To get their doctrine into one of these:
Posted on 04/03/2007 6:31:28 AM PDT by DouglasKC
Every spring, the anticipation and excitement of Easter is electrifying for many people. Churches prepare elaborate Easter programs that illustrate the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Parents take time to color Easter eggs and hide them so their children can hunt for them.
It's typical for TV movies this time of year to depict Easter as an enjoyable occasion of renewed happiness. Television advertisements and commercial businesses also get very involved with Easter as they offer colorful Easter baskets, Easter costumes and chocolate rabbits to celebrate this great religious event.
Many churches advertise outdoor Easter sunrise services, with any and all invited. Weather permitting, the Easter celebration is visually reinforced by watching the sun rise in the east.
But what do bunnies and colored eggs have to do with Jesus' resurrection?
And if this celebration is so important, why didn't Jesus teach His apostles and the early Church to observe it? The books of the New Testament were written over a span of decades after Jesus Christ's death and resurrection, yet nowhere do we see so much as a hint of any kind of Easter celebration.
So where exactly did Easter and its customs come from? Why do hundreds of millions of people celebrate the holiday today?
Can we find Easter in the Bible?
Easter is considered the most important religious festival in today's Christianity. "The Easter feast has been and still is regarded as the greatest in the Christian church, since it commemorates the most important event in the life of its Founder" (The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, 1986, Vol. 2, "Easter"). Given its popularity, one would think that surely this observance is found in God's Word.
Some cite Acts 12:4 as authority for celebrating Easter. But there's a problem in that Easter isn't really mentioned there at all. The King James Bible translators substituted "Easter" for the Greek word Pascha, which means "Passover." "The word [Easter] does not properly occur in Scripture, although [the King James Version] has it in Acts 12:4 where it stands for Passover, as it is rightly rendered in RV" (ibid.).
The vast majority of Bible translations recognize this error in the King James Version and rightly translate the word as "Passover" in Acts 12:4. The truth is, "there is no trace of Easter celebration in the [New Testament]" (ibid.)
Where did Easter come from?
If Easter isn't found in the Bible, where exactly did it come from? And just exactly what does the name Easter mean?
It's important to review credible historical sources to understand the celebration's true history. For example, The Encyclopaedia Britannica tells us: "At Easter, popular customs reflect many ancient pagan survivals—in this instance, connected with spring fertility rites, such as the symbols of the Easter egg and the Easter hare or rabbit" (15th edition, Macropaedia, Vol. 4, p. 605, "Church Year").
In the ancient world of the Middle East, people were far more connected to the land and cycles of nature than we are today. They depended on the land's fertility and crops to survive. Spring, when fertility returned to the land after the long desolation of winter, was a much-anticipated and welcomed time for them.
Many peoples celebrated the coming of spring with celebrations and worship of their gods and goddesses, particularly those associated with fertility. Among such deities were Baal and Astarte or Ashtoreth, mentioned and condemned frequently in the Bible, whose worship typically included ritual sex to promote fertility throughout the land.
It was only natural to the peoples of the ancient Middle East to incorporate symbols of fertility—such as eggs and rabbits, which reproduce in great numbers—into those pagan celebrations for their gods. As The Encyclopaedia Britannica notes above, Easter eggs and the Easter rabbit are simply a continuation of these ancient spring fertility rites.
Nineteenth-century Scottish Protestant clergyman Alexander Hislop's work The Two Babylons is still considered a definitive work on pagan customs that survive in today's religious practices.
On Easter, he wrote: "What means the term Easter itself? It is not a Christian name. It bears its Chaldean origin on its very forehead. Easter is nothing else than Astarte, one of the titles of Beltis, the queen of heaven, whose name, as pronounced by the people of Nineveh, was evidently identical with that now in common use in this country. That name, as found by [early archaeologist Sir Austen Henry] Layard on the Assyrian monuments, is Ishtar" (1959, p. 103).
The name Easter, then, comes not from the Bible. Instead its roots go far back to the ancient pre-Christian Mesopotamian goddess Ishtar, known in the Bible as Astarte or Ashtoreth.
Ancient resurrection celebrations
What did worship of this goddess Ishtar involve? "Temples to Ishtar had many priestesses, or sacred prostitutes, who symbolically acted out the fertility rites of the cycle of nature. Ishtar has been identified with the Phoenician Astarte, the Semitic Ashtoreth, and the Sumerian Inanna. Strong similarities also exist between Ishtar and the Egyptian Isis, the Greek Aphrodite, and the Roman Venus.
"Associated with Ishtar was the young god Tammuz [mentioned in Ezekiel 8:14], considered both divine and mortal . . . In Babylonian mythology Tammuz died annually and was reborn year after year, representing the yearly cycle of the seasons and the crops. This pagan belief later was identified with the pagan gods Baal and Anat in Canaan " (Nelson's Illustrated Bible Dictionary, 1995, "Gods, Pagan," p. 509).
Alan Watts, expert in comparative religion, wrote: "It would be tedious to describe in detail all that has been handed down to us about the various rites of Tammuz . . . and many others . . . But their universal theme—the drama of death and resurrection—makes them the forerunners of the Christian Easter, and thus the first 'Easter services.' As we go on to describe the Christian observance of Easter we shall see how many of its customs and ceremonies resemble these former rites" (Easter: Its Story and Meaning, 1950, p. 58).
He goes on to explain how such practices as fasting during Lent, erecting an image of the deity in the temple sanctuary, singing hymns of mourning, lighting candles and nighttime services before Easter morning originated with ancient idolatrous practices (pp. 59-62).
Another author, Sir James Frazer (1854-1941), knighted for his contributions to our understanding of ancient religions, describes the culmination of the ancient idolatrous worship this way: "The sorrow of the worshippers was turned to joy . . . The tomb was opened: the god had risen from the dead; and as the priest touched the lips of the weeping mourners with balm, he softly whispered in their ears the glad tidings of salvation.
"The resurrection of the god was hailed by his disciples as a promise that they too would issue triumphant from the corruption of the grave. On the morrow . . . the divine resurrection was celebrated with a wild outburst of glee. At Rome, and probably elsewhere, the celebration took the form of a carnival" (The Golden Bough, 1993, p. 350).
A new celebration with ancient idolatrous roots
In various forms, worship of this god under the names Tammuz, Adonis and Attis, among others, spread from the outer reaches of the Roman Empire to Rome itself. There a truly remarkable development took place: Early Catholic Church leaders merged customs and practices associated with this earlier "resurrected" god and spring fertility celebrations and applied them to the resurrected Son of God.
The customs of the ancient fertility and resurrection celebrations weren't the only ones morphed into a new "Christian" celebration, but they are among the most obvious. After all, many historians readily admit the origin of the name Easter and the ancient fertility symbolism of rabbits and decorated eggs (which you can verify yourself in almost any encyclopedia).
Frazer observes: "When we reflect how often the Church has skilfully contrived to plant the seeds of the new faith on the old stock of paganism, we may surmise that the Easter celebration of the dead and risen Christ was grafted upon a similar celebration of the dead and risen Adonis" (p. 345).
He goes on to note that the desire to bring heathens into the Catholic Church without forcing them to surrender their idolatrous celebrations "may have led the ecclesiastical authorities to assimilate the Easter festival of the death and resurrection of their Lord to the festival of the death and resurrection of another Asiatic god which fell at the same season . . . the Church may have consciously adapted the new festival [of Easter] to its heathen predecessor for the sake of winning souls to Christ" (p. 359).
Surprisingly, the celebration of Easter didn't finally win out until A.D. 325, nearly 300 years after Jesus Christ's death and resurrection!
As the Catechism of the Catholic Church explains in the section titled "The Liturgical Year," "At the Council of Nicaea in 325, all the Churches agreed that Easter . . . should be celebrated on the Sunday following the first full moon . . . after the vernal equinox" (1995, p. 332).
Up until this time, many believers had continued to commemorate Jesus' death through the biblical Passover as Jesus and the apostles had instructed (Luke 22:19-20; 1 Corinthians 11:23-26). Now, however, with the power of the Roman Empire behind it, the Catholic Church enforced its preference for Easter. Those who wished to continue to observe the biblical Passover had to go underground to avoid persecution.
Would Jesus Christ celebrate Easter?
The record of the New Testament is clear: The faithful members of the early Church continued to observe all that the apostles taught them, as they were taught by Jesus Christ. The record of history is equally clear: In later centuries new customs, practices and doctrines were introduced that were quite foreign to the original Christians, forming a new "Christianity" they would scarcely recognize.
So a key question is, should a Christian follow what Jesus taught or what later religious teachers taught?
It's always a good idea to ask the question, what would Jesus do?
If Jesus were in the flesh today, would He celebrate Easter? The simple answer is No. He does not change. "Jesus Christ is the same, yesterday, today, and forever," as Hebrews 13:8 tells us (emphasis added throughout). Jesus never observed Easter, never sanctioned it and never taught His disciples to celebrate it. Nor did the apostles teach the Church to do so.
Today, Jesus would observe the biblical Passover and Days of Unleavened Bread as Scripture teaches and as He practiced and taught (John 13:15-17; 1 Corinthians 5:7-8). In fact, He specifically said that He anticipated observing the Passover with His true followers "in My Father's kingdom" after His return (Matthew 26:26-29).
The feasts of Passover and Unleavened Bread have deep meaning to Christ's true disciples. They reveal aspects of God's plan for the salvation of humanity—commemorating the fact that Jesus died for us and lives in us and for us (1 Corinthians 11:26; Galatians 2:20; Colossians 3:3-4).
Should you observe Easter?
If you want to be a true disciple of Christ Jesus, you need to carefully examine whether your beliefs agree with the Bible. It is not acceptable to God to merely assume that He approves of or accepts non-biblical celebrations, regardless of whether they are done for proper motives.
The fact is that God says, "Learn not the way of the heathen"—those who don't know God's truth (Jeremiah 10:2, King James Version).
His Word gives us explicit instructions regarding worshipping Him with practices adopted from pagan idolatry: "Do not inquire after their gods, saying, 'How did these nations serve their gods? I also will do likewise.' You shall not worship the Lord your God in that way; for every abomination to the Lord which He hates they have done to their gods . . . Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you shall not add to it nor take away from it" (Deuteronomy 12:30-32).
Jesus Christ now commands everyone to repent of following all man-made religious traditions: "Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent" (Acts 17:30; compare Matthew 15:3).
Will you honor Christ's lifesaving instructions so that God can bless you? He said: "If anyone serves Me, let him follow Me; and where I am, there My servant will be also. If anyone serves Me, him My Father will honor" (John 12:26).
God wants you and me to obey His life-giving Word. When we do, we can serve Christ as His ambassadors on earth. There is no greater calling on earth and throughout time. For your ongoing happiness and security, turn to God now and seek His complete and perfect way. GN
The most definitive date that I have found for Herod's death is April 1st, 4 BC. That makes the birth of Christ 5 BC and his 30th birthday in 26 AD, the 15th year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar [Luke 3:1]. Three and a half years later his death in 30 AD.
Romanists have to twist everything and search the astrological charts and tea leaves to try to place his death at 33AD because that year Passover was a Friday. Their problem with their 33 AD number is that it doesn't leave much time for Saul's multi-year persecution of Jewish Christians before his conversion on the road to Damascus.
Jesus died in Jerusalem not Bithynia or Nicaea. Your link is confused.
To get their doctrine into one of these:
He was quoting [Jonah 1:17]. If he was entombed on Wednesday afternoon.....say about 4:00/4:30 P.M., like all the scriptures indicate....and resurrected Saturday about 4:00/4:30 P.M., like all the scriptures indicate, then He would still have been in the heart of the Earth three days and three nights....72 hours total.
However, if His burial took until dawn Thursday morning [Luke 23:54], and He was raised from the grave at dawn Sunday morning [Matthew 28:1-2] then His words "three days and three nights in the heart of the earth" are literally fulfilled in correct order. Isn't that right???
For the life of me, I cannot understand how you get "Thursday morning" from [Luke 23:54]? And.....[Matthew 28:1] (post #399). All translations agree that this is taking place late on the Sabbath Day.....and the tomb is empty! Verse 53 of Luke 23 says: και καθελων αυτο ενετυλιξεν αυτο σινδονι και εθηκεν αυτο εν μνηματι λαξευτω ου ουκ ην ουδεπω ουδεις κειμενοc/and having taken it down, he wrapped it in fine linen, and placed it in a tomb hewn out, where no one was yet laid. This means that the body was entombed....and the Sabbath was approaching....not there yet!
as it began to "dawn" toward the first day of the week
Epiphosko/Dawn. To draw on; to begin....like all Hebrew days...they began (dawned) at sunset. [Luke 23:54] και ημερα ην παρασκευη σαββατον επεφωσκεν/And the day was a preparation, and sabbath was approaching. "Young's Literal Translation" Have you ever heard the phrase "The Dawning of the Age of Aquarius?" This is referring to the "BEGINNING" of the age!
It does not say the Sabbath was already here. The Greek says it was approaching....late afternoon. You can attempt to spin this all you want to justify "Sol Invictus" ....but your argument is with scripture, not me! And you are forgetting that evening means everything from noon until sunset with an "Even" at 3:00 P.M. The Hebrews called the time of day the Sun was declining (from noon until sunset) evening. The time the sun was rising...morning.
Now....pay attention to this. [Genesis 1:5] and God calleth to the light 'Day,' and to the darkness He hath called 'Night;' and there is an evening, and there is a morning -- day one. God calls the darkness night, doesn't He? He calls the light....day, doesn't He? What composes the day....? Morning and evening, of course. This is why Joseph of Arimathea came to Pilate during the daylight hours..... called "Evening" by the Hebrews. If there is one thing you should ever take away from this study it is the fact that evening to the Hebrews was not night time!
The neat thing about having a 2000 year perspective is the ability to measure what is with what has happened.
Just like clothing fads come and go, so do heresies. We have seen in these forums examples of most of the great and many of the small heresies echoed. Those who do not understand history are doomed to repeat it. And there is a lot of repetition here.
We are the keepers of the Bible. Our doctrine comes from God.
Our church was founded by Jesus Christ. Not Martin Luther, or James I, or John Smythe, or John Calvin, or Alexander Campbell, or...
Most of our doctrines predate the Bible. If you formulate your doctrine of the moment, of the emotion, of the whim, based solely upon a portion of what God has given to us, don’t come whining to us when your error is revealed to you. YOPIOS is an invention of Satan. Ware its use.
I see. So eclipses of the sun or moon, and earthquakes would be limited to the immediate vicinity of Jerusalem, and not extend to a place a couple of hundred miles away.
I guess they made these phenomena a little different in those days.
Uncle Chip!!! I've already shown you that Matthew 28:1 "In the end of the sabbath" IS evening, not morning, back in post 272.
I'll reproduce it:
Mat 28:1 NOW after the Sabbath, as the first day of the week began to dawn, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to see the tomb.(New King James)
Let's look at the same verse, verse 1, in the “old” King James:
(KJVR) In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulcher
We have something a little different here. A subtle word change. “In the end of the sabbath”. Not “after the sabbath”, but “in the end of the sabbath”. Hmmm..
Let's look at one more translation....the American Standard version, which I believe first came out in sometimee in the 1890's:
Mat 28:1 Now late on the sabbath day, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.
So let' s look at the phrase "NOW after" in the New King James phrase "Now after the Sabbath,"
The phrase "now after" is actually the greek word opse. It's Strong's word 3796. Strongs says it means "late in the day; by extension after the close of the day: - (at) even, in the end.".
Note that the primary meaning is “late in the day”.
Luckily, this word is only used in two other places in the new testament. It's used in Mark 11:19, where it's translated “evening”:
Mar 11:19 When evening(OPSE) had come, He went out of the city.
And it's used in Mark 13:35 where it's also translated “evening”. And what's interesting about this verse is that it shows the difference between different times of day in greek usage.
Mar 13:35"Watch therefore, for you do not know when the master of the house is coming--in the evening (OPSE), at midnight, at the crowing of the rooster, or in the morning--
“Evening” is opse. Note that we have other “times” here. Commentators say that these are a reference to the 4 times into which Jews divided the night in new testament times. Evening is the first of these times, 6 PM to 9 PM. Midnight 9 PM to 12 AM. The crowing of the rooster, 12 AM to 3 AM, and morning, 3 AM to 6 AM.
OPSE is the first watch, evening. It is VERY far removed from morning, is it not?
Let's go back to Matthew 28:1 and look at one more translation. A Literal Translation by By James Murdock published in 1852: Mat 28:1 And in the close [evening] of the sabbath, as the first [day] of the week began to dawn, came Mary of Magdala and the other Mary, to view the sepulchre.
Now in the spring, in Jerusalem, it can be evening, the first watch of the night and STILL be light out. The sunset doesn't occur until 6:40 or later in the spring. So it can be evening, but still not the next Jewish "day", which starts at sunset.
Combine that with "epiphosko" and the evidence just from this one verse is conclusive. Jesus Christ was NOT resurrected in the morning. But was resurrected in the "evening", before sunset, on the sabbath.
Diego --- pay close attention to the actual meaning of the Greek word: "epiphosko". It means "to dawn, to grow light." The words "to draw on" used by the KJV mean "to dawn, to grow light". The day begins at evening, at dusk, when it is still growing dark, dusky. Night is ahead. "Epiphosko" describes the beginning of the period of light after the darkness of the night has passed.
"Epiphosko" has to do with the light of the morning day beginning to be seen. At 6:00 in the evening when the new Hebrew day begins, it is still growing dark, night is coming. It grows darker for hours and hours until sometime around morning and then it "begins to grow light, to dawn".
"Epiphosko" is thus translated "dawn" in Matthew 28:1 and clearly means "the morning" when light was breaking. The words "the sabbath drew on" do not mean that the day was about to begin but that it was proceeding and beginning to dawn. The Hebrew day is almost 12 hours old at "epiphosko" --- dawn.
Your problem is that you are allegorizing the words "epiphosko, dawn, draw on, grow light" to mean the day at 6:00 PM when it is really the day at 6:00 AM.
And "evening" ends the Hebrew day. How many times do the writers have to say that "evening had come" before Joseph went to Pilate. The multiple evening theory is pure bunk. Evening to the Jew was at sunset. Evening ended the day.If "evening" means "evening", then the day had ended and the new one had begun. And at that time it was still growing dark, getting darker, becoming night and would not begin to dawn until 12 hours later.
Jesus said "three days and three nights". The Hebrew day begins with the "night" and then the Hebrew "day" [the period of light] begins at dawn. Jesus said that his time in the earth would begin with a "day" [the period of light] a dawn not a "night". Thursday dawn began the first "day" [period of light], Thursday evening began the first "night" [period of darkness], and ended at dawn Sunday AM.
Luke 24:1 says "morning". The Hebrew day begins with evening not morning. If it is morning then the day is already 12 hours old.
The NAB notes on this passage:
2 [1] After the sabbath . . . dawning: since the sabbath ended at sunset, this could mean in the early evening, for dawning can refer to the appearance of the evening star; cf Luke 23:54. However, it is probable that Matthew means the morning dawn of the day after the sabbath, as in the similar though slightly different text of Mark, “when the sun had risen” (Mark 16:2). Mary Magdalene and the other Mary: see the notes on Matthew 27:55-56; 57-61. To see the tomb: cf Mark 16:1-2 where the purpose of the women’s visit is to anoint Jesus’ body.
1-20] Except for Matthew 28:1-8 based on Mark 16:1-8, the material of this final chapter is peculiar to Matthew. Even where he follows Mark, Matthew has altered his source so greatly that a very different impression is given from that of the Marcan account. The two points that are common to the resurrection testimony of all the gospels are that the tomb of Jesus had been found empty and that the risen Jesus had appeared to certain persons, or, in the original form of Mark, that such an appearance was promised as soon to take place (see Mark 16:7). On this central and all-important basis, Matthew has constructed an account that interprets the resurrection as the turning of the ages (Matthew 28:2-4), shows the Jewish opposition to Jesus as continuing to the present in the claim that the resurrection is a deception perpetrated by the disciples who stole his body from the tomb (Matthew 28:11-15), and marks a new stage in the mission of the disciples once limited to Israel (Matthew 10:5-6); now they are to make disciples of all nations. In this work they will be strengthened by the presence of the exalted Son of Man, who will be with them until the kingdom comes in fullness at the end of the age (Matthew 28:16-20).
Doug; you appear to headed along the Way.
Well it's nice that you're inserting your opinion, but as I showed you BIBLICALLY it means exactly what it says. You apparently can't dispute that the word OPSE means "evening", not morning and it's clearly and unmistakably used as such in scripture.
And "ephikosos" can also mean the lighting of the lamps, the rising of the evening star and it can also mean the dawning of a new day that beings at sunset. Which only make sense considering the meaning of the word OPSE.
Luke 24:1 will be an interesting study. Unfortunately I'm not going to have time to study or post for the next few days, but if diego or Chris wants to respond, feel free.
dawn on the first day of the week would not be saturday, saturday being the seventh day, the day of rest. thus dawn of the first day of the week as sabbath ended (at midnight saturday) he was risen on the third day (Sunday)
Perhaps you should read the Strong's Concordance on the meaning of "opse" #3796 = "late in the day, at evening, in the end of day, and by extension after the close of the day." Check it out.
Thus Matthew 28:1 means "After the close of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first of the week, came Mary Magdalene ...". She was up early in the morning with the bunnies, not running around all night in the dark with the coyotes.
You got that right.
Our church was founded by Jesus Christ.
That is not historically accurate.
Again, I am not interpreting ANYTHING. Jesus said 3 days and 3 nights, and I believe it. I don't give a rip what day He was resurrected, as long as He was in that tomb for 3 days and 3 nights. There is no justification whatsoever for switching the Sabbath from, well, the sabbath to Sunday. Your church teaches error and will be held accountable.
Mat 7:22 "Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?'
Mat 7:23 "And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.'
Mat 7:24 "Therefore everyone who hears these words of Mine and acts on them, may be compared to a wise man who built his house on the rock.
The resurrection had already taken place prior to the sun's rising.
The reason is that Sabbath celebrates the old Jewish faith which to this day refuses to acknowledge Christ sacrifice. The ressurection is the most important event in Christianity.
Just as baptism has replaced circumcision, Sunday replaces Saturday as the day to worship, as it acknowledges the Ressurection as the critical event in the faith. Non Jews are not bound by the jewish laws, read Acts.
Which is why on Pascha we get to church around 11, and stay till around 3 AM.
Clearly it had taken place before they got to the tomb, but how much earlier? 12 hours? 3 hours? ten minutes? or two minutes?
Matthew 28:1 says: "In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre. 2 And Behold, there was an earthquake; for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from door and sat upon it."
It appears that the resurrection is taking place as they are approaching the tomb as indicated by the earthquake, the descent of the angel, and the rolling back of the stone from the door. According to Matthew it happened as they arrived at the tomb.
We got our doctrines right from the source - the Lord Jesus Christ. He organized us and set us on our Way.
Departing from the Way, denying His organization on Earth, repudiating a portion of His Word, indulging in private interpretation, and then independently from the thousands of other organizations who have taken the same road, claiming to be the true Church of Christ in defiance of real historical evidence - and the Bible itself - seems a strange methodology to employ in order to attain everlasting life.
Me, I don’t want to set myself up as the leader of my own religion. It also says that in the Bible, doncha know.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.