# Easter...?



## StrictBaptist (Apr 23, 2011)

Is Easter a true christian holiday? My pastor says no. The KJV translates "pascha" once as Easter when Herod mentions he is going to hold an apostle, and kill him on "Easter". However if you follow the days and such, he says you can see that the Easter mentioned then was not the same Easter we celebrate, but was instead and always has been a pagan holiday..

Has anyone studied this? Can you point me out to any places to show otherwise?

Thanks this has been bothering me. My church celebrates passover and resurrection day insteas of easter...

Thanks

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk


----------



## Zenas (Apr 23, 2011)

No. It is not a Christian holiday. It's syncretism.


----------



## INsearch (Apr 23, 2011)

A man made "holiday" for the observance of the Resurrection of Christ. Pagan? nope, is it wrong? I wouldn't think so.


----------



## StrictBaptist (Apr 23, 2011)

INsearch said:


> A man made "holiday" for the observance of the Resurrection of Christ. Pagan? nope, is it wrong? I wouldn't think so.


 
I guess u didn't read my op? I said it was a pagan holiday around during time of Christ,not a man made one to observe the resurrection..
That it has been around for a long time and was origionaqlly a pagan holiday celebrated by the greeks and people like King Herod.

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk


----------



## torstar (Apr 23, 2011)

INsearch said:


> A man made "holiday" for the observance of the Resurrection of Christ. Pagan? nope, is it wrong? I wouldn't think so.


 
Yup.

So what do people do who hate Easter and Christmas during those times of the year?


----------



## INsearch (Apr 23, 2011)

StrictBaptist said:


> I guess u didn't read my op? I said it was a pagan holiday around during time of Christ,not a man made one to observe the resurrection..
> That it has been around for a long time and was origionaqlly a pagan holiday celebrated by the greeks and people like King Herod.



who cares? do you worship the fertility god now or something? If you use the "holiday" as a day of rememberance and worship of our Lord, then there is nothing wrong, and to say there is, just because way back in the day, this day was used for pagan means...then...i don't know what to say..thats just silly.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Apr 23, 2011)

torstar said:


> INsearch said:
> 
> 
> > A man made "holiday" for the observance of the Resurrection of Christ. Pagan? nope, is it wrong? I wouldn't think so.
> ...


 

I don't "hate" Easter and Christmas, but what do we do during those times? The same thing we do any other time of the year. Follow the Lord's command to gather together and set aside one day in seven for the Worship of God relying on the Ordinary Means of Grace as fully sufficient for Worship.


----------



## steadfast7 (Apr 23, 2011)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> torstar said:
> 
> 
> > INsearch said:
> ...


 
so no special mention of the historic resurrection event in sermon, greeting, or song?


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Apr 23, 2011)

Well I cannot speak for everyone but the historic resurrection gets a mention in pretty much every 52 Lord's Day services in sermon, prayer, greeting, and/or song.


----------



## Jack K (Apr 23, 2011)

We should judge Easter by what it is now, not by something that might have been connected to it thousands of years ago.

For example, imagine if I told you I reject the Democratic Party because the first Democrat president, Jefferson, was a deist. You'd say that's a poor reason. There may indeed be many good reasons to reject the Democratic Party and maybe some lingering influence of Jefferson is among those reasons, but we should base that decision on what the party is today, not what it used to be.


----------



## steadfast7 (Apr 23, 2011)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> Well I cannot speak for everyone but the historic resurrection gets a mention in pretty much every 52 Lord's Day services in sermon, prayer, greeting, and/or song.


 
no _special_ mention of the historic resurrection, eg. "Brothers and Sisters, Christ is risen, _this very day_!" I don't see how I could resist the temptation, and if I were actually trying to _suppress_ the gladness and celebration ...? I dunno if I could do that with good conscience. However, kudos to those who abide by other convictions.


----------



## Herald (Apr 23, 2011)

steadfast7 said:


> so no special mention of the historic resurrection event in sermon, greeting, or song?



I don't believe it is a violation of the RPW to teach or sing about the resurrection of our Lord. Some suggest preachers should avoid the resurrection topic at this time of year as well as Christ's first advent around Christmas time because it may draw attention to the holiday and minimize the solemnity of the Lord's Day. That's pandering to fear In my humble opinion. Where I draw the line is when a church elevates the day as special; more special than the Lord's Day itself.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Romans922 (Apr 23, 2011)

steadfast7 said:


> Backwoods Presbyterian said:
> 
> 
> > Well I cannot speak for everyone but the historic resurrection gets a mention in pretty much every 52 Lord's Day services in sermon, prayer, greeting, and/or song.
> ...


 
The resurrection is celebrated on the Lord's Day every Sunday (when Christ rose). That is why we don't celebrate the Sabbath on Saturday. Suppressing the resurrection may occur actually more with those who celebrate 'easter', they celebrate it once a year, God commands it 52 times a year (every Lord's Day). So tomorrow and every other Lord's Day, we can say Christ is risen, though this very day He did not rise, it was about 2000 years ago. Now He sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Apr 23, 2011)

steadfast7 said:


> Backwoods Presbyterian said:
> 
> 
> > Well I cannot speak for everyone but the historic resurrection gets a mention in pretty much every 52 Lord's Day services in sermon, prayer, greeting, and/or song.
> ...


 
Well he is not risen "_this very day_!" He _has_ arisen and reigns at the right hand of the Father.


----------



## StrictBaptist (Apr 23, 2011)

torstar said:


> INsearch said:
> 
> 
> > A man made "holiday" for the observance of the Resurrection of Christ. Pagan? nope, is it wrong? I wouldn't think so.
> ...


 
Honestly? My family does not celebrate xmass, because it first isn't Christ real birthdate, and second it is a holiday started by the RCC... it is a pagan day to worship the sun god. As for easter, my family celebrate passover and resurrection Sunday.


Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk


----------



## StrictBaptist (Apr 23, 2011)

Also I don't hate xmas or easter, but I do hate easter bunnies, santa clause and xmas trees, and all the paganity mixed by many many churches today during these Holidays.....
Honestly a church by me has santa in the church for pictures. Imagination or not. Santa is nothing differant then one of satans many lies told to our kids today... my kids know who Saint Nick was, but also know santa clause is a fake.
Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk


----------



## steadfast7 (Apr 24, 2011)

I can understand and appreciate not celebrating "Easter" Sunday as a full-fledged Christian holiday on account one's adherence to the RPW, but in my opinion, there's something not quite right about refusing _in one's own heart_ to acknowledge the specialness of the historic day that the Resurrection actually happened. It is special, and a cause for rejoicing, in the same way we celebrate birthdays. We don't wake up every morning saying, "Look everyone, I'm alive, therefore that's proof that I was once born!" No, rather, we have a particular birthday that is marked on a calendar and we consider it significant. It is a testimony to our birth, and does not in any way take away from the fact that we are alive today. It is fallacious to say that acknowledging an historic Resurrection sunday and being joyful therein takes away the joy of a regular Sunday. The opposite is true. it is the historic day that brings life and meaning to every other Lord's Day. It puzzles me why the historic Sunday is seen as an enemy to all other Sundays. Are we not an historic faith, founded upon historic events?

---------- Post added at 05:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:27 PM ----------




> As for easter, my family celebrate passover and resurrection Sunday.


 Ryan, this is interesting. How does your family celebrate Passover?


----------



## Curt (Apr 24, 2011)

The significance of every Lord's Day needs to be emphasized. There is too much of a casual attitude, even among reformed Christians, regarding the beauty and wealth of this gift of God.


----------



## StrictBaptist (Apr 24, 2011)

[/COLOR]


> As for easter, my family celebrate passover and resurrection Sunday.


 Ryan, this is interesting. How does your family celebrate Passover?[/QUOTE]

We celecrate is close to how the messianic jews do. I am almost to church so I will explain when I get home.

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk


----------



## Rufus (Apr 24, 2011)

> Also I don't hate xmas or easter, but I do hate easter bunnies, santa clause and xmas trees, and all the paganity mixed by many many churches today during these Holidays.....
> Honestly a church by me has santa in the church for pictures. Imagination or not. Santa is nothing differant then one of satans many lies told to our kids today... my kids know who Saint Nick was, but also know santa clause is a fake.
> Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk



When I have children I'm going to tell them the same thing about santa clause. I do like chocolate bunnies though.


----------



## TimV (Apr 24, 2011)

You're letting a sloppy KJV translation influence your theology. Easter is just the English word for Passover, period. Thursday is just the word for 5th day of the week, period. It has no connection to the Norse god Thor. Spanish, French, Dutch, Greek, Russian etc... people don't have that problem since their word for Passover sounds like Passover and ours simply doesn't.



> For Paul had decided to sail past Ephesus, so that he would not have to spend time in Asia; for he was hurrying to be at Jerusalem, if possible, on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 20:16).



After Christ's rising from the dead, Paul thought it good to keep other than the weekly Sabbaths.


----------



## ac7k (Apr 24, 2011)

I think that preaching the resurrection on Easter Sunday is a good thing, especially when the "un-churched" usually attend. It is an opportunity to preach to the lost. It is a tool of evangelism. 

And eating chocolate is good for me any time of the year. 

He is risen!


----------



## StrictBaptist (Apr 24, 2011)

TimV said:


> You're letting a sloppy KJV translation influence your theology. Easter is just the English word for Passover, period. Thursday is just the word for 5th day of the week, period. It has no connection to the Norse god Thor. Spanish, French, Dutch, Greek, Russian etc... people don't have that problem since their word for Passover sounds like Passover and ours simply doesn't.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 

Yep the same word, however if you look at the verse, you will see that the "pascha" mentioned there is a differant day then resurrection day. It was a pagan Holiday celbrated by Herod and his pagan worshipping people.
Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk


----------



## TimV (Apr 24, 2011)

StrictBaptist said:


> It was a pagan Holiday celbrated by Herod and his pagan worshipping people.


Claiming that doesn't make it so.


----------



## Peairtach (Apr 24, 2011)

It's strange how there's this hangover of these two days - Christmas and Easter - from pre-Reformation times in the evangelical and Reformed churches.

It seems to be mainly sentiment and pragmatism that means that even very Reformed men - men of great quality - are so attatched to them.

I suppose such men look upon it as a cultural matter of no great spiritual significance that such days are celebrated in one way or another but have no biblical warrant.

I suppose we should be glad that there's only debate about two "holy days" in the year in the Reformed Church.


----------



## StrictBaptist (Apr 24, 2011)

TimV said:


> StrictBaptist said:
> 
> 
> > It was a pagan Holiday celbrated by Herod and his pagan worshipping people.
> ...


 According to my bible "Easter" as it is shown in the KJV, and "passover" in others, is not the same day of the resurrection, follow the days and you will see. Easter in the KJV is too many days after passover to be the resurection day...


Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Apr 24, 2011)

The #1 argument I usually hear is "it is a good teaching tool".


----------



## Herald (Apr 24, 2011)

steadfast7 said:


> in my opinion, there's something not quite right about refusing in one's own heart to acknowledge the specialness of the historic day that the Resurrection actually happened.



Since that day always falls on a Sunday, is that Sunday (the Lord's Day) more special than the other fifty one throughout the year? That's _really _the question.


----------



## NB3K (Apr 24, 2011)

Easter & Christmas were outlawed by the New England Puritans for a long time! I think it was in the mid-1800's when it was legally allowed by law! I think these two "holidays" are nothing short of Idol worship. Besides the birth & the death of our Lord's human life is something we are to celebrate EVERYDAY! Just like the Sabbath! It's not just one day that belongs to God, but EVERYDAY is HIS.


----------



## INsearch (Apr 24, 2011)

NB3K said:


> nothing short of Idol worship.



Interesting...Idol worship of Christs birth and resurrection.......what? 

Personally our resurrection sunday service was very good. I think it kinda bothers me that so many just want to downplay Easter. Yes, EVERY Lords day should be used to celebrate Christs resurrection ect, but not every Sunday is specifically focused on that is it? I'm not sure how all your churches do it, but every sunday is a different sermon, not every sermon deals specifically with the resurrection. Easter is simply an especially focused day on the resurrection, and I don't see anything wrong with that.


----------



## Herald (Apr 24, 2011)

INsearch said:


> Yes, EVERY Lords day should be used to celebrate Christs resurrection ect, but not every Sunday is specifically focused on that is it?



Joshua, if a church proclaims the gospel faithfully then the resurrection _is _emphasized each and every Lord's Day. All preaching should be Christ-centered preaching. All Christ-centered preaching is rooted in the hope of the resurrection. It doesn't matter whether the topic of the sermon is resurrection related or not; the very fact that Christians gather on the Lord's Day is because of the resurrection.


----------



## steadfast7 (Apr 25, 2011)

Herald said:


> steadfast7 said:
> 
> 
> > in my opinion, there's something not quite right about refusing in one's own heart to acknowledge the specialness of the historic day that the Resurrection actually happened.
> ...



I would say there is a _sense_ in which, yes, it is more special. We do not worship on Sundays because the Lord resurrected over the course of a several Sundays scattered throughout the year, but because he rose on a _particular_ Sunday in history. This naturally makes it stand out to our minds, and to the memory of Christians. It works the same as anniversaries, birthdays, Independence Day. To eliminate the recognition and celebration of these days is to remove the memory from time and space and focus only on the ethereal. almost 'docetic' (?)

---------- Post added at 11:24 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:17 AM ----------

as an addendum, this doesn't mean that a service need be totally transformed such that it violates the conscience, but a recognition during the service and a hearty greeting among the brethren. Does this violate the RPW?


----------



## Herald (Apr 25, 2011)

steadfast7 said:


> I would say there is a sense in which, yes, it is more special.



Dennis, it either is or it isn't more special. It's not in a sense more special. If you believe it's more special where do you find scriptural warrant?


----------



## steadfast7 (Apr 25, 2011)

Herald said:


> steadfast7 said:
> 
> 
> > I would say there is a sense in which, yes, it is more special.
> ...


 
There is none for Easter, per se. One might be able to cite the examples of feasts days in the Old Testament that God commanded Israel to observe. These were very specific days. The principle here is that it is a memorial to special events that happened in history. It seemed important to God that the people take special note of history and remind themselves of their place within it. This was an apologetic against the myths and fables that abounded in the surrounding cultures. There are many things done in a worship service with no scriptural warrant, but done according to general revelation? the order of worship, for example. In the same way, I don't think the RPW was meant to keep us from being human. It is natural to commemorate days of special significance, and this is found in all cultures, suggesting that it's in-built in us.


----------



## SolaGratia (Apr 25, 2011)

This from www.scionofzion.com/kjv_1611_yahoo.htm:


Acts 12:4
(KJV) And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.
(1611 KJV) And when hee had apprehended him, hee put him in prison, and deliuered him to foure quaternions of souldiers to keepe him, intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.
(1568 Bishops Bible) And when he had caught hym, he put hym in pryson also, and delyuered hym to foure quaternions of souldiers to be kept, intendyng after Easter to bryng hym foorth to the people.
(1535 Matthews) And when he had caught him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to be kept, intending after ester to bring him forth to the people.
(1526 Tyndale) And when he had caught him he put him in preson and delyvered him to .iiii. quaternios of soudiers to be kepte entendynge after ester to brynge him forth to the peopl



(1881 RV) And when he had taken him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to guard him; intending after the Passover to bring him forth to the people.
(1901 ASV) And when he had taken him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to guard him; intending after the Passover to bring him forth to the people.
(2011 NIV) After arresting him, he put him in prison, handing him over to be guarded by four squads of four soldiers each. Herod intended to bring him out for public trial after the Passover.
(NASV) When he had seized him, he put him in prison, delivering him to four squads of soldiers to guard him, intending after the Passover to bring him out before the people.
(THE MESSAGE) and had him thrown in jail, putting four squads of four soldiers each to guard him. He was planning a public lynching after Passover.
(AMP) And when he had seized [Peter], he put him in prison and delivered him to four squads of soldiers of four each to guard him, purposing after the Passover to bring him forth to the people.
(NLT) Then he imprisoned him, placing him under the guard of four squads of four soldiers each. Herod intended to bring Peter out for public trial after the Passover.
(ESV) And when he had seized him, he put him in prison, delivering him over to four squads of soldiers to guard him, intending after the Passover to bring him out to the people.
(NKJV) So when he had arrested him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four squads of soldiers to keep him, intending to bring him before the people after Passover.
(NCV) After Herod arrested Peter, he put him in jail and handed him over to be guarded by sixteen soldiers. Herod planned to bring Peter before the people for trial after the Passover Feast.
(CEB) He put Peter in prison, handing him over to four squads of soldiers, sixteen in all, who guarded him. He planned to charge him publicly after the Passover.
(HCSB) After the arrest, he put him in prison and assigned four squads of four soldiers each to guard him, intending to bring him out to the people after the Passover.
(NIRV) After Herod arrested Peter, he put him in prison. Peter was placed under guard. He was watched by four groups of four soldiers each. Herod planned to put Peter on public trial. It would take place after the Passover Feast.
(RSV) And when he had seized him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four squads of soldiers to guard him, intending after the Passover to bring him out to the people.
(NAB-Roman Catholic) He had him taken into custody and put in prison under the guard of four squads of four soldiers each. He intended to bring him before the people after Passover.
(NWT-Jehovah’s Witnesses) And laying hold of him, he put him in prison, turning him over to four shifts of four soldiers each to guard him, as he intended to produce him for the people after the passover.

Textus Receptus - Traditional Text
ον και πιασας εθετο εις φυλακην παραδους τεσσαρσιν τετραδιοις στρατιωτων φυλασσειν αυτον βουλομενος μετα το πασχα αναγαγειν αυτον τω λαω

Hort-Westcott - Critical Text
ον και πιασας εθετο εις φυλακην παραδους τεσσαρσιν τετραδιοις στρατιωτων φυλασσειν αυτον βουλομενος μετα το πασχα αναγαγειν αυτον τω λαω

One of the accusations which is leveled at the King James Bible is the translation of the word “pascha” as “Easter.” The word “pascha” is not a Greek word but is from the Aramaic “pascha.” The Herod in view here was Herod Antipas who was a son of Herod the Great and who was grandson of Antipater I who was Idumaean which was Edomite. This means that Herod Antipas was not a Jew but an Edomite. The Edomites were descendants of Esau.

(Gen 25:30 KJV) And Esau said to Jacob, Feed me, I pray thee, with that same red pottage; for I am faint: therefore was his name called Edom.

(Gen 36:1 KJV) Now these are the generations of Esau, who is Edom.

Therefore the Herod Dynasty was not in the line of Jacob. It was the king of Edom who did not allow Israel to pass through their land when they came out of the Land of Egypt. (Num 20:21 KJV) Thus Edom refused to give Israel passage through his border: wherefore Israel turned away from him.

Archaeology has dug up many clay figures in the area known as Edom. The main gods of the Edomites were the fertility gods of the region. According to Assyrian secular records, it is known that Edom had one national god named “Qos,” however they were hardly monotheistic in that they had other gods. (2 Chr 25:14 KJV) Now it came to pass, after that Amaziah was come from the slaughter of the Edomites, that he brought the gods of the children of Seir, and set them up to be his gods, and bowed down himself before them, and burned incense unto them. If you notice this verse speaks about gods in the plural. There was also evidence of Baal worship. The Bible does not mention any specific gods which the Edomites worshipped. In fact, in the early years they had worshipped Jehovah but after they refused passage to Israel, they started to descend into idolatry. Since they had taken up the local gods of the area, Astarte, would have been one of the gods of the area. Normally wherever Baal was Astarte was also found. Astarte was a deity of fertility. Astarte was known as Aphrodite to the Greeks. Astarate was also known as “Ishtar” which was the goddess of fertility.

These false gods can be found in basically all of these ancient pagan civilizations. So the region of Edom, which was south of Israel, would not have been a stranger to them. These false gods even crept into both Israel and Judah. (Jer 7:18 KJV) The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger. The queen of Heaven was also known as Ishtar the fertility goddess. In our day, we are seeing a resurgence of goddess worship.

Now back to Herod’s declaration about Peter. Herod was going to wait until after Easter to bring Peter out to the people and no doubt they would have pronounced the same sentence as the Lord Jesus Christ received. Now, there seems to be a difficulty because the word “pascha” should be translated “Passover.” Correct? Absolutely not. We owe a great debt to William Tyndale who translated this verse correctly.

(1526 Tyndale) And when he had caught him he put him in preson and delyvered him to .iiii. quaternios of soudiers to be kepte entendynge after ester to brynge him forth to the people.

The reason that Tyndale had translated “pascha” as Easter in this verse was a question of timing.


(Num 28:16-17 KJV) And in the fourteenth day of the first month is the passover of the LORD. {17} And in the fifteenth day of this month is the feast: seven days shall unleavened bread be eaten.

(Mark 14:12 KJV) And the first day of unleavened bread, when they killed the passover, his disciples said unto him, Where wilt thou that we go and prepare that thou mayest eat the passover?

As we can see that the Passover came first and was followed by the Feast of Unleavened Bread. So if we look at Acts 12:3, we see a very important phrase.

(Acts 12:3 KJV) And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.)

Notice very carefully what it says in the last phrase. It states that these were the days of Unleavened Bread. The Passover was already complete. So therefore, in verse four, it would not make sense if Herod was going to bring Peter out after Passover when the Passover was already over but Peter was still in prison. Since the days of unleavened bread was a feast lasting seven days, we are not told what day this was. It could have been day 6 where Peter was still in prison.

Now enter the word “Easter.” Immediately Christians think of the day the Lord Jesus Christ rose from the dead. However, the word “Easter” is a very pagan name. It is derived from “Eostra” which is a pagan festival of Spring. The Bible nowhere commands Christians to celebrate the resurrection or birth of Christ. So when Christianity was turned into a religion by the third century, these pagan holidays were incorporated in the church calendar year but with Christian meanings. For example, Christmas was really the feast of Saturnalia but the church wanted to cover this pagan festival and therefore instituted Christmas as Christ’s birth being on December 25.


Herod being an Edomite and a pagan would not care the least about what festival was taking place. After all, they crucified the Lord Jesus Christ on the preparation day for the High Sabbath and Passover. Why would a pagan king concern himself with the holidays of the Jews? He could have had Peter executed any time he wanted to and during any holiday in the Jewish calendar.

Since Herod was a pagan, he would have been celebrating a feast of Ishtar, the fertility god. This was his “Easter” as he would have been too busy celebrating Ishtar under the name Easter, that he would wait until after his pagan festival was over and then he would get back to his duties and have Peter executed. Easter was a pagan spring festival which occurred simultaneously with Passover and therefore “Easter” is the proper word for Acts 12:4 and not Passover. So the “Easter” in Acts 12:4 is not the Christian “Easter” but it is the pagan Easter.

KJV 1611 Yahoo Group Posts


----------



## StrictBaptist (Apr 25, 2011)

I couldn't have said it better myself!




SolaGratia said:


> This from www.scionofzion.com/kjv_1611_yahoo.htm:
> 
> 
> Acts 12:4
> ...


 


Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk


----------



## Tripel (Apr 25, 2011)

A repeated argument I hear from the anti-Easters is "But we celebrate Christ's resurrection EVERY Lord's Day". 

Yes, I know. So do we. 

Just because I celebrate Easter does not mean I treasure the other 51 Lord's Days in the year less than anyone else. It's a weak argument.

I celebrate Easter, but no, I don't believe it is a "Holy Day" or a day more special in God's sight. However, I do appreciate that my church makes certain to have the resurrection specifically at the forefront of our worship service on this day. It shows itself in our hymns, Scripture readings, and sermon. 

I realize this bothers many of you, but tough. Scripture and the RPW does not forbid us to focus on a specific theme on a specific Lord's Day, nor does it forbid us from using something culturally relevant to direct us towards that specific theme. The same goes for Christmas.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Apr 25, 2011)

This is the Puritan Board; be respectful of the doctrinal standards governing it. This includes the historical-confessional position against holy days. If you find that bothers you; tough.
For those wishing to answer some of the challenges on this thread to the confessional Presbyterian position on holy days, do so on a different or new thread as this has strayed off the opening post. That said, I believe this thread is done.


----------

