top of page


(under construction)


If you are going to refuse to keep Easter, or attack Easter as a Feast Day or a Holiday, it should be for spiritual reasons or reasons of Faith, not because of a pack of lies. Here I hope to prove many lies are told about Easter.



The real question is, "Is it permissible in the true Christian Faith, to have a time of remembrance once a year, to remember the death and resurrection of Jesus?" I believe the answer to this is clearly YES!


Over this true underlying question are place smoky clouds of diversion tactics, containing misleading phrases and words like "traditions" and "exact calendar days" and "exact names" etc.


If you allow yourself to be side-tracked by these other issues you will always say "No!" to a such a day of remembrance, even though it seems clear such a day is allowed, but not commanded, in the same way as communion is commanded.


If you think heretical groups would say you can have such a day, so long as you call it "The Lord's Day" not Easter, dont have any national traditions attached to it, dont have commercialism, etc etc You are almost certainly WRONG! So that means these issues by that very fact are shown to be red herrings. The Messianic Jews just want you only to keep the feast days of the old law, and other cults just love to home in on controversial "add-on" topics to fulfil their real hidden agenda of stumbling you into their cult.



Firstly that Easter is a national traditional holiday in Britain, and other countries is simply a fact. If you want to deny it as a holiday of the Christian Faith, you must nevertheless admit that to other people it is treated as a religious holiday or feast day.

So, is it the same if a person keeps Easter as a traditional national holiday, rather than as a "part of their religion" or Faith? Clearly not. In England their are many traditional national holidays, including Guy Fawlkes night, or Bon Fire Night, or in the USA such days as 4th of July. If an American watches a firework display and "keeps" 4th of July, does that mean they believe in war? Of course not. Even so Easter can be kept and yet not as a part of some "rule of Faith".



Let us be clear from the beginning that not all Christians believe in keeping Easter, as a traditional feast day, or as a feast day of their Faith. Among Christians there has been a great division. So much so that at one time Oliver Cromwell and the Puritans in England made it illegal to keep Christmas and Easter, as they were convinced the Roman Catholics started both as Feast Days. However they had no real proof for this, especially about Easter. Similarly Easter was also made illegal in the USA for a time, as early believers there were also determined to limit what they considered Catholic influences in society. So for cults like the Jehovah's Witnesses to use the tactic of trying to disprove Easter as anything to do with the real Faith in the bible, and then try to say by doing this (or trying to) they have in some way disproved the Evangelical Christian Faith, when among Christians themselves there is so much proof of division over the subject, is a very deceptive ploy by them. Some might even want to keep Easter partly because they do not want to be mistaken as having the same hypocritical beliefs as a man like Oliver Cromwell.



There is a link worth mentioning between Easter and what the Apostle John called "The Lord's Day" (Revelation 1:10). Christians usually believe this is Sunday, or the first day of the week, and not Saturday, the 7th day. Some might argue that it is a natural progression from honouring this day with both a title, and the habit of assembling on that day (Jesus also visited his disciples post resurrection several times on this day), and this leading to it becoming an holy day, feast day or holiday, as it was The Resurrection Day, linking it immediately to the Passion and Resurrection. It may therefore have possibly been kept as a day from early on in the Faith by some, particularly as the days of the year it is kept on are so clear for the most part. However if it was to be kept as a Feast day, they would simply not want to call it Passover, as Passover was a forward looking feast day, and it can be argued keeping it as an old time feast would therefore be blasphemous (in a similar way to the mass - that still has Jesus on the cross). So a new name would be likely to be given to the day that sort to look back to a "once for all" sacrifice and glorious resurrection like the "sun or righteousness with healing in his wings" to chose God's own comparison in the bible, and not forward as the old Passover feast did.


It is very unlikely indeed people living in the East from where the Faith first expanded out into the world would call such a feast day "Easter" as they lived in the East, so it may perhaps have first been named "The Lord's Day".



It is a very very serious allegation to make against a believer who choses to remember the cross and resurrection once a year in a special way, that they are keeping a so called "pagan feast" simply for wanting to do that. Here I believe I can prove it is a false accusation against the keeping once a year of "The Lord's Day."

The entire argument is largely based on 3 things

1) Calendar dates

2) Traditions like eggs, and bunnies

3) The name "Easter"

4) Commercialism



Easter almost always falls on the exact same days as the Jewish Passover, but every now and then there is a discrepency because the calendar the Jews use is different from the Western Calendar that we use today. It is this fact that is used to "prove" that the smple act of remembering Jesus dying and being resurrected is branded "pagan" because the calendar we now use is Gregorian (introduced by a pope in 1582) and was a modification of the Julian Calendar (Roman - introduced by the authority of Julius Caesar in 46BC). This the critics of Easter say "proves" its corruption. At first this sounds a strong case to put forward.

The reason is "The Lord's Day" (the resurrection) happened in Spring, and in Spring there would obviously be hundreds of pagan festivals involving (among other things) female fertility goddesses. You might right ly say "So what? If The Lord's Day is defiled by this, so is the old Jewish Passover, that happens at the same time." You might think that means the attack on Easter is already destroyed by this fact. However the way it is renewed is to point out that the Jewish Calendard at the time of Jesus would come up (occassionally) with a different day than the Julian (and thus later Gregorian) Calendar, so therefore Easter follows pagan traditions.

Well firstly almost ALL these pagan festivals world wide would just generally use Spring as the time to hold their multiplicity of festivals. But secondly there is a jaw dropping serious refutation to this attack on Easter as follows.....

The Jewisah Calendar used at the time of Jesus was the Babylonian Calendar!!! The calendard the Jews acquired in their captivity in Babylon. Every single month of that calendard is associated with the worship of at least one false god or a demon! Yes it is true! So do you really think that following the Jewish Calendar is any less controversial than the present Calendar used in the West? It is the Babylonian Calendar NOT the Gregorian Calendar that has a month called TAMMUZ in it!!! And it is my belief that clever Jewish heretics in the Talmud used a kind of reverse psychology to negate their own involvement with TAMMUZ, by manipulating Tammuz Myths to attack the resurrection of Jesus, thus confusing smple minded people into thinking the Christian story of the death and resurrection of Jesus is or "should be" associated with Tammuz, and not THEM and their Babylonian Calendar. 


For this reason I do not see any reason to say that because what the bible calls "The Lord's Day" (the Day of his resurrection) happens in Spring, how a calendard marks Spring should in some way mean that pagan Spring worship DOES defile Easter but DOES NOT defile Jewish Passover. It defiles neither. It is simple a coincidence both hapen at the same time. If ayone is associated with the Tammuz myth it is the Jews and their Babylonian Calendar NOT Christians or "The Lord's day".


see Jewish Babylonian Calendar



Here you have a straight choice to believe the pseudo-historical lies told about Easter to undermine it as a feast day, or the far more innocent Christian explanations. Jim Staley is well known for his so called "exposure of Easter" as pagan in such videos as "Truth or Tradition". What he does not tell you is that what he quotes as "truth" as stories taken from the demonic tome The Talmud. This was written long after the early church started, not before. In it they devised comparisons between the Christian story of the death and resurrection of Jesus and the Tammuz myth. So does Jim Staley think it was not imply demonic for the leaders of the new religion Judaism (that did not preach keeping the Old Testament Law) to devise wicked comparisons of this kind to attack the Christian Faith? There is the first point. That was simply evil.


Secondly the book "The Two Babylons" by Hislop was used to attack Roman Catholicism. Heretical cults however stole his (later proven as pseudo-historical) stories, passed them off as their own (de-sourced them), and applied them to the whole Christian Faith, completely ignoring all the Christians who had died as martyrs, such as in Foxes Book of Martyrs, who stood against the idols and blasphemies of the Popes. This is a second wickedness that teachers like the Messianic Jews, the Jehovah's Witnesses, the Hebrew Roots Movement, and Jim Staley get up to. are your two choices:





"At some point after that she (Semiramis) died, and she was sent up into heaven, but apparently her deceased husband Baal was not ready for her, so he sent her back down to Earth in a giant egg, and it exploded in the Euphrates River, and the very first thing that she did when she came out of that egg, was that she turned a bird into an egg laying rabbit. That's right. As crazy as it sounds that is where we get our egg laying rabbit from. That's where we get the Easter bunny from." 




"The origin of the Easter egg is simple. Before Easter Sunday feasting and the celebration of the glorious resurrection of Jesus started, believers used to fast, as they remembered his passion and cross. While this fasting occurred the hens would keep laying their EGGS, and they were not being eaten, so by Easter Sunday there were a lot of eggs available for the feast. It's as simple as that. That is how eggs became associated with Easter Sunday.

In a similar way RABBITS are associated with "The Lord's Day" (as it is more correctly termed) as rabbits begin to breed in the Spring, and as Easter is in the Spring, this meat that was not as available in the Winter months also became associated with Easter. It is as simple as that."


Personally I give no credibility at all to the non-Christian cults and Talmudic style explanations. The standard Christian explanation seems very logical and sound. 



Certain cults like the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Messianic Jews love to spin lies like a spider's web about the origin of the word Easter, as if it is somehow linked to worshipping false gods. When you look at their claims however they look very weak.












The motivation of the Hebrew Cults in attacking so called Easter is to bring you under bondage to obey the Old Testament law, and keep the old feasts instead, even though that law was nailed to the cross and is not new covenant law. It is blasphemy to keep the Passover now as it was in the old law, as it was a forward looking feast, and keeping it is similar to the blasphemy of the mass. Sincerity is keeping the fulfilled feast now, as this is an attribute of the new birth given though the gospel. The old feast of tabernacles is obviously not law, as it was a remembrance how "you" (Israel) were in tents in the wildreness but "we" (those of us who are Gentiles) were NOT in tents, so the feast is not for us as our ancestors were not the subject, as well as the old law being no more the law. 


Other cults like the so called Jehovah's Witnesses want to use undermining Easter as a stepping stone to undermining the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, and Evangelical Christian fundamental teachings, even though there has always been a big division among born again Christians about keeping Christmas and Easter. It might be noted almost always these cults bundle Christmas and Easter together, as Christmas has somewhat less credibility than Easter does as biblical to keep.



I have heard it said "Jesus commanded holy communion, not remembering the resurrection, as his death SAVES not the resurrection". However this is flawed on two accounts, 1) No one is saying remembering "The Lord's Day" as a feast, holiday etc is a command, but a freedom in Christ concerning the keeping of days, and second it is an heretical statement as the Resurrection SAVES! Finally many of those attacking this feast are Hebrew Cults, and resorting to this "refutation" is a desperate and contradictory ploy, as holy communion is an entirely new law not found under Moses old law, which itself makes space for the new covenant allowance by not command to keep days. This allowance I believe is underpinned by warnings that if you keep such days to be careful the days do not become liturgical in nature, but that is a whole other study. Therefore if anything the arguement strengthens not weakens the case for remembering the Resurrection Day, as if Holy Communion is instituted to remember the cross, as the resurrection also saves it makes sense some might chose to remember Resurrection Day too.











bottom of page