Why do we do things not written in the Bible?

Bro.T said:

I need to see some resource on that, please.

Click to expand...

This is the Ordo of the Roman liturgical calendar for 2026; the date we call Easter in English is in bold, notice how it is called “Dominica Resurrectionis” meaning “the Lord’s Day of Resurrection” following Sabato Sancto (the Holy Sabbath, when our Lord reposed in the tomb) and how the days of the week are referred to in the octave (eight days including Pascha) - this being an example of what I would assume is your least favorite Church not using the word Easter at all with regards to the Resurrection. I can supply more, from Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox liturgical calendars, although past a certain point I would argue it becomes …. redundant, since really only a few languages refer to the Pascha using a word like English (if I remember correctly, its English, German and the Nordic languages).

Dies de Tempore Sanctorum Vespera d.h.
1 Feria Quarta Majoris Hebdomadæ Feria privilegiata Vespera de Tempore occurente F.IV
2 Feria Quinta in Coena Domini Feria privilegiata *I* Vespera de Tempore occurente F.V
3 Feria Sexta in Parasceve Feria privilegiata Vespera de Tempore occurente F.VI
4 Sabbato Sancto Feria privilegiata Vespera de sequenti. Sabb.
5 Dominica Resurrectionis Duplex I. classis Vespera de Tempore occurente Dom.
6 Die II infra octavam Paschae Duplex I. classis Vespera de Tempore occurente F.II
7 Die III infra octavam Paschae Duplex I. classis Vespera de Tempore occurente F.III
8 Die IV infra octavam Paschae Semiduplex Vespera de Tempore occurente F.IV
9 Die V infra octavam Paschae Semiduplex Vespera de Tempore occurente F.V
10 Die VI infra octavam Paschæ Semiduplex Vespera de Officio occurente, Commemoratio Sanctorum crastinorum tantum F.VI

Bro.T said:

You would have to show me some scriptures and verses on that, please. Until then let's focus on staying away from paganism.

Click to expand...

The subject of this thread doesn’t say anything about Paganism but rather asks “Why do we do things not in the Bible?” The implication being among other things that anything not described in the Bible is Pagan, but such an argument from silence is fallacious.

Bro.T said:

Let me just ask you a question why does it bother you so much that you cannot observe the Passover as it's written in the word of God? Why do u have to be press on using Easter to you and you know that Easter carry a pagan religion behind it. You God don't deal with Man's tradition. Didn't Paul say in Colossians 2: 8 B eware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. 9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

Click to expand...

If one of my Jewish friends invited me to celebrate Passover with them, I would be honored, and I would accept the invitation.

But I am Christian, and I believe that Jesus Christ was raised from the dead. Celebrating this event weekly and annually is important to me.

I do indeed work to avoid falling prey to vain deceit. As St Paul goes on to say in Colossians 2, "Therefore, do not let anyone condemn you in matters of food or drink or of observing festivals, new moons, or Sabbaths." Very good advice from St Paul.

Bro.T said:

The fact is Jesus was not even born in the winter season. When Jesus was born, "there were shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night." (Luke 2:8). This could never have occurred in Judea in the month of December. The shepherds always brought their flocks from the mountainsides and fields and corralled them no later than October, to protect them from the cold, rainy season that followed.

Click to expand...

That’s an extra-Biblical assumption, which ignores the historic facts of shepherding, which often has required standing outside in inclement weather (google a Shepherd’s Bush some time; its more than just the name of a train station in London).

At any rate Christians in the Holy Land, aware of what the winters are like there, are convinced that the nativity happened in December, which would be irrational if the weather were as inclement as you suggest.

PloverWing said:

If one of my Jewish friends invited me to celebrate Passover with them, I would be honored, and I would accept the invitation.

But I am Christian, and I believe that Jesus Christ was raised from the dead. Celebrating this event weekly and annually is important to me.

I do indeed work to avoid falling prey to vain deceit. As St Paul goes on to say in Colossians 2, "Therefore, do not let anyone condemn you in matters of food or drink or of observing festivals, new moons, or Sabbaths." Very good advice from St Paul.

Click to expand...

Indeed - but yet people contniue to condemn traditional Christians for this in violation of what St. Paul said.

Bro.T said:

Leviticus 23:5 In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is the Lord's Passover.

Note what the book states. The Lord's Passover must be observed on the 14 day of the first month, which is the month of Abib. This month can be set by the new moon in the spring. In the 4th verse it states it must be observed in its season, any other time is wrong. Within the Roman Christian community, the bread and wine is taken every Sunday or every first Sunday. They also have changed the name of the Passover. They call it communion, sacrament or when someone's about to die they call it the last rites. When this is done it is done in vain. It must be taken when the Lord says it must be taken.

Click to expand...

Wait, do you disagree with Communion as well? That's really wild. It's one of the most ancient and universal of Christian practices.

Does your church celebrate Communion at all, or just once a year at Passover, or never? With the exception of the Society of Friends, I don't know any Christian groups that reject Communion (and the Friends' reasoning is quite different from yours). What kind of church do you attend, may I ask? What persuaded you to join them?

Bro.T said:

The fact is Jesus was not even born in the winter season. When Jesus was born, "there were shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night." (Luke 2:8). This could never have occurred in Judea in the month of December.

Click to expand...

It could have. Here's an excerpt from Exposition of the gospel according to Matthew by William Hendrickson, page 182:

In a letter dated January 16, 1967 the New Testament scholar Dr. Harry Mulder of The Netherlands writes (my translation from the Dutch):

“During the brief Christmas vacation my wife and I traveled from Beirut [where he was teaching at the time] to Jerusalem. In this connection I can also answer your question regarding the presence of sheep around Bethlehem in the month of December. On Christmas eve in Shepherd Field a crowd had gathered to sing Christmas carols. We joined this crowd and took part in the singing. Right near us a few flocks of sheep were nestled. Even the lambs were not lacking. It was a moving sight. It is therefore definitely not impossible that the Lord Jesus was born in December. But it is perhaps interesting to mention in this connection that the swarthy Coptic monks whose humble dwellings are located in the heart of the older city celebrate Christmas every month on the roof of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, because we do not know in which month the Lord was born. The weather in Jerusalem was beautiful, thus also in Bethlehem. We spent a few hours in the fields of Ephrata and were not bothered by the cold orby anything of that kind.”

So while the popular talking point is that the weather would have made it impossible, this indicates it was possible.

Bro.T said:

The shepherds always brought their flocks from the mountainsides and fields and corralled them no later than October, to protect them from the cold, rainy season that followed. Notice in Songs of Solomon 2:11 and Ezra 10:9, 13, that winter was a rainy season and typically the herds would most likely not be out in the rainy winter season. "It was an ancient custom among Jews of those days to send out their sheep to the fields and deserts about the Passover (early spring), and bring them home at commencement of the first rain," says the Adam Clarke Commentary (Vol. 5, page 370, New York ed.) Continuing, "During the time they were out, the shepherds watched them night and day. As..the first rain began early in the month of Marchesvan, which answers to part of our October and November (begins sometime in October), we find that the sheep were kept out in the open country during the whole summer. And, as these shepherds had not yet brought home their flocks, it is a presumptive argument that October had not yet commenced, and that, consequently, Jesus was not born on December 25th, when no flocks were out in the fields; nor could He have been born later than September, as the flocks were in the fields by night.

Click to expand...

Adam Clarke cites no evidence for his claim that it was an "ancient custom among Jews" outside of the very vague claim of "see the quotations from the Talmudists in Lightfoot." No doubt this refers to J.B. Lightfoot, an Anglican Bishop from the 19th century, but without further specification I do not know where to look.

However, even if we were to assume this information is correct--note that both Lightfoot and Clarke lived in the 19th century and thus can be considered out of date--this being a general custom does not disqualify some shepherds from being out in the fields, particularly given the fact that Bethlehem does not have a particularly cold climate. Even if someone were to argue it would be unusual, unusual is not impossible.

Bro.T said:

Therefore, to celebrate Jesus' birth date on December 25th is not scripturally sound. Any encyclopedia will tell you that Christ was not born on December 25th. The exact date of Jesus' birth is entirely unknown, as all authorities acknowledge - though by reading the scriptures, it strongly indicates His birth was in the early fall, probably September, approximately six months after Passover. This can also be found in the Catholic Encyclopedia 1967.

Click to expand...

It is certainly not true that "any encyclopedia will tell you that Christ was not born on December 25th." Indeed, the very encyclopedia you cite does not, or at least I do not see where it says such a thing. The New Catholic Encyclopedia on page 656 of volume 3 says "Inexplicable though it seems, the date of Christ's birth is not known." It does not say that it was not in December; it says it is not known, which is different (and therefore leaves open a possibility of December 25).

It is true that some encyclopedias would say it isn't, but others will more accurately say, like the New Catholic Encyclopedia, that the date is not known for certain, which is the position I would hold. Do we know for sure? No. Was it December 25? Maybe.

For the record, though, an argument is mounted in this article that December 25 was indeed the actual birth of Jesus:

Bro.T said:

Of course I copy because I know and understand the different between God and Man. Also neither one of us was born in those days when all these pagan festivals and religion was added or try to be added to the word of God, so of course I'm gonna get my information from history.

Click to expand...

But you're not getting your information from history is the problem. You're getting them from places that make claims without evidence, and indeed make claims that are flat-out false.

Bro.T said:

Even the Bible itself is history, but but now I have a source and you complaining about the facts, is looking like you just have a problem with believing the truth, and that's your problem. At this point I'm not going to go back-and-forth with you about Easter being pagan because now I have shown you source and I prove my opposition on the subject of Easter is being pagan, so this is a belief problem, so if you don't believe it then that's on you, but I'm not going to continue going back-and-forth about it. You ask for a source and you got it!!

Click to expand...

What I asked for was evidence, particularly primary sources. You didn't offer any. That's the problem. If there is any record of pagans doing such-and-such, there would be... well, a record of it. A record that could be pointed to. But there appear to be absolutely no records of the things you have claimed. The fact you found a source claiming these things doesn't mean anything if the source offers no evidence, which it didn't. No primary sources were cited at all.

Let's take for an example the following statement the source you cited made:

In Germanic mythology, it is said that Ostara healed a wounded bird she found in the woods by changing it into a hare. Still partially a bird, the hare showed its gratitude to the goddess by laying eggs as gifts.

This offers no primary source for this (actually it offers no source at all, let alone any primary source). It just makes the claim with no evidence. So all you have done is shown that someone made this claim, but no proof has been offered by you or them. And of course no proof is offered, for there is no proof--as I noted before, there is not a single reference to Ostara in all of German mythology, because Ostara was just a speculation by a 19th century writer; some good information on that is found here. Jacob Grimm in the 19th century speculated about the existence of an Ostara, a later writer offered the further speculation she was associated with rabbits, and then people ran with these speculations and made up all sorts of stories about her that aren't found in any actual German mythology, which people then repeat as if they were actual German mythology, when they're actually things people made up in the late 19th century or later.

So you haven't offered actual evidence. You just pointed to some people who made claims without evidence. I can point to people making all sorts of claims, but if they don't have any actual evidence, then it's worthless. There's simply no evidence of so many of the claims you and your sources were making on Easter, which is exactly why your sources do not offer any evidence and just make the claims without evidence. That's the problem.

Bro.T said:

The fact is Jesus was not even born in the winter season. When Jesus was born, "there were shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night." (Luke 2:8). This could never have occurred in Judea in the month of December. The shepherds always brought their flocks from the mountainsides and fields and corralled them no later than October, to protect them from the cold, rainy season that followed. Notice in Songs of Solomon 2:11 and Ezra 10:9, 13, that winter was a rainy season and typically the herds would most likely not be out in the rainy winter season. "It was an ancient custom among Jews of those days to send out their sheep to the fields and deserts about the Passover (early spring), and bring them home at commencement of the first rain," says the Adam Clarke Commentary (Vol. 5, page 370, New York ed.) Continuing, "During the time they were out, the shepherds watched them night and day. As..the first rain began early in the month of Marchesvan, which answers to part of our October and November (begins sometime in October), we find that the sheep were kept out in the open country during the whole summer. And, as these shepherds had not yet brought home their flocks, it is a presumptive argument that October had not yet commenced, and that, consequently, Jesus was not born on December 25th, when no flocks were out in the fields; nor could He have been born later than September, as the flocks were in the fields by night.

Therefore, to celebrate Jesus' birth date on December 25th is not scripturally sound. Any encyclopedia will tell you that Christ was not born on December 25th. The exact date of Jesus' birth is entirely unknown, as all authorities acknowledge - though by reading the scriptures, it strongly indicates His birth was in the early fall, probably September, approximately six months after Passover. This can also be found in the Catholic Encyclopedia 1967.

Click to expand...

It doesn't matter when Jesus Christ was actually born.

The Christian leaders chose to commemorate the birth of their Savior on December 25 of every year. The leaders of Christ's Church were given the power to decide feasting days and fasting days for the Christians.

The Church's leaders also decided how to commemorate Jesus' resurrection from the dead; the day (always a Sunday) changes every year presently. They could someday decide that the first Sunday in April of every year, for example, be the day to celebrate the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. He gave them the power to do this.

Matthew 16:19
I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Matthew 18:18
“Amen, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Bro.T said:

Then focus on the Bible term Passover, which is written in the word of God, and that you stay safe....here's why....Let's go into Revelation 20: 11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. 12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. 13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. 14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

Stick with Passover, Passover is written in the word of God all the way from exodus thur Revelation. Stay away from man's tradition, because man's tradition is not written in the book of life. Pay attention!!

Click to expand...

There's no reason for me to use the vocabulary that you prefer.