Do you think Easter is Christian?

[civilwarbuff]

There is a 3rd possibility also....

Question: "On what day was Jesus crucified?"

Answer: The Bible does not explicitly state on which day of the week Jesus was crucified. The two most widely held views are Friday and Wednesday. Some, however, using a synthesis of both the Friday and Wednesday arguments, argue for Thursday as the day.

Jesus said in Matthew 12:40, “For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.” Those who argue for a Friday crucifixion say that there is still a valid way in which He could have been considered in the grave for three days. In the Jewish mind of the first century, a part of day was considered as a full day. Since Jesus was in the grave for part of Friday, all of Saturday, and part of Sunday—He could be considered to have been in the grave for three days. One of the principal arguments for Friday is found in Mark 15:42, which notes that Jesus was crucified “the day before the Sabbath.” If that was the weekly Sabbath, i.e. Saturday, then that fact leads to a Friday crucifixion. Another argument for Friday says that verses such as Matthew 16:21 and Luke 9:22 teach that Jesus would rise on the third day; therefore, He would not need to be in the grave a full three days and nights. But while some translations use “on the third day” for these verses, not all do, and not everyone agrees that “on the third day” is the best way to translate these verses. Furthermore, Mark 8:31 says that Jesus will be raised “after” three days.

The Thursday argument expands on the Friday view and argues mainly that there are too many events (some count as many as twenty) happening between Christ's burial and Sunday morning to occur from Friday evening to Sunday morning. Proponents of the Thursday view point out that this is especially a problem when the only full day between Friday and Sunday was Saturday, the Jewish Sabbath. An extra day or two eliminates that problem. The Thursday advocates could reason thus: suppose you haven't seen a friend since Monday evening. The next time you see him it is Thursday morning and you say, “I haven’t seen you in three days” even though it had technically only been 60 hours (2.5 days). If Jesus was crucified on Thursday, this example shows how it could be considered three days.

The Wednesday opinion states that there were two Sabbaths that week. After the first one (the one that occurred on the evening of the crucifixion [Mark 15:42; Luke 23:52-54]), the women purchased spices—note that they made their purchase after the Sabbath (Mark 16:1). The Wednesday view holds that this “Sabbath” was the Passover (see Leviticus 16:29-31, 23:24-32, 39, where high holy days that are not necessarily the seventh day of the week are referred to as the Sabbath). The second Sabbath that week was the normal weekly Sabbath. Note that in Luke 23:56, the women who had purchased spices after the first Sabbath returned and prepared the spices, then “rested on the Sabbath.” The argument states that they could not purchase the spices after the Sabbath, yet prepare those spices before the Sabbath—unless there were two Sabbaths. With the two-Sabbath view, if Christ was crucified on Thursday, then the high holy Sabbath (the Passover) would have begun Thursday at sundown and ended at Friday sundown—at the beginning of the weekly Sabbath or Saturday. Purchasing the spices after the first Sabbath (Passover) would have meant they purchased them on Saturday and were breaking the Sabbath.

Therefore, according to the Wednesday viewpoint, the only explanation that does not violate the biblical account of the women and the spices and holds to a literal understanding of Matthew 12:40, is that Christ was crucified on Wednesday. The Sabbath that was a high holy day (Passover) occurred on Thursday, the women purchased spices (after that) on Friday and returned and prepared the spices on the same day, they rested on Saturday which was the weekly Sabbath, then brought the spices to the tomb early Sunday. Jesus was buried near sundown on Wednesday, which began Thursday in the Jewish calendar. Using a Jewish calendar, you have Thursday night (night one), Thursday day (day one), Friday night (night two), Friday day (day two), Saturday night (night three), Saturday day (day three). We do not know exactly what time He rose, but we do know that it was before sunrise on Sunday. He could have risen as early as just after sunset Saturday evening, which began the first day of the week to the Jews. The discovery of the empty tomb was made just at sunrise (Mark 16:2), before it was fully light (John 20:1).

A possible problem with the Wednesday view is that the disciples who walked with Jesus on the road to Emmaus did so on “the same day” of His resurrection (Luke 24:13). The disciples, who do not recognize Jesus, tell Him of Jesus' crucifixion (24:21) and say that “today is the third day since these things happened” (24:22). Wednesday to Sunday is four days. A possible explanation is that they may have been counting since Wednesday evening at Christ's burial, which begins the Jewish Thursday, and Thursday to Sunday could be counted as three days.

In the grand scheme of things, it is not all that important to know what day of the week Christ was crucified. If it were very important, then God's Word would have clearly communicated the day and timeframe. What is important is that He did die and that He physically, bodily rose from the dead. What is equally important is the reason He died—to take the punishment that all sinners deserve. John 3:16 and 3:36 both proclaim that putting your trust in Him results in eternal life! This is equally true whether He was crucified on a Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday.

Recommended Resources: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus by Gary Habermas and Logos Bible Software.

http://www.gotquestions.org/three-days.html

 

[Dkh587]

I don't have to. I have more than one verse in my Bible. I am not the one trying to force a false 21st century interpretation onto the scripture. I understand historical context. Those who ignore their history are doomed to repeat it.

Jewish Encyclopedia-DAY
In the Bible, the season of light (Gen. i. 5), lasting "from dawn [lit. "the rising of the morning"] to the coming forth of the stars" (Neh. iv. 15, 17). The term "day" is used also to denote a period of twenty-four hours (Ex. xxi. 21). In Jewish communal life part of a day is at times reckoned as one day; e.g., the day of the funeral, even when the latter takes place late in the afternoon, is counted as the first of the seven days of mourning; a short time in the morning of the seventh day is counted as the seventh day; circumcision takes place on the eighth day, even though of the first day only a few minutes remained after the birth of the child, these being counted as one day. Again, a man who hears of a vow made by his wife or his daughter, and desires to cancel the vow, must do so on the same day on which he hears of it, as otherwise the protest has no effect; even if the hearing takes place a little time before night, the annulment must be done within that little time. The day is reckoned from evening to evening—i.e., night and day—except in reference to sacrifices, where daytime and the night following constitute one day (Lev. vii. 15; see Calendar). "The day" denotes: (a) Day of the Lord; (b) the Day of Atonement; (c) the treatise of the Mishnah that contains the laws concerning the Day of Atonement (See Yoma and Sabbath).E. G. H. M. F.

Jewish Encyclopedia online​

Do the folks over at Jewish Encyclopedia pay you to quote them?

That didn't tell me where the 3rd night was in between Friday afternoon & Sunday morning

Friday night - 1
Saturday night - 2
???

Where is the 3rd night? Why do you reject the Messiah's own words to uphold the traditions of men?

“Now YHWH had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah. And Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights.”
‭‭Jonah‬ ‭1:17‬ ‭KJV‬‬


“For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭12:40‬ ‭KJV‬

Again, 3 DAYS, and 3 NIGHTS

Friday afternoon to Sunday morning BEFORE SUNRISE is NOT 3 nights. seriously I'm done responding to you regarding this topic.

 

[prodromos]

Synecdoche. Learn what it means.

 

[roamer_1]

You have posted a lot of unsupported opinion. Your approach doesn't reconcile the gospel accounts - it takes what you perceive as John's gospel chronology and set your perception of that chronology up as the standard by which all three other gospels must be interpreted.

It isn't my opinion. It is the truth.

All I can say is that you are so focused on "3 days and 3 nights" because of the way we understand it in our culture that you are unwilling to accept that it could have meant something different at that time, and that has dictated your entire approach to understanding the passion week.

No, my focus has been upon Palm Sunday. All one has to do is ask one's self why it was that everyone was standing around with palm fronds that day... Why everyone was turned out in the streets in anticipation, and the rest must naturally and necessarily come...

Without a doubt, all four accounts mark that day, and that day was Sunday, without any doubt.

Thereafter it is simple mathematics. From the time that Lamb is brought into the city to the time the lamb is sacrificed is necessarily four days (counting Sunday). In the afternoon of the fourth day, that lamb was surely slaughtered, and Passover is, without a doubt, that very night...

Use your fingers, draw a chart... But there is no way you can stretch that out to Friday. It cannot be done, anymore than you can get three days and nights out of Friday night to Sunday morning.

But if Passover is calculated naturally from the entry of the lamb, it is conveniently Wednesday afternoon that the lamb would be sacrificed... And amazingly enough, there are three days and three nights available for the grave.
Go figger.

No, really. Go figger. There is only one way that it all works out.

 

[roamer_1]

I realize that it is critical for certain folks to make every facet of Jesus' life coincide with some feast or festival in the OT

You may wiggle any way you choose - Palm Sunday tells the tale. You cannot get 4 days to stretch to Friday. You've been had.

And yes, Unleavened Bread is an High Holy day.

 

[Dkh587]

Synecdoche. Learn what it means.

Lol are you serious?

It says "Jonah was in the belly of the whale for 3 days and 3 nights"

Messiah didn't say it was a figure of speech. He said Jonah was in the whale 3 days and 3 nights, and he said he would in the grave 3 days & 3 nights also.

Do you care to take a guess at where the 3rd night is between Friday afternoon and Sunday morning?

Friday night - 1st night
Saturday night - 2nd night

Where's the 3rd night?

 

[Der Alte]

Do the folks over at Jewish Encyclopedia pay you to quote them?

That didn't tell me where the 3rd night was in between Friday afternoon & Sunday morning

Friday night - 1
Saturday night - 2
???

Where is the 3rd night? Why do you reject the Messiah's own words to uphold the traditions of men?

“Now YHWH had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah. And Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights.”
‭‭Jonah‬ ‭1:17‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭12:40‬ ‭KJV‬

Again, 3 DAYS, and 3 NIGHTS

Friday afternoon to Sunday morning BEFORE SUNRISE is NOT 3 nights. seriously I'm done responding to you regarding this topic.

Endlessly repeating your opinion does not make it any more true. I provide evidence you only provide opinion. If your fanciful interpretation is correct there should be some historical evidence somewhere, by somebody. Jewish history contradicts you. Early church history contradicts you.

 

[Dkh587]

You may wiggle any way you choose - Palm Sunday tells the tale. You cannot get 4 days to stretch to Friday. You've been had.

And yes, Unleavened Bread is an High Holy day.

they are in grave error. No matter how much we try to show them and explain them the scriptures, they are upholding man-made traditions and teachings despite being shown overwhelming evidence IN TORAH & in the gospels that a Friday burial and Sunday morning resurrection is impossible

We have shown them enough. It's up to them to decide whether to align with the Scriptures or the erroneous teachings and traditions of the Christian church

 

[nomadictheist]

they are in grave error. No matter how much we try to show them and explain them the scriptures, they are upholding man-made traditions and teachings despite being shown overwhelming evidence IN TORAH & in the gospels that a Friday burial and Sunday morning resurrection is impossible

We have shown them enough. It's up to them to decide whether to align with the Scriptures or the erroneous teachings and traditions of the Christian church

Oh yes, we were overwhelmed by your 3 verses from the Torah and your 1 verse from the New Testament. I've never seen so much Biblical evidence for a doctrine.

 

[Chris Tan]

The only scriptures Timothy knew from his youth was the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament.

And where did you get this information from? The Holy Bible?

 

[Chris Tan]

No, the celebration of the resurrection of our Lord is entirely and indeed definitively Christian.

It also represents the continuation and fulfillment of Passover, which is why we call it Pascha.

I'd appreciate it very much if you could show me from where in the Scriptures did you get of such a "command" or "instruction".

Ah, now herein you are simply engaging in eisegesis, for there is ample scriptural support for the doctrine of the real presence in its various forms, including transubstantiation, which indeed is why most Christians believe in that. They might not tale it to the RC extreme of Eucharistic adoration, but they believe our Lord when he said "This is my body."

You say: "the doctrine of the real presence in its various forms, including transubstantiation, which indeed is why most Christians believe in that". Well, I'm a Christian, and I certainly don't believe in such a thing which was concocted out of Vatican. Are you then also saying that every time you break bread in the communion, that piece of bread becomes the "flesh and body of Christ"?

Funny thing you say you are a Christian and yet your profile of faith says, "Eastern-Orthodox". Are you too embarrass to just say Christian? Was Jesus Christ even a Eastern-Othodox?

Unless of course one condescends to read the Gospels.

I thought the Gospels was the ultimate revelation of who the Lord Jesus Christ was. You mean you have other sources from your Eastern-Orthodox of who Jesus Christ is apart from the Gospels from the Holy Bible? Then maybe you should take heed from the Lord Jesus Christ of the Holy Bible,

"And Jesus answered and said to them: “Take heed that no one deceives you. For many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and will deceive many." (Matthew 24:4,5); "“Then if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or ‘There!’ do not believe it. For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. See, I have told you beforehand." (Matthew 24:23-25)

Did your Eastern-Orthodox christ warned you of such a thing?

Part of the pleasure of being Orthodox is being able to take comfort in the knowledge that such warnings are simply the fruit of a certain misguided zeal, admirable in fervour if not application. There are many chaps on this forum that disagree with you and I about John 1:1 and deny the eternal deity of our Lord; would that you might consider directing your energies towards a refutation of their manifold errors.

You know what? When Christ was here in the flesh, almost every Jew hated Him when He was doing His ministry. Finally, their hate manifested in them murdering Him at Calvary. Believe me when I say that I find great comfort that I have received this Truth of the Lord Jesus Christ. And to end where we started, I am definitely sure that the Easter you celebrate has nothing to do with the Christ of the Holy Bible.

The only thing that they have is to use His name in vain to celebrate something that's rooted in paganism. And that does not mean I do not believe that my Lord Jesus Christ did not resurrect from the dead. He did! And that's why I will have eternal life.

 

[Chris Tan]

" I have 'be warned' " - huh?

I TREMBLE with trepidation...

OK, Chris Tan -- just DON'T GO on Easter -- go to a baseball game or sumpn

Sheesh. Let the rest of us go to Easter and Pascha - get off our backs.

"warned" -- BAH !!!

Am I stopping you from doing Easter or Pascha?
Or do you just simply hate the Word of God that's being presented?
"get off our backs"? Was I even ever on your back to begin with?
I thought this was a forum and I was simply replying to blogs, just as others also reply to my blogs.
Maybe you should be the one going to a baseball game and not bother coming to this Christian Forum.
Get it? "Christian Forum"?
Were you expecting this forum to talk about worldly things that does not pertain to Christianity?
Seriously?

 

[civilwarbuff]

I believe the verbal abuse has been noted.....

 

[roamer_1]

Funny thing you say you are a Christian and yet your profile of faith says, "Eastern-Orthodox". Are you too embarrass to just say Christian? Was Jesus Christ even a Eastern-Othodox?

Whoa, dude. EO's are good folks - I don't always agree with them, but there is no doubt they are Christian, and better at it than many...

 

[Wgw]

I'd appreciate it very much if you could show me from where in the Scriptures did you get of such a "command" or "instruction".

I will happily oblige as soon as you show me where you get a specific command or instruction to engage in polemics on Internet fora.

You say: "the doctrine of the real presence in its various forms, including transubstantiation, which indeed is why most Christians believe in that". Well, I'm a Christian, and I certainly don't believe in such a thing

Most do, however; the Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Assyrians, Lutherans, Anglicans, Methodists, Moravians and Calvinists all believe in some form of the Real Presence, and collectively account for most Christians.

which was concocted out of Vatican.

Alas, no. Not even the RC interpretation of transubstantiation was "concocted" in the Vatican.

Are you then also saying that every time you break bread in the communion, that piece of bread becomes the "flesh and body of Christ"?

Most Christians believe our Lord is present in the Eucharist. The Orthodox, along with Catholics, Assyrians and Lutherans do believe the bread actually becomes the body of our Lord, or that our Lord is physically present in it, whereas Calvinists believe in a spiritual presence.

Funny thing you say you are a Christian and yet your profile of faith says, "Eastern-Orthodox".

The Orthodox are Christians.

Are you too embarrass to just say Christian?

No, but I also prefer to be specific; I don't wish to be accused of Ninjadoxy.

Was Jesus Christ even a Eastern-Othodox?

Now let us not be rather too cheeky, shall we? For you know that our Lord is the Head of the Church, and if one adheres to a visible church ecclesiology, the answer would obviously be "yes," and I expect and indeed hope my Catholic friends would likewise express that our Lord was Catholic.

I thought the Gospels was the ultimate revelation of who the Lord Jesus Christ was.

They are.

You mean you have other sources from your Eastern-Orthodox of who Jesus Christ is apart from the Gospels from the Holy Bible?

Yes. For example, the Epistles, Acts, the Apocalypse, the Old Testament...

Did your Eastern-Orthodox christ warned you of such a thing?

Indeed He did. Ever heard of Simon Magus? Or Mani? Or Arius?

You know what? When Christ was here in the flesh, almost every Jew hated Him when He was doing His ministry. Finally, their hate manifested in them murdering Him at Calvary. Believe me when I say that I find great comfort that I have received this Truth of the Lord Jesus Christ. And to end where we started, I am definitely sure that the Easter you celebrate has nothing to do with the Christ of the Holy Bible.

So do you believe then that our Lord was murdered and did not resurrect? Because otherwise your argument is self-contradictory.

The only thing that they have is to use His name in vain to celebrate something that's rooted in paganism.

What we celebrate at Pascha is rooted in the four Gospels. not Paganism.

And that does not mean I do not believe that my Lord Jesus Christ did not resurrect from the dead. He did! And that's why I will have eternal life.

Ah, so there you have just contradicted yourself; you claim Pascha has nothing to do with the Christ of the Holy Bible, but you also admit he died and rose again on the third day.

Ergo, you contradict yourself.

If, on Pascha, we instead celebrated our Lord's invention of carbonated beverages, you might well have a point. As it hapoens, we do not...

 

[Chris Tan]

I will happily oblige as soon as you show me where you get a specific command or instruction to engage in polemics on Internet fora.



Most do, however; the Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Assyrians, Lutherans, Anglicans, Methodists, Moravians and Calvinists all believe in some form of the Real Presence, and collectively account for most Christians.



Alas, no. Not even the RC interpretation of transubstantiation was "concocted" in the Vatican.



Most Christians believe our Lord is present in the Eucharist. The Orthodox, along with Catholics, Assyrians and Lutherans do believe the bread actually becomes the body of our Lord, or that our Lord is physically present in it, whereas Calvinists believe in a spiritual presence.



The Orthodox are Christians.



No, but I also prefer to be specific; I don't wish to be accused of Ninjadoxy.



Now let us not be rather too cheeky, shall we? For you know that our Lord is the Head of the Church, and if one adheres to a visible church ecclesiology, the answer would obviously be "yes," and I expect and indeed hope my Catholic friends would likewise express that our Lord was Catholic.



They are.



Yes. For example, the Epistles, Acts, the Apocalypse, the Old Testament...



Indeed He did. Ever heard of Simon Magus? Or Mani? Or Arius?



So do you believe then that our Lord was murdered and did not resurrect? Because otherwise your argument is self-contradictory.



What we celebrate at Pascha is rooted in the four Gospels. not Paganism.



Ah, so there you have just contradicted yourself; you claim Pascha has nothing to do with the Christ of the Holy Bible, but you also admit he died and rose again on the third day.

Ergo, you contradict yourself.

If, on Pascha, we instead celebrated our Lord's invention of carbonated beverages, you might well have a point. As it hapoens, we do not...

Goodness! Everyone of your reply is based on just assertions.

I will happily oblige as soon as you show me where you get a specific command or instruction to engage in polemics on Internet fora.

Revelations 22:18,19 - "For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book."

That is, if you cannot show me from the Holy Bible explicitly where it says that Easter or Pascal is ordained of by God Almighty, you are then deemed to have added on to the word of God. Isn't that what Revelation 22:18,19 means?

Good enough for you?

Now again, show me where your Easter and Pascal is from the Holy Bible?

 

[Chris Tan]

Whoa, dude. EO's are good folks - I don't always agree with them, but there is no doubt they are Christian, and better at it than many...

Please know the difference of what is a denomination. Eastern-Orthodox, Roman Catholics, Methodist etc are denominations. Basically divisions of people who claim to be Christians but they rather call themselves names that's never associated with what is taught in the Scriptures. And the Bible speaks against such practices.

"Now I say this, that each of you says, “I am of Paul,” or “I am of Apollos,” or “I am of Cephas,” or “I am of Christ.” IS CHRIST DIVIDED? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?" (1 Corinthians 1:12,13)

What's wrong if you're a follower of Jesus Christ and just call yourself a Christian? Isn't that where the name Christianity came from? One who follow Christ?

Just to side-track a little since you said, "EO's are good folks". So too are many outside of the Christian faith. I know of Buddhist and Muslims who are "good folks". But I have news for you, "good folks" don't go to heaven. Christians do.

 

[nomadictheist]

Please know the difference of what is a denomination. Eastern-Orthodox, Roman Catholics, Methodist etc are denominations. Basically divisions of people who claim to be Christians but they rather call themselves names that's never associated with what is taught in the Scriptures. And the Bible speaks against such practices.

"Now I say this, that each of you says, “I am of Paul,” or “I am of Apollos,” or “I am of Cephas,” or “I am of Christ.” IS CHRIST DIVIDED? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?" (1 Corinthians 1:12,13)

Funny thing is, this was written to a body of believers - of Christians, that is.

Most people choose to identify with a denomination because it is a fairly easy way to identify where you stand on certain controversial doctrines. While Paul says that Christians should not be divided, he doesn't say that identifying yourself with a denomination makes you not a Christian.

What's wrong if you're a follower of Jesus Christ and just call yourself a Christian? Isn't that where the name Christianity came from? One who follow Christ?

Just to side-track a little since you said, "EO's are good folks". So too are many outside of the Christian faith. I know of Buddhist and Muslims who are "good folks". But I have news for you, "good folks" don't go to heaven. Christians do.

It was also written that "If you judge your brother, you are no longer a doer of the law but a judge. But there is only one Lawgiver and Judge..."

Judging the state of a brother's soul - that is, pronouncing him condemned - is not something that we are to do as Christians. When you teach as doctrines the commandments of men (for where in the Bible are we told we must not celebrate the Lord's resurrection?), you are making yourself as God.

The Lord alone knows the hearts of men. Perhaps you should leave the judging to Him.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Revelations 22:18,19 - "For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book."

You do understand that the bible in not A book; it is a collection of books of which Revelation is just one. This is bible study 101. So Rev 22:18-19 is referring specifically to Rev, not the bible as a whole.

Isn't that what Revelation 22:18,19 means?

The short answer is no......

And if celebrating the resurrection of Messiah is offensive to you....you don't have to go.

 

[roamer_1]

Please know the difference of what is a denomination. Eastern-Orthodox, Roman Catholics, Methodist etc are denominations. Basically divisions of people who claim to be Christians but they rather call themselves names that's never associated with what is taught in the Scriptures. And the Bible speaks against such practices.

Well, as a matter of course, a Christian forum debating various theologies would be a cacophony without some ready designations to go by... If someone calls himself a Baptist, as an instance, I have a pretty sure grasp where he is coming from, without any need for an overview... And an EO is plenty different than a Baptist, so I appreciate that I don't need all that explained every time. Likewise them for me - as a 'Christian Messianic' my thinking is pretty radically different from all y'all - I am sure glad I don't have to explain any more than I do already.

What's wrong if you're a follower of Jesus Christ and just call yourself a Christian? Isn't that where the name Christianity came from? One who follow Christ?

Well, no... In the original they were followers of the Way, or Nazarene.

Just to side-track a little since you said, "EO's are good folks". So too are many outside of the Christian faith. I know of Buddhist and Muslims who are "good folks". But I have news for you, "good folks" don't go to heaven. Christians do.

Careful where you're stepping there friend... You'll be judged by your own measurement...