As Easter approaches, as they do for every holiday, a small yet vocal minority of Christians are certain to crawl up through the floorboards and "remind" us: Easter is a pagan holiday, and everyone who celebrates it is an unredeemed idolater doomed to face God's unrelenting wrath. On the other side of the aisle are those who will question your faith if you do not celebrate Easter. Are you sinning if you observe Easter? Are you sinning if you don't? As I will proceed to show, the answer is a definitive "no" to both. Rather, the Bible shows that our celebrations are a mere shadow of things to come, and we are free to partake or abstain as we see fit. God, and God alone, will judge, yet He will accept observance of, or abstinence from, any season. What He will not tolerate is this petty bickering over whether or not we should observe Easter.
This division is carnal
Before we go on to actually solve the dispute, one thing we need to establish is that it may actually never be solved. As with all things, the human heart, which is deceitful and desperately wicked (Jeremiah 17:9) will inevitably get in the way. Thus, even with all the Biblical information I am about to provide, some Christians will remain steadfast in whichever belief they hold. Thus, without intending to trot out any clichés, "it's not a Gospel issue". That means whether you believe we should or should not celebrate Easter, you cannot get around the fact that we are all still family. If you celebrate Easter, Christians who do not are still your brethren. If you do not celebrate Easter, Christians who do are still your brethren. Thus, we should not fight over this.
But we still do. Yet, Paul says in 1 Corinthians 3:1-4: "And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual people but as to carnal, as to babes in Christ. I fed you with milk and not with solid food; for until now you were not able to receive it, and even now you are still not able; for you are still carnal. For where there are envy, strife, and divisions among you, are you not carnal and behaving like mere men? For when one says, “I am of Paul,” and another, “I am of Apollos,” are you not carnal?"
This division is carnal, and so actually shows great spiritual immaturity. You are a babe in Christ, says Paul, if you divide over that which ought not divide us. Keep in mind, contextually, Paul is addressing bigger divisions. Divisions between legitimate Apostles, and even Christ Himself (1 Corinthians 1:12). But Paul reminds us one verse later: Christ is not divided. It is impermissible for us to divide, as brethren. If we must declare someone anathema, let it be over a genuine, Gospel-altering error. Something as pathetically trivial as a chocolate egg is no reason to exclude a brother from the Kingdom.
Scripture is sufficient
As I alluded to above, there are times when division is acceptable. The key is "Gospel-altering". Paul says if anyone preaches a different Gospel, consider him anathema (Galatians 1:8-10). But this same Paul says that divisions are carnal, and not even genuine sin is enough to immediately sever the relationship. If someone is caught in sin, we, who are spiritual, should restore him in the spirit of gentleness (Galatians 6:1).
There are times when immorality can be cause for division (though even this with intent to save the brother). In 1 Corinthians 5, for example, Paul speaks of a brother whose immorality is not even named among the Gentiles, sleeping with his father's wife. Paul commands the Corinthians to deliver him over to Satan so his flesh may be destroyed, in order to save his spirit.
But this is because of immorality not even the Gentiles would tolerate. It is also explicitly mentioned in Scripture. This is a key factor. Throughout Scripture, we are constantly told that Scripture is sufficient. Most famously, 2 Timothy 3:16-17 tells us "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work." On its own, this verse is sufficient to tell us that we do not need anything else but the Bible to address this question. If Christians should celebrate Easter, the Bible would prescribe it. If Christians should not celebrate Easter, the Bible would forbid it.
But though it is sufficient on its own, this verse is not on its own. As both a word of wisdom (e.g. Proverbs 30:6) and as a command (e.g. Deuteronomy 4:2), the Bible commands us not to add to the word of God. If you say "God says...", it's ok not to remember the exact chapter and verse, but it's not ok if there is no chapter and verse.
Scripture is insufficient
With that in mind, the easiest defence of Easter is that the Bible says absolutely nothing about Easter. Of course, we could say "of course it does", because Easter is the celebration of Scripture's central theme. On Easter, we pay special attention to the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ, without which the entire Christian faith is nothing (1 Corinthians 15:1-17). But ultimately, there is neither a command to celebrate, neither is there a command to abstain.
Now, on its own, this would be enough. When it comes to the morality of personal practice, anything not explicitly forbidden is implicitly allowed. This even seems to be explicitly stated in Romans 5:13, where Paul says "For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law." Here, he's speaking about the law of Moses. Is it a sin to eat pork? According to Jesus, no (Mark 7:19), but under the law of Moses, pigs are among the unclean animals, which Jews were not permitted to eat.
But clearly, Paul is saying sin is in the world regardless of the law, it's just not imputed. Well, as he had already pointed out in Romans 2:14, there is one law that was always present: God has written it on our hearts. That's why Gentiles, who do not have the law, do the things in it by nature. You don't need Moses to instinctively know that theft, murder, adultery etc. are wrong. So sin is imputed because there is a law. It's just not Moses' law. So, why are things like Easter different?
Thinking about the pork issue, there are actually two key factors. The first is covenantal law. Adam and his immediate descendants couldn't eat pork because God only permitted them a vegetarian diet. Noah, following the flood, was given everything, so it was fine for him to eat pork, so long as the blood had been drained. The Jews, under the law of Moses, were forbidden to eat pork. Finally, as we've already shown, Jesus purified all foods.
But that leads us into the second factor: The conscience. There are, according to the New Testament, times when it is impermissible for a Christian to eat pork. When? When that person thinks it is impermissible.
The key Scripture here is Romans 14, which begins thus: "Receive one who is weak in the faith, but not to disputes over doubtful things. For one believes he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats only vegetables. Let not him who eats despise him who does not eat, and let not him who does not eat judge him who eats; for God has received him. Who are you to judge another’s servant? To his own master he stands or falls. Indeed, he will be made to stand, for God is able to make him stand." (Romans 14:1-4). So, can you eat pork? If you believe you can, God says yes, and no one is allowed to judge you for it, even if their faith is too weak (God's words, not mine) to permit themselves.
But Romans 14 continues "One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind. He who observes the day, observes it to the Lord; and he who does not observe the day, to the Lord he does not observe it. He who eats, eats to the Lord, for he gives God thanks; and he who does not eat, to the Lord he does not eat, and gives God thanks." (v5-6).
We now have very explicit permission to regard any day as we see fit. If we, as I tend to do, observe all days equally, that's ok. You don't have to celebrate Easter, you can see it as any other day. But there is nothing so special about Easter that requires a Christian to see it as an impermissible celebration. You can observe it, so long as you observe it to the Lord.
As I say, the key here is conscience. The morality of your attitude towards Easter is entirely dependent upon your posture towards God. You can sin by celebrating Easter if, for whatever reason, you find it unconscionable. This is weak faith, and does not permit you to judge others, but it does make it genuinely unclean to you. If, by contrast, you are fully convinced in your own mind, the only rule is to keep weaker brethren in mind. That is, just as you don't flaunt your drinking habits in front of an ex-alcoholic, it is unloving (and therefore sinful) to flaunt your Easter celebrations in front of a weaker brother who feels offended by Easter.
Conscience vs. Paganism
Of course, there are some things that cannot be purified by the conscience. Scripture forbids stealing, so you cannot justify it. Scripture forbids murder, so you can't justify it. Scripture forbids adultery, so you can't justify it. If you are fully convinced, in your own mind, that you can do what Scripture forbids, the Bible makes it abundantly clear: You are wrong.
So perhaps the anti-Easter brigade have a point? As it turns out, not even close. See, while it is entirely acceptable to say you cannot purify sin with your conscience, these things are all explicitly sinful. If there isn't a "thou shalt not", or "the Lord hates" etc., there's usually some kind of logical case you can follow for why a certain sin is a sin.
Not so with Easter. In fact, when Easter opponents speak against it, there are only two routes they will take. The first is to associate something with Easter that doesn't necessarily have to be associated with it. The second is to take an ambiguous condemnation of sin in general, and assume Easter is covered by it, which is circular reasoning.
Regarding the former, much like with Halloween, there are elements of Easter, like the Easter Bunny, and Easter eggs, that might be problematic. Of course, there's still no sin in Easter eggs. There's no real Biblical association, but nothing says "thou shalt not hide, eat, or decorate an egg". But nothing about Easter says you have to have eggs involved, either.
In the same way, nothing says you have to involve the Easter Bunny. The added element here is that the Easter bunny may involve some element of lying, which is a sin no amount of personal conviction can purify. And unlike with Santa, the Easter Bunny is neither based on a historical figure, nor really useful for teaching children anything. Of course, if you are honest with your kids, there ceases to be any sin in the character. A rabbit that poops chocolate eggs, while weird, isn't evil. But once again, one can divorce the Easter Bunny from Easter entirely. In fact, for my entire life, I have never associated him with Easter at all. He is third hand knowledge for me, mainly because of the movies in which he features.
Ultimately, while Easter may be "set" by the culture, it is celebrated by the individual. What you do on the day is entirely up to you. If you want to eat a chocolate egg, it may be easier to obtain during this season, but you can do it on Easter as on any day. And you don't have to. To you, Easter may be a day of quiet reflection on the death and resurrection. Nothing forces you to so much as think of anything else.
History of Easter
But perhaps there's something inherently pagan about Easter? We do, after all, live in an uninformed culture. We don't know much about history, we just do what we were taught by the previous generation. So what if there's some sinister history behind Easter that automatically makes it idolatrous?
I was most amused, many years ago, to see a Christian who suggested as much. In his mind, the term "Easter" comes from Ishtar, the goddess of war, sex, and fertility. He wasn't entirely opposed to Christians celebrating Easter, but "if we must", he suggested we reject the name. His proposed alternative? "Resurrection Sunday."
Why is this so amusing to me? Simply because while the Easter/Ishtar connection seems to be nothing more than a speculative myth (with far more credible origins theories), the word Sun-day comes from the Anglo Saxon practice of dedicating that particular day to the worship of the sun. Thus, in order to avoid paganism, he hopped over to paganism.
But there are greater ironies to this Ishtar theory. Ultimately, it is nothing more than an unsubstantiated theory. We do not know, nor are we likely to ever actually discover, the true origins of the word "Easter". One thing we do know, however, is that Christ is the "Lion of Judah" (Hosea 5:14; Revelation 5:5). Yet, rather than bunnies or chicks, Ishtar seems to be similarly associated with lions. Which makes sense. In that particular region, the lion would have been the "mightiest" animal, and even we consider it the "king of the jungle", knowing full well it neither lives in the jungle, nor would it be remotely capable of taking on the actual apex predator of the jungle: the tiger.
But to the ancient region of Mesopotamia, Ishtar's domain, the lion was the apex predator, so of course, the "goddess of war" would be associated with them. Yet, her association with the lion does not mean we should somehow try to take Christ's title "Lion of Judah" away from Him to avoid paganism.
In fact, this wouldn't be the first time God has taken what was pagan and used it for His own glory. When it comes to pagan gods, Baal is about the most obvious example. He tempted Israel to sin by worshiping him, his demands were especially grievous, and he receives the most hilarious treatment when 400 of his prophets went up against Elijah. "Perhaps he's pooping" (1 Kings 18:27).
But aside from forever being relegated to the porcelain throne, Baal also lost one of his titles to God. In Psalm 68:4, Got is referred to as He who rides on the clouds, which, in Hebrew, almost perfectly mirrors Baal's title as cloud rider. This is a scathing rebuke of Baal, inspired by God Himself, not the Psalmist participating in some pagan worship.
In much the same way, if we give any credibility to any origins theory in which Easter comes from some pagan practice, what matters is it now glorifies God. In fact, the simple fact that there is no indisputable pagan origins theory for the origins of Easter shows that we, as a Church, did very well in overcoming the pagans. Just as God is forever known as "He who rides on the clouds", whereas no one really associates this with Baal anymore, Easter is now firmly known as the celebration of Christ's death and resurrection.
The Easter Savior
And that includes among the unbelievers. If you did a survey with just one question, "what is Easter", you're not going to get very many people talking about Ishtar, or Eostre, or any other ancient pagan gods/goddesses with some theoretical connection to Easter. Ironically, it is the Christians complaining about these things who keep their memory alive. Most people will, for better or for worse, associate Easter with the Christian faith.
And frankly, that's where we need to keep it. See, as Scripture says, we need to be ready to preach in and out of season (2 Timothy 4:2). When it's not Easter, we need to preach Christ, and Him crucified. When it is Easter, we have a greater opportunity to do so. Everyone expects it at this time. To the world, it's just an excuse to eat chocolate eggs. But they know what we're preaching. They don't look at us and see a bunch of pagans worshiping some goddess of war and peace. They see us as worshiping the Prince of Peace. And just as He's on our minds, He's on theirs, too. Easter is a Gospel opportunity, and whether you celebrate or not, God isn't giving you the day off. As His word says, "See then that you walk circumspectly, not as fools but as wise, redeeming the time, because the days are evil." (Ephesians 5:15-16).
Conclusion
So what is the conclusion of this matter? Simply that you must draw your own. If you, as a Christian, cannot bring yourself to celebrate Easter, it is actually genuinely wrong for you, for "...whatever is not from faith is sin." (Romans 14:23). But what if you are fully convinced in your own mind that you can, or should, celebrate? Go for it! No one may judge you for it.
At any rate, we are commanded to unite as Christians, and whatever we do, be it on our own, or as a group, we have a greater command: To preach the word in all seasons. Easter is not a special day, either to do much work so we may relax the rest of the year, or to take a time off so we may work the rest of the year. Whether or not we celebrate Easter, we are inseparably bound to its central message, and it is essential that we spread it.