The Pagan Origin Of Easter

[francisdesales]

Among the many errors which crept in after the Apostles died was Lent and its false connection with the sufferings and crucifuxion of Christ. It is supposed to represent the forty days of fasting of Christ in the wilderness. However, the people do not fast as Christ did, but they only give up one or several things which they like, or sometimes do not like. If they really wanted to commemorate the death and suffering of Christ, they would fast the entire forty days. Christ nowhere in the Bible tells us to commemorate the forty days of fasting as an annual church festival.

So unless a person eats absolutely NO FOOD for 40 days, they are not "fasting as Christ did"? You miss the point. The idea is to conform oneself to Christ, not to be a complete duplicate, since NONE OF US can go sinless. Are you willing to say that unless you are sinless, like Christ, you are not worthy of the effort of trying to lead a life of holiness???

Christ suggested that man fast in Matthew's Gospel. Did He say one must fast for 40 days? The "40 days" is to remember the sacrifice of Christ, not to perfectly emmulate it. We are wounded creatures who offer our measly sacrifices to God, uniting them with the perfect Sacrifice of Jesus Christ. As an adopted son of God, I have confidence that the Lord will accept my meager sacrifice, just as a father would accept a scribbled drawing with crayons on a paper and call it "art" and hang it on the refrigerator...

In earlier times, it was only adhered to by the Catholic Church and those churches that were closely connecte to it in religious form. However, the celebration has reached such popularity until now even some of those who claim pentecostal ties announce their holy week services.

That is because people see the utility and Scriptural backing for the practice. People do away with such sacrifices because they do not have the self-discipline necessary to give to God anything of value to Him. The practice is quite ancient, practiced by the Jews as well as the Gnostics and Catholics. Fasting is part of the Judeo-Christian tradition of conforming oneself to the Lord, giving even a small piece of oneself to God. We are called to "die to yourself", and fasting is a part of that action. The "health and wealth" communities certainly do not like the idea, nor do American advertisers and secular materialistic "Christians".

Lent could not even begin to compate with those forty terrible days which God spent proving that He could live without yielding to temptation, because in most cases, those who keep it when tempted hard enough, will quickly get what they want.

The practice of Lent doesn't NEED to be AS the 40 days in the desert. Some people have, indeed, done what the Lord has literally done. But we shouldn't focus on rigorism as the standard of the success of a practice. The Lord is a loving Father and desires effort.

But we find Jesus when the devil came to tempt Him again and again, He would rebuke him. We find on one occasion when He had become hungered, the devil came to Him and showed Him the stones, which were in Jerusalem and closely resembled bread. The devil boldly told Him. . . If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread. Matthew 4:3

Jesus answered him saying. . . It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. Matthew 4:4.

The devil showed God the kingdoms of the world and the glory of them, but God would not lower His testimony for material things. THe Bible does not at all endorse Lent, it is only a tradition devised out of carnal intention of men, it has no place in the Church of God.

Man, with the power of Christ within him, can also rebuke the temptations of the devil... Dying to self strengthens us and removes attachments to worldly things.

Lent was established at the council of the Catholic Church at Nicaea, 325 A.D. but was not well instituted until the middle of the fourth centurt. It was near this time that the birth of Jesus was celeprated on December 25th, first in Rome, and before the end of the century, it was celebrated in the East also.

The universal Church considered the practice valid in conforming one to Christ, even if the Apostles did not institute an official 40 day period of fasting and prayer. Would you gainsay such a move by the Church, JUST because the Catholic Church established the practice? The idea of fasting precedes the incarnation. The 40 day period is merely a prolongation on a smaller scale of what WAS practiced by the Church. The Didache, written before all the Gospels, teach of a two-day a week practice which differed from the "hypocrites" (Jews). The 40-day practice originated more with the catechumens preparing for the Easter Vigil and their initiation into the Church, but expanded to include everyone as a preparation for the coming of the Christ with the holy days of the Triduum and Easter.

The actual meaning of the word Lent, comes from the Latin lengten, lencten, meaning spring. It denotes the spring period of fasting in preparation for Easter; in the Western Catholic Church, a penitential period extending from Ash Wednesday to Easter. Some writers associate it to the middle ages. [/color]http://wholetruthevangelist.com/gpage2.html

Of course, the practice is not APOSTOLIC TRADITION, but it does have biblical beginnings in the symbolism of 40, the preparation of oneself for the coming Christ, and the concept of fasting. I find the practice spiritually suitable, strengthening me to resist temptations better. Perhaps you should try it and see for yourself whether it can be useful in your walk with Christ. The goal of the Church is to conform people to the image of Christ, so it is a worthy practice if it instills spiritual resistance to temptation and an adherence to the suffering Christ, Whom I am crucified with and die with daily.

Regards