Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Thankful for Grace

Now that I'm done with the Easter study, I seem to be meditating quite a bit on my time in bondage to Herbert Armstrong's error.

In my time confined in Armstrongism, I spoke out boldly against Easter and those who observe it. I concentrated on the name, putting forward grossly inappropriate and highly questionable statements as fact - for instance that "Easter comes from the pagan goddess Eostre, who is Ishtar, and the Bible says God hates Ishtar." I fashioned verbal weapons regarding the pagan origins of eggs and bunnies and lilies, and I beat my fellow Christian with those weapons.
I claimed a billion+ men, women, and children, who call on the name of Jesus Christ and trust in Him for their hope and salvation, were no Christians at all but merely pagans fooling themselves straight into God's wrath.
I threw the term "heretics" at historical figures like Anicetus and Justin and Bede and many others. I was ignorant towards what these people wrote because they were heretics after all and why would I read the lies of heretics?
Rather, I poured over the material of Herbert W Armstrong to devour his facts and figures and private interpretations regarding these things as if those writings were the Gospel itself. I treated them as infallible. I searched for other information that agreed with me on these things. All else had to be lies!
I made excuse after distorted excuse for why the Bible, especially Galatians and Romans, weren't saying what they most certainly were saying, or why the timing of events and days wasn't what it most certainly was, or why this or that thing was a pagan, idolatrous sin when that was in reality not the case.
I disregarded the grace of Christ and treated the law as if the weekly Sabbath were nailed to the cross and died for my sins.
Until I stopped being afraid.

I had no idea that my motivation was twofold: fear and pride.

Fear. I was so untrusting of Jesus Christ to handle my salvation that I went on, day after uncertain day, wondering if I would wake up in God's presence to be glorified forever or eternally condemned to death. I had no confidence, no trust... no faith! Because my heart was on my own efforts, and I could not escape the poor quality of my own works. While I feared about trusting myself, I was also afraid to death at the idea of trusting Christ. The thought of putting everything in Christ's hands terrified me; I couldn't do it. 
I was battling against grace, while believing I was battling towards it.

(I JON. 4: 17-19) 17 Love has been perfected among us in this: that we may have boldness in the day of judgment; because as He is, so are we in this world. 18 There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves torment. But he who fears has not been made perfect in love. 19 We love Him because He first loved us.

Pride. I was in God's true Church! We had the truth! In Armstrongism, we believe it to be axiomatic that 99.9% of all who lived had no understanding of the things we knew, and that our "truth" came only from God's Spirit. It wasn't that we believed lies and the obvious distortions of fact and faith drove others away, certainly not! It was Providence guiding us. Others were just blind, pathetic fools to be pitied. They would be resurrected to shame. The wonders stored up for me, on the other hand, were beyond description. Comparing man to man made all that fear I had previously described go calmly away for a short time. At least I wasn't a pagan! I was tormented in my deepest heart, so the salve was to point out the flaws in others. My pride had shut my eyes and my ears to anything but the teachings of the founder, Pastor General, and spiritual and temporal leader of the Church since its inception, Herbert W Armstrong.
But we were all of us deceived.

(I TIM. 6: 3-5) 3 If anyone teaches otherwise and does not consent to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which accords with godliness, 4 he is proud, knowing nothing, but is obsessed with disputes and arguments over words, from which come envy, strife, reviling, evil suspicions, 5 useless wranglings of men of corrupt minds and destitute of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain [not just gaining money, but gaining salvation]. From such withdraw yourself.

When my eyes opened and I saw the love of Jesus Christ, and I knew for the first time the limitless expanse of His selfless love and grace, the shackles fell off, and the prison doors opened wide. The light shone into my heart and I could see what a fool I was!
In reality, the shackles had fallen off and the gate had opened wide now these one thousand nine hundred and eighty (give or take) years ago. I needed merely to walk out of the prison. What was I waiting for? It was as if the door had rusted solid and had fallen off. The shackles turn to dust at the slightest touch and float away in the sweet breeze. The prison walls had crumbled long ago and flowers had grown up over them. All that was ugly and fearful and the long shadows that gnashed at me... were all in my mind. All long gone in the comforting light of the Son, and the new day in Him.
What on earth was I waiting for?!

Now, Herbert Armstrong has no more power over me. I am not afraid any more! Now I can know the truth, and the truth has set me free (JON. 8: 32).

(II COR. 5: 21) For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.

Thank God for His wonderful gift of grace!



************ It is important that you understand; Everything on this blog is based on the current understanding of each author. Never take anyone's word for it, always prove it for yourself, it is your responsibility. You cannot ride someone else's coattail into the Kingdom.
Acts 17:11
************

Tuesday, April 20, 2010

Easter History - part II

In part I of this series, we investigated Passover and how that ties in with the Lord’s Supper. We saw how Jesus changed the Passover and we saw it is not the Passover of the Old Covenant. Jesus made all things new (II COR. 5: 17).
In this installment, we will investigate how the Lord’s Supper ties in with Easter, and we will answer not a few questions that I hope clear things up about Easter and its supposedly pagan origins.

What was Easter originally called?

When Jesus and the Apostles ate the Last Supper early on the 14th, with all new symbols that were a remembrance of Him, this broke the remembrance away from the Passover Seder which is held early on the 15th with old symbols that were a remembrance of the Exodus. The name Passover remained. Easter is an English word; and not by any means the original name of the feast. Passover is an English word too; anyone who wants to make a huge deal about calling something by a different name should remember that the name of the celebration isn’t Passover. In Hebrew and Aramaic the name is Pesach. In Greek and Latin the name is Pascha.

When the New Testament was being formed, the name of the Last Supper was “Pascha.” Pascha is used 29 times in the New Testament. When the KJV translates Acts 12: 4 into Easter, the original word is Pascha. When the Quartodecimans and the church in Rome argued over timing, they argued over one and the same feast, which was Pascha. When we read the ancient histories, particularly by Eusebius who wrote about the infamous Council of Nicea, the word he used was Pascha. This is the name that was used for hundreds of years before English even became a language or the word Easter was ever uttered. To this very day the name of the Easter celebration throughout most of Christendom is Pascha (or some very similar derivitive), as it always had been. The Catholic Encyclopedia lists a great number of the Paschal names:

"The Greek term for Easter, pascha, has nothing in common with the verb paschein, "to suffer," although by the later symbolic writers it was connected with it; it is the Aramaic form of the Hebrew pesach (transitus, passover). The Greeks called Easter the pascha anastasimon; Good Friday the pascha staurosimon. The respective terms used by the Latins are Pascha resurrectionis and Pascha crucifixionis. In the Roman and Monastic Breviaries the feast bears the title Dominica Resurrectionis; in the Mozarabic Breviary, In Lætatione Diei Pasch Resurrectionis; in the Ambrosian Breviary, In Die Sancto Paschæ. The Romance languages have adopted the Hebrew-Greek term: Latin, Pascha; Italian, Pasqua; Spanish, Pascua; French, Pâques. Also some Celtic and Teutonic nations use it: Scottish, Pask; Dutch, Paschen; The correct word in Dutch is actually Pasen Danish, Paaske; Swedish, Pask; even in the German provinces of the Lower Rhine the people call the feast Paisken not Ostern. The word is, principally in Spain and Italy, identified with the word "solemnity" and extended to other feasts, e.g. Sp., Pascua florida, Palm Sunday; Pascua de Pentecostes, Pentecost; Pascua de la Natividad, Christmas; Pascua de Epifania, Epiphany. In some parts of France also First Communion is called Pâques, whatever time of the year administered."
-Holweck, Frederick. "Easter." The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 5. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1909. 19 Apr. 2010.

It was traditional even in the Apostle’s day to fast before Passover. (Technically, this is a holdover from an ancient Hebrew tradition where the first-born male would fast before Passover.) The eastern Christians followed the example of a Paschal fast ending on the 14th of the Hebrew month of Nisan. The westerners followed the example of a Paschal fast ending on the Lord’s Day after the 14th. The Europeans eventually found tracking the 14th of Nissan to be prohibitively disruptive, and didn’t fancy binding the celebration of Jesus’ death and resurrection to the calendar and calculations of the Jews who rejected Christ. All they wanted was a static date for Pascha and an answer on when to end the fast. That is the entire debate. No one ever doubted when Jesus ate the Last Supper and was crucified, nor did anyone ever doubt the time of His resurrection. From late in the first century, after the destruction of the temple, the western churches observed the Last Supper on the Sunday after the 14th of Nisan; the eastern churches on the 14th itself.

Eusebius (who was there), clearly and without equivocation, shows us that the celebration people argued over is none other than the Last Supper, which is Passover. Eusebius says there was a:

“diversity of judgment in regard to the time for celebrating one and the same feast”.
-Eusebius, Life of Constantine, book III, chapter V, in section “Of the Disagreement Respecting the Celebration of Easter”.

So, it was one and the same Feast! While HWA would invent an argument over paganism, Eusebius, who was there, says no such thing. The timing arguments appear to me, after much reading and re-reading, to be more focused on when to end the Paschal fast (the same fast that has become Lent). The arguing was not over any pagan roots of Easter.
So, Easter is Pascha.

What about the name “Easter”?

It is unfortunate that certain Germanic languages and English have changed the name of the festival, and certain people have latched onto that name in order to build a false case against it.
Easter is an English word. It is most likely taken from the Old English word “Eastre.” All scholars are not agreed about the etymology (when are all scholars ever in agreement). English is a Germanic language, after all. And the English word Eastre seems to come from the German word “Eostramonath.”
So, what is that?

HWA would make a great deal over the idea that “Eostre” is the name of a pagan goddess. The only source we have for the “Eostre was a pagan goddess” theory are the writings of a Catholic Benedictine monk named Bede (also called “the Venerable Bede”) in his work “De Temporum Ratione” (“The Reckoning of Time”) which he wrote in the early 700’s AD. So, for all people who think Catholics are unreliable liars, your condemnation rests on Catholic writings. Keep that in mind.

Bede was a historian and was attempting to determine the history of the English and Germanic peoples. Here is exactly what he wrote, translated into English of course:

"Eosturmonath has a name which is now translated "Paschal month", and which was once called after a goddess of theirs named Eostre, in whose honour feasts were celebrated in that month. Now they designate that Paschal season by her name, calling the joys of the new rite by the time-honoured name of the old observance."

When we actually read Bede’s own writings as opposed to taking HWA on blind faith, we learn that Eostremonath is the old High German name for the month of April. Bede goes on to say that by his day any customs relating to Eostre had died out and the Paschal Month alone was celebrated. And that’s really all he says about it.
I must make it abundantly clear that this particular spelling is Bede’s alone, as there was no official spelling, and the word is Germanic but Bede wrote in Latin. To be completely accurate, there was no official spelling of the English, either, since the first English dictionary wasn’t written until 1604.
Do we have any corroborating evidence about the month? Yes.

We know that Charlemagne, scourge of the German pagans, officially named the month of April “Ostarmanoth” around the year 800. (Any Encyclopedia or a thousand other sources will have info on this. See the WikiPedia article on the Julian Calendar under the section “Month names” for example.) That name remained until the 15th century, while unofficially the name was used even until the 20th century (and might even still be used to this day by some people.) So Bede, spelling aside, is completely accurate on the name of the month. It’s the name of the goddess that we doubt here.

The Germanic week days were named after gods and goddesses (Wednesday = Woden’s Day. Thursday = Thor’s Day. And so forth.) This is completely undeniable, and we know of the gods that the days were named after. The months, on the other hand, were not named after gods and goddesses. They were named after meteorological or environmental events. When we look in the old German, we find no certain parallel for any goddess named Eostre.

The name of the month comes from the name of the goddess, according to Bede, who has no corroborating proof. So it’s the month that was named after the goddess, not the Paschal feast. The Paschal feast is renamed after the month, not the goddess. So, even if Bede were right, the goddess still bears no direct influence on Easter. Thus, to the detriment of all who love to condemn a billion+ Christians, the timing bears far more on the name than any goddess does.

Who is Ostara?

Some people argue that Eostre is another name for a Germanic fertility goddess called Ostara (among other names). However, there is far more speculation than fact in this claim.
A little known truth is that this “Eostre = Ostara” claim actually originates with Jakob Grimm, of the Grimm Brothers Fairy Tales. Don’t let that fool you, the Grimm brothers were highly intelligent, well read, and thoroughly credentialed scholars.
Jakob Grimm wrote a book on German mythology which was first published in 1835 under the title “Deutsche Mythologie” (“Teutonic Mythology”) in which he investigated the origins of Eostre. The section on Ostara appears in Volume I, in chapter XIII section 7 which is titled “Hruoda (Hrede). Ostara (Eastre)”. Most of the information about Ostara comes in two paragraphs.
That's it. Two paragraphs.
Though I fear it will needlessly lengthen this study, I will print every word that Jacob Grimm has written here for you to read in order that you may see how speculative it is for yourself:

"On the other hand, the Anglo-Saxon historian [Bede] tells us the names of two beings, whom he expressly calls ancient goddesses of his people, but of whose existence not a trace is left among other Germans. ... The two goddesses, whom Beda [Bede] (de temporum ratione cap. 13) cites very briefly, without any description, merely to explain the months named after them, are Hrede and Eastre, March taking its Saxon name from the first, and April from the second... It would be uncritical to saddle this father of the church, who everywhere keeps heathenism at a distance, and tells us less of it than he knows, with the invention of these goddesses."
-Grimm.[emphasis mine]
Alternate link: http://www.northvegr.org/lore/grimmst/013_10.php

"We Germans to this day call April ostermonat, and Ostarmanoth is found as early as Eginhart [an abbot who worked as a Secretary for Charlemagne]. The great christian festival, which usually falls in April or the end of March, bears in the oldest of [Old High German] remains the name ostara; it is found mostly in the plural, because two days were kept at Easter. This Ostara, like the [Anglo Saxon] Eastre, must in the heathen religion have denoted a higher being, whose worship was so firmly rooted, that the christian teachers tolerated the name, and applied it to one of their own grandest anniversaries. All the nations bordering on us have retained the Biblical 'pascha'; even Uliphilas writes paska, not austro, though he must have known the word; the Norse tongue also has imported its paskir, Swedish pask, Danish paaske. The [Old High German] adverb ostar expresses movement toward the rising sun [this info taken from Gylfaginning which is the first section of a 13th century Icelandic prose book called Edda or Prose Edda – you will note the 13th century is far later than 700 AD], likewise the Old Norse austr, and probably an [Anglo Saxon] eastor and Gothic austr. In Latin the identical auster has been pushed round to the noonday quarter, the South. In the Edda a male being, a spirit of light, bears the name of austri, so a female one might have been called Austra; the High German and Saxon tribes seem on the contrary to have formed only an Ostara, Eastre (fem.), not Ostaro, Easra (masc.). And that may be the reason why the Norsemen said paskir and not austrur; they had never worshipped a goddess austra, or her cultus was already extinct.
"Ostara, Eastre seems therefore to have been the divinity of the radiant dawn, of upspringing light, a spectacle that brings joy and blessing, whose meaning could be easily adapted to the resurrection-day of the christian's God. Bonfires were lighted at Easter, and according to a popular belief of long standing, the moment the sun rises on Easter Sunday morning, he gives three joyful leaps, he dances for joy. Water drawn on Easter morning is like that at Christmas, holy and healing; here also heathen notions seems to have grafted themselves on great christian festivals. Maidens clothed in white, who at Easter, at the season of returning spring, show themselves in clefts of the roch and mountains, are suggestive of the ancient goddess."
-Grimm. [emphasis mine]
Alternate link: http://www.northvegr.org/lore/grimmst/013_11.php

And there you have it. This is a “Eostre = Ostara” proposal by Jacob Grimm, not a hard fact. He even admits that he is speculating about something Bede gave no detail about, and “of whose existence not a trace is left among other Germans.”
That doesn’t stop most people from constructing elaborate scenarios from this information, however, and with that they boldly condemn billions.

And still other, far more determined, people claim that if we go back far enough Ostara derives from Ishtar/Ashtoreth. There is no solid evidence for this whatsoever. All claims of this nature are purely speculative (even so, they are taught as fact.) If we can’t find proof for Eostre as a goddess let alone this Ostara, how on earth can we possibly have the proof that links her to Ishtar? The words sound alike, and that’s enough. But this appears to me to be what we call “false cognates.” They are not related. It doesn’t help that these claims probably come from Alexander Hyslop, who we all know was wholly unreliable. Certainly Jacob Grimm never intended his work to be so grossly misused.

This theoretical goddess bears no more influence on the name of Easter than Saturn’s Day has on the seventh-day Sabbath. Calling the Sabbath “Saturday” doesn’t make anyone any more a pagan than calling Pascha “Easter.” For all of the people who make such a huge fuss over something so simple as a name, don’t they know “Pentecost” is Helenistic Greek word, and the real name of the day is Sukkot? Using this same line of thinking with which they condemn a billion+ Christians, aren’t they also a pagan for keeping Pentecost? The Hellenistic Greeks were pagans! (I hope you understand I'm being facetious.)
HWA was well known for playing word games. He once claimed Mussolini was called “Il Duce” because “duce” is the Anglo-Saxon word for “demon.” When in reality, it is the Latin word for “commander,” and from this same word we get the English word “Duke.”
I used to play the same word games myself... until I stopped being afraid of the truth.

For anyone wanting more information about this, we recommend you read the following three links on the subject. They are quite informative:

Where did Easter come from?
The Origin Easter - Pagan or Christian? (see p.2)
Is Easter a Pagan Festival?

From the evidence we have, we can be confident that the word Easter comes from the name of the month in which it fell, not from the name of a goddess. Eaosturmonath was likely shortened in the translation, as is common with long names, and eventually we get the English word Easter.

Ancient pagan holiday?

HWA taught that there was a dispute in the earliest years about whether to keep Passover or whether to adopt a pagan holiday. This is patently false!
Regardless of what happened in Germany hundreds of years afterwards, Pascha is most definitely not derived from a pagan holiday. No pagan holiday was involved in any sense. The issue was about the calendar and following after Judaism, not paganism, but all parties involved were observing Pascha. Not only is Herbert Armstrong’s claim untrue, but it is baseless. There are no reliable facts behind this claim whatsoever.

The idea of rabbits and eggs, although they are often found as fertility symbols in ancient religions, didn’t factor in to Pascha for almost a thousand years after Jesus died - after the Paschal festival had reached Germany, and after the Germanic peoples began successfully spreading out to the west. But all of this doesn’t deter the ones who are blindly determined to condemn Easter and all who celebrate it. They take something that happened a thousand years after the fact, move it back in time to the first century, and blame the Catholics, and all Christians besides themselves, for all forms of things they are entirely innocent of.

We now must turn and fend off some claims that get dangerously close to blasphemy. Some of the true zealots hate the actual history of Easter so much that they would undermine the Deity of Christ in order to smear Easter. In a stellar example of “post hoc ergo propter hoc” (after this therefore because of this) there are many people who claim Easter (and even Christ Himself) is simply a hold-over from the worship of the ancient gods Mithra and Attis.
According to Edwin M. Yamauchi, PhD. who holds a doctorate in Mediterranean Studies from Brandeis University, taught at Miami University in Ohio for 35+ years, wrote over 17 books including the 578-page "Persia and the Bible", and in 1978 delivered a paper to the Second International Congress of Mithraic Studies (I only list this info to show that the guy knows his Mithra), there is a very high probability that HWA is flat wrong on his pagan origin of Easter. HWA always attributed Easter to pagan gods, but let’s hear from an actual historian.

About Mithra:

“…even though Mithras was a Persian god who was attested as early as the fourteenth century BC, we have almost no evidence of Mithraism in the sense of a mystery religion in the West until very late – too late to have influenced the beginnings of Christianity.”
-Edwin Yamauchi. P. 168
Strobel, Lee. The Case for the Real Jesus. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1987.

"Western Mithraism didn't exist until the mid-second century [AD]... too late to have influenced the development of first-century Christianity."
-Edwin Yamauchi. P.169
Ibid.

About Attis:

“… [Pierre] Lambrechts has demonstrated that the supposed ‘resurrection’ of Attis doesn’t appear until after AD 150 – more than a century after Jesus.”
-Edwin Yamauchi. P.177
Ibid.

 And about Adonis:

“Pierre Lambrechts  has shown that there are no indications of a resurrection in the early information we have about Adonis. While there are four texts that speak of his resurrection, they date from the second to the fourth century AD – long after Jesus.”
--Edwin Yamauchi. P.177
Ibid.

And about the common origin of all gods and goddesses which HWA often preached:

“Yes, there was a widespread view that there was a general, common mystery religion, but upon a closer examination of the sources, nobody believes that any longer.”
“These were quite different beliefs. In fact, by the mid-twentieth century, scholars had established that the sources used in these writings were far from satisfactory and the parallels were much too superficial.”
-Edwin Yamauchi. P.167
Ibid.

The fallacious claim by HWA is that since we see bunnies and eggs in the Easter decorations, then all of Easter must be pagan. That simply isn’t true. The fallacy is that Mithra and Attis are older than Easter, therefore Easter must come from them. This is what we call the “post hoc ergo propter hoc” fallacy; or “after this therefore because of this.” Nothing could be farther from the truth! Easter comes from Pascha, not paganism. And it would appear that paganism was far busier adopting Christian precepts in the decades after Christ than Christianity was busy adopting pagan precepts.
Regarding the bunnies and eggs, these were incorporated sometime around 1,000 A.D. They do not in any way indicate that Easter is pagan. If they offend, leave them out. If they're sin to you, they're sin to you. They are nothing to the overall celebration of Jesus the Christ.

I would very much like to point out that in Christianity these things are not objects of worship. They are not idols. No one bows before them, or prays to them, or considers them important to their faith or the worship of God in any way. No one sees them as fertility symbols. In fact, Armstrong had to spend a great deal of time and effort convincing people that these were fertility symbols in order to condemn them. They are fun traditions for kids, and that’s all they are. To condemn a billion+ people over them seems a bit silly to me now that I have a better understanding of what Easter is.

In Armstrongism there is a terrible fear of anything not found in the Old Testament. Well, as I have already pointed out, Hanukkah is not in the Old Testament, yet there Jesus is keeping it. I think this fear we had drove us to put an improper weight on the verses that speak against idolatry, but we gave little weight to the verses that speak against condemnation. Knowing what I know now, I feel that is very sad.

Let us now investigate further some specific details about Easter’s timing.

Timing of Easter

The Gentile church in Europe was of the opinion that Jewish reckoning of time, which could place the festival on any day of the week, was disruptive. The Jews used a lunar calendar, days began at sundown, and relied on calculations and the decisions of the Jewish leadership to determine years, seasons, months, and days - many of which were determined by sight. The Romans used a solar calendar, days began at midnight, and had no such reliance on a priesthood or ties to a certain geographical area. All they wanted was a fixed and reliable date. So, even though the Church in Asia claimed they received their traditions from the Apostles, who kept the 14th of Nisan Passover as well as the Lord's Day on Sunday (REV. 1: 10), there is no clear command in the New Testament on when to observe Pascha. It was pure tradition. So the debate went on, and eventually the western opinion won out.

Try to keep in mind that the Apostles were Jewish converts living mainly during the time before the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem. They didn’t have the calendar issues like the Gentiles did.
Also keep in mind that Jesus Himself changed the timing of Pascha. The Lord’s Supper is Passover, but it is not the Old Covenant Passover, and the timing is not according to law. Unfortunately that is how Armstrongists view it. I feel this is the true root of the issue here. The two Covenants cannot be blended together. And the New Covenant cannot be interpreted through the lens of the Old, rather it is the other way around.

Some claim Easter is a celebration of the Spring equinox, but this is false. Easter is not on the Spring equinox; just like Christmas is not on the Winter equinox. It can’t quite be a celebration of the equinox if it isn’t on the equinox. Generally speaking, the 14th of Nisan is often closer to the Spring equinox than Easter is.
The timing was not intended to celebrate the beginning of Spring, but the equinox was a reliable recurring guide for timing.
The rule since the 325 AD is: “Easter is observed on the Sunday after the first full moon on or after the day of the vernal equinox.” And that was chosen because the 14th of Nisan was impossible to determine with accuracy, yet it would keep the date near the 14th of Nisan. You see, most people are blissfully unaware that, anciently, Passover was always on a full moon after the vernal equinox. Find that date, go up one Sunday and voila: Easter! Even if the Jews completely lost their ability to determine time, Easter would always be near the time when Jesus died.
There is nothing inherently wrong with using the equinox for timing. Indeed, that is precisely what God intended for it (GEN. 1: 14).

Some may ask, "If that's true, then why isn't Passover always near Easter?" It was anciently, but not anymore. In the fourth century, a few decades after the date for Easter was set, the Jews under Rabi Hilel II changed the way they calculate Passover. This was in response to Roman pressure that the Sanhedrin was not allowed to meet to determine the calendar properly. They now use a mathematical model to determine the calendar, and by extension the holy days which rely on the calendar.
Unfortunately, if you rely on the modern Jews to provide the Hebrew calendar, you're still not observing the Holy Days as Jesus did. (I'm not knocking the Jews. They did what they had to do. I'm addressing people who judge and condemn others over timing that they themselves get wrong.)

Some claim the Easter sunrise service is derived from the ancient pagan practice of welcoming the sun on the morning of the spring equinox, but this is false. We have ancient Christian documents as well as a Roman record from Pliny the Younger, showing Christians held sunrise services precisely because that is what they received from the Apostles and read in the Gospels about the timing of Jesus’ resurrection.

But if timing is so crucial to salvation, as Armstrongism teaches, let’s spend a minute on that and see if they get timing right.

We saw in the first part of this series that HWA’s timing of Passover is wrong, there is a bitter ongoing dispute over the correct timing of Passover if it is the 14th or the 15th, and the Night to Be Much Observed is more or less a made-up thing. So their timing isn’t any better than anyone else’s.
But did you know that for 40 years Herbert Armstrong (supposedly an Apostle taught directly by God) taught Pentecost falls on Monday. According to this reasoning, everyone who lived and died observing the wrong date/time were terrible sinners awaiting condemnation.
RedFox of Living Armstrongism, in the post “What Was WCG Before 1970 Like?” adds this:

“Around 1948-9 a controversy erupted in RCG. It has been described as traumatic. Anyone who disagreed with HWA's Monday Pentecost was cast out of the church, only to learn 25 years later that they were right.”

In Armstrongism, to be cast out of the church means eternal death. One cannot overstate the gravity of convicting people of an offense worthy of eternal death… only to completely about face. In 1974, Pentecost was changed to Sunday. Incidentally, this change in dating caused a huge split in the church and prompted Raymond Cole to establish the Church of God the Eternal. To this day they observe Pentecost on Monday, citing as authority HWA’s claims that God revealed the truth to him at the beginning. Both cannot be right.
Timing issues appear in other areas as well. The Church of the Great God calculates Pentecost differently in years when the First Day of Unleavened Bread falls on a weekly Sabbath. Hidden in this Pentecost conflict is a debate on when the Wave Sheaf offering occurred (LEV. 23: 11-15), and thus a dispute over the timing of Jesus' resurrection.

So why all of this confusion over such a “plain truth” as timing? If it’s so vital for salvation, why can’t even the people who say they are doing it right seem to get it right?
It’s because timing isn’t as important as they say! What matters is Jesus.

(I COR. 11: 25) …This do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.

And what matters is what’s in your heart.

(I COR. 11: 27-31) 27 Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. 28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For he who eats and drinks in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body. 30 For this reason many are weak and sick among you, and many sleep. 31 For if we would judge ourselves, we would not be judged.

What would you suppose is in the heart of a person who would condemn another person over the timing of something which they themselves get wrong? My guess is it’s probably not the stuff that is pleasing to Christ. Good thing there’s still time to change the heart!

Easter or Passover?

This really is the original question, isn’t it? This is the question that got the ball rolling early in the second century AD. Here we are today still asking it. I wonder if it’s worth the trouble for me to review it.

Frankly, it’s up to your faith and your relationship with God.
If your faith prefers to keep Passover with a church like the COG7 who invites all baptized Christians to their Lord’s Supper on the 14th of Nisan, then God bless you and I pray your observance is Spirit-filled and enriching. The Apostles did it, so there’s nothing wrong with it.
If your faith prefers to follow the western Gentile tradition and attend an Easter Sunday service – with or without rabbits and eggs – then God bless you and I pray your observance is Spirit-filled and enriching. The early Gentiles did it, Polycarp and Anicetus lived side-by-side through it, that’s how Christians have done it for 1,900 years, so there’s nothing wrong with it.

Just remember Jesus the Christ, and keep Him in your heart to purify it. Condemnation is not an option – towards yourself or others.

I’ve been told, "You can't refute the fact that the Bible does not teach the observance of Christmas and Easter."

Oh, but I can!
Jesus’ birth is very much in the Bible. Whether we call it “Christmas” or not, and regardless of what day was eventually settled on for the festival, the birth of Christ is very real, and besides His death and resurrection there has been no other day in the history of mankind that compares to the day on which He was born. Does the Bible command that we celebrate it? No. But it doesn’t say not to. (That’s for another study.)
But Pascha, on the other hand, it does teach. If we can get past these childish disputes over names and timing, we would see this plainly.

The Bible doesn't teach the observance of Thanksgiving for that matter. The Bible doesn't teach the observance of Hanukkah either - yet there Jesus is keeping it (JON. 10: 22). So what are we to say? Seems to me like these arguments are grasping at straws.

I’ve been told, “I only want to do what Jesus did.”

Then you can't refute the fact that Jesus kept Hanukkah (and the other Jewish festivals like Purim). So why don't you do those? This argument falls apart when we find the people who put such a high value on only doing what Jesus did are not actually doing what Jesus did.
Need I remind anyone that Jesus changed the timing of Pascha? Why then are a billion+ Christians, who fully trust in Jesus Christ as their personal Savior, condemned as pagans for doing what Jesus Himself did?
I’ll bet “doing what Jesus did” suddenly became a lot less important for some people who claim that’s all they want to do.

Summary

Easter is Pascha. Pascha is Easter.
Easter is an English word that comes from the High German name for the month of April, Eostremonath. It does not come from the name of a goddess.
Easter is not pagan in origin, but began as a matter of desiring a reliable, set timing for the Lord’s Supper and the fast that went with it that doesn’t rely on the Jews to determine the timing.
Bunnies and eggs were introduced after 1,000 A.D. They don’t even factor in. Even if they were pagan fertility symbols, we have no idea if that is what they were to the Germans whose traditions we’ve inherited. They could have been innocent spring symbols. Armstrongists shouldn’t condemn seasonal symbols. A great many times I have seen cornucopias and other harmless items set out on tables as a symbol of harvest. The Bible is full of symbols. The bread and the wine are symbols. There is nothing inherently wrong with symbols.

So, whichever way your faith in God leads you to worship Him, I pray He purifies your heart and blesses you. I pray He leads to see that condemnation isn’t proper. Who would demand the law, yet ignore the many commands against condemnation? And I pray He leads you to further study on this topic, and a deeper understanding of the New Covenant in His blood.

Friday, April 16, 2010

Easter History - part I

I wonder about the people who say "Easter is pagan." I wonder if they do anything at all besides rehash Herbert Armstrong’s old material and Google up "Easter" in order to find other people to say what HWA said? Goodness knows I didn’t while I was a true Armstrong believer. I only wanted to find what I already believed.

As it turns out, a lot of people observe Easter. So, I figure I’d better find out all I can about it if I’m going to condemn people as unsaved pagans for keeping it. But what happens when you find out something you have so much invested in is not true? Well, read on and find out.
This will be part one of a two-part study into Easter. In this part, we will investigate the details of Passover and Jesus’ death. We need to look at this first because in part two we will investigate how these things tie in to Easter.

What is Easter anyway?

Easter is the day on which most Christians celebrate the death and resurrection, but mostly the resurrection, of our Lord Jesus Christ. Easter day, also called Resurrection Sunday, is the New Covenant Passover. In the old Catholic traditions, the traditions that spread through Europe, Easter is more than just a day, it is a “season” that continues 50 days until Pentecost.

Origins of Easter

We can read in Exodus about Passover, where the Israelites were spared from the 10th Plague of God on Egypt by putting the blood of a lamb on their doorways.
This from a Judaism 101 article on “Pesach: Passover”:

The name ‘Pesach’ (PAY-sahch, with a ‘ch’ as in the Scottish ‘loch’) comes from the Hebrew root Pei-Samekh-Cheit  , meaning to pass through, to pass over, to exempt or to spare. It refers to the fact that G-d ‘passed over’ the houses of the Jews when he was slaying the firstborn of Egypt. In English, the holiday is known as Passover. ‘Pesach’ is also the name of the sacrificial offering (a lamb) that was made in the Temple on this holiday.”

It should be obvious to Christians that the lamb and its blood represented the body and blood of Jesus, who is our Passover Lamb (I COR. 5: 7).

So, this Pesach, which is Hebrew, is called Pascha in Greek and Latin. Easter to this very day is called Pascha in most places, and always has been.
This is taken from the first paragraph of the online Catholic Encyclopedia article on Easter:


"The Greek term for Easter, pascha, has nothing in common with the verb paschein, "to suffer," although by the later symbolic writers it was connected with it; it is the Aramaic form of the Hebrew pesach (transitus, passover). The Greeks called Easter the pascha anastasimon; Good Friday the pascha staurosimon. ... The Romance languages have adopted the Hebrew-Greek term: Latin, Pascha; Italian, Pasqua; Spanish, Pascua; French, Pâques. Also some Celtic and Teutonic nations use it: Scottish, Pask; Dutch, Paschen; The correct word in Dutch is actually Pasen Danish, Paaske; Swedish, Pask; even in the German provinces of the Lower Rhine the people call the feast Paisken not Ostern. The word is, principally in Spain and Italy, identified with the word "solemnity" and extended to other feasts, e.g. Sp., Pascua florida, Palm Sunday; Pascua de Pentecostes, Pentecost; Pascua de la Natividad, Christmas; Pascua de Epifania, Epiphany. In some parts of France also First Communion is called Pâques, whatever time of the year administered."
Holweck, F. (1909). Easter. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Retrieved April 16, 2010 from New Advent:http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05224d.htm


When the early Christians spread Pascha into northern Germany sometime before 700 AD, the Germans renamed the day to Eostre. Since English is a Germanic language, we adopted that name rather than Pascha, and the English version of Eostre became Easter. We’ll go much deeper into this in part two.

Easter is Pascha; Pascha is Easter. So, let’s look into Pascha.

Timing of Passover

Passover, as we can see in Leviticus 23: 5, is a seven-day long Festival which begins at the end of the 14th day of the Hebrew month of Nisan and continues into the 15th. Keep in mind that in Hebrew tradition, days begin at sundown.
In Armstrongism, Passover has been separated into its own day, and the seven-day celebration which the Jews call “Passover” is called by Armstrongists the “Days of Unleavened Bread.” Thus the whole thing would appear to be an eight-day celebration. But this is not as it should be. Let’s look in to that a bit, because it becomes important to point out a few things.

(LEV. 23: 4-8) 4 These are the feasts of the LORD, holy convocations which you shall proclaim at their appointed times. 5 On the fourteenth day of the first month at twilight is the LORD’s Passover. 6 And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the Feast of Unleavened Bread to the LORD; seven days you must eat unleavened bread. 7 On the first day you shall have a holy convocation; you shall do no customary work on it. 8 But you shall offer an offering made by fire to the LORD for seven days. The seventh day shall be a holy convocation; you shall do no customary work on it.

Verse 5 says the Passover is on the 14th. But "Passover" refers to the slaughter of the lambs. There is no single day celebration called Passover in these verses. This was done late in the day on the 14th, not at the beginning of the day. This is how we see things play out in Jesus' time, and this is the way things continue today.

I have heard so very many and complicated explanations in Armstrongism for why the Jews do not keep their own celebrations correctly. These same Armstrongists rely on the authority of the Jews to declare the correct timing of the weekly Sabbath, however. So the Jews are wrong (when they contradict HWA) and the Jews are right (when they agree with HWA). This should not be done!
It is true that many of the Jews in the Diaspora keep an eight-day Passover. But this doesn’t change the fact that Jesus was in Jerusalem before 70 AD, and there was no eight-day festival there. So Armstrongism is without an excuse here.

The Passover lamb was chosen on the 10th day of the Hebrew month of Nisan/Abib (EXO. 12: 3), the lamb is tested for blemishes for four days just as Jesus was questioned by the leaders of the Jews and declared without fault by Pilot (LUK. 23 4), the lamb was then slaughtered late on the 14th day at twilight (EXO. 12: 6), and the meal is eaten early on the 15th day.

In Hebrew tradition, the evening comes before the morning, so the evening of the 15th starts at sundown (roughly 6 PM), not at midnight. To most western minds, this would look to us like the lamb was slaughtered and eaten on the same day, but that is because we are thinking that the 14th ends at midnight, when in the Hebrew mind it ends at sundown and after sundown it becomes the 15th.


To be more exact about the timing of sundown, Luc has verified this for us:

"Passover / Pesach in 2010 will commence at exactly 7:00:37 P.M. on Monday, March 29, 2010, and end at exactly 8:14:12 P.M. on Tuesday, April 6, 2010 (Source: MyZmanim.com). Although sunset or sundown ("shkiah ha'chama" in Hebrew) at sea level occurs at exactly 7:18:37 P.M."


So that's about as exact as a person can get. Keep in mind, however, that in the 30's AD, things were done in a much less scientific manner, often by sight, and there were several strings attached that we won't get into here. So even though we know precisely when sundown is today, that doesn't tell us exactly when the Jews determined sundown to be at that time.

Did Herbert Armstrong get the timing right?

The odd thing is that the Armstrongists observe Passover one day too soon – at the beginning of the 14th or in other words, on the night that the 13th of Nisan becomes the 14th. (Look at any Holy Day calendar from any Armstrongist splinter group and compare that timing of Passover to any Jewish website.) But if we do that, the lamb would have to be killed on the 13th. There is no command to kill a lamb on the 13th. If one has ever roasted a whole lamb (or any animal for that matter), one knows this cannot be done quickly, so to assume the lamb was killed, cooked, and eaten after sundown at the beginning of the 14th is nonsensical. There is no way the Armstrongist view can be possible, except if the Jews eat the Passover meal in the middle of the night, and that simply isn’t the case.

Remember, the lamb was to be killed at twilight (late afternoon). Twilight comes late in the day, before sundown, not early in the night after sundown. Hebrew days begin after sundown, so the twilight hours of a day come late, towards the next day. We know that the lamb was killed late on the 14th, usually between 1:30 and 3:30 PM. There was no cooking allowed on the 15th, so all of this had to be done by sundown on the 14th. I mention that because Armstrongists observe Passover immediately after sundown at the beginning of the 14th. This is improper as this is before twilight.
Additionally, ask yourself this question - if Passover is on the 14th and the first Day of Unleavened Bread is on the 15th, as Armstrong taught, why observe the Passover with unleavened bread when it simply isn’t time yet?

Timeline of events:
Nisan 13
Nisan 14
Nisan 14
Nisan 15
Day
Night
Day
Night
Prepare Last Supper.
Eat Last Supper & arrest. Start de-leavening.
Trial, crucifixion & burial. Finish de-leavening. Slaughter of lambs.
Passover Seder.

Armstrong’s version:
Nisan 13 (Tue.)
Nisan 14 (Tue. – Wed.)
Nisan 14 (Wed.)
Nisan 15 (Wed. – Thu.)
Day
Night
Day
Night
Finish de-leavening. Slaughter of lambs & prepare Last Supper.
Passover Seder which is Last Supper.
Trial, crucifixion & burial.
Night to Be Much Observed.

Armstrongists argue this timing strenuously, as they do all calendar issues, but this “14th/15th controversy” is particularly potent and divisive among them. The 15th group is correct, although they are by far the minority and run contrary to HWA’s teachings. Frankly, I would never have said that two years ago, and this is more for party loyalty than any understanding I had on the subject. For all of those times Armstrongists judge and condemn a billion+ Christians for getting the timing of Easter wrong (and I was right there with them), they act hypocritically in that they are wrong, too.
Our own standard of measurement will be what God uses to measure us with.

What about the Night to Be Much Observed?

To make things more confusing, HWA cites Exodus 12: 42 and created another special night called the “Night to Be Much Observed” (Night to be Much Remembered) at the beginning of the15th. In other words, after the 14th ends at sundown and the 15th has begun, when the Jews are eating the Passover, Armstrongists are eating another meal entirely. If we think about the timing, the Israelites ate the Passover at night, and left Egypt the next day. However, according to Armstrongist timing, the Passover is observed and the next evening there is another observation.

It should be pointed out that just because Exodus 12: 42 appears in the text after the story of the day Israel left Egypt, that doesn’t mean the night to be observed comes chronologically after the day Israel left Egypt. Verse 42 could very well refer back to the Passover again, since the entire chapter is about the Passover and the next verses have clearly returned to the Passover. The Jews have no such corresponding festival as Armstrongists observe. It is extremely likely that HWA simply missed the boat on this one.

Matthew 26 and Mark 14

Some people may take issue with this timing, citing Matthew 26: 17 and Mark 14: 12.

(MAT. 26: 17) Now on the first day of the Feast of the Unleavened Bread the disciples came to Jesus
(MAR. 14: 12) Now on the first day of Unleavened Bread, when they killed the Passover lamb…

It would seem like there is a contradiction in the Bible here. And it might seem that this contradicts what I said about the timing of the Last Supper. But there is a valuable clue if we go backwards a bit to Matthew 26: 2 and Mark 14: 1.

(MAT. 26: 2) You know that after two days is the Passover…
(MAR. 14: 1) After two days it was the Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread.

We've gone back in time one day. So, we see that these verses claim there were two days until Passover. Matthew 26: 17 and Mark 14: 12 are obviously one day later. They are still one day previous to Passover, and one day previous to Passover is the evening on which the Last Supper was held.
Now let's see another clue if we go forward in time again.

(MAT. 27: 62) On the next day, which followed the Day of Preparation
(MAR. 15: 42) Now when evening had come, because it was the Preparation Day, that is, the day before the Sabbath

The “Sabbath” was a High Day. Nothing says it was not also a weekly Sabbath. Both authors say the day Jesus died was the preparation day; the day before the Sabbath. So we know they are not saying that day was "High Day" in Matthew 26: 17 and Mark 14: 12.

So, what are Matthew and Mark talking about, then? They are saying that the 14th was the preparation day, which was the first day that leavening was to be removed from the households and all of the other preparations for making the home and possessions “de-leavened” had to be accomplished. What they are saying is that this day was the first day without leavening. They are not saying this day is the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread.
Leavening had to be completely gone before the lambs were slaughtered or everything would be defiled. Matthew and Mark are referring to the start of the 14th, because on the 14th at twilight they killed the lambs, and that is why the killing of the lambs is mentioned in Mark 14: 12. Matthew and Mark are not even remotely trying to say that say that very day was one and only High Holy Day known as the “first day of Unleavened Bread”, even if the name is capitalized in most translations.

To introduce some possible additional evidence here, a close look at the Greek in Matthew 26: 17 leaves Luc and myself with the impression that the first day of Unleavened Bread was approaching, rather than already arrived. That would seem to fit the facts.
It is also reported that the Galileans according to their tradition at that time always finished de-leavening by the sundown that ended the 13th and began the 14th. This might explain why Jesus and the Apostles prepared on the 13th.

Was the Last Supper the Passover Seder meal?

There is an interesting puzzle hidden in here. When did Jesus eat the Last Supper, and was it the Seder meal?
If the Passover meal was eaten on the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, on the 15th of Nisan, then the night Jesus was arrested was a High Holy Day. Jesus would never have been crucified on the High Holy Day (MAT. 26: 5). 
Rather, we know it was either a Preparation Day (MAT. 27: 62; MAR. 15: 42; LUK. 23: 54; JOH. 19: 14, 31, 42). The first day of the seven-day Passover often is on the weekly Sabbath, so the Holy Day and the Sabbath can easily be the same day.
Now, read John 19: 31 closely:

(JOH. 19: 31) Therefore, because it was the Preparation Day, that the bodies should not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.

Here we have Jesus already dead, and it is still the Preparation Day before the Holy Day, which the Armstrongists would refer to as the first day of Unleavened Bread. We can only conclude from this that Jesus died at the time the Passover lambs were being slaughtered, which is only proper because He is our Passover Lamb. And that can only mean the Last Supper was a day earlier than the Passover Seder. Jesus can’t quite be killed as the Passover Lamb, and afterwards eat the Seder. Instead, Jesus ate it one day early. This makes a great deal of sense when we see the Last Supper is never mentioned to have included lamb.
But does that mean Jesus intended the Last Supper to be the Passover Seder meal?

(LUK. 22: 8) And He sent Peter and John, saying, “Go and prepare the Passover for us, that we may eat.” 

So, according to Jesus, the Last supper was His Passover supper.
As an interesting side-note, Jesus was the first-born son of His family. There was a tradition that He was to fast on the day before Passover to commemorate the 10th Plague. As we understand it, a final meal for the first-born sons was typically started towards the end of the 13th, and carried on after sundown into the 14th. There is a chance the Last Supper was this last meal before Jesus’ fast would have begun. So, it was carrying a double-meaning for Jesus.

To add fuel to this dating fire, we know from Christian history that in the first centuries there were groups called “Quartodecimans.” Quartodeciman comes from the Latin word “Quattuordecim” which means “fourteen.” These people insisted that the Lord’s Supper could only be observed on the 14th day of Nisan, because that was the time Jesus ate it.
This is also the tradition of the Apostles. Eusebius records for us that (in about 150 AD) when Anicetus, Bishop of Rome, championed a different day because following the Hebrew calendar was prohibitive, Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna and student of the Apostle John, went to visit him and claimed the 14th was the time taught to him by the Apostles (Eusebius, “Church History”, book V, chapter 24, verse 16).
Eusebius also relates to us that one Polycrates, leader of the Bishops in Asia, specifically mentioned that the Lord’s Supper was “observed the day when the people put away the leaven” (Eusebius, “Church History”, book V, chapter 24, verse 6).
So this adds credence to the idea that the Last supper was a day earlier than the Seder.

So, was it the Seder, then? It depends on your point of view. Jesus knew He was going to die, and opted to eat with His Apostles rather than miss a meal that obviously had so much meaning for Him (LUK. 22: 15). So, in that regard it was the Seder. But in another sense, Jesus was instituting something radically different and never before seen – the New Covenant. He did it with different symbols and at a different time. So in that sense it is not the old Seder.

My point in this is to show that there is a clear discrepancy between the law and what Jesus did. Why point that out? Because the battle cry of Armstrongists is, “The law! The law!” Oh how very many times I have heard, “the law is eternal!” Yet they are not keeping the law, are they? Certainly not! They cry out ever and anon “Jesus didn’t change the law!” Oh, but He did!

So Armstrongists are torn between following the letter of the law and following Christ’s example. To compensate for this, some Armstrongists claim that Jesus had the date correct and the Jews had it wrong. Some go off on multi-part sermons with vivid scenarios and deep studies into the “real” meaning of the Hebrew word “evenings” and et cetera. They are trying to marry Jesus back to the law again. But this is impossible.
If Jesus ate the Passover on the “correct” time and the Jews did not, then that would also mean that Jesus died a day after the “correct” slaughtering of the Passover lambs - and the symbolism is completely ruined. If Jesus intended to show the “correct” timing of the Seder, then the “correct” timing of the slaughter was before the Last Supper on the 13th, and that is contrary to the law. Ergo, Jesus is not the Passover Lamb. So this argument tears Jesus down to set up the law. It is simple to excuse Jesus for eating the Seder a day early since He knew He was going to die (and why not, people eat it weeks later when they cannot eat it at the proper time), but to blow the whole symbolism of the lamb is harder to excuse. Or else it means the Hebrew calendar is wrong by a day, the 13th is actually the 14th, Friday is actually supposed to be the Sabbath, and both the Saturday and the Sunday proponents are wrong. But that is simply ridiculous!

The simple and unavoidable fact is Jesus ate the Lord’s Supper one day early, law or no law. The Lord’s Supper is on the 14th, while Passover is not. And even though the Armstrongists observe what they do on the 14th, they say what they do is in keeping with the Old Testament, and it most certainly is not. And that is also why the “Night to be Much Observed” is such a mystery. Armstrong’s view of timing is wrong. There is no separate “Night to be Much Observed” on the 15th of Nisan; there is only Passover.
So follow Jesus into the New Covenant, or follow the law into the Old Covenant. You decide.

For all the times I participated with other Armstrongists in blaming and condemning all other Christians for getting the timing of Passover wrong, Jesus ate Passover on a different day, too. So, if we are going to claim over and over that “we must do what Jesus did” then we also must not condemn others over the timing of days.

(COL. 2: 16-17) 16 So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths, 17 which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ. 

Is our remembrance of the Last Supper exactly like Passover?

Easter is Passover, but it is also a departure from Passover. Just look at this regulation regarding the Passover:

(EXO. 12: 43-49) 43 And the LORD said to Moses and Aaron, “This is the ordinance of the Passover: No foreigner shall eat it. 44 But every man’s servant who is bought for money, when you have circumcised him, then he may eat it. 45 A sojourner and a hired servant shall not eat it. 46 In one house it shall be eaten; you shall not carry any of the flesh outside the house, nor shall you break one of its bones. 47 All the congregation of Israel shall keep it. 48 And when a stranger dwells with you and wants to keep the Passover to the LORD, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near and keep it; and he shall be as a native of the land. For no uncircumcised person shall eat it. 49 One law shall be for the native-born and for the stranger who dwells among you.

At that time, the Gentiles would most certainly not be allowed to participate in Passover. Now we know that Gentiles most certainly are allowed to take part, and we also know circumcision and the law of Moses are not a requirement for participation (ACT 15: 1-29).

Jesus instituted the bread and the wine, which are not the main part of the Passover Seder, as opposed to lamb. He said that the bread was His flesh, and the wine His blood. This certainly is not part of Passover. Then there was the concentration on service, illustrated by the foot washing. There is no precedent for that in Passover.
Finally, we have these words:

(LUK. 22: 19) …do this in remembrance of Me.

Not in remembrance of Moses nor of the Exodus nor the 10th plague, but in remembrance of Him (I COR. 11: 24-26). That makes the biggest difference of all.

For all the people who demand what we are to do is continue in the Old Covenant observance of Passover, this is simply not accurate. Jesus fulfilled the law (MAT. 3: 15; 5: 17; LUK. 22: 44). He has made the Old obsolete (HEB. 8: 13); behold all things are new (II COR. 5: 17)! All of these things point to Him (COL. 2: 17). This is the New Covenant. A New Covenant in His blood.

(MAT. 26: 28) For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
(MAR. 14: 24) And He said to them, “This is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many. 
(LUK. 22: 20) Likewise He also took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood, which is shed for you.

Summary

In part one, we have seen that the Jews do observe Passover correctly, on the 15th of Nisan, but Jesus made the decision to eat the Last Supper a day earlier, on the 14th. Herbert Armstrong’s view of the timing of these things is an awful mess.
The correct timing of Passover starts at the sundown which begins the 14th of Nisan, when the leaven was to be removed from the Jewish homes. The14th is the Preparation Day before the Holy Day. This is the night on which Jesus ate the Last Supper and was arrested. Night comes and goes. At about the time of the daily sacrifice, 9 AM, Jesus was scourged. Then He was declared blameless by Pilot – just like a Passover lamb - and sent to die. He was hung on the cross around noon.  After noon was the slaughter of the Passover lambs. During that very procedure, our Lord died to fulfill the symbolism and He became our Passover Lamb. No doubt the priests were still slaughtering lambs when the earthquake hit and the veil was torn in two. The lambs were roasted and the Seder meal prepared while Jesus’ body was being prepared by Joseph of Aramathea and Nicodemus to go into the tomb. He was laid into the tomb before sundown, just as the Seder meal had to be finished by sundown. Sundown is roughly 6 PM, so at this point He was already dead for about three hours. As sundown came, the15th of Nisan began, and now it was fully “Passover,” the first day of Unleavened Bread.
On Sunday, the first day of the week, our Lord was found risen from the tomb.






(I COR. 11: 23-26) 23 For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you: that the Lord Jesus on the same night in which He was betrayed took bread; 24 and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “Take, eat; this is My body which is broken for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” 25 In the same manner He also took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood. This do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.” 
26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death till He comes.


************
It is important that you understand; Everything on this blog is based on the current understanding of each author. Never take anyone's word for it, always prove it for yourself, it is your responsibility. You cannot ride someone else's coattail into the Kingdom.
Acts 17:11
************