Historical Easter Question for Minimalist

[Tonus]

I like the idea that they took two "symbols of fertility" (rabbits and eggs) and came up with a rabbit that lays eggs. Or at least that's how I prefer to remember it.

[Minimalist]

Now xtians love to rattle on how "Paul" dates from the first century but the earliest we actually hear of him in solidly datable references is in the mid 2d century and Justin never heard of any "Paul" either....although he did hear of "Paul's" sponsor, Marcion.  The whole thing is very confusing because the handful of actual facts we have do not match up to xtian bullshit.

Can you elaborate on this? I thought the Epistles were dated to something like 20 years after the events described in the gospels. Or are you saying that it wasn't necessarily Paul who wrote them?

http://www.marcion.info/


Here, check this out first. 

Marcion wrote the first canon of the New Testament in AD 140. For centuries Marcion has been maligned as a heretic, since the Church Fathers like Tertullian accused him of taking the razor to the Bible and cutting out several of the Pauline epistles; Acts, 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus. In addition the only Gospel in Marcion's Bible is two thirds of Luke. Actually that's it. One Gospel and ten Pauline epistles, which means no Revelations and no Old Testament.


Christians like to tell us that Marcion changed the Bible to suit his theology. However it appeared to me from the beginning that before Marcion there was no documented history of Christianity as we know it. So for example there are no reliable historical contemporary accounts of Paul, Peter, Luke, Mark or even the Jesus that we think of today. Likewise archaeological New Testament fragments have been dated starting around 190 AD, again consistent with the first New Testament being written 140 AD.
In addition Bible scholars who actually question things have come to the conclusion that some of the Pauline epistles were added later than whoever wrote the first ones. Their conclusions are consistent with Marcion's Bible being the original text.

The group which eventually won out - and there were many xtian/gnostic groups running around the Eastern Roman empire - are called the proto-orthodox by Bart Ehrman.  They wrote an origin story of their own and denounced Marcion as a "heretic" but it seems that they were more than willing to take his writings and re-purpose them to their own use.  Of course, all we now have is emerged from their process of tinkering.  Who the hell knows what Marcion's originals had to say.

[abaris]

Easter - probably derived from the Germanic goddess Eostre - is a northern European term.

In the southern countries, France, Italy, etc. the term is some derivation of pesach which was the jewish term for Passover.

She's also called Ostara - hence the name "Easter" or more to the point the German word for it: "Ostern", which is literally derived from the name of the goddess. And of course she had her feast and celebration around the same time of the year.

As far as the christian date is concerned, it was the english monk Beda Venerabilis , who determined that Easter should be celebrated on the first sunday after the first full moon in spring. That was in the early 8th century. He died in 735.

[DeistPaladin]

More than likely, they were quite different. Paul's letters include tidbits like "seed of David" and "born of a woman" to describe Jesus. These features would have been wholly blasphemous to the Marcionites, who saw Jesus as a "higher god" than Yahweh, who rejected all things Jewish and who certainly would have rejected the idea of Jesus as a baby. The Marcionite Jesus came into this world as all gods do, appearing as a fully formed adult one day. 

So either:
1. Marcion read these things and promoted Paul, hoping no one else would read them.
2. Marcion promoted Paul as a prophet but never read his letters.
3. Marcion was working with a different set of letters. 

I'm going with option 3 as the most likely. 

[Minimalist]

4.  Marcion wrote/edited/compiled those letters.

[DeistPaladin]

4.  Marcion wrote/edited/compiled those letters.

I'm changing my choice to 4, then, but it is compatible with 3. 

[Pyrrho]

Where does the Easter bunny fit in? Was he an apostle, or perhaps even one of the Trinity?

As Tonus already indicated, rabbits have to do with fertility.  Which is also why there are Easter eggs.  As this is early spring, one can easily see the connection with (re)birth and fertility, as things are renewed.  This has been celebrated in many cultures for a very long time.

Basically, Christian holidays took over earlier, pagan celebrations, and incorporated some of the details to keep the locals happy.  Think about the fuss you would have if you want to stop people from celebrating something they have traditionally celebrated.  It is easier to convert people if you allow them to keep some of their local customs (and thus, we also have in Christianity the idea that circumcision is not required, as that would diminish the conversion rate considerably).

With Christmas, the tree has to do with earlier pagan celebrations, and the timing is near the winter solstice.  There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to think that Jesus was actually born on December 25, even if he existed at all.  But celebrating then keeps the holiday time when people were already celebrating anyway, and so Christianity just gave a different explanation for the celebration, without stopping people from doing the celebrations they were already doing, even allowing them to keep some of the details, which really make no sense as far as Christianity is concerned.

[Polaris]

Easter is a Pagan holiday again if christianity is true every single christian who does christmas and easter is going to hell.

What is called Easter in English and German (most world languages either call it either Passover or a word closely related to the word for Passover) is based upon the Jewish celebration of Passover in how it lead up to death of Jesus. In Western cultures, secular activities were later added based upon the celebrations of the time.....it's the weirdest of the Christian holidays in the West since there is an extreme distinction from the celebration within the Church and the celebration in the world. Also I believe, the Mithras cult co-opted some of the religious implications of the holiday in a last-ditch attempt when Rome was moving to ban the worship of pagan gods.

Christmas has traditionally been a holiday loathed by hardline Christians....in the Middle Ages, it was a rather debaucherous celebration and was banned on multiple occasions. Like Easter now, there used to be a fine distinction between the holy celebration and the celebration by the masses. But unlike Easter, Christmas was first a pagan holiday.

[Minimalist]

BTW, Summer... looks like Passover is a pile of shit, too.

http://askville.amazon.com/Passover-sede...d=49482203

A "Passover meal" dates back a long time. Presumably, the first Passover meal was held in the Wilderness, if you believe in the exodus from Egypt. But, the traditional seder as we know it today has its origins much later. I believe the current seder tradition stems heavily from 2 periods:

• Late 1st/2nd/3rd Centuries CE/AD, and
  
• Medieval times
  

[ThomM]

From another forum: 

"I need your help, my fellow damned souls -

I still haven't found out the exact timeline of the development of the Easter myth. Yes, the concept of the killed then resurrected deity is common in almost all ancient religions, but what I haven't pinpointed yet is how the execution of the political dissident Jesus of Nazareth in c. 30 CE morphed into what we know as the Easter story in less than a century.
Please share any academic scholarly references you may know of."



Any ideas? 

First - you must remember that there was no execution of a political dissident - the "christ' of these stories is not a person - but an amalgamation of dozens of different fictional texts of the time.

Now - think of the number of stories we have of the venerable James Bond - of whom we have far more details than that of the christ - down to his preferred libation. It is a LOT easier when you can make it all up yourself and don't have to bother yourself will mindless "reality".

But in fact it was not the writers that made up their stories that brought the "concept" of the christ together - it was the leaders of the religion - who decided to "choose" among the many and varied and conflicting stories  - and VOTED which should be included and which should not be. And that did not happen in less than a century - it took almost 4 centuries. Remember - there were LOTS of different stories and claims made by lots of different sects - most of which were deliberately destroyed once the "bible" was fully ratified. THe few that have survived to this day (Gospels of Thomas - and Mary Magdalene come to mind but there are others) all have far more MAJOR disagreements with the voted on persona of the christ.

And for that you have to get the reason WHY the New Testament was compiled (IT was not written as a single book). THat bring us to a Roman Emperor - Constantine I, who converted to "Christianity" and then required the church to compile the basis for their religion.  There were at the time - LOTS more gospels _ why only four - and why one of a person who could not have seen the christ if he had existed. So - the church called together a group pf Synods near the end of the fourth century CE(Including the Synod at Hippo among others) - and somewhere in them - and it is by no means agreed which - an accepted version of the "Bible" came to pass - the Latin Vulgate - as approved by Pope Jerome. While a clear "preference" for which "stories" would be included in the bible years before - it was not until the individual pieces were VOTED ON by the church leaders - and then made cannon by the Pope - did we actually have an idea what the Roman church - which would be the dominant christian church for ages - wanted their christ story to be.

Also remember that only the rich could actually afford their own books - AND  - the church made it a sin for the average follower to have a copy.