Do Sabbath-keepers celebrate Easter?

That is an excellent question, and I am going to post another site where you can go and ask someone who knows.

http://www.abundantrest.org/

This is run by a SDA minister, but he gives some answers you don't always expect. You see, he READS the bible and lets God tell him the answer.

When you get to the site, click on Fellowship Forem, then post your question.

Tam,

 

Basically, it depends on the group. Sabbatarianism is a progressive movement, in that different groups arise taking it to the next level. The SDA's emphasized the weekly Sabbath against Sunday, which was regarded as "pagan". Yet, they still accepted the Friday crucufixion/Sunday resurrection, so the annual Easter Sunday was acceptable to them. Christmas also, many accept.
Out of them came the Church of God 7th day movement, which rejected the traditional crucifixion/resurrection days in favor of a more literal "three days and three nights" Wednesday crucifixion/End of Sabbath Resurrection. To be consistent, if they were going to condemn the "pagan" Sunday and keep the OT Sabbath, then we should also condemn the "pagan" Easter in favor of the Nisan 14th Passover seder (annual communion); as well as Christmas and the other more overtly pagan derived holidays. Armstrong came out of them, and added the rest of the annual feasts. They did still accept the more religiously sterile Thanksgiving, but then more radical groups (such as the House of Yahweh) said even that was pagan (the Amerindian "Harvest Home" festival).

So it all depends on what level of OT lawkeeping the group is on.

 

We don't. In all my time at an SDA Church, not once did I see any thing done for Easter.

What I believe about modern Easter can best be explained in an article I read, that you can find here:

Easter's Origins

Keeping Sunday doesn't really play a part in the Sabbatarian keeping Easter.

Read that article, and tell me what you think!

God Bless,
Kelly

 

From the website posted by Kelly:

"During the third and fourth centuries A.D.. Roman christian missionaries traveled through the pagan countryside converting pagans to the new popular christianity. At every chance they would transform pagan traditions and customs into christian customs simply by giving it a christian name."

Sentences like the bolded on reek of lack of true scholarship. Considering this article doesn't really source anything except Scripture verses, and you'd never find a source that verifies the bolded portion ("at every chance," "simply by giving it a christian name," etc). By the way, this statement makes no sense in light of the fact that this article says that the Christian celebration uses a PAGAN name. Which is it?

 

I suppose I am one of the "others."

No, I (we) don't celebrate Easter. We do commemorate our Lord's death and resurrection on Passover, however, as well as on Yom Kippur ("yome kee-poor"). On Passover (Pesach -- "pay-sokk"), we have a complete dinner, called a seder ("say-der") which includes what Christians commonly call communion. Yom Kippur is a prayer and fasting day which we take a month to prepare for, by deeply considering our life's actions/inactions and taking care of any problems before the day comes. It is a solemn day.

 

The Pagan name of Easter is 'Ishtar'.

Easter is the Christianized name!

Sorry you don't like my sources, would you like to substantiate your claim that they are false by showing us sources that are contrary to what I have shown?

Perhaps the CC has a site that explains what 'really happened'.

 

Kelly,

I hope you are not serious in thinking that that is how this works. It is not my job to find official sources that go into detail about what did not happen in history. I mean, my big book of "stuff that never happened" can only discuss a few of the infinite things that did not happen, after all.

Your source claims something DID happen. Thus, there must be substantial evidence to back it up. There is not even one single source named (nor an author, at least on that page). Thus, THEIR scholarship is suspect, and it is not my job to refute them when they don't even back their statement up.

If they did, Kelly, it would certainly use sources (ever read an encyclical? Almost every sentence has a footnote.) and would not make such statements as "ever time" or "at every chance" or "everyone" or "all of them, etc. It's called generalization, and it's a poor substitute to factual information.

 

How convenient that would be for you, but after all, that would be impossible for you to prove that it didn't happen, considering that it DID.

But after all, it wasn't for arguments sake, check the first post, it was targeting Sabbath keepers (me not you) and our OPINION.

The whole website is by the same man, a Pastor. He does say what his source is, on the main page of 'Paganism in the church'. That link is a sermon in a series. Sheesh, it only took me 2 minutes to find that stuff!

But it is your job to actually look at the site before you start accusing people of lying.

That's nice. This website is a group of sermons that were actually preached. The first page references that he uses many different books to gain his information. I would even go as far as to say that if you REALLY cared to know where each and every bit came from he would be happy to tell you. He has a link to his email for 'questions and comments'. There is also a yahoo group discussion from the home page.

Actually, saying 'at every chance' can mean a multiple of things. Every chance I get, I hug my husband. Does that mean I am hugging him 24/7? NO! I only see him twice a day for about 20 minutes! Everytime I talk to my sister I tell her I love her. Does that mean I am telling her I love her the whole time I'm talking to her? Your argument is bunk.

Find a new angle.

The Church in Rome joined Pagan Rome to Christian Rome.

History, secular and Christian, attests to this.

Easter is just another example of the combining of the two.

It doesn't seem to bother you that Christmas was orignally pagan, and the sacredness of the sun day, so why should this bother you?

-Kelly

 

Good point. It didn't seem to bother Paul, either, since he tells us not to let anyone judge us by such things as days we choose to commemorate.

 

Good point. It didn't seem to bother Paul, either, since he tells us not to let anyone judge us by such things as days we choose to commemorate. </font>[/QUOTE]Really?

Paul who?

 

Colossians 2:16 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. 18 Let no one cheat you of your reward, taking delight in false humility and worship of angels, intruding into those things which he has not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, 19 and not holding fast to the Head, from whom all the body, nourished and knit together by joints and ligaments, grows with the increase that is from God. 20 Therefore, if you died with Christ from the basic principles of the world, why, as though living in the world, do you subject yourselves to regulations-- 21 "Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle," 22 which all concern things which perish with the using--according to the commandments and doctrines of men? 23 These things indeed have an appearance of wisdom in self-imposed religion, false humility, and neglect of the body, but are of no value against the indulgence of the flesh.

 

Debbie, Diane, and John,

So then I guess we can all take your own advice and not judge those of us who choose NOT to celebrate pagan holidays, nor keep pagan days of worship, and choose to keep the true Sabbath of God, and the REAL resurrection day?

Glad to know we are on the same page.

God Bless,
Kelly

 

A Christian is not to be judged by his/her keeping of such days, nor is he to be judged by the NOT keeping of such days. There's no biblical requirement to keep the sabbath on Saturday, Sunday, or Tuesday, for that matter. There's no biblical requirement to commemorate days like Christmas, Easter, etc. Likewise, there's no biblical ban on keeping of such days as well. There is, however, a biblical command to rest one day in seven, but how, where, and when one does that is determined by the individual.

 

Good.

Exodus 20:8-11, Genesis 2:1-3

Good.

Deuteronomy 12:29-32

The Biblical Commandment to rest DOES NOT say to rest 'one' day out of seven. It is specific.

SO either ignore the whole thing, or take it for how it is written.

Please don't rewrite it to suit your 'individual' determinations.

God Bless,
Kelly

 

Not at all.

I don't feel bound in any way. I find it a joy to keep the Sabbath, and look forward to it each week!

There are two ways of looking at everything.

Some men see marriage as a 'ball and chain' of bondage, being bound by the 'law' to stay faithful to their wives.

Other men see it as an expression of their love and admiration for their wives to stay faithful.

In a very similar way I am in a 'marriage' with my Heavenly Father, through His Son, Jesus Christ.

I am faithful to Him because I love Him, the same way that I am faithful to my husband because I love him.

Not because I am bound.

God Bless,
Kelly

 

Kelly,

You seem to misunderstand what I mean by "source." I have no doubt that someone wrote this, and he can use it in whatever means he wants to. I care not that this is a sermon. I care about verifying what he states matter-of-factly. That means, providing an authentic scholarly work of history that testifies that what I bolded from his sermon is in fact true. All you have done is to state that the whole work is a sermon (which is not what I asked for, but a source to verify INFORMATION CONTAINED WITHIN) and to simply state "Oh, but it is true!"

If you can't understand it, I don't see the point in discussing it further. I'm interested in historical fact here, not the words of a pastor ABOUT historical facts that he cares to not back up.