Christian definitives for older words and their definitions

[Harold Garvey]

Shouldnt't words be definitive of Christian observations and not old dead rituals practiced according to the former things?

"Easter" is no longer understood as a pagan ritual giving homage to the goddes of fertility and love, but rather the Christian commemoration of the Resurrection of Christ.

Christians refer to the Passover as a Jewish observance in regards to when Moses led the Hewbrews out of Egypt in eating the passover lamb and eating bitter herbs. That alone ought to give more credence to the observation of Easter by Christians over something completely "Hebraic".

Could it just be that the KJV translators saw this to be the implication and chose this as the replacement of the Passover?

Proverbs 23:26

Acts 16:16-20

Galatians 4:1-11

 

[franklinmonroe]

... "Easter" is no longer understood as a pagan ritual giving homage to the goddes of fertility and love, but rather the Christian commemoration of the Resurrection of Christ. ...

I understand what you're saying, Harold. Actually, I find 'Easter' to be nearly an offensive term. I have found 'Easter' to mean bunnies, eggs, candy, fancy women's hats, retail sales, and churchish rituals. I much prefer the term "Resurrection Sunday'.

 

[Trotter]

Could it just be that the KJV translators saw this to be the implication and chose this as the replacement of the Passover?

Actually, it was the Catholic Church who is to blame for Easter creeping in in place of Passover in the KJV.

The Catholic Church would take a pagan holiday of the people it was assimilating and "blend" it in by mixing it with a Christian holiday (holy day). This made it easier for the pagans to become a part of the church since their stuff was added in. This is completely contrary to actual Christian beliefs and practices, but this is the Catholic Church, not a Christian one.

The KJV translators merely used the name that the pope had issued for the occasion... especially since the Anglican church was just a split from the Catholic one, anyway.

The proper name should be Passover, but we should regard it as Resurrection Day since Christ is our Passover.

 

[Salty]

but we should regard it as Resurrection Day since Christ is our Passover.

:thumbs: Amen brother :jesus:

 

[Salty]

The proper name should be Passover, but we should regard it as Resurrection Day since Christ is our Passover.

:thumbs: AMEN BROTHER :jesus:

 

[Harold Garvey]

The KJV translators merely used the name that the pope had issued for the occasion... especially since the Anglican church was just a split from the Catholic one, anyway.

The proper name should be Passover, but we should regard it as Resurrection Day since Christ is our Passover.

But doesn't giving this time of year the name "Passover" also mean there should be a meal consisting of a lamb without blemish and eaten with bitter herbs?


Christians don't observe the Passover. Romans of that day were distinctly against the observance by it interfering with their pagan ritual.

The use of "Easter" in no way gives an implication of the detraction to either event but has come to be known as the commemorative event of The Resurrection.

The objection to "Easter" is amiss in that the word has changed meaning over the years. isn't that what modern versionists decry is the archaic use of words, yet we see here some decry "Easter" and insist on an archaic ritual?

 

[Harold Garvey]

:thumbs: AMEN BROTHER :jesus:

I agree with this being The Resurrection Day, but that's what "Easter" means.

"Passover" is antiquated by the fulfillment of Christ rising from the dead. The word would not be considered archaic.

The only time I see anywhere that "Easter" means a pagan ritual is historically demonstrative alone.

We celebrate "Christmas" but we do not go to "mass". This example also shows how a word is defined to carry more authority over a past meaning. That past meaning becoming antiquated has allowed the word's proper use to change.

The differences between antiquity of words and there being deemed "archaic" is a usage deal.

We may not use words said to be archaic because they are not part of OUR vernacular, but they haven't been antiquated having a former meaning and adopting a new and adverse difference in that meaning.

"Gay" is a prime example of vernacular change. In 1890 it meant to be joyuous, today it has been perverted to mean that being a sodomite is to be a joyous person.

We might even use the term "gay" in the former usage and never even hint towards being sodomistic.

I'll tend to stay with the less perverted understandings of words.

"Easter" is in no way a perversion of the former meaning but a distinct change.:thumbs:

I find it totally insane, or is that inane, to object to the term in Acts 12 as "easter", but find it giving a totally wrong impression of the time in question to refer to it as The Passover after Christ already to have Risen and the Passover having no meaning any longer except as it having a historical use as in the O.T. and before Christ.

We'll be celebrating Easter in 2010!

 

[AntennaFarmer]

Actually, it was the Catholic Church who is to blame for Easter creeping in in place of Passover in the KJV.

...
The KJV translators merely used the name that the pope had issued for the occasion... especially since the Anglican church was just a split from the Catholic one, anyway.

.....

My understanding is different. Can you document that the pope is the origin for the word "Easter"?

A.F.

 

[Trotter]

My understanding is different. Can you document that the pope is the origin for the word "Easter"?

The pope didn't coin the name, A.F. Easter was a pagan ritual with pagan origins and name (I do belive is derived fron Astarte, but don't go by just my "think"). The Catholic Church incorporated the pagan festival of Easter and overlapped it with the celebration of the resurrection. That way the "new converts", or same pagans paying their dues to Rome... same thing... still did their own thing, but it was now sanctioned by the Church.

I just wish I could remember the sources for the info. This getting older thing really stinks.

 

[DHK]

We'll be celebrating Easter in 2010!

That is another can of worms; another subject. It also should be discussed in the General Baptist Forum. But for the short answer: "Not me." I won't celebrate the pagan holiday of Christmas either. It has as many pagan roots as Easter does. I will celebrate the birth of Christ with my family, but not Christmas. Why are you fixated on pagan celebrations? Christians substituted their own holidays on pagan festivals. In other words they Christianized paganism. Would you take all the Islamic holidays today and try and hold the nearest possible Christian festival to it--making a holiday out of it.

For example: Eid Al-Aha. The Festival of Sacrifice, lasting about three days, occurring 70 days after Ramadan, the month of fasting. It is then that they also sacrifice a goat in memory of Abraham's sacrifice of "Ishmael."
--So on that day we should sacrifice a ram to honor Abraham's sacrifice of "Isaac," what Abraham really did. We need to correct the wrong. We need to have a Christian sacrifice in place of this pagan festival in honor of Abraham but only correct a few things. Christianize the pagan festival. Let's do it! Update the holidays to make them relevant to today's religions.
You can be the first one to initiate it Harold.

 

[just-want-peace]

Words evolve in meaning, sometimes slowly over time, and sometimes virtually overnight.

Easter, to me, is simply the designation of the resurrection of Christ, regardless of the meaning some 200+/- years ago.

Now if you prefer to ignore the evolution of word meanings, a question:

Would you consider it a compliment to be labeled G@Y today, because of the dictionary definition of G@Y from 75 years ago??:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:??

 

[Jerome]

I much prefer the term "Resurrection Sunday'.

Yes, there's nothing at all pagan about the names of the days of the week:laugh:

 

[Harold Garvey]

The pope didn't coin the name, A.F. Easter was a pagan ritual with pagan origins and name (I do belive is derived fron Astarte, but don't go by just my "think"). The Catholic Church incorporated the pagan festival of Easter and overlapped it with the celebration of the resurrection. That way the "new converts", or same pagans paying their dues to Rome... same thing... still did their own thing, but it was now sanctioned by the Church.

I just wish I could remember the sources for the info. This getting older thing really stinks.

I provided a source from Wikipedia that states the referring to "Easter" being directly linked to Eostre is wrong.

here's another reference:http://www.gotquestions.org/easter-origins.html

 

[DHK]

Yes, there's nothing at all pagan about the names of the days of the week:laugh:

Here is the difference. Most people would define Sunday as the first day of the week. It is not a religious festival, but the name of a day of the week, though it may have pagan origins. (My name has pagan origins).

But both Easter and Christmas are religious festivals. Christians do celebrate those days as a religious day in and of itself. They have a holiday on that very occasion because of that day. And yet both days do have a pagan origin. That is the difference.

 

[DHK]

I provided a source from Wikipedia that states the referring to "Easter" being directly linked to Eostre is wrong.

here's another reference:http://www.gotquestions.org/easter-origins.html

So this is what you celebrate Harold??

Question: "What are the origins of Easter?"

Answer: The origins of Easter are rooted in European traditions. The name Easter comes from a pagan figure called Eastre (or Eostre) who was celebrated as the goddess of spring by the Saxons of Northern Europe. A festival called Eastre was held during the spring equinox by these people to honor her. The goddess Eastre’s earthly symbol was the rabbit, which was also known as a symbol of fertility. Originally, there were some very pagan (and sometimes utterly evil) practices that went along with the celebration. Today, Easter is almost a completely commercialized holiday, with all the focus on Easter eggs and the Easter bunny being remnants of the goddess worship.

 

[Harold Garvey]

That is another can of worms; another subject. It also should be discussed in the General Baptist Forum. But for the short answer: "Not me." I won't celebrate the pagan holiday of Christmas either. It has as many pagan roots as Easter does.

Go start one there then, this is a discussion of translation in the Bible Versions and Translations forum.

I will celebrate the birth of Christ with my family, but not Christmas.

Then you will be celebrating the same Chrstmas I will.:smilewinkgrin:

Why are you fixated on pagan celebrations? Christians substituted their own holidays on pagan festivals. In other words they Christianized paganism.

Not as you'd like to view this. Chrisians have REPLACED pagan rituals just as GRACE has replaced the penalty for sin and eternal life replaced being dead in tresspasses and sins.

Would you take all the Islamic holidays today and try and hold the nearest possible Christian festival to it--making a holiday out of it.

Everything Islamic will be REPLACED when Jesus rules the nations with a rod of iron.:godisgood:

For example: Eid Al-Aha. The Festival of Sacrifice, lasting about three days, occurring 70 days after Ramadan, the month of fasting. It is then that they also sacrifice a goat in memory of Abraham's sacrifice of "Ishmael."
--So on that day we should sacrifice a ram to honor Abraham's sacrifice of "Isaac," what Abraham really did. We need to correct the wrong. We need to have a Christian sacrifice in place of this pagan festival in honor of Abraham but only correct a few things. Christianize the pagan festival. Let's do it! Update the holidays to make them relevant to today's religions.
You can be the first one to initiate it Harold.

Um, why would you say we should honor Abraham the same way we honor Jesus?

Don't we already recognize what Jesus did in the place of sacrificing a lamb of one year?

I do.:godisgood:

 

[Harold Garvey]

Words evolve in meaning, sometimes slowly over time, and sometimes virtually overnight.

Easter, to me, is simply the designation of the resurrection of Christ, regardless of the meaning some 200+/- years ago.

Now if you prefer to ignore the evolution of word meanings, a question:

Would you consider it a compliment to be labeled G@Y today, because of the dictionary definition of G@Y from 75 years ago??:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:??

Depends on the context huh?

 

[Harold Garvey]

:laugh:

Yes, there's nothing at all pagan about the names of the days of the week:laugh:

Good one!:thumbsup:

 

[Harold Garvey]

Here is the difference. Most people would define Sunday as the first day of the week. It is not a religious festival, but the name of a day of the week, though it may have pagan origins. (My name has pagan origins).

But both Easter and Christmas are religious festivals. Christians do celebrate those days as a religious day in and of itself. They have a holiday on that very occasion because of that day. And yet both days do have a pagan origin. That is the difference.

Yet you are giving more credence to the negative aspect rather than give due reverence to the actuality of how true Christians worship on these two days.

That is simply WRONG.

 

[Harold Garvey]

So this is what you celebrate Harold??

You would like to think so in your efforts to subjugate anything I say to fit your ideas.

I gave the reference to where that site says the term comes from.

I will celebrate Easter, Christmas and any other day as a day unto the Lord with worship of the Only Wise God. care to object?

The purpose of this thread was to expose the hypocrisy when those who demand the KJV to be archaic and then turn around and demand we stick with antiquated meanings, y'know, just like YOU have.