The word 'Easter' is not in the Bible, so why do so many churches celebrate it?  Is it okay to celebrate Christmas and Easter as Christ's birth and resurrection?

 

Sincerely,
Easter Egg Hunter

Dear Easter Egg Hunter,

Christmas, Easter, St. Valentine's Day, St. Patrick's Day, Lent, and Good Friday are all examples of religious holidays that are not mentioned in the Bible.  So where do they come from?  The following history of Easter comes directly from International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, an accepted and respected source of religious history:

"The English word comes from the 'Eastre' or 'Estera', a Teutonic goddess to whom sacrifice was offered in April, so the name was transferred to the paschal feast.  The word does not properly occur in Scripture, although the Annotated Version has it in Acts 12:4 where it stands for Passover, as it is rightly rendered in Revised Version.  There is no trace of Easter celebration in the New Testament, though some would see an intimation of it in 1 Cor 5:7." (ISBE)

Easter's roots are not Biblical - but pagan.  It's very name is a reflection of that fact.  There is nothing wrong with celebrating Easter as a holiday, but it is important that we not confuse a secular holiday with a Biblical commandment.  Paul warned that we can't place importance upon any day beyond what Christ has already commanded His church (Col 2:16-17).  Unfortunately, society has emphasized non-Biblical days such as Christmas, Easter, Lent, etc. as being of great value and importance.  Easter Sunday and Christmas mass are traditionally the most significant events of the year to much of the Judeo-Christian world.  That ought not to be.  Christ commands that we remember His death and resurrection every Sunday (Acts 20:7, 1 Cor 11:26).  That is where Christ placed His emphasis.  We should do the same.

Why is the Lord's Supper offered on Sunday nights as well as Sunday mornings? They didn't offer it in the 1st century. If it were available twice, then why are we commanded to "wait for one another" 1 Cor 12:33? If they had a second offering, wouldn't they have no need to wait for each other?

 

Sincerely,
One Too Many

Dear One Too Many,

Waiting for one another has nothing to do with only offering communion once.  We are commanded to take the Lord's Supper as a remembrance of Christ (1 Cor 11:24-25).  We are given the example that the church took it on the first day of the week, i.e. Sunday (Acts 20:7).  We are also commanded to wait for each other before partaking (1 Cor. 11:33).

So the question is, what does waiting for each other look like?  Does every member have to be there?  Is it still waiting for each other if someone is sick that day, and we take communion without them?  What if people are traveling?  Of course, we could never take the Lord's Supper if we waited for each other in this manner!  To understand what Paul meant when he commanded the Corinthian church to wait for each other, you have to see the context that he said it in.

The Corinthian church was treating the Lord's Supper like a common meal (1 Cor. 11:20-22).  They were eating it in a common, disorderly, unholy manner.  Paul reprimanded them for that - and rightfully so.  The solution was to wait for each other, to do it in an organized fashion.  They were to set aside a time to take the Lord's Supper on the first day of the week, so that all could be there.  By offering it twice, you aren't violating the command to wait for each other - in fact you are upholding it!  The Lord's Supper is being taken in a organized fashion, so that all can remember and examine themselves as God intended.

My question revolves around the gift of tongues.  I was invited to a church to be prayed for as a teacher in the community.  As I was on stage, a pastor started praying for me. During the prayer, he started speaking in tongues without an interpreter. I have read the passages in the bible discussing tongues; however, I am confused on the "proper" use of tongues. What do you think about the gifts of tongues?

 

Sincerely,
Tongue Tied

There was a proper way to use tongues back in the first century, but speaking in tongues today has no resemblance to that practice.  God endowed certain christians with the ability to perform miracles through the apostles (Acts 8:18).  One of those abilities was speaking in tongues - the ability to miraculous speak in other REAL languages (Acts 2:4-11).  Paul re-emphasizes this point in 1 Cor 14:10.  That is exactly why Paul instructed the Corinthians to have an interpreter.

The modern practice of speaking in tongues involves people speaking in what they call "hidden" or "spiritual" languages that make no sense to anyone, anywhere.  There is no example of this type of speaking in tongues anywhere in the New Testament.

Miraculous gifts were given to the first century church because they did not have the complete Bible as we do.  Miracles were a confirmation that those preaching were sent by God (Mk 16:20); they were how God bore witness that these men were His servants (Heb 2:2-4).  These miracles were necessary at that time, but now that the perfect Word of God has been completed, they are no longer needed (1 Cor 13:8-10).  We have all the prophecies of God written down, all the divine knowledge is in God's Word, and the Bible is translated into every language on the planet.  Now that is something worth talking about!

     Hello again, and may God continue to bless you all.  My question is concerning a trend in the Lord’s church and its consequences.  I am having trouble concerning fellowshipping with the denominational world.  I don't believe it is a good idea for the Lord’s church’s members to be thrown up together with speakers that are not Christians… i.e. at Christian youth rallies, inviting them in during Bible study, or holding breakfast with them to show our support for each other.  We are to be in the world, NOT of the world.  I think it shows an acceptance of their false doctrine, and waters us down… not to mention confusing our own on where we stand and why.

I don't hate the sinner, just the sin, but we need to draw the line and say, “That's it.”  Thanks a lot.

Sincerely,
Influenced

Dear Influenced,

There is nothing wrong with studying with people from the denominational world in hopes of converting them to the one true church of Jesus Christ (Eph 4:4-6), but it is dead wrong to support false teachers.

2 Jhn 1:10 says that we shouldn’t even give a greeting to those that are false teachers.  We cannot in any way confuse people by supporting the denominational world.  The denominations have left the basic teachings of Christ, and these religious leaders are destroying people’s souls.  They nullify God’s laws in order to keep their traditions (Mk 7:9).  Jude warned that false teachers are like hidden rocks that sink ships and shepherds that fail to protect the flock (Jude 1:12).  God’s church should have no communion with the doctrines of demons (1 Tim 4:1).

     Are there different things a church can do when they are assembled together versus not in an official assembly?

Sincerely,
Events Planner

Dear Events Planner,

Whenever the local church functions as a group, they have only three things that they are authorized to do: teach the saved, preach to the lost, and care for needy Christians (read “Purpose Driven Church” for specifics on the work of the church).  This is true in the worship service, and it is also true with any other group decision and action.  The local church is the pillar and ground of the truth every day of the week (1 Tim 3:15).