Posted on 04/10/2009 10:32:45 AM PDT by DouglasKC
Consider these important facts. First, Easter Sunday is traditionally revered as the day of Jesus' resurrection—although the Bible clearly states that He had already risen before Sunday dawned in the city of Jerusalem.
Second, even though Good Friday is generally observed as the traditional day of His crucifixion, Christ Himself told the disciples that He would be in the grave for all of three days and three nights. How can three days and three nights possibly fit between a Friday-afternoon crucifixion and a Sunday-morning resurrection?
Third, the word Easter is not found in the Greek New Testament. Nor is there biblical mention of or instruction to observe Lent.
Finally, unlike the specific instruction to commemorate Christ's death, there is absolutely no commandment in the New Testament to observe the date of Jesus' resurrection. Yet today's religious customs are so ingrained in the church calendar that many would consider it heretical to question them.
Most of the world is scarcely aware that the original apostles did not institute or keep these customs, nor were they observed by the early Christian Church. Try as you might to find them, Lent, Good Friday and Easter are not so much as mentioned in the original Greek wording of the New Testament. (The word Easter appears only once in the King James Version of the Bible—in Acts 12:4—where it is flagrantly mistranslated from the Greek word pascha, which should be translated "Passover," as most versions render it.)
The justification for the Lenten 40-day preparation for Easter is traditionally based on Jesus' 40-day wilderness fast before His temptation by Satan (Harper's Bible Dictionary, "Lent"; Matthew 4:1-2; Mark 1:13). The problem with this explanation is that this incident is not connected in any way with Jesus' supposed observance of Easter. The 40-day pre-Easter practice of fasting and penance did not originate in the Bible.
Many people still follow such practices, assuming that such activities honor God and are approved by Him. But, we should ask, how does God regard such extrabiblical customs? Consider God's instructions to those who would worship Him:
"Take heed to yourself that you are not ensnared to follow them, after they are destroyed from before you, and that you 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; for they burn even their sons and daughters in the fire 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, emphasis added throughout).
The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia notes: "The term Easter was derived from the Anglo-Saxon 'Eostre,' the name of the goddess of spring. In her honor sacrifices were offered at the time of the vernal [spring] equinox" (1982, Vol. 2, "Easter").
Many battles were fought over its observance date, but the Council of Nicea finally fixed the date of Easter in A.D. 325 to fall on the first Sunday after the full moon on or after the vernal equinox (March 21).
Not generally known is that "the preparation for Easter season, beginning on Ash Wednesday and continuing for a week after Easter Day, was filled with pagan customs that had been revised in the light
of Christianity. Germanic nations, for example, set bonfires in spring. This custom was frowned on by the Church, which tried to suppress it . . . In the sixth and seventh centuries [monks] came to Germany, [bringing] their earlier pagan rites[,] and would bless bonfires outside the church building on Holy Saturday. The custom spread to France, and eventually it was incorporated into the Easter liturgy of Rome in the ninth century. Even today the blessing of the new fire is part of the Vigil of Easter.
"Medieval celebrations of Easter began at dawn. According to one old legend, the sun dances on Easter morning, or makes three jumps at the moment of its rising, in honor of Christ's resurrection. The rays of light penetrating the clouds were believed to be angels dancing for joy.
"Some Easter folk traditions that have survived today are the Easter egg, rabbit and lamb. During medieval times it was a tradition to give eggs at Easter to servants. King Edward I of England had 450 eggs boiled before Easter and dyed or covered with gold leaf. He then gave them to members of the royal household on Easter day. The egg was an earlier pagan symbol of rebirth and was presented at the spring equinox, the beginning of the pagan new year.
"The Easter rabbit is mentioned in a German book of 1572 and also was a pagan fertility symbol. The Easter lamb goes back to the Middle Ages; the lamb, holding a flag with a red cross on a white field, represented the resurrected Christ [rather than the sacrifice of His life, as a fulfillment of the Passover lamb, that paid for the sins of the world (John 1:29)]" (Anthony Mercatante, Facts on File Encyclopedia of World Mythology and Legend, 1988, "Easter").
Easter traditions are embraced by many who profess Christianity. Yet none of these practices are found in the Bible or the customs of the early Church. Jesus and His apostles did not establish or perpetuate such practices, which obscure the true biblical meanings and observances of this time of year. In fact, a fourth-century church historian, Socrates Scholasticus, wrote in his Ecclesiastical History that neither the apostles nor the Gospels taught the observance of Easter, nor did they or Jesus give a law requiring the keeping of this feast. Instead, "the observance originated not by legislation, but as a custom" (chapter 22, emphasis added).
Even as early as the close of the second century, the theologian Irenaeus bore witness in his letter to Victor, bishop of Rome, that some early Roman bishops forbade the observance of Passover on the 14th of Nisan. This was the date of the biblical observance practiced each spring by Jesus and the apostles. At the time that the Nisan 14 Passover observance was banned, ecclesiastical authorities introduced Lent and Easter into Christian practice.
A century later the Syriac Didascalia recorded the attempts of teachers in Rome to reconcile Jesus' words that He would be entombed "three days and three nights in the heart of the earth" (Matthew 12:40) with a Friday-afternoon crucifixion and a Sunday-morning resurrection. According to their reasoning, Jesus' sufferings were part of the three days and three nights of Scripture. Friday morning from 9 to noon was counted as the first day, and noon to 3 p.m. (which was darkened) was considered the first night. Three in the afternoon to sunset was reckoned as the second day, whereas Friday night to Saturday morning constituted the second night. The daylight part of Saturday was the third day, and the night portion to Sunday morning was the third night.
In other words, the three days and three nights in the grave that Jesus said would be the sign that He was indeed sent from God were transformed into a period of two days and two nights, or a total of no more than 48 hours. This has subsequently been reduced even further in modern times by figuring from late afternoon Friday to early Sunday morning, which takes away another 12 hours or more. Such reasoning has to discount or somehow explain away Jesus' clear promise that He would be entombed three days and three nights.
Easter and Lent are nonbiblical and were not observed by the apostles or the first-century Church. The biblical record shows, however, that the early Church diligently kept other observances, the New Testament Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread, just as Jesus and the apostles had done (Matthew 26:17-19; Acts 20:6; 1 Corinthians 5:8; 11:23-26). These were supplanted in later years by the customs and practices of Easter and Lent.
Passover is an annual reminder of Jesus' sacrificial death to pay the penalty for our sins (Matthew 26:26-28). The Feast of Unleavened Bread is a celebration that focuses on a Christian's need to live in sincerity, truth and purity (1 Corinthians 5:8). The nonbiblical festivals of Lent and Easter, added decades after the time of Jesus Christ and the apostles, only cloud the true significance of Christ's life, death and resurrection and the purpose of His coming.
The Passover, instituted in Exodus 12, continues by Jesus Christ's example and command—but with a change of symbols. Jesus' death fulfilled the symbolism of the sacrificial Passover lamb (Matthew 26:17-28; John 1:29). However, the New Testament Passover has been improperly replaced as an annual memorial of the death of Christ by Easter. We are commanded to commemorate Christ's death, not His resurrection (1 Corinthians 11:23-28).
Jesus Christ's promise was fulfilled exactly as He said, a fact that is made clear when we study and compare the Gospel accounts. These records give a clear, logical explanation that is perfectly consistent with Christ's words. Let's focus on Jesus' last days on earth to gain the proper perspective and understanding of how and when these events occurred.
Jesus said that, like the prophet Jonah, He would be entombed three days and three nights and that He would be raised up the third day after His crucifixion and death (Matthew 12:39-40; 17:23; 20:19). Putting these scriptures together, we see that He was resurrected at the end of the third day after His death. Luke 23:44 shows that He died around the ninth hour (Jewish reckoning), or 3 p.m. He would have been buried within the next few hours so that His body could be entombed before the approaching Sabbath (John 19:31).
Jesus' resurrection could not have been
on a Sunday morning because John 20:1-2 shows that He had already risen before Mary Magdalene came to the tomb early in the morning, arriving "while it was still dark." Therefore, neither could His death have occurred Friday afternoon, since that would not allow for His body to be in the grave three days and three nights. Clearly, the Good Friday-Easter Sunday explanation and tradition is without scriptural foundation.
Notice also that John 19:31 mentions that the Sabbath immediately after Jesus' death was "a high day"—not the weekly seventh-day Sabbath (from Friday evening to Saturday evening), but one of the annual Sabbaths, the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread (see Leviticus 23:6-7), which can fall on any day of the week.
In fact, two Sabbaths—first an annual Holy Day and then the regular weekly Sabbath—are mentioned in the Gospel accounts, a detail overlooked by most people. This can be proven by comparing Mark 16:1 with Luke 23:56.
Mark's account tells us, "Now when the Sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices, that they might come and anoint Him" (Mark 16:1). However, Luke's account describes how the women who followed Jesus saw how His body was laid in the tomb. "Then they returned and prepared spices and fragrant oils" for the final preparation of the body. And they rested on the Sabbath according to the commandment" (Luke 23:56).
Mark tells us that the women bought the spices after the Sabbath, "when the Sabbath was past." Luke, however, tells us that they prepared the spices and oils, "and they rested on the Sabbath according to the commandment." How could the women have bought spices after the Sabbath, yet then prepared them and rested on the same Sabbath?
That is obviously impossible—unless two Sabbaths are involved, with a day between them. Once we realize this, the two accounts become clear (see "The Chronology of Christ's Crucifixion and Resurrection," p. 18). Christ died near 3 p.m. and was placed in the tomb near sunset that day—a Wednesday in the year 31. That evening began the "high day" Sabbath, the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, which fell on Thursday that year. The women rested on that day, then on Friday purchased and prepared the spices and oils for Jesus' body, which could not be done on either the Holy Day or the weekly Sabbath. They then rested again on the weekly Sabbath before going to the tomb before daybreak on Sunday morning, at which time they discovered that Christ had already been resurrected.
The fact that two Sabbaths are involved is confirmed by Matthew 28:1, where the women went to the tomb "after the Sabbath." The Sabbath mentioned here is actually plural in the original Greek and should be translated "Sabbaths." Some Bible versions, including Alfred Marshall's Interlinear Greek-English New Testament, Ferrar Fenton's translation, Green's Literal Translation and Young's Literal Translation, make this clear.
Once we realize that two Sabbaths were involved—first an annual Holy Day, which was observed from Wednesday evening until Thursday evening, and the normal weekly Sabbath from Friday evening to Saturday evening, the fulfillment of Christ's words becomes clear.
The Savior of all humanity died near 3 p.m. on Wednesday and was buried shortly before sunset that day. From Wednesday sunset to Thursday sunset is one day and one night; from then until Friday sunset is two days and two nights; and from then until Saturday sunset is three days and three nights. Jesus Christ was resurrected at the end of this three-day and three-night period, near sunset on Saturday. Thus He was already risen long before the women came to the tomb before daylight on Sunday morning.
Jesus Christ's words were thus perfectly fulfilled, as verified by the Gospel accounts. He was not crucified on Friday afternoon, nor was He resurrected on a Sunday morning. The biblical evidence shows the Good Friday-Easter Sunday tradition to be a fabrication.
A correct harmonization of all the facts demonstrates that Jesus died near 3 p.m. that Wednesday afternoon, was entombed near sunset and was resurrected near sunset on Saturday, exactly three days and three nights later—just as He had stated. These are the facts, the correct biblical chronology that verifies the identity of Jesus Christ as the Son of God.
The chart on page 18 gives a day-by-day chronology of these events as described in the Gospel accounts.
Actually, the principal festivals and holidays observed by mainstream Christendom are a poor and pale reflection of true biblical teachings. Easter and Lent are a poor substitute for the wondrous truths revealed by keeping God's feasts.
The New Testament Church continued to observe the annual Passover to commemorate the death of Jesus Christ, but used the new symbols of bread and wine that He instituted (1 Corinthians 11:23-28). Today the members of the United Church of God commemorate this eminently important event in the same manner, in accordance with Christ's instructions. Again, the Bible contains no record of the Church observing Easter or Lent during the time of the apostles, nor any biblical command to observe Good Friday or Easter Sunday, especially since Christ did not die on Good Friday and was not resurrected on Easter Sunday. Instead, the apostles faithfully followed Christ's instructions to observe the biblical Passover "in remembrance" of Him (Luke 22:19; 1 Corinthians 11:24-25). GN
You reject the Trinity?
Wow.
There’s a great, quick litmus test for this level of error: “Do you reject the Holy Trinity?”
He did. And he told Christians to observe God's feast of Passover and Unleavened bread:
1Co 5:7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
1Co 5:8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.
If that's not clear enough, the Lord caused to be recorded a plain statement about Paul's desire to observe the His holy days:
Act 18:21 But bade them farewell, saying, I must by all means keep this feast that cometh in Jerusalem: but I will return again unto you, if God will. And he sailed from Ephesus.
And if that's not clear enough, then you can read how the the church was formed on one of the Lord's holy days:
Act 2:1 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.
Act 2:2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.
Act 2:3 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.
Act 2:4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
Simply put, traditional Christianity has scrubbed the Lord's holy days from the remembrance of most. But not from scripture.
I embrace what the Lord Jesus Christ taught and what scripture confirms. You yourself said the trinity is a tradition not found in scripture.
***Regarding the holy days, the traditional church failed.***
I would dispute that. The Church of Jesus Christ became Christian with all that that means, and not Jewish. They acknowledged that the Saturday Sabbath was Jewish and created the Sunday holy day of the Christian God.
***Christ spoke about and kept the holy days he created. His disciples kept these very same days. ***
Read through Acts. That is the progression where the Church dissociated itself from Judaism.
***Historically we can find evidence where the traditional church decided to create their own days.***
Yes, that is some of the authority that was granted to it by Christ.
***As you correctly point out, the notion the holy spirit is part of the Godhead in heaven is not scriptural but is traditional. Again, I believe scripture. The father and the son are co-equal in the Godhead in heaven.***
Got it. Therefore you are not Christian. The nomenclature is Judaizer, I believe. The Jews are our elder brethren, that we must reverence as the first to know God. One must examine things, though. One cannot go back into the womb.
***The father and the son are co-equal in the Godhead in heaven. They holy spirit is their presence in the earth, but the holy spirit is not a person and part of the Godhead in heaven. Scripturally.***
That is an often arrived-at reading of sola scriptura.
Fortunately, Christ left us His Church, instead of NT scripture so that there is no question of theology.
***There’s a great, quick litmus test for this level of error: “Do you reject the Holy Trinity?”***
There are many who do and they are not limited to the Judaizers.
How nice of you to quote Acts 2:1, the descent of the Holy Spirit, the Third Person of the Holy Trinity, on the Apostles. Thus the Catholic Church was born.
Of course, neither is the errant tradition of men known as sola scriptura.
23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread. 24 And giving thanks, broke, and said: Take ye, and eat: this is my body, which shall be delivered for you: this do for the commemoration of me. 25 In like manner also the chalice, after he had supped, saying: This chalice is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as often as you shall drink, for the commemoration of me. 26 For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until he come.St. Paul understood Holy Eucharist.
Not in 1Co 5:7-8 he didn't.
Are you unlearned about the context in which the book of Galatians was written as well as the teachings of Paul in general? In a word - YES I believe Paul would say this - for he did! From chapter 1 it is evident that Paul is writing about a false teaching entering the Galatian church (1:6). The characteristics of this false teaching are documented in verses 1:6-9; 2:4-5; 3:1-5; 4:17; 5:10, 12; and 6:12-13. These have been properly identified as Judizers - those seeking to place believers under the obligations of the law and its requirements.
What Paul is referring to here is gentiles who wanted to return to worshipping pagan days.
Context is everything here Doug, and this passage cannot be read and interpreted in isolation to the whole of the book as well as Paul's other teachings regarding the law. By the time we reach 4:8-11, Paul is warning the Gentiles that while they were once under bondage to false gods, they were now turning to a new bondage under the Mosaic law. So that by verses 10-11 Paul is upset that they are going backward under this new bondage taught by the Judizers, not falling back into pagan worship - that is not the subject of his letter. For again, in 4:28-30 Paul again writes to reject the legalists. This whole book is dedicated to that subject and a reference as you would interpret it is completely out of place.
The ONLY scriptures Paul had were the books of what we call the "old testament". It would have been blasphemous for him to call the words of the Lord "weak and beggarly elements".
You err in that 1) Paul was taught by the resurrected Jesus and 2) Paul had the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Through him, God was writing scripture. Saul would have considered the comments to be blasphemous. Paul saw these weak and beggarly elements through the sacrifice on the cross and Christ. Paul puts these elements in their proper place in Romans.
Forgot to ping you to
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2226464/posts?page=231#231
The Levitical religious laws simply don’t apply to Christians.
The Lord said to Peter during the white sheet vision: “Don’t call anything that I’ve cleansed unclean.”
Here is the impasse, Doug. I think God has given freedom in these things, and you think God still requires them. That’s it in a nutshell.
How many years does this make?
***Is this the Annual Douglas KC Anti-Easter thread we have all been waiting for?
How many years does this make?***
I seem to remember a few.
It’s a Campbellite Tradition.
Thank you for your honesty. Man indeed did determine that scriptural commands of the Lord were inferior to the tradition of men.
Read through Acts. That is the progression where the Church dissociated itself from Judaism.
Certainly. But the sabbath and the holy days have always belonged to God and not the Jews. They are His possessions:
Lev 23:2 "Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: 'The feasts of the LORD, which you shall proclaim to be holy convocations, these are My feasts.
Got it. Therefore you are not Christian. The nomenclature is Judaizer, I believe. The Jews are our elder brethren, that we must reverence as the first to know God. One must examine things, though. One cannot go back into the womb.
I readily acknowledge that I have rejected heresy and have embraced the revealed word of the Lord presented to us in scripture. But you are using the term "Judaizer" incorrectly. Biblically a Judaizer was one who wanted to reject God's grace and return to works based salvation. Sometimes it meant someone who wanted to follow Jewish tradition instead of scripture. But nowhere did it encompass someone who wished to worship the Lord on the holy days he created.
That is an often arrived-at reading of sola scriptura.
I don't reject teachers or tradition. Rightly, I reject teachers and traditions that teach error and apostasy.
Interesting.
The Campbellites that I grew to know in NE Indiana (mostly conservative CofC) didn’t have a problem with Easter. Holy Thursday and Good Friday didn’t exist, though. Christmas was an optional extra - if it fell on Sunday they might celebrate it; otherwise it was too much of a bother.
My wife’s best friend there had a father who was a prancing dancing peacock of a CofC preacher who ostracized his family (except for one) because they didn’t worship his bony backside sufficiently. He was eventually moved to South Dakota and from there went back to Ireland. I saw exactly one of his stage shows in Sioux Falls and refused to have anything to do with them after that.
But I was unaware of any anti Easter proclivities in that bunch. Maybe it was a different bunch (there are dozens of different Campbellites littering the ionosphere).
This was a very specific vision given in the context of gentiles being called into God's church. Peter tells us what his vision meant:
Act 10:28 Then he said to them, "You know how unlawful it is for a Jewish man to keep company with or go to one of another nation. But God has shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean.
Peter, a direct disciple who knew Jesus Christ personally, did not believe what you are saying. He believed what he said. Anything else is revisionist addition to his vision.
Here is the impasse, Doug. I think God has given freedom in these things, and you think God still requires them. That’s it in a nutshell.
I think God has given us these things for our benefit and salvation. I think pride fullness and tradition prevent many from embracing what God has freely given us.
***I would dispute that. The Church of Jesus Christ became Christian with all that that means, and not Jewish. They acknowledged that the Saturday Sabbath was Jewish and created the Sunday holy day of the Christian God.
Thank you for your honesty. Man indeed did determine that scriptural commands of the Lord were inferior to the tradition of men. ***
I would say, rather, that the worship of Christ and the practice of Christianity necessarily is different than Jewish worship practices.
***Read through Acts. That is the progression where the Church dissociated itself from Judaism.
Certainly. But the sabbath and the holy days have always belonged to God and not the Jews. They are His possessions:
Lev 23:2 “Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: ‘The feasts of the LORD, which you shall proclaim to be holy convocations, these are My feasts. ***
Are you a child of Israel?
***Got it. Therefore you are not Christian. The nomenclature is Judaizer, I believe. The Jews are our elder brethren, that we must reverence as the first to know God. One must examine things, though. One cannot go back into the womb.
I readily acknowledge that I have rejected heresy and have embraced the revealed word of the Lord presented to us in scripture.***
But you embrace the OT practices which the NT Church of Jesus Christ has set aside.
***But you are using the term “Judaizer” incorrectly. Biblically a Judaizer was one who wanted to reject God’s grace and return to works based salvation. Sometimes it meant someone who wanted to follow Jewish tradition instead of scripture. But nowhere did it encompass someone who wished to worship the Lord on the holy days he created.***
Biblically a Judaizer is one that wishes Christians to practice Jewish law; let’s be accurate.
If you wish to worship the Lord on any day of the week, that does not make you non Christian; where are you headed with this train of thought?
***That is an often arrived-at reading of sola scriptura.
I don’t reject teachers or tradition. Rightly, I reject teachers and traditions that teach error and apostasy.***
Then you would embrace Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, Polycarp, Ignatius, Augustine, John Chrysostom, Francis of Assissi, Thomas More and Cardinal Newman, correct? And you would reject the Campbells pere et fils, Barton Stone, and especially the traitor Sydney Rigdon who left the Campbellites and went to the Latter Day Saints and wrote most of their theology. Right?
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.