's all there.

I've asked you 4 or 5 times to show me what major doctrine is missing from the NIV that's in
the KJV - you can't answer.

Besides, Modern Translations have changed the words in the book of Revelation, too.

Not necessarily; the words may not have been in the original manuscripts.
Of course, as you refuse to compare with Bibles written in the original languages, you can tell yourself that you're right.

I know. You don't see what Westcott and Hort as a change to the Bible. But it was. They departed from the Received Text and this can be easily seen by the watering down of major doctrines,

Like what?
I've asked you this and had no answer.

So you can shout “KJVO-myth” and “KJV gets easter wrong,” until your ears bleed, but it will not change the truth of what I have already shown that you cannot adequately account for with a rational explanation.

And you can fill the entire forum with "evidence" that the KJV is perfect; it won't change the fact that you have been asked some simple questions which you cannot answer, and have been presented with simple facts that you do not accept.

In any event, we should agree to disagree in love and respect.
I don't believe we are going to see eye to eye on this issue.

I know this wasn't addressed to me, but I doubt I will ever agree with you either.
Which is fair enough in one way. But you started this thread, knowing that the topic has been thrashed out several times before, and, probably, knowing that it would attract people who would disagree with you.
So far, 39 people have voted in your poll; 32 of them say 'no'.

Faithful fruit came about from men of God believing the KJV. John Wesley and his followers proves that good fruit can come out of such a beloved Bible.

No.
a) no one denying that the KJV is a Bible; the word of God and that he can speak through it. But he can speak through other versions too.
b) The Holy Spirit had a great deal to do with John Wesley's conversion - as he does with everyone else's.
c) Other people have had just as dramatic conversions after reading other versions, and have gone on to bear much fruit. That's because they remained in the vine and filled with the Spirit, not because they read a certain translation of Scripture.
d) When Wesley had his "heart warming experience" in 1738 - which some might say was conversion; others say it was baptism in the Holy Spirit - he was not reading the KJV, but Martin Luther's introduction to the book of Romans.

You have to ask yourself the real reason why you hate the KJVO belief.
What is the real reason?

Again, I know this wasn't addressed to me - but for me it's the implication that if we don't have the "right" word of God then we must be substandard Christians.
There is also the fact that it seems that many want to replace Jesus with the KJV.
Jesus saves - not the Bible translation.
Jesus is THE word - translations are of the written words.
Jesus is perfect - man made translations aren't.
Jesus is God - I am pretty sure that in another thread someone even called the KJV "divine". No; it isn't.
We are called to lay down our lives for the Gospel, for Jesus and for one another - not a translation of his word.

 

[JulieB67]

Passover is supposed to be the first full moon in spring, so it would be the first full moon after the Spring Equinox

I'm going with the Spring Vernal Equiniox starting the first month,

Exodus 12:2 ""This month shall be unto you the beginning of months: it shall be the first month of the year to you

It starts in the month Abib/ Nissan, which is first month and starts at the vernal equinox

God sets the passover

Leviticus 23:5 "In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is the Lord's Passover."

It is the same time span every year and would only change a day at leap year. I just can't see Passover getting so far away from the day God intended. He says 14th day of the first month in the evening, which starts the day.

But that's me.

You did give me a laugh with the cuckoo, I have never heard that one. Wow.

 

[JSRG]

I'm going with the Spring Vernal Equiniox starting the first month,

Exodus 12:2 ""This month shall be unto you the beginning of months: it shall be the first month of the year to you

It starts in the month Abib/ Nissan, which is first month and starts at the vernal equinox

No, it doesn't start with the vernal equinox. I tried to keep things a bit simple in my previous post, but here's the more complicated version of what's going on.

Here's how the Hebrew Calendar works. The time it takes for the moon to go from a new moon back to another new moon is about 29.53 days. The Hebrew Calendar is set up so that each month is equal to that time (months are 29-30 days, with some having different numbers depending on the year, with the goal of averaging out the time to the aforementioned number). Thus, the start of each month is a new moon and the middle of each month is a full moon. Nisan/Abib 14, therefore, is the middle of the month, the full moon, and when Passover starts.

However, while it means the months coincide with the phases of the moon, you can't have these months add up to a year; you fall short at 12 months and go too far with 13 months. So with the standard 12 months, you'd fall short of a year and Passover would start sliding back, becoming a winter holiday, then a fall holiday, then a summer holiday, and then back to a spring holiday. That's obviously a no-no. To compensate for this, every several years they added in an extra month at the start, similar to how we add an extra day in leap years because a year is slightly more than 365 days. But in what years do you add the extra month? Originally it was calculated based on Passover. Passover is a spring festival, so they would add in the extra month whenever Nisan 14 would fall prior to the spring equinox. (sometimes they would actually add in the extra month even if Nisan 14 fell prior to the spring equinox if they felt it didn't feel enough like spring yet)

Back in the time of Jesus, and for several centuries afterwards, this decision was made by the Sanhedrin. But the Sanhedrin later got disbanded, so there was no central authority to decide when to add in the extra month. So what should be done? How do you keep everyone's calendars in sync? Rabbis came up with a mathematical formula to decide when the leap year occurs, much like how in the Julian/Gregorian Calendar we have a leap year every 4 years. Thus you have no need for a central authority each year to tell you, as you would know in advance when to do it, much like how we know exactly which years will be leap years ahead of time, like how we don't need to wait until 2024 to know that it'll be a leap year.

However, much like the Julian calendar, the calculations they came up with were slightly off. In the case of the Julian Calendar, this meant that in the 16th century they jumped the calendar forward ten days to compensate, then set it so that some leap years would be "skipped"--the next year that will happen in is 2100, which will not be a leap year. This new version, used today, is called the Gregorian Calendar. Mind you, despite getting it more accurate, the Gregorian Calendar isn't quite right either, though it'll be more than a thousand years from now when the error will be big enough to make us be a day off.

A similar problem occurred with the Hebrew Calendar. The current calculations cause it to, on average, move forward 6 minutes each year. That sounds like a small amount, but as centuries go by it starts to really add up. This has resulted in Passover--and other Jewish holidays--drifting forward in the year. In most years it still falls on the right date, but some years it doesn't, and is farther in the year than it should be. This problem will gradually be exacerbated as time goes on until people come up with a fix and implement it.

Here's some Jewish sites that give good explanations on this:
How Does the Spring Equinox Relate to the Timing of Passover? - About the Jewish Leap Year (explains the history of calculating which years have leap years)
Jewish Calendar is Slowly Drifting Off Track (explains how the current calendar calculations are moving Passover--and other holidays--forward in time)
Fixed Calendar - Features (another site explaining the same)

 

[robycop3]

No translation is "perfect"

I use the KJV because it can be translated back to the Hebrew/Greek but there are mistakes as others have said.

Easter is a big one for me. It should be 3957 Pascha -passover. And since Christ became our passover we should be celebrating the Passover (14 days after the spring equinox) in his name by taking the Lord's supper in rememberance of him. Today's "Easter" has just taken off in so many directions that many young children are waiting on the easter bunny, etc.

But having said that I can't recommend any modern translation that has changed words and can't at least be translated back to the manuscripts that were/are available. Because one word can make a huge difference in changing the meaning of a single verse. And omitting words will have the same effect, because you lose the word that can be translated back.

For example the KJV uses the word "taken" in many verses. But when you look up the word in the Hebrew/Greek as it applies to the verse it's in, there are different words/meanings.

Here are just two verses in the NT

Matthew 24:40 "Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken and the other left."

Matthew 9:15 "And Jesus said unto them, "Can the children of the bride chamber mourn, as long as the bridegroom is with them? but the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken from them, and then shall they fast."

The word taken in 24:40 is Greek 3880 paralambano, meaning to receive near, ie associate oneselves with.

The word taken in Matthew 9:15 -Greek 522-apairo -to lift off, ie remove, take (away)

Anyone reading a version that just had the word "taken" in it in the Matthew 24:40 verse might believe that meant literally removed from this earth without having the resource to be able to translate it back.

Something like at times can change a entire person's belief system.

Even in Genesis 1,

Genesis 1:2 "And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep."

was
1961 hayah
hayah (haw-yaw); a primitive root [compare OT:1933]; to exist, i.e. be or become, come to pass (always emphatic, and not a mere copula or auxiliary):KJV - beacon, altogether, be (-come), accomplished, committed, like), break, cause, come (to pass), do, faint, fall, follow, happen, have, last, pertain, quit (oneself-), require, use.

But this is an interesting thread with info from both sides, thanks!

Please try back-translating the words "and shalt be" in Rev. 16:5.

 

[JulieB67]

No, it doesn't start with the vernal equinox. I tried to keep things a bit simple in my previous post, but here's the more complicated version of what's going on.

I know what you are trying to say about the Hebrew Calender. I still feel like we should be going by solar not lunar. I don't believe that's what God intended. Even years from now we should not be celebrating Passover in the summer. Abib/Nissan starts at the beginning of Spring, not summer. If you go by the solar and spring equinox starting the biblical new year (as I believe it does) Passover date doesn't change. I think that's what God intended.

We'll just have to agree to disagree.