This is one of those places where the manuscript selection makes a difference. The textus receptus says
πάντα ἰσχύω ἐν τῷ ἐνδυναμοῦντί με Χριστῷ
while the Majority Text says
πάντα ἰσχύω ἐν τῷ ἐνδυναμοῦντί με

Note, they are identical except the Textus Receptus has Christ (in Greek) on the end.

Thanks for clarifying that Anna.

I've also read that it says "Easter" because that's what was being celebrated. That goddess has been around forever, after all. Passover was already over. There's more than one theory out there about it.

_________________
Mom to Christian (13), Saphira (10), Xavier (5), and Adrian (2).

Lisa, you might be thinking of the Textus Vaticanus, which the Vatican keeps under lock and key. They sometimes let scholars look at it, but not very often and never the whole thing.

Wait - Scott - so you're saying you don't believe God kept His word intact? The KJV proves itself over and over and over, from Old Testament to New. Is your NKJV copyrighted by the publisher?

What I am saying is that even Greek scholars who prefer the KJV will admit that it mistranslates several things. The KJV is NOT the original text. The Greek is the original text. If you were to say "I am a Textus Receptus person" or "I am a majority text person" I would accept either of those as valid defenses of the truth. "I am a KJV only person" is just as fundamentally flawed as "I am a NKJV person" or "I am a NASB person." God didn't hand the Bible down in English, and the KJV translators didn't bother to respect the words of the original text.

As far as the "maybe they were celebrating Easter" comment, this is when they still held the Jewish festivals. Not only that, but it is the word for Passover. The intentional mistranslation here is problematic. The KJV is also where we get the introduction of the word "baptize", which was a Greek word that meant (literally) immerse. It was a word that would be used for naval vessels that were sunk in combat. The Catholic and Anglican churches were practicing sprinkling, and so instead of translating the word correctly they transliterated it to avoid offending church leaders.

As I said before, the KJV is a decent translation, but it's clearly not perfect.

Herod and his soldiers weren't Jewish.

I wouldn't mind someone saying they're a NASB only person if that's where their research led them. One of them obviously has to be God's preserved word. God doesn't expect us all to be Greek scholars, lol. He has used America to reach many nations, so it would only make sense that he gave us His word to do so. Even people in other countries recognize the difference between the KJV and other versions and they say they go to their Bible that was translated from KJV when they want to know what God really has to say.

And technically, the originals are in heaven. That would be Jesus. God is not bound or limited by language, nor does He favor a certain language.

_________________
Mom to Christian (13), Saphira (10), Xavier (5), and Adrian (2).

The reason I say I'm KJV only and not just Textus Receptus only, is because I believe God used both to give us His word in the English language. Not that they were perfect, God uses flawed people.

_________________
Mom to Christian (13), Saphira (10), Xavier (5), and Adrian (2).

I must correct my earlier statement. DH let me know when I mentioned it to him. We do not use the Textus Receptus (a series of works done by the Catholic Dutch Priest & Scholar Erasmus), but rather the Bible as conveyed and preserved by the Orthodox Church for 2000 years. But, the differences between the two are very minor.

We do not incorporate "new discoveries" - the result of which are showing up in modern translations.

I agree with the essence of what Lisa is saying - God preserves His Word through history. (although we may not agree on all the particulars)

But as for the word for Baptize in Greek, it is Baptizo (I Baptize). I think it's a stretch to call a change from Baptizo to Baptize a translational error.

_________________
http://stuffedveggies.blogspot.com/

[quote="scottbiddle"]What I am saying is that even Greek scholars who prefer the KJV will admit that it mistranslates several things. The KJV is NOT the original text. The Greek is the original text. If you were to say "I am a Textus Receptus person" or "I am a majority text person" I would accept either of those as valid defenses of the truth. "I am a KJV only person" is just as fundamentally flawed as "I am a NKJV person" or "I am a NASB person." God didn't hand the Bible down in English, and the KJV translators didn't bother to respect the words of the original text.

Ah well...we'll have to agree to disagree, lol. I believe it's the perfect, literal, Holy Spirit inspired word of God.

Lisa, it doesn't matter what Herod was, the Greek doesn't say *Easter*. Here's a website that explains it pretty well:
http://www.truthortradition.com/modules ... le&sid=494