Is “Easter” in the original Scriptures?

[Hidden In Him]

Got any orthodox Church Fathers who embraced Judaizing?

Walpole, when you can, I'm interested in your response to the previous post.

Blessings,
- H

 

[Walpole]

Walpole, when you can, I'm interested in your response to the previous post.

Blessings,
- H

Just seeing this.

I'll reply to that previous post now...

 

[Walpole]

I'm assuming that Polycarp is ok since you didn't give me an answer. Here is why I was asking: According to Eusebius, Polycarp argued for keeping the Jewish date for the Passover. Why would he do that if he were not wanting to maintain the Jewish feasts after a Christian manner?

Polycarp is of course ok. However, I do not think he is making your point. Polycarp was not advocating for the continued celebration of the Jewish passover. After all, Polycarp was not even Jewish.

He did, however, advocate for keeping the pascha a fixed feast, as opposed to a moveable feast. Polycarp wanted Pascha (Easter) celebrated on a fixed day each year, regardless of what day of the week it fell. That day happened to be 14 Nisan, which tradition states is the day Christ died (March 25th). In the West, the tradition was to celebrate Pascha (Easter) on Sunday, the first day of the week and which many Fathers would call the 8th day.

“At this time, while Anicetus was at the head of the church of Rome, Irenaeus relates that Polycarp, who was still alive, was at Rome, and that he had a conference with Anicetus on a question concerning the day of the paschal feast…” (Eusebius, Church History, 4.14.1-7).

“And when the blessed Polycarp was at Rome in the time of Anicetus, and they disagreed a little about certain other things, they immediately made peace with one another, not caring to quarrel over the matter. For neither could Anicetus persuade Polycarp not to observe what he had always observed with John the disciple of our Lord, and the other apostles with whom he had associated; neither could Polycarp persuade Anicetus to observe it, as he said that he ought to follow the customs of the presbyters that had preceded him…” (ibid).

Here, let me add some other material while I am at it.

In the 190s, a disagreement occurred between Polycrates, the bishop of Ephesus, and Victor, the bishop of Rome. “A question of no small importance arose at that time. For the parishes of all Asia, as from an older tradition, held that the fourteenth day of the moon, on which day the Jews were commanded to sacrifice the lamb, should be observed as the feast of the Saviour’s passover” (ibid, 5.23.1).

Eusebius, a pro-Roman Church writer, admitted that Polycrates and the bishops in agreement with him followed an older practice than that of the bishops of Rome. And it certainly was not just a tradition, but truth rooted in Scripture and the example of Jesus and His early disciples.

Polycrates wrote a letter to Victor to defend his practice of Passover. It was preserved by Eusebius, and an excerpt is located below:

“But the bishops of Asia, led by Polycrates, decided to hold to the old custom handed down to them. He himself, in a letter which he addressed to Victor and the church of Rome, set forth in the following words the tradition which had come down to him: ‘We observe the exact day; neither adding, nor taking away. For in Asia also great lights have fallen asleep, which shall rise again on the day of the Lord’s coming, when he shall come with glory from heaven, and shall seek out all the saints. Among these are Philip, one of the twelve apostles…and, moreover, John, who was both a witness and a teacher, who reclined upon the bosom of the Lord…And Polycarp in Smyrna, who was a bishop and martyr…[others are mentioned]… Melito the Eunuch who lived altogether in the Holy Spirit, and who lies in Sardis, awaiting the episcopate from heaven… All these observed the fourteenth day of the passover according to the Gospel, deviating in no respect, but following the rule of faith. And I also, Polycrates, the least of you all, do according to the tradition of my relatives, some of whom I have closely followed. For seven of my relatives were bishops; and I am the eighth. And my relatives always observed the day when the people put away the leaven. I, therefore, brethren, who have lived sixty-five years in the Lord, and have met with the brethren throughout the world, and have gone through every Holy Scripture, am not affrighted by terrifying words. For those greater than I have said ‘We ought to obey God rather than man’ [Acts 5:29]…I could mention the bishops who were present, whom I summoned at your desire; whose names, should I write them, would constitute a great multitude. And they, beholding my littleness, gave their consent to the letter, knowing that I did not bear my gray hairs in vain, but had always governed my life by the Lord Jesus” (ibid, 5.24.1-8).

Polycrates cited that he and his relatives also celebrated the day of removing leaven (a reference to removing leaven before the feast of unleavened bread). Those that celebrated Passover on the 14th of Nisan had tremendous support – Polycrates said that ‘a great multitude’ supported him. Eusebius attested that all the churches of Asia still kept Passover in this manner.

The Bishop of Rome, Victor, would have none of this! He tried to excommunicate the Eastern churches. This move was an attempt to separate the two groups from each other.

The Quartodeciman Controversy

The Quartodeciman Controversy – Part 1 By Kelly McDonald, Jr. In the New Testament, we learn that Jesus kept the Passover (also called Pascha) on the 14th of the Hebrew month called Aviv or N…

sabbathsentinel.org

Again, this in no way states Polycarp advocated for keeping Jewish feasts. What you call the Passover, the Greek Christians (like Polycarp) called the Pascha, which is word Eusebius uses. It is what we English speakers would call Easter.

"Pascha" = Πάσχα

Eusebius. The Ecclesiastical History : Eusebius : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Eusebius. The Ecclesiastical History, translated from Greek by Kirsopp Lake and J.E.L. Oulton (New York, 1926, 1932), in 1075 bookmarked and searchable pdf...

archive.org

 

[Hidden In Him]

He did, however, advocate for keeping the pascha a fixed feast, as opposed to a moveable feast. Polycarp wanted Pascha (Easter) celebrated on a fixed day each year,

But the fixed date was the Jewish date for the Jewish Passover, not some random fixed date.

What you call the Passover, the Greek Christians (like Polycarp) called the Pascha, which is word Eusebius uses. It is what we English speakers would call Easter.

"Pascha" = Πάσχα

Of course. It was the Christian version of the Passover, hence why the Greek word was used to translate "Passover" from the Hebrew.

“You know that after two days the Passover (πάσχα) is coming, and the Son of Man will be handed over to be crucified.” (Matthew 26:2)

Now on the first day of Unleavened Bread the disciples came to Jesus and asked, “Where do you want us to make preparations for you to eat the Passover? (πάσχα)" (Matthew 26:17. See also v.18-19 and about 20 other verses)

Walpole, you are downplaying the obvious. The early church observed the Christian version of the Jewish PASSOVER until the Council of Nicea determined all Christians should specifically avoid having any association with the Jews. That decision was based on prejudice, but not on wisdom. Many of the early Christians not only did not despise the Jews, they were Jews, and there were reasons why men like Polycarp argued for keeping things tied to the Jewish observance. But it appears the council despised the Jews by 325 AD, and this was their overriding motivation.


When the question relative to the sacred festival of Easter arose, it was universally thought that it would be convenient that all should keep the feast on one day; for what could be more beautiful and more desirable, than to see this festival, through which we receive the hope of immortality, celebrated by all with one accord, and in the same manner? It was declared to be particularly unworthy for this, the holiest of all festivals, to follow the custom [the calculation] of the Jews, who had soiled their hands with the most fearful of crimes, and whose minds were blinded. In rejecting their custom,113 we may transmit to our descendants the legitimate mode of celebrating Easter, which we have observed from the time of the Savior’s Passion to the present day. We ought not, therefore, to have anything in common with the Jews, for the Savior has shown us another way; our worship follows a more legitimate and more convenient course (the order of the days of the week); and consequently, in unanimously adopting this mode, we desire, dearest brethren, to separate ourselves from the detestable company of the Jews, for it is truly shameful for us to hear them boast that without their direction we could not keep this feast. How can they be in the right, they who, after the death of the Savior, have no longer been led by reason but by wild violence, as their delusion may urge them?They do not possess the truth in this Easter question; for, in their blindness and repugnance to all improvements, they frequently celebrate two passovers in the same year. We could not imitate those who are openly in error. How, then, could we follow these Jews, who are most certainly blinded by error? For to celebrate the passover twice in one year is totally inadmissible. But even if this were not so, it would still be your duty not to tarnish your soul by communications with such wicked people [the Jews]. Besides,consider well, that in such an important matter, and on a subject of such great solemnity, there ought not to be any division. Our Saviour has left us only one festal day of our redemption, that is to say, of his holy passion, and he desired [to establish] only one Catholic Church. (Eusebius, Vita Const., Lib. iii., 18–20. Letter of the Emperor to all not present at the council)

 

[Hidden In Him]

When the question relative to the sacred festival of Easter arose, it was universally thought that it would be convenient that all should keep the feast on one day; for what could be more beautiful and more desirable, than to see this festival, through which we receive the hope of immortality, celebrated by all with one accord, and in the same manner? It was declared to be particularly unworthy for this, the holiest of all festivals, to follow the custom [the calculation] of the Jews, who had soiled their hands with the most fearful of crimes, and whose minds were blinded. In rejecting their custom,113 we may transmit to our descendants the legitimate mode of celebrating Easter, which we have observed from the time of the Savior’s Passion to the present day. We ought not, therefore, to have anything in common with the Jews, for the Savior has shown us another way; our worship follows a more legitimate and more convenient course (the order of the days of the week); and consequently, in unanimously adopting this mode, we desire, dearest brethren, to separate ourselves from the detestable company of the Jews, for it is truly shameful for us to hear them boast that without their direction we could not keep this feast. How can they be in the right, they who, after the death of the Savior, have no longer been led by reason but by wild violence, as their delusion may urge them?They do not possess the truth in this Easter question; for, in their blindness and repugnance to all improvements, they frequently celebrate two passovers in the same year. We could not imitate those who are openly in error. How, then, could we follow these Jews, who are most certainly blinded by error? For to celebrate the passover twice in one year is totally inadmissible. But even if this were not so, it would still be your duty not to tarnish your soul by communications with such wicked people [the Jews]. Besides,consider well, that in such an important matter, and on a subject of such great solemnity, there ought not to be any division. Our Saviour has left us only one festal day of our redemption, that is to say, of his holy passion, and he desired [to establish] only one Catholic Church. (Eusebius, Vita Const., Lib. iii., 18–20. Letter of the Emperor to all not present at the council)

Btw, I'm not writing as an anti-Catholic, but I would think Catholics should at least own it that anti-semitism was in play here, not just theology. John Chrysostom, another father whom the Catholic Church recognizes, expressed a rather deep hatred for the Jews at around the same time, and where there is this much smoke there most certainly had to be some fire.

“The Jews sacrifice their children to Satan… They are worse than wild beasts. The synagogue is a brothel, a den of scoundrels, the temple of demons devoted to idolatrous cults, a criminal assembly of Jews, a place of meeting for the assassins of Christ, a house of ill fame, a dwelling of iniquity, a gulf and abyss of perdition…

The synagogue is a curse. Obstinate in her error, she refuses to see or hear; she has deliberately perverted her judgment; she has extinguished within herself the light of the Holy Spirit…

[The Jews] have fallen into a condition lower than the vilest animals. Debauchery and drunkenness have brought them to the level of the lusty goat and the pig. They know only one thing: to satisfy their stomachs, to get drunk, to kill and beat each other up like stage villains and coachmen…

I hate the Jews because they violate the Law. I hate the Synagogue because it hates the Law and the Prophets. It is the duty of all Christians to hate the Jews.” (Chrysostom, First Homily Against the Jews)

 

[Walpole]

But the fixed date was the Jewish date for the Jewish Passover, not some random fixed date.

Right, because Christ happened to die on the Jewish Passover. It is for that reason that Polycarp and the quartodecimens wanted the Pascha celebrated on that day. It wasn't because they wanted to keep the Jewish Passover. Rather, it was because for the Christian, our passover historically occurred on the day of the Jewish passover.

Of course. It was the Christian version of the Passover, hence why the Greek word was used to translate "Passover" from the Hebrew.

“You know that after two days the Passover (πάσχα) is coming, and the Son of Man will be handed over to be crucified.” (Matthew 26:2)

Now on the first day of Unleavened Bread the disciples came to Jesus and asked, “Where do you want us to make preparations for you to eat the Passover? (πάσχα)" (Matthew 26:17. See also v.18-19 and about 20 other verses)

Walpole, you are downplaying the obvious. The early church observed the Christian version of the Jewish PASSOVER until the Council of Nicea determined all Christians should specifically avoid having any association with the Jews. That decision was based on prejudice, but not on wisdom. Many of the early Christians not only did not despise the Jews, they were Jews, and there were reasons why men like Polycarp argued for keeping things tied to the Jewish observance. But it appears the council despised the Jews by 325 AD, and this was their overriding motivation.


When the question relative to the sacred festival of Easter arose, it was universally thought that it would be convenient that all should keep the feast on one day; for what could be more beautiful and more desirable, than to see this festival, through which we receive the hope of immortality, celebrated by all with one accord, and in the same manner? It was declared to be particularly unworthy for this, the holiest of all festivals, to follow the custom [the calculation] of the Jews, who had soiled their hands with the most fearful of crimes, and whose minds were blinded. In rejecting their custom,113 we may transmit to our descendants the legitimate mode of celebrating Easter, which we have observed from the time of the Savior’s Passion to the present day. We ought not, therefore, to have anything in common with the Jews, for the Savior has shown us another way; our worship follows a more legitimate and more convenient course (the order of the days of the week); and consequently, in unanimously adopting this mode, we desire, dearest brethren, to separate ourselves from the detestable company of the Jews, for it is truly shameful for us to hear them boast that without their direction we could not keep this feast. How can they be in the right, they who, after the death of the Savior, have no longer been led by reason but by wild violence, as their delusion may urge them?They do not possess the truth in this Easter question; for, in their blindness and repugnance to all improvements, they frequently celebrate two passovers in the same year. We could not imitate those who are openly in error. How, then, could we follow these Jews, who are most certainly blinded by error? For to celebrate the passover twice in one year is totally inadmissible. But even if this were not so, it would still be your duty not to tarnish your soul by communications with such wicked people [the Jews]. Besides,consider well, that in such an important matter, and on a subject of such great solemnity, there ought not to be any division. Our Saviour has left us only one festal day of our redemption, that is to say, of his holy passion, and he desired [to establish] only one Catholic Church. (Eusebius, Vita Const., Lib. iii., 18–20. Letter of the Emperor to all not present at the council)

The decision was based on the fact that Jews rejected Christ. Continuing to celebrate Jewish rituals is incompatible with Christianity. Again, this is because all the Jewish rituals pointed to something which was to come: the Messiah.

By continuing to participate in these Old Testament Jewish rituals, it would be implying Christ never came and fulfilled that which the Old Testament rituals all pointed to. (Read the last line of Eusebius which you quoted above.)

 

[Walpole]

Btw, I'm not writing as an anti-Catholic, but I would think Catholics should at least own it that anti-semitism was in play here, not just theology. John Chrysostom, another father whom the Catholic Church recognizes, expressed a rather deep hatred for the Jews at around the same time, and where there is this much smoke there most certainly had to be some fire.

“The Jews sacrifice their children to Satan… They are worse than wild beasts. The synagogue is a brothel, a den of scoundrels, the temple of demons devoted to idolatrous cults, a criminal assembly of Jews, a place of meeting for the assassins of Christ, a house of ill fame, a dwelling of iniquity, a gulf and abyss of perdition…

The synagogue is a curse. Obstinate in her error, she refuses to see or hear; she has deliberately perverted her judgment; she has extinguished within herself the light of the Holy Spirit…

[The Jews] have fallen into a condition lower than the vilest animals. Debauchery and drunkenness have brought them to the level of the lusty goat and the pig. They know only one thing: to satisfy their stomachs, to get drunk, to kill and beat each other up like stage villains and coachmen…

I hate the Jews because they violate the Law. I hate the Synagogue because it hates the Law and the Prophets. It is the duty of all Christians to hate the Jews.” (Chrysostom, First Homily Against the Jews)

This is a red herring. Your original argument which I addressed was this...

---> "Again, like the early fathers, I would prefer if we observed the Jewish customs after a spiritual manner the way the early church did, because it ties into revelation from God and insight from scripture."

(Source)

This is demonstrably false as the Fathers did not prefer we observe Jewish customs. In fact they argued against it for reason I posted previously.

 

[Hidden In Him]

By continuing to participate in these Old Testament Jewish rituals, it would be implying Christ never came and fulfilled that which the Old Testament rituals all pointed to. (Read the last line of Eusebius which you quoted above.)

Ah, but see this is where I take the exact opposite stance, and I appreciate your courteous reply.

See, the Jewish feasts did indeed point to things that were to come; i.e. they were prophetic foreshadowings of major events that would happen in the church era, and were happening in the lives of early church Christians, such as Pentecost. This IMO is why they were still observing them after a Christian manner. They held prophetic significance, and there was no reason why they should be forgotten entirely simply because the Jews did not understand what they had foreshadowed and were keeping them after the flesh.

 

[Hidden In Him]

This is a red herring. Your original argument which I addressed was this...

---> "Again, like the early fathers, I would prefer if we observed the Jewish customs after a spiritual manner the way the early church did, because it ties into revelation from God and insight from scripture."

(Source)

This is demonstrably false as the Fathers did not prefer we observe Jewish customs. In fact they argued against it for reason I posted previously.

Let's turn to some Biblical texts next, and I will show you what I mean. You can give me your counter-arguments. Right now I need to step away, but maybe I can also write up a piece on what the feasts represented prophetically. I used to have it in my old work, but I think it accidentally got erased and I will have to rewrite it all over again.

I'll catch up tonight or tomorrow.

Blessings,
- H

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

Did you ever have a birthday cake for your children? If so, by your own logic, you are carrying on a pagan tradition. Birthday cakes. As long as these are in the birthday tradition, celebrating birthdays is pagan.

Your logic ---> "Bunnies and eggs. As long as these are in the Easter tradition, Easter is pagan."


Just want to see if you are at least consistent.

Yes, celebrating birth is pagan, it's narcissistic, but I'm not getting dogmatic at it like you do.

 

[Walpole]

Yes, celebrating birth is pagan, it's narcissistic, but I'm not getting dogmatic at it like you do.

"This is how the birth of Jesus the Messiah came about..." - The pagan narcissist St. Matthew

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

"This is how the birth of Jesus the Messiah came about..." - The pagan narcissist St. Matthew

Jesus's birthday, not yours. Besides, there's no specific holiday for the celebration of the Lord's birthday ordained by God in the bible, and the Lord wasn't born on December 25th, that's winter solstice.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

"This is how the birth of Jesus the Messiah came about..." - The pagan narcissist St. Matthew

And don't take my words for it, take Paul's:

"Nor give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which promote speculations rather than the stewardship of God's work, which is by faith." (1 Tim. 1:4)

 

[Walpole]

Jesus's birthday, not yours.

"Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children." - Ephesians 5:1

Besides, there's no specific holiday for the celebration of the Lord's birthday ordained by God in the bible, and the Lord wasn't born on December 25th, that's winter solstice.

December 25th was not the winter solstice at the time of Christ's birth. (see Julian calendar)

However, even if it was, that does not mean anything as they are not mutually exclusive. Remember, Christians believe by virtue of the Incarnation, the entire universe if the theater of God's grace now. For Christ is the Lord of the Universe.

 

[Walpole]

And don't take my words for it, take Paul's:

"Nor give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which promote speculations rather than the stewardship of God's work, which is by faith." (1 Tim. 1:4)

I'm not sure what you think you are proving with St. Paul's admonition to his young bishop Timothy. For the Apostle was warning his young bishop about Gnosticism, with its innumerable intermediaries (“genealogies”) descending between God and the physical world.

For if pedigrees / genealogies / births did not matter or were not significant in Christianity, then you should remove the first chapter of the gospel written by that pagan narcissistic St. Matthew, along with the third chapter of St. Luke's.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

"Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children." - Ephesians 5:1

What does that have to do with birthday?

December 25th was not the winter solstice at the time of Christ's birth. (see Julian calendar)

However, even if it was, that does not mean anything as they are not mutually exclusive. Remember, Christians believe by virtue of the Incarnation, the entire universe if the theater of God's grace now. For Christ is the Lord of the Universe.

It is mutually exclusive. Christ might have been conceived around the time of Christmas, but he was born around the feast of tabernacle in autumn. Christ is also the light of the world, yet ironically, winter solstice is the darkest day of the year with the shortest day time and the longest night time.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

I'm not sure what you think you are proving with St. Paul's admonition to his young bishop Timothy. For the Apostle was warning his young bishop about Gnosticism, with its innumerable intermediaries (“genealogies”) descending between God and the physical world.

For if pedigrees / genealogies / births did not matter or were not significant in Christianity, then you should remove the first chapter of the gospel written by that pagan narcissistic St. Matthew, along with the third chapter of St. Luke's.

Again, Christ's genealogy, not yours or anybody else's. Christ's matters, others' don't. God has no grandchildren, daith cannot be passed down through the DNA.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Walpole

My apologies, Walpole. I meant to write some things up but I’ve gotten bogged down here lately. I still want to write those threads cuz the insight is really good, it just may take me longer than I realized.

Blessings,
- H