Many preconceived ideas and wrong teachings can be brought in and have been, even by well meaning men and become tradition, but not be true. We see this in the idea that the wicked will continue to live eternally in hell, or that man is immortal, etc.. So we have to look at what was brought in from outside of the scriptures, and being picked up although not its true meaning. In the case of this preconception, it actually led to the word being changed from its original meaning, to "Easter". The Greek word that the King James Version translates as ?Easter? is actually the word ?Pascha? (Hebrew: פסח?Pesach) which means ?Passover?. It was during an annual Passover celebration that Jesus was crucified at Jerusalem. Here is the text in question:

Acts 12:4 King James Version

"4 And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people."

We find it was translated incorrectly because the bible scholars preconceived ideas led them to this. If we look at the text from previous versions we find it was correctly translated...

Acts 12:4 1599 Geneva Bible

"4 [a]And when he had caught him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to be kept, intending after the Passover to bring him forth to the people."

Acts 12:4 Wycliffe Bible

"4 And when he had caught Peter, he sent him into prison; and betook him to four quaternions of knights, to keep him, and would after pask bring him forth to the people [willing after pask to bring him forth to the people]."

And others..

Acts 12:4 Complete Jewish Bible

"4 so when Herod seized him, he threw him in prison, handing him over to be guarded by four squads of four soldiers each, with the intention of bringing him to public trial after Pesach."

Acts 12:4 Young's Literal Translation

"4 whom also having seized, he did put in prison, having delivered [him] to four quaternions of soldiers to guard him, intending after the passover to bring him forth to the people."

So how could this happen, why would such learned men change something from one meaning to another, simple, because of their preconceived ideas. You see, it has taken time, but Greek philosphy and Ghonosticism had been picked up and in Rome the old beliefs and festivals were still followed by the Romans and many Christian and leaders didnt see a problem with it. One of the first disputes arose as the bishop of Rome allowed the celebration of the Pasch or Passover to continue till the following Sunday so Christians could also celebrate Spring Equinox festival as they had done before. Now the danger of allowing the Christians to join in pagan solstice celebrations was overlooked as the new pagan 'converts' joined the church and swelled the numbers under the bishop of Rome. But other Christian leaders saw the danger of worship according to the old pagan festivals and tried to stop it in what came to be known as Paschal/Easter controversies. The first recorded such controversy came to be known as the Quartodeciman controversy.

Eusebius of Caesarea (Church History, V, xxiii) wrote:
"A question of no small importance arose at that time [i.e. the time of Pope Victor I, about A.D. 190]. The dioceses of all Asia, according to an ancient tradition, held that the fourteenth day of the moon [of Nisan], on which day the Jews were commanded to sacrifice the lamb, should always be observed as the feast of the life-giving pasch (epi tes tou soteriou Pascha heortes), contending that the fast ought to end on that day, whatever day of the week it might happen to be. However it was not the custom of the churches in the rest of the world to end it at this point, as they observed the practice, which from Apostolic tradition has prevailed to the present time, of terminating the fast on no other day than on that of the Resurrection of our Saviour." So the bishop of Rome began the practice of fixing the celebration of Passover for Christians on Sunday and it spread through the old areas of the Empire.Polycarp the disciple of John the Apostle who was now the bishop of Smyrna, came and confronted Anicetus, the Bishop of Rome who had allow the changes in the Passover and other changes to bring in converts. According to Irenaeus, around the 150s or 160, Polycarp visited Rome to discuss the differences that existed between the other centers of Christianity in Asia and Rome "with regard to certain things" and especially about the time of the Pasch or Passover which in Rome were now the Easter festivals. Irenaeus says that Polycarp, the bishop of Smyrna, observed the fourteenth day of the moon, whatever day of the week that might be, following therein the tradition which he derived from John the Apostle. Irenaeus said that on certain things the two bishops speedily came to an understanding, while as to the time of the Pasch and the change to Easter, each adhered to his own custom. Polycarp following the eastern practice of celebrating Passover on the 14th of Nisan, the day of the Jewish Passover, regardless of what day of the week it fell while the bishop of Rome let it be observed on Sunday.

So the Bishop of Rome ignored the warning and continued to allow the Passover to be observed on Sunday at the pagan Spring Equinox festival and we can see how the Pasch was change to the festival of Easter. But not only was it just the festival as more pagan converts came in, they were allowed to worship on the pagan Spring Equinox festival day which they were used to, while Christians continued to worship on Sabbath. The festival on Easter controversy continued, with the Eastern churches giving it stiff opposition until the Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D., at which time Sunday was declared the official day for Easter observance. Emperor Constantine immediately followed this, the same year, with civil enactments enforcing it among the churches, and it began to take hold as we see to this day.

So now you can see how this led to the Bible Scholars changing Gods truth, to their preconception of what it was, yet it was from another tradition, not of God.

That reminds me of the misplaced comma in regards to what Christ said to one of the other two that were crucified with Him.

I notice the NIV has this:
Act 12:4
After arresting him, he put him in prison, handing him over to be guarded by four squads of four soldiers each. Herod intended to bring him out for public trial after the Passover.

In fact, of the versions on BlueLetterBible, the KJV is the only one with "Easter".
Things that make you go, hmmm.

That is why I wouldn't be a KJV only type of person.

We have to see and understand the preconceive ideas of man versus what is in Gods Word, so its good to look back and study what is there.

Translations are never absolute renditions of the original.
The ideal is going to the original.
Yes, there are some problems with translation even in the KJV. However, since most of us aren't Greek and Hebrew scholars, when it comes to which English version is the closest by far the KJV holds the highest record.
I am not a KJV only person as I find some other translations can aid considerably in understanding passages, but KJV is still the most foundational in seeking the true meaning.

"Most foundational"? Hmm. Depends what you mean by that.

Since I don't understand Hebrew, I believe a wide variety, closely inspected and compared, would be most useful in understanding passages. Along with a Strong's linkage of words used to help understand the usage. That no version would be "foundational". That the versions that are written in the language you speak, leading to reading of that version would be most useful rather than an archaic language version that you don't read. Kind of reminds me of a certain time when the "authorities" said you can't read any version but this one in a language you don't speak, and we'll tell you what it means.

That no one has been given the message to cast doubt on the Word of God.

I mainly use the NKJV, but also compare it with the KJV and others when doing a study.

Yep.

This is why it is important to study the Scriptures as in line upon line and precept upon precept, here a little, there a little.