Proper Christian living in a multi-religious context

Originally posted by Conrau K
Don't give me that crap. The dispute is about what Eusebius meant, not God. What did Eusebius mean when he wrote that 'feast of the Saviour's passover'? You seem to think that it must have meant the Lord's supper. There is absolutely no evidence in favour of that and the canon of the Council of Nicaea clearly refutes it.

[b]almost every reference that i h the Romans and yourselves and all those who have observed Easter from the beginning.[/b]

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
sorry your tone leaves much to be desired, im done, you may make many references to the Nicene fathers until you are blue in the face, every vestige of evidence point to the fact, that there is no mandate to celebrate Easter, it has no association with the passover, for it was a memorial to Christs death, not his resurrection. it was observed by the ...[text shortened]... culate until you are content, the matter is completely resolved in my mind, have a good evening!

Originally posted by Conrau K
You are kidding right? You even quoted Socrates yourself as if an authority. Easter is the feast of the passover (this is why in non-Germanic languages, it is known as Pasqua or pascha). It is so obvious. It is stated in the canons of the Council of Nicaea and by Socrates Scholasticus. In the last four pages of posts, you have not given a single piece of ev the new passover, not that the Lord's supper and feast of the passover are the same event.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
where is the biblical mandate to celebrate Easter? nowhere in the entire biblical cannon, hardly evidence for a scriptural practice is it? Where is the parallel between Easter and the passover, nowhere, it a borrowed pagan festival, that is why! we can quite easily however draw the parallels from the passover of Christ and the ancient Jewish passove ...[text shortened]... ns, they had no knowledge of it, like your apostate trinity, it would have been unknown to them.

Originally posted by Conrau K
Robbie, focus. The issue here is what Eusebius meant. Now since you believe that the Nicene fathers were old charlatans obsessed with philosophy and bereft of any scriptural knowledge, how do you know that when he wrote 'feast of our Lord's passover', he meant 'Lord's supper'?

I suspect Polycarp did believe in the Trinity; his friend St Irenaeus and St Ignatius of Antioch both argued in favour of the divinity of Christ.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
answer the question Conrau, you shall not slither away, where is the scriptural mandate to celebrate Easter, if you please!

Originally posted by Conrau K
I don't claim there is one. I believe that the Church has the right to create and institute new feast days, as it has done recently for the new saints. What I argue, however, is that Christians since the time of the apostles have always celebrated the Lord's supper on Sunday. So the question is put to you again (and I have counted now, it is the eleventh time) -- How do you know that Eusebius meant 'Lord's supper'?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
there is no scriptural mandate to celebrate Easter, it is a non scriptural practice, why thank you, it must have been hard for you to admit, i do hope you didnt choke! therefore if it is non scriptural and there is no mandate, how can you state that the lords evening meal is Easter, if you cannot state that it is Easter, then what are you talking abo hen you can see past the apostasy of the Nicene fathers, you may wish to take a look at them.

Chapter 18. He speaks of their Unanimity respecting the Feast of Easter, and against the Practice of the Jews.

At this meeting the question concerning the most holy day of Easter was discussed, and it was resolved by the united judgment of all present, that this feast ought to be kept by all and in every place on one and the same day. For what can be more becoming or honorable to us than that this feast from which we date our hopes of immortality, should be observed unfailingly by all alike, according to one ascertained order and arrangement? And first of all, it appeared an unworthy thing that in the celebration of this most holy feast we should follow the practice of the Jews, who have impiously defiled their hands with enormous sin, and are, therefore, deservedly afflicted with blindness of soul. For we have it in our power, if we abandon their custom, to prolong the due observance of this ordinance to future ages, by a truer order, which we have preserved from the very day of the passion until the present time. Let us then have nothing in common with the detestable Jewish crowd; for we have received from our Saviour a different way. A course at once legitimate and honorable lies open to our most holy religion. Beloved brethren, let us with one consent adopt this course, and withdraw ourselves from all participation in their baseness. For their boast is absurd indeed, that it is not in our power without instruction from them to observe these things. For how should they be capable of forming a soundjudgment, who, since their parricidal guilt in slaying their Lord, have been subject to the direction, not of reason, but of ungoverned passion, and are swayed by every impulse of the mad spirit that is in them? Hence it is that on this point as well as others they have no perception of the truth, so that, being altogether ignorant of the true adjustment of this question, they sometimes celebrate Easter twice in the same year. Why then should we follow those who are confessedly in grievous error? Surely we shall never consent to keep this feast a second time in the same year. But supposing these reasons were not of sufficient weight, still it would be incumbent on your Sagacities to strive and pray continually that the purity of your souls may not seem in anything to be sullied by fellowship with the customs of these most wicked men. We must consider, too, that a discordant judgment in a case of such importance, and respecting such religious festival, is wrong. For our Saviour has left us one feast in commemoration of the day of our deliverance, I mean the day of his most holy passion; and he has willed that his Catholic Church should be one, the members of which, however scattered in many and diverse places, are yet cherished by one pervading spirit, that is, by the will of God. And let your Holinesses' sagacity reflect how grievous and scandalous it is that on the self-same days some should be engaged in fasting, others in festive enjoyment; and again, that after the days of Easter some should be present at banquets and amusements, while others are fulfilling the appointed fasts. It is, then, plainly the will of Divine Providence (as I suppose you all clearly see), that this usage should receive fitting correction, and be reduced to one uniform rule.

The words of the Catholic Catechism make clear that Easter and the paschal feast and passover are the same event:

1170 At the Council of Nicaea in 325, all the Churches agreed that Easter, the Christian Passover, should be celebrated on the Sunday following the first full moon (14 Nisan) after the vernal equinox. Because of the different methods of calculating the 14th day of the month of Nisan, the date of Easter in the Western and Eastern Churches is not always the same. For this reason, the Churches are currently seeking an agreement in order once again to celebrate the day of the Lord's Resurrection on a common date.

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/1170.htm

From wikipedia:

By the later second century, it was accepted that the celebration of Pascha (Easter) was a practice of the disciples and an undisputed tradition. The Quartodeciman controversy, the first of several Paschal/Easter controversies, then arose concerning the date on which Pascha should be celebrated.

The term "Quartodeciman" refers to the practice of celebrating Pascha or Easter on Nisan 14 of the Hebrew calendar, "the LORD's passover" (Leviticus 23:5). According to the church historian Eusebius, the Quartodeciman Polycarp (bishop of Smyrna, by tradition a disciple of John the Evangelist) debated the question with Anicetus (bishop of Rome). The Roman province of Asia was Quartodeciman, while the Roman and Alexandrian churches continued the fast until the Sunday following, wishing to associate Easter with Sunday. Neither Polycarp nor Anicetus persuaded the other, but they did not consider the matter schismatic either, parting in peace and leaving the question unsettled.

Controversy arose when Victor, bishop of Rome a generation after Anicetus, attempted to excommunicate Polycrates of Ephesus and all other bishops of Asia for their Quartodecimanism. According to Eusebius, a number of synods were convened to deal with the controversy, which he regarded as all ruling in support of Easter on Sunday.[22] Polycrates (c. 190), however wrote to Victor defending the antiquity of Asian Quartodecimanism. Victor's attempted excommunication was apparently rescinded and the two sides reconciled upon the intervention of bishop Irenaeus and others, who reminded Victor of the tolerant precedent of Anicetus.

Quartodecimanism seems to have lingered into the fourth century, when Socrates of Constantinople recorded that some Quartodecimans were deprived of their churches by John Chrysostom[23] and that some were harassed by Nestorius.[24]

"And how," you may well ask, "is the blood of the real Passover Lamb, the Son of the Almighty God, applied to a believer in this electronic age?" The answer is: By taking part in a special memorial service called the Passover Service on the evening of the 14th Abib each year, which is the divinely appointed time. The Passover Service is a memorial of the Saviour's death on Calvary and every believer in the Messiah is commanded to keep it. "this do in remembrance of me" said the Messiah, the Lamb of God. Memorial services, incidentally are not observed several times a year; neither should they be observed at any time people fancy. The time to observe the Passovere Service has been divinely appointed; and that time is the evening of the 14th day of the month of Abib. Let all who read, pause and take note.

http://atschool.eduweb.co.uk/sbs777/saccal/festbook/feasts.html

after simply googling, feast of saviours passover, not a Jehovahs Witness site

“Moreover we know from the Quartodeciman’s sources (i.e. those who kept Passover on Nisan 14 ACCORDING TO THE JEWISH RECKONING), which apparently represent a DIRECT CONTINUATION OF THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, that the PASCHAL FEAST WAS INDEED OBSERVED BY CHRISTIANS. Its celebration … occurred … as well stated by J. Jeremias, ‘at the SAME TIME AS THE JEWISH PASSOVER, that is, on the NIGHT OF THE 15TH OF NISAN. . .” (page 81).

The Quartodecimans contentiously keep Passover on the one day, once per year…They keep the Passover on whichever day the fourteenth of the month falls…Christ had to be slain on the fourteenth of the month in accordance with the law (Epiphanius. The Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis, Books II and III (Sects 47-80), De Fide). Section IV, Verses 1,3;1,6;2,6. Translated by Frank Williams. EJ Brill, New York, 1994, pp. 23-25).

http://www.cogwriter.com/news/church-history/tpm-advocates-wrong-passover-date/

In the simple practice of the memorial Supper, the "Christian Passover", we identify - annually - with our Saviour in his terrible sufferings throughout that night and the following day. It's a solemn ceremony Christians can observe in any place and in any circumstance of poverty or abundance. Indeed the apostle corrected the Corinthians for turning the occasion into a binge, telling them to separate the memorial meal from any form of partying (I Corinthians 11:17ff)!

http://www.abcog.org/nh/passover.htm

not a jehovahs witness websight

how many references will ittake to convince you that the feast of the saviours passover is one and the same as the lords evening meal? celebrated annualy, by the early church, on the corresponding Jewish calender month of Nisan the fourteenth, i could spend hours but my word makes no progrees with you, for you have an agenda of advocating the teachings of Catholicism and the apostasies of the nicene creed! any child could discern that they are one and the same, it is now quite apparent that this is so. i ask anyone who is interested in an objective point of view, simply google feast of saviours passover and see how it equates to the lords evening meal!

Originally posted by Conrau K
The words of the Catholic Catechism make clear that Easter and the paschal feast and passover are the same event:

1170 At the Council of Nicaea in 325, all the Churches agreed that Easter, the Christian Passover, should be celebrated on the Sunday following the first full moon (14 Nisan) after the vernal equinox. Because of the different methods of calcu ...[text shortened]... day of the Lord's Resurrection on a common date.

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/1170.htm