No; for me to have been wrong, Easter would've had to existed when Luke wrote "Acts", even if known by another name. I'm a decent amateur historian, & I've found no evidence that the anniversary of Jesus' resurrection was observed by too many people then, & if it had been, the Jewish religious leadership whom Herod was trying to please at Caesar's order would CERTAINLY not have observed it ! The delay in dealing with Peter was due to PASSOVER, & nothing else !Given the facts and the history of translation, your opinion is not supported. That was my point, which you goofed, and missed
Go ahead, but like what I posted earlier and demonstrated, your opinions are not substantiated by facts.I can post KJV goofs all day.
You haven't refuted any of them yet. I posted FACTS, to which you didn't respond. All the other readers see that.Go ahead, but like what I posted earlier and demonstrated, your opinions are not substantiated by facts.
While I can easily refute your opinions, I observed that facts will not alter your beliefs. Therefore, my continuing in this area is futile..
No longer will I respond to the issue of the KJV in this thread. The last word is yours.
Don’t waste your time CES. John has already made the requisite debunks above and subsequent observations regarding the futility in this exercise. Furthermore, Roby rightly pointed out the wallflowers can see what happened here.roby, roby, roby.....when will you get tired of beating a dead horse? So many BETTER things you could spend your time on.
I observed that facts will not alter your beliefs. Therefore, my continuing in this area is futile..
Never called you a name except KJVO by accident. And you still haven't begun to actually refute the FACTS I presented.YOU ARE WRONG AGAIN
Never have been KJVO
I gave you FACTS, and all you can do is call me names to "pigeon hole" me. I will not respond to that crap from anyone. Good Bye.