Today is the annual holiday called by many “Easter Sunday.” Millions celebrate the resurrection of Jesus on this date. Many consider “Easter” the most holy of all religious holidays. Strangely, for some, it marks the only time they attend a worship assembly. Did you realize that the first century church did not observe a yearly celebration of the Lord’s resurrection? The word “Easter” is found only once in the King James Version of the Bible (Acts 12:4).
The word, pascha, is translated incorrectly and should be translated as “Passover,” as it is translated elsewhere in the King James Version. It is certain that the New Testament contains no reference to a yearly observance of the resurrection of Christ. The word “Easter” actually comes from an Anglo-Saxon word, Eastre, and is the name for a Teutonic goddess of spring and fertility. This being the case, we should be prompted to ask some inquiring questions about this annual holiday. Should the Lord’s church involve herself in such a holiday?
The exact time Easter began to be celebrated is not known, although there are references to it as early as the second century AD. Those who adopted it did not observe it uniformly, nor was it observed at the same time. Some observed it on the day believed to have been the resurrection day, regardless of the day of the week when it occurred. Others observed it always on the Sunday nearest to the day believed to have been the day of Jesus resurrection. In AD 325, the Council of Nicea fixed the day on a Sunday, but did not specify which Sunday. Finally, in the seventh century, Easter was decreed to be celebrated on the first Sunday after the first full moon succeeding the vernal equinox (March 21), and always after the Jewish Passover. If the full moon occurs on a Sunday, Easter is the Sunday after. By this arrangement, Easter may take place as early as March 22, or as late as April 25.
Paul gives warning regarding “Feast Days”, he expressed his concern for the church in Galatia, 4:8-11. He does not say that their practice was wrong per se, only that he is concerned.
From the context, Paul’s concern was with the “why” they were doing these things. If they were placing a religious connotation on the celebrating of these feasts Paul says, they would be in error. Paul was not opposed to observing various feasts for he kept Jewish customs when expedient (1 Cor. 9:19-20). Paul had Timothy circumcised (Acts 16:1-3). He took a vow (Acts 18:18). He sought to keep a Jewish feast in Jerusalem (Acts 18:19-21). Paul also participated in purification ceremonies, which included animal sacrifices (Acts 21:17-26; Num. 6:13-20).
However, Paul makes it very plain that the practicing of such feasts should be kept on an individual basis (Rom. 14:5-6), that it should not be bound on others (Gal. 2:3-5), and that it is to have nothing to do with our justification in Christ (Gal. 5:4-6). Where Paul drew the line for right or wrong in keeping feasts was in making such matters church doctrine or practice, where people were compelled to do them.
Jesus gave stern warnings against the religious practice of human traditions. He rebuked the Pharisees for their use of traditions (Mark 7:1-13), for they made their traditions necessary for all to observe (Mark 7:7) – thus, laying aside the commands of God (Mark 7:8-9). The traditions of men are wrong, then, when they become matters of doctrine, and when they displace the commands of God by the very keeping of the traditions.
0 Comments