CONCERNING EASTER IN ACTS 12:4 by George L. Faull

http://steve-finnell.blogspot.com/2017/02/concerning-easter-in-acts-124-by-george.html
 

 CONCERNING EASTER IN ACTS 12:4   by George L. Faull

One of the teachers in Sunday School was defending the "Easter celebration" our church hosts each year. She said that those who object to the word "Easter" are misguided souls, since the word "Easter is even used in:
Acts 12:4, "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."
I heard you speak at a rally that I had attended one time and you told that it was a shame to refer to Jesus’ resurrection by this name. Was this woman’s defense a legitimate defense of the practice of calling Jesus’ resurrection, "Easter?"
Answer:
This woman is a good example of why the Word of God says, "Be not many teachers, knowing they shall receive the greater condemnation." It is pathetic that one who presumes to be a teacher of the Word would be so careless a student. In fact, I have a hard time believing that she studies at all.
First: I cannot imagine a commentary of any kind not showing the fallacy of translating the word as "Easter" in Acts 12:4.
Second: The word is "pascha," and appears 29 times and is translated "Passover" every time but this one verse. The King James Version’s use of the word "Easter" is indefensible from every stand point.
Third: The context alone shows that Herod was wanting to hold Peter till after the Passover. These were the days of unleavened bread (verse 3). In other words, it was Passover week, and he was going to kill Peter as he had John. If he intended to do that at the end of Passover week, then Sunday (which would supposedly be Easter) would be the day he would do it.
Fourth: Your teacher could do well to study Church History. "Easter" began to be celebrated years later than the first century. I just looked up the origin of "Easter" on the internet (not that I didn’t already know it). The first article I looked at said, "Easter, like Christmas, is a blend of paganism and Christianity." The second sentence informs us that it is named after an Anglo Saxon goddess. The third paragraph tells us how it is that it falls on the first Sunday after the Spring equinox. This is a moveable date between March 22nd and April 25^th. It has been calculated in this way since 325 A.D. A little late for Herod to execute Peter to please the Jews, don’t you think? Of course, since it is on a moveable date, many years Easter has been and is celebrated before Passover. So people celebrate His resurrection that year before the commemoration of His death. Why? Easter was a moon goddess and a goddess of fornication. Can you imagine that? They dated the celebration of the resurrection of God’s Son based on the celebration of a pagan moon goddess!!!
I suggest that the reader go to http://wilstar.com/holidays/easter.htm for a pro Easter explanation of Easter's origin.
Conclusion:
I guess I am saying that your teacher should do a little more studying. She is wrong from context, linguistically, and historically, as any good commentary will show. I must add one more thing. Some teachers know the truth, but bluff and actually defend an undefendable position because they want it their own way. There is the possibility that your teacher knows what I just told you, but intentionally deceives people. There is the possibility that she just simply showed that the word "Easter" is in the King James Version and then let people deduct that it is quite alright to join paganism to Christianity. "See, the word ‘Easter’ is in the Bible." Let’s hope the lady you are dealing with is only ignorant and not deceitful. I wish to be gracious, but it seems to me that she has to be one or the other.

Thanks for writing.