This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 |
Right now the article presents Easter as a purely Christian event, seemingly existing in a vacuum, and devoid of the syncretic and secular elements that accrue around, influenced, or develop with modern popular western holidays. This isn't the reality. Regarding popular Easter customs see, for example, from the American Encyclopedia of Folklore, an academic work ( [1]):
- "Eggs and hares, for instance, both carry associations with a goddess of spring, and, further, symbolize fertility. By the same logic, the baskets—or in some cases, nests—children prepare and leave to be filled by the Easter Bunny represent nurture and rebirth. " (p. 121)
Moreover:
"Although the image of a hare does not relate directly to the sacred purpose of Easter, the resurrection of Jesus Christ, it does carry an association with a pre-Christian goddess of spring. It also symbolizes fertility. Both ideas are tied, however tenuously, to Easter's general theme of renewal and rebirth." (p. 122)
Specifically regarding the Easter Bunny:
"By custom, the Easter Bunny pays an annual visit to contribute to the holiday enjoyment of children at this time of year. It is the Easter Bunny who many children believe fills the empty baskets, nests, or hats boys and girls leave out before Easter. Consequently, the candy and treats made available at this season often pay tribute to the Easter Bunny, especially in terms of the traditional confection of chocolate molded into a rabbit. Some children also consider the items in use at special Easter festivities, such as egg rolls and e.g. hunts, were provided or hidden by the Easter Bunny for their benefit." (p. 122)
I get the impression that this article really goes out of the way to whitewash out secular observance of this holiday and syncretic elements. Easter remains a major Christian holiday, but it's not only that. One wouldn't know that by taking the time to read this article. :bloodofox: ( talk) 18:18, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
- "The move away from official governmental sanction of Easter has not retarded development of a national Easter culture, which centers primarily around an extra religious elements of the holiday day, many of which probably derive from pre-Christian fertility symbolism in Europe. The gift-bearing Easter bunny and Easter egg hunts and rolls (one of which occurs on the White House lawn) need not reflect Easter's religious significance, but can suggest reawakened fecundity of spring. This season focus has also made Easter a time for purchasing and wearing new clothing in bright and pastel colors to contrast with the somber hues of winter attire." (p.455)
After thinking about this a while, it still seems to me that the Etymology section is displaced in this article. It may be that this position is the one commonly used in many articles, but consider that for most topics the name is directly associated with the topic itself, often close to its inception, or at least prominence. In this case, "Easter" is the deviant term, the one used in relatively restricted circumstances in time as well as geography, and in fact is derived not from anything to do with the observance itself, but from a tacked-on association developed in an even more restricted environment. Really, it is an artifact of the English language (perhaps German as well), and not the term used during centuries of undivided Christianity and in large parts of Christendom to the present day. Etymological discussion of "Easter" as a term properly belongs to an adjunct position, like where I moved it before being reverted. The article would also do better to discuss in a more prominent way the etymology and meaning of "Pascha", which is the term directly attached to the Christian holiday and its origins. Evensteven ( talk) 17:30, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
There was an objection to my link to the Attic calendar. At first, the Roman church was still using tables based on an 8-year cycle. There are other wiki pages linking that cycle (the octaeteris) with the Attic calendar, but fair enough: the Romans got their astronomy from the Greeks but I don't have a source with an explicit link and it's a simple-enough pattern that it could have been independently invented.
At the same time, Esoglou, with thanks for watching over the page, do not get so trigger-happy that you simply revert unquestionable improvements—links to octaeteris and Augustalis—along with one or two contentious aspects. — LlywelynII 00:42, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
If there are WP:UNDUE concerns, we still WP:PRESERVE the information, but it may be time to shunt a good chunk of text to a new page on the History of Easter. It certainly needs clearing up: Nicaea's treatment of Easter was part of the reaction against those following Jewish dating, not something separate from it. — LlywelynII 00:53, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
In the lead section, the following text with respect to the date of Easter appears:
...the date of Easter as the first Sunday after the full moon (the Paschal Full Moon) following the March equinox.
Both "after" and "following" have a common implication that disallows coincidence. Using that implication, consider the case of the ecclesiastical equinox falling on 21 March. The earliest date for the Paschal Full Moon that follows that would be 22 March, and the earliest date for the first Sunday after that, i.e., the earliest date for Easter, would be 23 March -- which is incorrect, as Easter can fall on 22 March.
Clearly, either the term "after" or the term "following" should be changed to "on or after."
The Wikipedia articles http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easter_controversy#Second_phase [1] and /info/en/?search=First_Council_of_Nicaea#Separation_of_Easter_computation_from_Jewish_calendar [2] state that Easter should come after the equinox.
Note that the Wikipedia article on the Paschal Full Moon ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paschal_Full_Moon [3]) states the following, which is not inconsistent with the previously cited articles:
The date of Easter is determined as the first Sunday after the first paschal full moon falling on or after the Spring Equinox (March 21).
Note the key clause "on or after," which differs from the other articles but properly allows for Easter to occur on 22 March.
If correct, the term "following" should be changed to "on or after", and this same edit should be made in other Wikipedia articles that have comparable statements about the date of Easter.
ChuckEdN ( talk) 15:24, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
In the year 2019 vernal equinox will occur at Mar 20, 21:58 UTC and first full moon after it, at Mar 21, 01:43 UTC. Georges Theodosiou — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.4.224.210 ( talk) 11:20, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
It's a real bind that "Easter" is semi - protected. References 46 and 81 need work. I asked an administrator to unprotect and my request was archived. Maybe IP editors are not taken notice of? Could someone with knowledge of the above case ask one of the administrators there (e.g. Lankiveil) to do it? This is supposed to be the encyclopaedia anyone can edit and four years is a long time. 156.61.250.250 ( talk) 19:00, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Easter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please delete 2014 as its useless 92.161.223.95 ( talk) 09:06, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
What is Eid al-Adha? It is a Muslim feast that, to quote Wikipedia, "honors the willingness of Abraham (Ibrahim) to sacrifice his young first-born son Ishmael (Ismail)a as an act of submission to God's command, before God then intervened to provide Abraham with a lamb to sacrifice instead". That is what is essential about it and Wikipedia is right to define it as such. It is also a public holiday in some countries. A five-day holiday in the Sudan: an official explained to me that it is traditional for each married man to sacrifice a sheep or a goat for the feast; in his family, he said, "we are four married brothers and so we need five days to celebrate the feast". Non-Muslims in the Sudan celebrate the five-day holiday too, though not as a for them religious feast. They celebrate it in non-religious ways, even if they too may eat the meat of sheep or goats. That does not alter what the feast is in itself. The feast is called by various names in various languages: in the Sudan, it is called by the Turkish name of Corban Bairam. That does not alter what the feast is in itself. Customs, names, ways of celebrating, and the supposed origins of these do fit in an article on Eid al-Adha, but they should not be allowed to obscure what Eid al-Adha is.
All dictionaries agree on the definition of Easter. See Oxford English Dictionaries, Merriam-Webster. What Easter is in itself is clear. When, long after it originated, the name "Easter" was given to it, that did not alter what Easter is in itself. When it was introduced into areas where, as is claimed, a Germanic goddess was celebrated in the spring (not necessarily on exactly the same date), that did not alter what Easter is in itself. The attachment to it of various customs and usages, and its non-religious celebration, did not alter what Easter is in itself. All these matters have a place in an article on Easter, but they should not be allowed to obscure what Easter is. Esoglou ( talk) 06:55, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
This argument is based on both philosophic and linguistic essentialism, the notion that things and concepts have unique and distinct essences. While this is a valid position, it is distinctly a minority position in academia. Therefore it is not a satisfactory basis for deciding to omit anything from a Wikipedia article. Burressd ( talk) 21:51, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
Just published today: [3]. -- Softlavender ( talk) 12:19, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Easter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
2602:306:B80C:8870:79D1:D28D:5A94:A84 ( talk) 07:00, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Easter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
This is not a Christian Ritual, but a catholic beginning so don't forget about putting that also. 2602:306:B80C:8870:79D1:D28D:5A94:A84 ( talk) 07:02, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
Please make resurrection of Jesus Christ at the introduction only one blue link. Using one link for 'resurrection of' and another for 'Jesus Christ' is really exaggeration, and too many blue links only make crowd and create confusion... Thank you. -- 141.196.196.99 ( talk) 14:56, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
This article mentions that some consider Easter to have pagan roots, but doesn't discuss this it beyond that (or if it does, it does so without using the word pagan). Can someone expand on this in a dedicated paragraph? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:15, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Additionally, neither does the article mention the pagan connection to the origin of the word Easter. That is, having the Greek word Ostera or Eostre (Anglo-Saxon goddess of spring) as it's origin. Neither is there any reference to the Wiki page ( http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostara) relating to it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.28.125.12 ( talk) 02:23, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
I came to this page to find links to academic controversies over the word and concept and content and ancient origins and antecedents and analogues of the Easter celebration. I'm annoyed they weren't here (at least at the time I visited the page). It is an extreme disservice to the reader to omit links to an important controversy merely because of what may be dogmatic religious beliefs on the part of some of the editors. (Essentialism by the way the way tends to be a marker of conservative Christian beliefs.) I view that simple censorship: it is a violation of NPOV to eliminate links to an actual academic controversy. Burressd ( talk) 21:59, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
I've noticed too the lack of reference to Easter as first being a Pagan day of celebration of the spring equinox and the worship of the Pagan goddess of fertility. Too much attention given to the cover artists here, not the original artists! The oracle 2015 ( talk) 20:45, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The official Greek name of Easter is NOT Pascha, but Lambre (Lampre) [Greek Λαμπρη] from Greek Lambros/ Λαμπρος meaning 'to shine' [the English word 'lamp' i.e. light bulb comes from the same root]. This is reflected in the English version of the word 'Easter' which originates from the proto-indo European 'Austro' also meaning 'to shine'. Additionally, the ancient Greek word 'Astro' means 'Star' and also denotes an object shining brightly. So, the name of Easter in Greek is LAMBRE. You have to research this and make the correction. Pascha is derived from Jewish customs which is NOT the correct word for Easter. Lambre is, or 'the Shining', which in the past referred to the Goddess of the Dawn Eostre and Ostara (austros), but obviously now refers to the new 'light', or shining of Jesus Christ. Another notable connection here should be written down probably, that the ancient Greek God Zeus also was called 'the Shining Father', from the old Sanskrit root 'Diau' meaning 'to shine'. Therefore, it has been common over the ages to denote Gods as shining, or owners of light, or bringing the light. This is not exception with Jesus Christ. Thank you. I am awaiting for an answer and I will check again this post. Please do consult/ contact any Greek authorized person to furnish you with the correct information about Easter, it is called Lambre officially in Greek and not the perhaps common Pascha as usually may be termed. Sincerely. 46.251.102.152 ( talk) 11:13, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Thank you, Sir for your prompt answer. I think proof is the fact that the direct translation of Easter [or Eoster/ Ostara/ Austro/ aus] which means 'dawn', or 'to shine' to the Greek language is 'Lambre/ Lambros' from the Greek verb 'Lambo' [Λαμπω] meaning 'to shine'. Actually apparently is the opposite i.e. the English word Easter may be a direct translation/ association with the Greek word 'Lambre' since the Greek Christian Church is more-or-less perhaps one of the oldest Christian Churches, thus those who humbly actually kept the tradition of Jesus Christ and the Apostles, so the Greek word probably took precedence to the English equivalent word.
If you would like additional proof, then I will have to find an authorized either priest, or I contact the Greek archdiocese, or a Greek university professor who is specializing in Theology to furnish me with the relevant information. I may require some time until i prepare such a proof, so perhaps we leave this topic open, until I conclude my search. Thank you for taking your time in reviewing this topic. Sincerely, 46.251.102.152 ( talk) 11:17, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
This is the article about the main feast in Christianity, the wikilink I suggest is the one to Jesus' place in Christianity (which is the reason for the feast). It's really pretty simple. Evensteven ( talk) 18:02, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
The Jesus in Christianity article refers not to a person? Well, that is the essence of your argument, and of those preceding you. I will say again that that is personal opinion, a bias. Both articles are about a person. One is more biographical, the other more religious. But it is all about a person. To argue as all of you are doing is simply to make a point about how religion is false and therefore that anything that it has to say has no connection to reality. I can recognize as well as the next person that that's a common perception, and a very convenient one for those who wish to adopt it. But it remains only a put-down, dismissiveness. I don't expect anyone to make any life-changing decisions here. I do expect WP to speak in an unbiased voice, per its policies. And I can also see that, to date, bias prevails. Therein lies the cause of my feistiness above, though you may have thought I was on a soapbox. I wasn't; I'm not. If you are unwilling to hear me, so be it; you are free to do so. If you think that helps WP, I remain unconvinced, having heard only opinion, but I have felt very strongly that the point needed to be made. WP is what we (together) make it. I've taken it as my responsibility to contribute my say in that. But WP is not a WP:BATTLEGROUND, not even about policy, because it can't work if it is (so what would be the point?). Evensteven ( talk) 14:36, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
about Christian beliefs about that personis an article about Christ as a human being, of physical presence in history, and is every bit as much about the historical person as the other article. The article "Jesus" is also about Jesus of Nazareth, but without reference to Christianity, and its material is limited to what can be derived from documentary and outside evidence, since its purpose seems to be to separate him from religion. Well, there's nothing wrong with describing that evidence, or using it in a scholarly way for what it's worth, and making that the topic of a WP article. And quite clearly there is plenty of work that has been done in that direction, and plenty of notability of that work, etc, everything requisite. The thing is, that article presents Jesus from a viewpoint that differs from that of Christianity, within which there can be no such separation. That separate viewpoint seems to be desired by those who do not accept Christianity, and who view the Christian doctrines with disbelief. Again, fine. WP knows a good and reasonable way to deal with viewpoints, and having an entire article that describes a viewpoint is also reasonable when there is so much material, as in this case.
Rwenonah, I very much appreciate your return here also in this manner, for this comment is respectful and shows no bias. For much of bias is the manner in which POV is expressed, but also in a person's inability to countenance a differing POV. We each have our POVs still, and that is surely to be expected. But you have put away bias, and that is to be commended. It's what makes WP:Civility work.
Let's dispose of peripheral matters first. The English name "Easter" is a naming anomaly peculiar to our language, and its connections to paganism do not remotely affect the holiday. There's no harm in a secular or nonreligious holiday that uses bunnies or egg painting, and for all I care, it can be called Easter too. And I'm not in denial about present-day western culture and its disinterest in religion generally. But that's current demographics only.
The origin of Pascha (the foundational name) derives from Hebrew and is Christian. The holiday has always been a Christian one, and still is just as much as it used to be. Secular society has co-opted the name Easter (that's ok) and some celebrations (like egg hunts) and celebrates a secular holiday. That one is not the same as the religious holiday, which remains religious. And some people in the west celebrate both, so there's quite a bit of cross-celebration. But that doesn't negate the religion in the religious festival. What you do see is that there are also many people who do not take their religion very much to heart, and so everything they do treats religious matters lightly. And I grant how widespread that is. It still does not separate the Christian holiday from its religious base, neither its religious origins nor its current religious celebration. Many secular persons consciously shut out religion and its celebrations from their lives, preferring not to see them, but that does not mean they aren't there, nor does it mean that the religious celebrations are considered to be highly important to those who observe them, well, religiously. So the argument that Easter has virtually changed somehow isn't true. What has changed is peoples' behavior - but not all people. I think there are some biased anti-Christian advocates who wish to maintain the idea that religious Easter has disappeared, but that is a bias designed to dismiss those who don't share their POV. Don't be put off by my use of "bias". But understand that Orthodox Christianity has undergone repeated persecutions across most of its 2000-year history, as well as other less brutual contentiousness. The most serious it has ever known occurred in Soviet Russia under the Communists. It knows and recognizes all the gradations of disrespect from experience. That is, perhaps, one reason why eastern Christianity generally is so much more alert in its religious practice than western.
So now we're ready to head back towards my previous comment: the Christian faith (that's faith singular, as in the whole Church together) is 2000 years old, and is very much alive and present today. One foundation of that faith is in Jesus, the Christ, a single person who is both God the Son (in his divinity) and the Son of Man (in his humanity), and who in his humanity lived on earth from around 3-4 BC to around AD 30. The article "Jesus in Christianity" is about that person. There is no article about "Christian ideas" because the only idea ever maintained throughout Christianity is that Jesus is a person, and a most exceptional person. Do I have an idea you are a person? Yes. But so what? Do I say you are a person. Yes. And that's what matters, because otherwise I'd just be talking to my own idea. You need to understand that Christianity in its entirety is not a "collection of ideas". That would merely be a philosophy. It is also not a "collection of beliefs". That would be a collage. It is a faith, a religious faith, a single thing, but a thing shared among people, and not just people still living, but people long dead. I couldn't give a hoot about anybody's idea about even a historical person, or a resurrection, or any other miracle, and consider that my religion, and neither have other Christians. To bring it up again, St Paul said "if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile",
1 Cor 15:17 and Christians have shared that faith. And as you have said, an idea cannot be resurrected
(well, maybe, but that's actually a different subject). The manner in which you are viewing these two WP articles makes no sense in term of Christianity. If what you say is really how Wikipedians want to characterize them, then the result is that there is no actual article about "Jesus in Christianity" at all. It would need to be retitled (if you want accuracy) to "Christian ideas about Jesus" (or some such).
All of which gets us back to how Easter (Pascha, really) is tied to Jesus, for the tie is through the religious festival in Christianity, and an article called "Jesus in Christianity" must be talking about the person who is Jesus. Biography is a wonderfully wide type of literature, by the way, and our modern approaches are not the only valid ones. But biography itself is also not the only way to talk about a person. Evensteven ( talk) 00:49, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
Looks like we'll have to agree to disagree. Rwenonah ( talk) 01:05, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Easter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I would like to add the following information ( source, p.1 Daily Telegraph Saturday 16 Jan. 2016 - and probably other UK newspapers) to the Dates of Easter section Deecej ( talk) 14:15, 16 January 2016 (UTC) On Friday 15th January 2015 The Archbishop of Canterbury, The Most Reverend Justin Welby announced that Anglican leaders would join discussions with other church leaders about a move to fix the date of Easter. Archbishop Welby said that primates had agreed to join talks initiated by the head of the Coptic orthodox Church, Pope Twadros II on fixing a date for Easter and that following a meeting of bishops and archbishops, Anglican leaders had voted to join discussions with the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches to set an annual date. He said that Easter should most likely be fixed for the second or third Sunday of April, but that he did not expect any change to happen "for between five or ten years time."
What on earth is meant by "cynically depicting"? Could anyone explain, or remove this clause?
-- 188.95.247.163 ( talk) 11:12, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
Introduction, paragraph 3, near end : "full moon" should be "Ecclesiastical Full Moon", for which there is a page to link to. The behaviour of the actual Astronomical Moon is no longer relevant to finding the Date of Easter Sunday. 94.30.84.71 ( talk) 15:47, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 6 external links on
Easter. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 02:08, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Easter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the Easter page under theological significance it says that Christians believe Easter allows for a 'spiritual resurrection' for Christians that believe in Jesus. There are quite a number of Christians who believe that when Jesus returns we will experience a Physical resurrection, and that this is in fact the meaning of Easter. That this is a historical belief is shown by reading the apostles creed where it refers to 'and we look forward to the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting'. My request is simply that the word 'spiritual' be deleted from 'spiritual resurrection'. Thank you. 24.253.38.57 ( talk) 04:09, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template. —
JJMC89 (
T·
C) 05:45, 31 March 2016 (UTC)This
edit request to
Easter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The Easter entry needs to be fixed so that it does not reference Passover. Easter and Passover have nothing in common and are totally different. It's an insult to reference Passover as being similar to Easter'' Gschofer ( talk) 00:37, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Gschofer: That's quite an antichrist agenda you have there. Y'shua bar Yosef was lashed 39x and crucified on the first day of Passover Friday April 7, 30 AD / 7.4.783 AUC / 14 Nisan 3790 HC. The Jewish Messiah was born on Saturday (Sabbath) April 17, 6 BC / 17.4.748 AUC / 29 Nisan 3755 HC. God-incarnate was both born and crucified under the sign of Aries the Ram/Lamb and is known as the (Passover) "Lamb of GOD". 2601:589:4705:C7C0:99D1:6EC8:266C:262D ( talk) 21:53, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Easter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The 17th century Russian icon of the Resurrection is in fact Bulgarian, as can be seen in the details here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:17th-century_unknown_painters_-_The_Resurrection_of_Christ_-_WGA23478.jpg or here http://www.wga.hu/html_m/m/master/zunk_y/13icon.html Peter Vlahov ( talk) 12:13, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Easter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
there's a markup mistake: after passover, there should be two "'", but there is only one. Quote: derives from the Hebrew ''pesach'', ''passover'.|date= 20 January 1998}}
141.76.96.71 ( talk) 06:28, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
EDIT REQUEST - The original Easter Sunday was on April 9, 30 AD / 9.4.783 AUC / 16 Nisan 3790 HC. 2601:589:4705:C7C0:99D1:6EC8:266C:262D ( talk) 22:03, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
In 2025, Gregorian Easter and Julian Easter are on the same date, April 20. http://www.orthodoxchristian.info/pages/Pascha_dates.htm The WCC referenced page incorrectly says that the Julian date for Easter is May 20. This is wrong, both the Julian and the Gregorian Easter must fall on a Sunday. May 20, 2025 is a Tuesday.
This page has the correct date for 2025 /info/en/?search=List_of_dates_for_Easter Wynnac ( talk) 21:48, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
I find it quite strange that the article on "Easter" does not discuss the pagan origins of the tradition. There seems to be a bias here toward one particular religion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.205.236.66 ( talk) 23:16, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
The Religious observance section of the article has no references. This will prevent the article from being listed on the Main Page on Sunday. Many of the Holy Week articles have been omitted due to general lack of quality, and it would be a shame if this one were too. Thanks. — howcheng { chat} 06:56, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
By using the word matzah for the Last Supper, the article is biased. Orthodox Christians do not believe the bread at the Last Supper was unleavened bread. We believe the Last Supper was a preparatory meal for Passover not a Passover meal itself. To support this claim, the original Greek text in the Bilble (Luke, John, and Mark were originally written in Greek) uses the word ἄρτον which describes leavened bread. I would suggest just using the generic word bread instead of matzah. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.107.188.8 ( talk) 16:11, 20 April 2017 (UTC) There is no question Exodus refers to unleavened bread. That is not the discussion here. I have never seen any translation of the Bible that uses the word matzah. They all use bread when describing the Last Supper. When receiving the Holy Eucharist, Orthodox Christians use leavened bread not unleavened bread. As I said before; Mark, Luke, and John were originally written in Greek. The use the word arton which refers to leavened bread. I am not here to argue who is right regarding leavened versus unleavened bread. I am suggesting to use the work bread to make in acceptable to all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wolverineguy55 ( talk • contribs) 21:39, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Easter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The explanation "Jewish festival known in English as Passover, commemorating the Jewish Exodus from slavery in Egypt" is ambiguous and misleading. It seems to be a pandemic misunderstanding that "Passover" refers to the Israelites crossing the Red Sea and the Sinai desert fleeing slavery under the Egyptians. While this is certainly true of the Exodus, Passover specifically refers to the 10th plague visited on the Egyptians prior to flight where all the first born of Egypt were slain by the Angel of the Lord, except those with the Blood of the Lamb painted above their doorways. For these the angel of death "passed over" (when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and the plague shall not be upon you... Ex.12:13). Also, I suggest omitting the term "Jewish" before "Exodus", as not only Jews (children of the tribe of Judah) but all twelve tribes of Israel participated in the Exodus. Thus, I recommend an edit stating:
"Jewish festival known in English as Passover, commemorating the 10th of the Plagues of Egypt where the first born of Egypt were slain by the angel of death but the Israelites were "passed over" [1] prior to the Exodus from slavery in Egypt..." Jesrbryant ( talk) 17:31, 16 April 2017 (UTC)jesrbryant Jesrbryant ( talk) 17:31, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
Not done: the English term "Passover" derives from the passing-over of the 10th plague, but it's incorrect to say that the entire Pesach festival is based around that one specific detail, rather than the Exodus as a whole. Power~enwiki ( talk) 04:05, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
In the first para, there should be a short phrase stating something like, "according to Christian belief", as it relates to that and only that. 1.144.107.104 ( talk) 05:46, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Easter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In Canada, I don't think Easter Monday is a holiday. 2001:569:732D:2D00:555:503C:701D:C3A4 ( talk) 09:03, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 |
Right now the article presents Easter as a purely Christian event, seemingly existing in a vacuum, and devoid of the syncretic and secular elements that accrue around, influenced, or develop with modern popular western holidays. This isn't the reality. Regarding popular Easter customs see, for example, from the American Encyclopedia of Folklore, an academic work ( [1]):
- "Eggs and hares, for instance, both carry associations with a goddess of spring, and, further, symbolize fertility. By the same logic, the baskets—or in some cases, nests—children prepare and leave to be filled by the Easter Bunny represent nurture and rebirth. " (p. 121)
Moreover:
"Although the image of a hare does not relate directly to the sacred purpose of Easter, the resurrection of Jesus Christ, it does carry an association with a pre-Christian goddess of spring. It also symbolizes fertility. Both ideas are tied, however tenuously, to Easter's general theme of renewal and rebirth." (p. 122)
Specifically regarding the Easter Bunny:
"By custom, the Easter Bunny pays an annual visit to contribute to the holiday enjoyment of children at this time of year. It is the Easter Bunny who many children believe fills the empty baskets, nests, or hats boys and girls leave out before Easter. Consequently, the candy and treats made available at this season often pay tribute to the Easter Bunny, especially in terms of the traditional confection of chocolate molded into a rabbit. Some children also consider the items in use at special Easter festivities, such as egg rolls and e.g. hunts, were provided or hidden by the Easter Bunny for their benefit." (p. 122)
I get the impression that this article really goes out of the way to whitewash out secular observance of this holiday and syncretic elements. Easter remains a major Christian holiday, but it's not only that. One wouldn't know that by taking the time to read this article. :bloodofox: ( talk) 18:18, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
- "The move away from official governmental sanction of Easter has not retarded development of a national Easter culture, which centers primarily around an extra religious elements of the holiday day, many of which probably derive from pre-Christian fertility symbolism in Europe. The gift-bearing Easter bunny and Easter egg hunts and rolls (one of which occurs on the White House lawn) need not reflect Easter's religious significance, but can suggest reawakened fecundity of spring. This season focus has also made Easter a time for purchasing and wearing new clothing in bright and pastel colors to contrast with the somber hues of winter attire." (p.455)
After thinking about this a while, it still seems to me that the Etymology section is displaced in this article. It may be that this position is the one commonly used in many articles, but consider that for most topics the name is directly associated with the topic itself, often close to its inception, or at least prominence. In this case, "Easter" is the deviant term, the one used in relatively restricted circumstances in time as well as geography, and in fact is derived not from anything to do with the observance itself, but from a tacked-on association developed in an even more restricted environment. Really, it is an artifact of the English language (perhaps German as well), and not the term used during centuries of undivided Christianity and in large parts of Christendom to the present day. Etymological discussion of "Easter" as a term properly belongs to an adjunct position, like where I moved it before being reverted. The article would also do better to discuss in a more prominent way the etymology and meaning of "Pascha", which is the term directly attached to the Christian holiday and its origins. Evensteven ( talk) 17:30, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
There was an objection to my link to the Attic calendar. At first, the Roman church was still using tables based on an 8-year cycle. There are other wiki pages linking that cycle (the octaeteris) with the Attic calendar, but fair enough: the Romans got their astronomy from the Greeks but I don't have a source with an explicit link and it's a simple-enough pattern that it could have been independently invented.
At the same time, Esoglou, with thanks for watching over the page, do not get so trigger-happy that you simply revert unquestionable improvements—links to octaeteris and Augustalis—along with one or two contentious aspects. — LlywelynII 00:42, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
If there are WP:UNDUE concerns, we still WP:PRESERVE the information, but it may be time to shunt a good chunk of text to a new page on the History of Easter. It certainly needs clearing up: Nicaea's treatment of Easter was part of the reaction against those following Jewish dating, not something separate from it. — LlywelynII 00:53, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
In the lead section, the following text with respect to the date of Easter appears:
...the date of Easter as the first Sunday after the full moon (the Paschal Full Moon) following the March equinox.
Both "after" and "following" have a common implication that disallows coincidence. Using that implication, consider the case of the ecclesiastical equinox falling on 21 March. The earliest date for the Paschal Full Moon that follows that would be 22 March, and the earliest date for the first Sunday after that, i.e., the earliest date for Easter, would be 23 March -- which is incorrect, as Easter can fall on 22 March.
Clearly, either the term "after" or the term "following" should be changed to "on or after."
The Wikipedia articles http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easter_controversy#Second_phase [1] and /info/en/?search=First_Council_of_Nicaea#Separation_of_Easter_computation_from_Jewish_calendar [2] state that Easter should come after the equinox.
Note that the Wikipedia article on the Paschal Full Moon ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paschal_Full_Moon [3]) states the following, which is not inconsistent with the previously cited articles:
The date of Easter is determined as the first Sunday after the first paschal full moon falling on or after the Spring Equinox (March 21).
Note the key clause "on or after," which differs from the other articles but properly allows for Easter to occur on 22 March.
If correct, the term "following" should be changed to "on or after", and this same edit should be made in other Wikipedia articles that have comparable statements about the date of Easter.
ChuckEdN ( talk) 15:24, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
In the year 2019 vernal equinox will occur at Mar 20, 21:58 UTC and first full moon after it, at Mar 21, 01:43 UTC. Georges Theodosiou — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.4.224.210 ( talk) 11:20, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
It's a real bind that "Easter" is semi - protected. References 46 and 81 need work. I asked an administrator to unprotect and my request was archived. Maybe IP editors are not taken notice of? Could someone with knowledge of the above case ask one of the administrators there (e.g. Lankiveil) to do it? This is supposed to be the encyclopaedia anyone can edit and four years is a long time. 156.61.250.250 ( talk) 19:00, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Easter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please delete 2014 as its useless 92.161.223.95 ( talk) 09:06, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
What is Eid al-Adha? It is a Muslim feast that, to quote Wikipedia, "honors the willingness of Abraham (Ibrahim) to sacrifice his young first-born son Ishmael (Ismail)a as an act of submission to God's command, before God then intervened to provide Abraham with a lamb to sacrifice instead". That is what is essential about it and Wikipedia is right to define it as such. It is also a public holiday in some countries. A five-day holiday in the Sudan: an official explained to me that it is traditional for each married man to sacrifice a sheep or a goat for the feast; in his family, he said, "we are four married brothers and so we need five days to celebrate the feast". Non-Muslims in the Sudan celebrate the five-day holiday too, though not as a for them religious feast. They celebrate it in non-religious ways, even if they too may eat the meat of sheep or goats. That does not alter what the feast is in itself. The feast is called by various names in various languages: in the Sudan, it is called by the Turkish name of Corban Bairam. That does not alter what the feast is in itself. Customs, names, ways of celebrating, and the supposed origins of these do fit in an article on Eid al-Adha, but they should not be allowed to obscure what Eid al-Adha is.
All dictionaries agree on the definition of Easter. See Oxford English Dictionaries, Merriam-Webster. What Easter is in itself is clear. When, long after it originated, the name "Easter" was given to it, that did not alter what Easter is in itself. When it was introduced into areas where, as is claimed, a Germanic goddess was celebrated in the spring (not necessarily on exactly the same date), that did not alter what Easter is in itself. The attachment to it of various customs and usages, and its non-religious celebration, did not alter what Easter is in itself. All these matters have a place in an article on Easter, but they should not be allowed to obscure what Easter is. Esoglou ( talk) 06:55, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
This argument is based on both philosophic and linguistic essentialism, the notion that things and concepts have unique and distinct essences. While this is a valid position, it is distinctly a minority position in academia. Therefore it is not a satisfactory basis for deciding to omit anything from a Wikipedia article. Burressd ( talk) 21:51, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
Just published today: [3]. -- Softlavender ( talk) 12:19, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Easter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
2602:306:B80C:8870:79D1:D28D:5A94:A84 ( talk) 07:00, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Easter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
This is not a Christian Ritual, but a catholic beginning so don't forget about putting that also. 2602:306:B80C:8870:79D1:D28D:5A94:A84 ( talk) 07:02, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
Please make resurrection of Jesus Christ at the introduction only one blue link. Using one link for 'resurrection of' and another for 'Jesus Christ' is really exaggeration, and too many blue links only make crowd and create confusion... Thank you. -- 141.196.196.99 ( talk) 14:56, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
This article mentions that some consider Easter to have pagan roots, but doesn't discuss this it beyond that (or if it does, it does so without using the word pagan). Can someone expand on this in a dedicated paragraph? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:15, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Additionally, neither does the article mention the pagan connection to the origin of the word Easter. That is, having the Greek word Ostera or Eostre (Anglo-Saxon goddess of spring) as it's origin. Neither is there any reference to the Wiki page ( http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostara) relating to it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.28.125.12 ( talk) 02:23, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
I came to this page to find links to academic controversies over the word and concept and content and ancient origins and antecedents and analogues of the Easter celebration. I'm annoyed they weren't here (at least at the time I visited the page). It is an extreme disservice to the reader to omit links to an important controversy merely because of what may be dogmatic religious beliefs on the part of some of the editors. (Essentialism by the way the way tends to be a marker of conservative Christian beliefs.) I view that simple censorship: it is a violation of NPOV to eliminate links to an actual academic controversy. Burressd ( talk) 21:59, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
I've noticed too the lack of reference to Easter as first being a Pagan day of celebration of the spring equinox and the worship of the Pagan goddess of fertility. Too much attention given to the cover artists here, not the original artists! The oracle 2015 ( talk) 20:45, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The official Greek name of Easter is NOT Pascha, but Lambre (Lampre) [Greek Λαμπρη] from Greek Lambros/ Λαμπρος meaning 'to shine' [the English word 'lamp' i.e. light bulb comes from the same root]. This is reflected in the English version of the word 'Easter' which originates from the proto-indo European 'Austro' also meaning 'to shine'. Additionally, the ancient Greek word 'Astro' means 'Star' and also denotes an object shining brightly. So, the name of Easter in Greek is LAMBRE. You have to research this and make the correction. Pascha is derived from Jewish customs which is NOT the correct word for Easter. Lambre is, or 'the Shining', which in the past referred to the Goddess of the Dawn Eostre and Ostara (austros), but obviously now refers to the new 'light', or shining of Jesus Christ. Another notable connection here should be written down probably, that the ancient Greek God Zeus also was called 'the Shining Father', from the old Sanskrit root 'Diau' meaning 'to shine'. Therefore, it has been common over the ages to denote Gods as shining, or owners of light, or bringing the light. This is not exception with Jesus Christ. Thank you. I am awaiting for an answer and I will check again this post. Please do consult/ contact any Greek authorized person to furnish you with the correct information about Easter, it is called Lambre officially in Greek and not the perhaps common Pascha as usually may be termed. Sincerely. 46.251.102.152 ( talk) 11:13, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Thank you, Sir for your prompt answer. I think proof is the fact that the direct translation of Easter [or Eoster/ Ostara/ Austro/ aus] which means 'dawn', or 'to shine' to the Greek language is 'Lambre/ Lambros' from the Greek verb 'Lambo' [Λαμπω] meaning 'to shine'. Actually apparently is the opposite i.e. the English word Easter may be a direct translation/ association with the Greek word 'Lambre' since the Greek Christian Church is more-or-less perhaps one of the oldest Christian Churches, thus those who humbly actually kept the tradition of Jesus Christ and the Apostles, so the Greek word probably took precedence to the English equivalent word.
If you would like additional proof, then I will have to find an authorized either priest, or I contact the Greek archdiocese, or a Greek university professor who is specializing in Theology to furnish me with the relevant information. I may require some time until i prepare such a proof, so perhaps we leave this topic open, until I conclude my search. Thank you for taking your time in reviewing this topic. Sincerely, 46.251.102.152 ( talk) 11:17, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
This is the article about the main feast in Christianity, the wikilink I suggest is the one to Jesus' place in Christianity (which is the reason for the feast). It's really pretty simple. Evensteven ( talk) 18:02, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
The Jesus in Christianity article refers not to a person? Well, that is the essence of your argument, and of those preceding you. I will say again that that is personal opinion, a bias. Both articles are about a person. One is more biographical, the other more religious. But it is all about a person. To argue as all of you are doing is simply to make a point about how religion is false and therefore that anything that it has to say has no connection to reality. I can recognize as well as the next person that that's a common perception, and a very convenient one for those who wish to adopt it. But it remains only a put-down, dismissiveness. I don't expect anyone to make any life-changing decisions here. I do expect WP to speak in an unbiased voice, per its policies. And I can also see that, to date, bias prevails. Therein lies the cause of my feistiness above, though you may have thought I was on a soapbox. I wasn't; I'm not. If you are unwilling to hear me, so be it; you are free to do so. If you think that helps WP, I remain unconvinced, having heard only opinion, but I have felt very strongly that the point needed to be made. WP is what we (together) make it. I've taken it as my responsibility to contribute my say in that. But WP is not a WP:BATTLEGROUND, not even about policy, because it can't work if it is (so what would be the point?). Evensteven ( talk) 14:36, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
about Christian beliefs about that personis an article about Christ as a human being, of physical presence in history, and is every bit as much about the historical person as the other article. The article "Jesus" is also about Jesus of Nazareth, but without reference to Christianity, and its material is limited to what can be derived from documentary and outside evidence, since its purpose seems to be to separate him from religion. Well, there's nothing wrong with describing that evidence, or using it in a scholarly way for what it's worth, and making that the topic of a WP article. And quite clearly there is plenty of work that has been done in that direction, and plenty of notability of that work, etc, everything requisite. The thing is, that article presents Jesus from a viewpoint that differs from that of Christianity, within which there can be no such separation. That separate viewpoint seems to be desired by those who do not accept Christianity, and who view the Christian doctrines with disbelief. Again, fine. WP knows a good and reasonable way to deal with viewpoints, and having an entire article that describes a viewpoint is also reasonable when there is so much material, as in this case.
Rwenonah, I very much appreciate your return here also in this manner, for this comment is respectful and shows no bias. For much of bias is the manner in which POV is expressed, but also in a person's inability to countenance a differing POV. We each have our POVs still, and that is surely to be expected. But you have put away bias, and that is to be commended. It's what makes WP:Civility work.
Let's dispose of peripheral matters first. The English name "Easter" is a naming anomaly peculiar to our language, and its connections to paganism do not remotely affect the holiday. There's no harm in a secular or nonreligious holiday that uses bunnies or egg painting, and for all I care, it can be called Easter too. And I'm not in denial about present-day western culture and its disinterest in religion generally. But that's current demographics only.
The origin of Pascha (the foundational name) derives from Hebrew and is Christian. The holiday has always been a Christian one, and still is just as much as it used to be. Secular society has co-opted the name Easter (that's ok) and some celebrations (like egg hunts) and celebrates a secular holiday. That one is not the same as the religious holiday, which remains religious. And some people in the west celebrate both, so there's quite a bit of cross-celebration. But that doesn't negate the religion in the religious festival. What you do see is that there are also many people who do not take their religion very much to heart, and so everything they do treats religious matters lightly. And I grant how widespread that is. It still does not separate the Christian holiday from its religious base, neither its religious origins nor its current religious celebration. Many secular persons consciously shut out religion and its celebrations from their lives, preferring not to see them, but that does not mean they aren't there, nor does it mean that the religious celebrations are considered to be highly important to those who observe them, well, religiously. So the argument that Easter has virtually changed somehow isn't true. What has changed is peoples' behavior - but not all people. I think there are some biased anti-Christian advocates who wish to maintain the idea that religious Easter has disappeared, but that is a bias designed to dismiss those who don't share their POV. Don't be put off by my use of "bias". But understand that Orthodox Christianity has undergone repeated persecutions across most of its 2000-year history, as well as other less brutual contentiousness. The most serious it has ever known occurred in Soviet Russia under the Communists. It knows and recognizes all the gradations of disrespect from experience. That is, perhaps, one reason why eastern Christianity generally is so much more alert in its religious practice than western.
So now we're ready to head back towards my previous comment: the Christian faith (that's faith singular, as in the whole Church together) is 2000 years old, and is very much alive and present today. One foundation of that faith is in Jesus, the Christ, a single person who is both God the Son (in his divinity) and the Son of Man (in his humanity), and who in his humanity lived on earth from around 3-4 BC to around AD 30. The article "Jesus in Christianity" is about that person. There is no article about "Christian ideas" because the only idea ever maintained throughout Christianity is that Jesus is a person, and a most exceptional person. Do I have an idea you are a person? Yes. But so what? Do I say you are a person. Yes. And that's what matters, because otherwise I'd just be talking to my own idea. You need to understand that Christianity in its entirety is not a "collection of ideas". That would merely be a philosophy. It is also not a "collection of beliefs". That would be a collage. It is a faith, a religious faith, a single thing, but a thing shared among people, and not just people still living, but people long dead. I couldn't give a hoot about anybody's idea about even a historical person, or a resurrection, or any other miracle, and consider that my religion, and neither have other Christians. To bring it up again, St Paul said "if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile",
1 Cor 15:17 and Christians have shared that faith. And as you have said, an idea cannot be resurrected
(well, maybe, but that's actually a different subject). The manner in which you are viewing these two WP articles makes no sense in term of Christianity. If what you say is really how Wikipedians want to characterize them, then the result is that there is no actual article about "Jesus in Christianity" at all. It would need to be retitled (if you want accuracy) to "Christian ideas about Jesus" (or some such).
All of which gets us back to how Easter (Pascha, really) is tied to Jesus, for the tie is through the religious festival in Christianity, and an article called "Jesus in Christianity" must be talking about the person who is Jesus. Biography is a wonderfully wide type of literature, by the way, and our modern approaches are not the only valid ones. But biography itself is also not the only way to talk about a person. Evensteven ( talk) 00:49, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
Looks like we'll have to agree to disagree. Rwenonah ( talk) 01:05, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Easter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I would like to add the following information ( source, p.1 Daily Telegraph Saturday 16 Jan. 2016 - and probably other UK newspapers) to the Dates of Easter section Deecej ( talk) 14:15, 16 January 2016 (UTC) On Friday 15th January 2015 The Archbishop of Canterbury, The Most Reverend Justin Welby announced that Anglican leaders would join discussions with other church leaders about a move to fix the date of Easter. Archbishop Welby said that primates had agreed to join talks initiated by the head of the Coptic orthodox Church, Pope Twadros II on fixing a date for Easter and that following a meeting of bishops and archbishops, Anglican leaders had voted to join discussions with the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches to set an annual date. He said that Easter should most likely be fixed for the second or third Sunday of April, but that he did not expect any change to happen "for between five or ten years time."
What on earth is meant by "cynically depicting"? Could anyone explain, or remove this clause?
-- 188.95.247.163 ( talk) 11:12, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
Introduction, paragraph 3, near end : "full moon" should be "Ecclesiastical Full Moon", for which there is a page to link to. The behaviour of the actual Astronomical Moon is no longer relevant to finding the Date of Easter Sunday. 94.30.84.71 ( talk) 15:47, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 6 external links on
Easter. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 02:08, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Easter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the Easter page under theological significance it says that Christians believe Easter allows for a 'spiritual resurrection' for Christians that believe in Jesus. There are quite a number of Christians who believe that when Jesus returns we will experience a Physical resurrection, and that this is in fact the meaning of Easter. That this is a historical belief is shown by reading the apostles creed where it refers to 'and we look forward to the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting'. My request is simply that the word 'spiritual' be deleted from 'spiritual resurrection'. Thank you. 24.253.38.57 ( talk) 04:09, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template. —
JJMC89 (
T·
C) 05:45, 31 March 2016 (UTC)This
edit request to
Easter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The Easter entry needs to be fixed so that it does not reference Passover. Easter and Passover have nothing in common and are totally different. It's an insult to reference Passover as being similar to Easter'' Gschofer ( talk) 00:37, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Gschofer: That's quite an antichrist agenda you have there. Y'shua bar Yosef was lashed 39x and crucified on the first day of Passover Friday April 7, 30 AD / 7.4.783 AUC / 14 Nisan 3790 HC. The Jewish Messiah was born on Saturday (Sabbath) April 17, 6 BC / 17.4.748 AUC / 29 Nisan 3755 HC. God-incarnate was both born and crucified under the sign of Aries the Ram/Lamb and is known as the (Passover) "Lamb of GOD". 2601:589:4705:C7C0:99D1:6EC8:266C:262D ( talk) 21:53, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Easter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The 17th century Russian icon of the Resurrection is in fact Bulgarian, as can be seen in the details here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:17th-century_unknown_painters_-_The_Resurrection_of_Christ_-_WGA23478.jpg or here http://www.wga.hu/html_m/m/master/zunk_y/13icon.html Peter Vlahov ( talk) 12:13, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Easter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
there's a markup mistake: after passover, there should be two "'", but there is only one. Quote: derives from the Hebrew ''pesach'', ''passover'.|date= 20 January 1998}}
141.76.96.71 ( talk) 06:28, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
EDIT REQUEST - The original Easter Sunday was on April 9, 30 AD / 9.4.783 AUC / 16 Nisan 3790 HC. 2601:589:4705:C7C0:99D1:6EC8:266C:262D ( talk) 22:03, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
In 2025, Gregorian Easter and Julian Easter are on the same date, April 20. http://www.orthodoxchristian.info/pages/Pascha_dates.htm The WCC referenced page incorrectly says that the Julian date for Easter is May 20. This is wrong, both the Julian and the Gregorian Easter must fall on a Sunday. May 20, 2025 is a Tuesday.
This page has the correct date for 2025 /info/en/?search=List_of_dates_for_Easter Wynnac ( talk) 21:48, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
I find it quite strange that the article on "Easter" does not discuss the pagan origins of the tradition. There seems to be a bias here toward one particular religion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.205.236.66 ( talk) 23:16, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
The Religious observance section of the article has no references. This will prevent the article from being listed on the Main Page on Sunday. Many of the Holy Week articles have been omitted due to general lack of quality, and it would be a shame if this one were too. Thanks. — howcheng { chat} 06:56, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
By using the word matzah for the Last Supper, the article is biased. Orthodox Christians do not believe the bread at the Last Supper was unleavened bread. We believe the Last Supper was a preparatory meal for Passover not a Passover meal itself. To support this claim, the original Greek text in the Bilble (Luke, John, and Mark were originally written in Greek) uses the word ἄρτον which describes leavened bread. I would suggest just using the generic word bread instead of matzah. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.107.188.8 ( talk) 16:11, 20 April 2017 (UTC) There is no question Exodus refers to unleavened bread. That is not the discussion here. I have never seen any translation of the Bible that uses the word matzah. They all use bread when describing the Last Supper. When receiving the Holy Eucharist, Orthodox Christians use leavened bread not unleavened bread. As I said before; Mark, Luke, and John were originally written in Greek. The use the word arton which refers to leavened bread. I am not here to argue who is right regarding leavened versus unleavened bread. I am suggesting to use the work bread to make in acceptable to all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wolverineguy55 ( talk • contribs) 21:39, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Easter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The explanation "Jewish festival known in English as Passover, commemorating the Jewish Exodus from slavery in Egypt" is ambiguous and misleading. It seems to be a pandemic misunderstanding that "Passover" refers to the Israelites crossing the Red Sea and the Sinai desert fleeing slavery under the Egyptians. While this is certainly true of the Exodus, Passover specifically refers to the 10th plague visited on the Egyptians prior to flight where all the first born of Egypt were slain by the Angel of the Lord, except those with the Blood of the Lamb painted above their doorways. For these the angel of death "passed over" (when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and the plague shall not be upon you... Ex.12:13). Also, I suggest omitting the term "Jewish" before "Exodus", as not only Jews (children of the tribe of Judah) but all twelve tribes of Israel participated in the Exodus. Thus, I recommend an edit stating:
"Jewish festival known in English as Passover, commemorating the 10th of the Plagues of Egypt where the first born of Egypt were slain by the angel of death but the Israelites were "passed over" [1] prior to the Exodus from slavery in Egypt..." Jesrbryant ( talk) 17:31, 16 April 2017 (UTC)jesrbryant Jesrbryant ( talk) 17:31, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
Not done: the English term "Passover" derives from the passing-over of the 10th plague, but it's incorrect to say that the entire Pesach festival is based around that one specific detail, rather than the Exodus as a whole. Power~enwiki ( talk) 04:05, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
In the first para, there should be a short phrase stating something like, "according to Christian belief", as it relates to that and only that. 1.144.107.104 ( talk) 05:46, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Easter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In Canada, I don't think Easter Monday is a holiday. 2001:569:732D:2D00:555:503C:701D:C3A4 ( talk) 09:03, 1 April 2018 (UTC)