If you speak English, what would be your English name for the Christian festival which is called Pascoa in modern Portugal?
Also called Pasqua in modern Italy.
Also called Pâques in modern France?
Why is the same festival called 'Easter' in modern English?
The festival in England at this time of year is the same festival as above, but with the name changed in English to 'Easter.' Yes, only in the English-speaking world.
But English people have also used the word 'Passion' for it. (You may have heard of the film 'The Passion of the Christ' which is relevant.) 'The Passion' comes from the Latin word for "suffer", rather than the word Passover. I'm getting ahead of myself now...
The addition of the later word 'Easter' may seem strange. Call the festival by one of its continental names instead if it helps, e.g. Pasqua !
How did we get here?
Christians have had such a festival, a 'Pascoa' (in whatever language you will) from very early times.
Polycarp, the disciple of John, celebrated it, according to Irenaeus (the disciple of Polycarp). Irenaeus wrote this about 180AD.
Melitus, his contemporary, said it was celebrated when Servilius Paulus was proconsul of Asia.
Theophilus and Polycrates also wrote about it in the second century.
It's connected with Passover.
Passover
Passover, as you should know, was (and is) a way of celebrating the Jewish Exodus story.
Jesus' work (his cross and resurrection) is the beginning of a new Exodus story, and of course it's a story that happened at about Passover time.
Jesus' Passover work is what the church is celebrating each year, in continuity with the church's Jewish origins. (This can be seen from Melito's sermon on the festival.)
The matching of the annual Passover celebration with Christ's sufferings goes back a long way, back to the scriptures. 1 Corinthians 5:7 reads "Christ our Passover has been sacrificed". There was no doubt then as to whom Christians were celebrating every year around Passover time. This wording is from Paul's exhortation to the Corinthians to keep the Passover Festival in a Christian way.
Ye Olde English
In the English of the period when the KJV translation was written, they could have referred to the event as "the Passion" or "Easter" as both were used of the calendar event. Hence public performances of "the Easter mysteries" are also called "the Passion plays". The KJV could as easily have written "the Passion" as "Easter".
The Passion encompasses the interpretation of the Passover through the suffering and death of Christ.
Continuity
The church explicitly remains in continuity with its Jewish origins at that time of year. For example, the Anglican liturgy for so-called 'Easter' makes repeated reference to Passover/Paschal/Passion.
This is what Christians are celebrating at that time of year: "Christ our passover lamb has been sacrificed for us." (You can see the liturgy online.)
And if you want more of the Passover in your festival, then why not go to one of the celebrations being run at that time of the year by the organisation Jews for Jesus.
KJV versus NKJV
Let's come to the question of why the Greek word "Pascha" (Passover) was translated as "Easter" in the KJV translation.
The Greek wording of Acts 12:4 is 'meta to pascha'. The KJV renders it in two words: "after Easter". But it means 'after the passover'!
The risk in using the word 'Easter' is that the connection with passover is overlooked. So the New King James Version dropped 'Easter'.
Which do you think is more accurate - "Easter" or "the passover"?
I think "Easter" is inadvisable.
In Acts 12:4 Herod is the agent, and he would have had only the Jewish Passover in mind, without the Christian understanding of it. What matters is the meaning of the word.
Using "Easter" gives the wrong impression that Herod had in mind the Passover as interpreted through the death of Christ. That is why it is inaccurate. As a rendering of "to pascha", it is out of place.
But on what date?
In my view, the date for the celebration is secondary, and not a matter which ought to result in any real division between Christians. St Paul advised us not to judge one another about days - some days are more special to one and not to another. (Man looks on the outward appearances. However God looks on the heart.)
Concern for the date goes back to the Passover regulations Exodus chapter 12. But if this were vital, would you eat unleavened bread for a week in accordance with the Passover instructions in Exodus 12? Fair play to you if you do.
If someone wants to adhere to a particular calendar as one of your church's distinctives, that's fine by me. But it should not be an occasion for anyone to judge Christians who are not attached to that. There's enough division in the world without seeking to add to it.
Should one avoid a word suspected of being pagan?
Some people get hot under the collar about the origins of the word Easter. This sort of thing can get a bit silly.
Do we avoid use of written scriptures in religion practices because pagans used writings first (Sumerian Cuneiform)?
Do we spend the whole of the month of March avoiding mention of 'March' for fear of honouring the pagan god Mars? (March is named after Mars.)
Do we avoid using the word 'Wednesday' for fear of honouring the pagan god Woden? (Wednesday is named after Woden.)
The word Easter is a later accretion, a Johnny-come-lately attachment to the festival. There are other later accretions (bunnies, eggs) to the festival, but none of these are pagan and are not a big deal. Tim O'Neill answers questions about Easter and pagan beliefs in an excellent post here: Easter, Ishtar and Eostre (historyforatheists.com)
Nothing to do with chocolate either
By the way, "Easter" was not used by the KJV translators in order to please chocolate eaters! Chocolate arrived in England in the 1650s, not fifty years earlier!
But next 'Easter', feel free to say Happy Pascha! And you will be in the spirit of the thing, even if you baffle people!
Could you respond to this he claims origin reads his ex of Jesus into the text and misreads Josephus and actually reads he Justice into the text I’ll quote it here hedgesipus with Josephus please here’s his full argument I’ll quote it here We get a bunch of boners here. Hegesippus predates Clement of Alexandria. So that Clement used a phrase Hegesippus invented is not an argument against Hegesippus inventing it. And the Gospel of Thomas is not quoted or cited by any author before the 3rd century, so we cannot in fact establish the text we have of it dates earlier—and remember, just because our Medieval Coptic copy says certain things, does not mean those things were in the text of it centuries earlier; in fact we know they often weren’t: early Greek papyrus fragments show significant differences from the Coptic text Green is referring to. Scholars do imagine the original could date anywhere from 100 to 200 A.D. But that it was written in the 2nd century and that that is what it then said are both speculations based on no evidence.
ReplyDeleteIn On the Historicity of Jesus (pp. 326-31) I suggest Hegesippus is actually quoting or adapting this story from a lost Acts of James, which could well date earlier that century. But I don’t bother with that speculation in the article Green is addressing. Because I don’t actually claim Hegesippus invented the appellation in that article; I only suggest it looks like this story originated it (hence the “as if” Hegesippus did). And I list evidence in support of that conclusion: the designation is derived in this narrative from the claim that Isaiah predicted the events in this story; and James is merely called “just” many times before one of his murderers sticks the term to his name ironically near the end of the tale—in other words, he is not introduced as “James the Just”; he is depicted as getting the name from this story.