Actually, you would be arguing against dictionaries, and an Encyclopedia.
See
post #953,
post #954,
post #955.
Also, I would encourage you to read in their entirety the following two articles with an open mind. If not, you are simply seeing what you want to see because you have a serious “
hate on” for the KJB for some odd reason.
“Easter” or “Passover” in Acts 12:4?
Another King James Bible Believer
Sir, depending on WILL KINNEY for any KJVO intel is as depending upon Vlad Putin for honesty over cyberhacking. I have proven him wrong on more than one site, in which he either exits or bans me if he has the authority. (I know how to get by most bans if I choose.)
If after you carefully considered the information given in these two articles with an open mind, and you are still shaking your head… “no.” I don’t know what else to tell you to convince you.
You can't. The AV makers clearly knew the difference between Easter & passover, calling Easter, along with Christmas, one of the 2 holiest days of the year, & placing an "Easter-Finder" in the front ofthe AV 1611. And the early Geneva translation has "passover" in Acts 12:4. And once more, the translation must reflect LUKE'S written thoughts, not those of the translators. And Luke was plainly thinking of PASSOVER!
You are simply not agreeing for your own personal reasons. In that case, we can politely agree to disagree in love in respect in Christ.
I disagree because I'm right, and have proven so.
You go back to your imperfect “choose your own adventure bibles” (as your ever slightly changing authority), and I go back to my pure Word (the KJB as my FINAL word of authority).
The KJV (NOT"KJB") is NOT pure, & that's been soundly PROVEN here. It's your right to use an outdated, goof-ridden version if you wish, but as for me & my house, we shall serve the LORD, using ACCURATE Bible translations in OUR language.
We will both have to give an account of the truth to the Lord our God in how we served Him in this life and in everything we thought, said, and did. We cannot hide from the Lord anything. I am following what I believe is the truth and I am 100% convinced in regards to my position on the KJB (Which is a unique position in that the KJB is either the pure Word (without error), or the KJB may be very close to being perfect like upper 90% or something). But I would not know if the KJB is not pure without facing God one day. I have to choose one Word of God that is pure that I can hold in my hands today and take by faith. If not, then I am the seat of God and determine what are God’s words, and what are not God’s words. I don’t have that kind of authority. It’s either all true, or all false. I choose to trust God by faith in His Word. I would rather trust in His Word more than trust less. But you can doubt His Word in parts if you like and say there are errors in His Word. I just don’t think that is beneficial to uplifting and building the faith in loving God and others with a self sacrificial love that Christ calls us to answer.
Look closely at your position. When something has been **PROVEN** to be an error & you still accept, does that correct said error?
And I don't doubt one word of God's; I DO doubt some translations of some of them. I've pointed out a few of them from your pet version, and yet you still try to defend them. Wrong is WRONG. Two wrongs don't make a right. When a rendering is wrong & you wrongly try to justify it, that doesn't make it right.
The KJVO myth comes from SATAN, & he uses it to create strife & dissent among Christians, & to place doubt upon several translations of God's word. And people such as you and the aforementionedm Mr. Kinney are in thrall to that myth, still believing it when it's been proven completely false. Your repeating of the "Psalm 12:6-7 thingie" several times proves your thralldom, as that false doctrine comes straight from a 7TH DAY ADVENTIST'S book. (The SDA is a known quasi/pseudo-Christian cult.) There's simply NO SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT for the KJVO myth, a fact which automatically makes it FALSE.