Why Christians Shouldn’t Observe the Seder

Below is a sneak peek of this INSIDER content.

As Easter approaches, many evangelical Christians prepare to celebrate the resurrection of Jesus Christ, the cornerstone of our faith. Yet, in recent decades, a growing number of churches and believers have adopted practices borrowed from Jewish tradition, most notably the Passover Seder. Promoted as a way to connect with the "roots" of Christianity, Seder observance has gained traction, particularly among those influenced by premillennial dispensationalism—a theological framework that emphasizes a distinct role for Israel in God’s plan. While the intention may be to honor biblical history, this practice raises serious concerns. Talmudic Judaism, which underpins the modern Seder, is...
To view this content, you must be a member of Protestia's Patreon at $5.95 or more
Unlock with Patreon

32 thoughts on “Why Christians Shouldn’t Observe the Seder

  1. ” Seder observance has gained traction, particularly among those influenced by premillennial dispensationalism”

    The only people I’ve met personally who have bought into observance of it are all Catholics. Catholicism is very Jewish, and that’s not a good thing. Catholicism invented Exclusive Psalmody in the 4th century at a council that banned all the hymns Christians had written up to that point and said only the Book of Psalms may be sung. I find it ironic, and interesting, and I’m developing an argument on this, but it requires a lot of thought, and maybe historical research, is that Paul says Peter is the apostle to the Jews and he Paul to the Gentiles , in Galatians 2:6-9, where Paul says that the Pillars make a handshake agreement with him:

    “6 As for those who were held in high esteem—whatever they were makes no difference to me; God does not show favoritism—they added nothing to my message. 7 On the contrary, they recognized that I had been entrusted with the task of preaching the gospel to the uncircumcised,[a] just as Peter had been to the circumcised.[b] 8 For God, who was at work in Peter as an apostle to the circumcised, was also at work in me as an apostle to the Gentiles. 9 James, Cephas[c] and John, those esteemed as pillars, gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship when they recognized the grace given to me. They agreed that we should go to the Gentiles, and they to the circumcised.”

    Now, we see in the 2nd century, Polycarp is claimed to be a “direct disciple of John” and to apparently observe the passover, whereas Anicetus is descended from a theological line from a different apostle (Paul maybe) and does not observe the passoever but rather Easter Sunday, and this causes some disagreement and confusion. This seems to only be a continuation of the mess going on in Paul’s own time, where the apostles split into two factions, one focused on the circumcision and one on the uncircumcision. And it would seem that Roman Catholicism is a continuation of the circumcision faction; they’ve dropped circumcision by now, but kept a Judaizing and legalistic disposition.

    1. Remote work isn’t just a trend, it’s the future of work. qs Work Remotely from your own house. We just want your typing skills, You can make more than 120USD/Hr. No matter where you are. Let’s Grow together and do great things, even if we’re far apart…
      Take a Look………

      Begin here>>>>>>>>> Payathome9.Com

      1. Remote work isn’t just a trend, it’s the future of work. qs Work Remotely from your own house. We just want your typing skills, You can make more than 120USD/Hr. No matter where you are. Let’s Grow together and do great things, even if we’re far apart…
        Take a Look………

        Begin here>>>>>>>>> Go ON my ProFILE

    2. Remote work isn’t just a trend, it’s the future of work. qs Work Remotely from your own house. We just want your typing skills, You can make more than 120USD/Hr. No matter where you are. Let’s Grow together and do great things, even if we’re far apart…
      Take a Look………

      Begin here>>>>>>>>> https://tinyurl.com/46fjveeh

  2. Many kelvinators are into the heresy of replacement theology. Hence the Protestia article. I guess they think eggs and bunnies are better. Eggs and bunnies, eggs and bunnies.

    1. Remote work isn’t just a trend, it’s the future of work. qs Work Remotely from your own house. We just want your typing skills, You can make more than 120USD/Hr. No matter where you are. Let’s Grow together and do great things, even if we’re far apart…
      Take a Look………

      Begin here>>>>>>>>> ­­­­W­­­­o­­­­r­­­k­­­­a­­­­p­­­­p­­­­1­­.­­C­o­­­­m

  3. Your hero John MacArthur called replacement theology heresy on Ben Shapiros program a few years ago.

    1. John MacArthur is not long for this world, so hopefully he repents of his Zionist heresy and his Calvinist heresy before his quickly approaching death, and hopefully with a public recantation.. He said himself, he’s “on his last lap.”

      1. Remote work isn’t just a trend, it’s the future of work. qs Work Remotely from your own house. We just want your typing skills, You can make more than 120USD/Hr. No matter where you are. Let’s Grow together and do great things, even if we’re far apart…
        Take a Look………

        Begin here>>>>>>>>> https://zeep.ly/mzOdL

  4. Eggs and bunnies seem to come from a response to the legalism of Catholicism in its Lent restrictions. In Luther’s time, the papacy had banned eating eggs or any meant for all 40 days of Lent, as well as butter. Now days, of course, due to Protestantism existing, Catholicism no longer demands abstinence from meat for all 40 days of Lent, nor is there any mention of abstinence from eggs or butter. Instead, today, they require abstinence from meat only on Fridays in Lent, and a fast on Thursday and Friday (coming up this week) where you are only allowed to eat 2 meals. But in Luther’s day, no meat was to be consumed from Ash Wednesday until Easter Lunch, nor any eggs. So what do you think people did on Easter Sunday? They celebrated the end of the fast the pope had imposed by eating meat and eggs. But what meat would be available? Bunnies. Because they could not go hunt during Holy Week, so no deer would be available, etc. But if they had caught some rabbits at the beginning of Lent, they will have multiplied during Lent, and so Easter Lunch consisted of bunny and eggs.

    As to observing a passover seder; we were not brought out of Egypt, so its a lie to do. We should be observing Christ’s death and resurrection, and it makes the most sense to do it the Sunday following passover, as that’s when he rose. And I dare say, modern scholarship has shown, to the satisfaction of 99% of Jews, that the Exodus from Egypt is a fictionalized account celebrating their exodus from Babylon after the Babylonian captivity, so Jews don’t even any longer believe the Exodus took place. Therefore, they celebrate it only as an ethnic observance but not as a true religious festival, for they no longer believe God brought them out of Egypt. From my perspective as a real, non-Judaized Christian, it doesn’t matter if they’re right; if the Exodus never happened, it doesn’t matter, as what matters is Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection. Certainly we Gentiles were not brought out of Egypt with a high hand and so on, and so eating bitter herbs to remember a slavery in Egypt that we never experience is silly, but if the Jews are right on their own history in asserting that it never happened to them either, then its doubly silly to observe that. Instead we should observe what Christ did for us.

    And those of us who are of European descent, and are Protestants, can also observe not only Christ’s salvation of us by his death and resurrection, but also the Reformation’s liberation of us from the Lent fasting rules of the papacy of Luther’s time, by eating bunnies and eggs, even if we now only eat them in token form as chocolate.

  5. Two things. The Passover is a clear picture of Christ. The last supper was a Passover meal. Romans 11:1 is very clear about future Israel as well as Zechariah 8:23. This is what happens when every scripture is filtered through the heresy of Calvinism.

    1. Replacement theology predates Calvinism by 2000 years, and was held by everyone until Joseph Smith invented Christian Zionism in (I think its 2nd Nephi, or maybe 3rd Nephi) in the Book of Mormon. Its literally not until the 1800s that Christian Zionism spreads, and it spreads first among Mormon, via the Book of Mormon that first helped spread it, and then later non-Mormon picked it up from the Mormons and spread it, namely Scofield and Darby, and others. And yet, even so, until youtube came to exist in around 2004, the majority position of all Christian churches was still Replacement Theology, even as having a hymnal and either piano or organ was still the norm. Then an Internet meme was invented in 2004 and pushed by women on youtube, that “Replacement Theology is heresy,” and around the same time was brought in the rock concert “worship.” But keep teaching Mormonism if you want. Specifically, Joseph Smith taught in the Book of Mormon, that the Gentiles are tasked by God with gathering together all the Jews and restoring them to the land of Israel, and this is what all the dispies basically now believe, that God has tasked us with restoring the Jews to Israel and that once we do then Jesus will return.

    2. And when I say “Replacement theology predates Calvinism by 2000 years” I didn’t make a mistake, because you will say that Calvinism dates from 1500, so from 30 AD to 1500 AD is not 2000 years. I’m counting from Isaiah and Hosea, who taught that the Gentiles will replace the Jews, as Paul quotes in Romans 9:25-32

      “25 As he says in Hosea:

      “I will call them ‘my people’ who are not my people;
      and I will call her ‘my loved one’ who is not my loved one,”[a]

      26 and,

      “In the very place where it was said to them,
      ‘You are not my people,’
      there they will be called ‘children of the living God.’”[b]

      27 Isaiah cries out concerning Israel:

      “Though the number of the Israelites be like the sand by the sea,
      only the remnant will be saved.
      28 For the Lord will carry out
      his sentence on earth with speed and finality.”[c]

      29 It is just as Isaiah said previously:

      “Unless the Lord Almighty
      had left us descendants,
      we would have become like Sodom,
      we would have been like Gomorrah.”[d]”

      Paul understands Hosea’s prophecy, not as about the lost 10 tribes as Judaizers do, but as about the Gentiles.

      Also, Paul is clear that although all Gentiles potentially can be saved, only a fraction of the Jews can be, for even if Israel numbers like the sand of the sea, only a small remnant can be saved from Israel. But of the Gentiles, there is no limit.

      And of this subject about only a small remnant of Israel being able to be saved, Paul speaks of the Lord “cutting the work short quickly”, or “quickly executing the decree” (however you think it should be translated), meaning, he will save the remnant quickly (i.e. in the first century) and then cut Israel off. This happened in 70 AD.

      1. I forgot to include the text of 30-32 which clarifies Paul’s interpretation of these passages from Hosea and Isaiah, where he explains their meaning:

        “30 What then shall we say? That the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; 31 but the people of Israel, who pursued the law as the way of righteousness, have not attained their goal. 32 Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works. They stumbled over the stumbling stone.”

        So Hosea’s speech about calling her beloved who was not loved and calling them my people who were not my people is about the Gentiles. And that only a small remnant of Israel can be saved is absolutely true because the rest will stumble over the stumbling stone.

    3. @H Summerville:

      ““7 He who corrects a scoffer gets shame for himself,
      And he who rebukes a wicked man only harms himself.
      8 Do not correct a scoffer, lest he hate you;
      Rebuke a wise man, and he will love you.” – Proverbs 9:7-8

      Yes, you are the scoffer, and I will never see the out pouring of your hate, but it will be here I am sure.

      I always knowing when I am dealing with a devils advocate, because they simply throw out ad hominems and no argument. So you are a complete waste of time, but I am admonish you to beg God for forgiveness of your sins, to repent of your lies. God will judge you, it will be harsh, and it will be swift, and maybe you have forgotten Matthew 7:

      “7 “Judge[a] not, that you be not judged. 2 For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you.” – Judging is fine, but it will be coming back upon you, every lie and harsh judgement. Turn to Christ, call upon his name and be saved before it is too late.

  6. Joe you have way too much time on your hands. Stick with the KJV bible not your biased view of church history.

    1. I quoted the NIV because you seem too illiterate to understand the KJV. If you really are a KJVO, you should then understand that Daniel 9 is not about the anti-Christ but about Christ, because it does not speak of a 7 year peace treaty of the anti-Christ but says that the Messiah (Christ) will be cut off in the midst of the week in which he confirms a covenant with many. This is the 3.5 years of his ministry, and he is cut off, killed, on the cross, and then the 3.5 first years of the church. This is him confirming a covenant (the New Covenant) with many. Your dispie interpretation requires modern translations that bias the text by changing the Hebrew word “moschiach” to “anti-christ” but moschiach means Messiah which is Christ, not anti-Christ. Also it requires changing covenant to peace treaty, and other silly animal tricks.

  7. Funny thing is, per the Talmudic rules, Jews have to use a shankbone of a lamb, a bare bone, and cannot eat lamb at the Seder. But those dispies and papists that will observe the passover will eat lamb. This is because Jews understand the lamb of the passover must be sacrificed in the temple to be eaten on passover, so cannot eat lamb on passover, but the lamb is substituted in two ways: they eat chicken or something else and only have a lamb shankbone on the table to symbolize the lamb. Its always the case that when Jew Larpers try to observe Jewish rituals, they don’t understand how to properly do it. Literally the passover cannot be properly observed anymore because of God destroying the temple in 70 AD, and that was part of the point.

  8. Joe, just responding to your first post here. Peter and Paul were not at odds. The Apostles honored the Great Commission, and carried the Gospel in all directions. Peter stayed in Israel. But they were not at odds with one another. God told Peter to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles, and that the ceremonial law had already been accomplished. See Acts chapters 10 and 11. Particularly note Acts 10:34-48.

    1. They are plainly at odds on Jewish Christians continuing circumcision. Peter and James clearly think they should. Paul not only doesn’t require Gentiles to get circumcised but bans circumcision completely. This is why Peter is the apostle to the circumcision and Paul to the uncircumcision.

      1. I’m not aware of any scripture where either Peter or James claimed that circumcision was required for salvation, for anyone, Jew or Gentile. You’re reading into scripture something that isn’t there. The subject of the meeting in Acts 15 was about whether or not newly converted gentiles needed to be circumcised. And both Peter and Paul agreed that they did not. But there is no implication that either believed it was required for those of Jewish birth. That’s nowhere to be found in scripture.

      2. There is no partiality with the Lord. (Rom. 2:11, Eph. 6:9, etc.)

        God does not have two different standards, one for Jews and one for Gentiles. The lineage of Jacob is still of significance, and prophetic significance, but that doesn’t mean there are two different standards.

        By claiming that Peter and Paul were at odds on such an important issue, you’re essentially claiming that God is inconsistent, that the leading of the Holy Spirit is inconsistent. Either that or you’d have to claim either Paul or Peter were frauds. Yet both knew one another and scripture records accepted one another as Apostles, directly called by Jesus Himself.

        Any disagreements, confusion, etc. were ironed out quickly very early on, by the leading of the Holy Spirit. Understand the accounts in Acts are describing events very early on, right after Jesus’ resurrection. And it wasn’t until the Lord showed them, that the Apostles began to understand what to do next.

      3. Also note that Paul was not the only apostle to take the gospel to the gentiles. Andrew went northeast into what is now Russia. Matthew traveled to Ethiopia. Mark went to Alexandria. And so on. They honored the Great Commission.

        You’re basically claiming, Joe, that Peter and James were oddballs who were at odds with all the others. And that is just not true. What’s true is that those who ministered to the Jews had a different set of problems and concerns to deal with than those who ministered to the Gentiles, while the Gospel was and is the same for all.

      4. Also, Paul did not ban or forbid circumcision. What he said was that those who claimed it was necessary for salvation (i.e. the judaizers), were back under the law. The Apostles were all in agreement on this, that we are saved by faith alone, by grace alone, and not by works. Things such as covering the head, eating meat, which day to meet, and so on, are not to cause strife. (ceremonial things) If you want to eat ham, for example, that’s fine. If a Jewish Christian doesn’t want to eat ham, that’s fine. But when or if either claim one or the other is required for salvation, that’s when it is made into a false gospel.

        The Apostles did not disagree on this.

        1. Paul banned it altogether saying “whoever gets circumcized becomes a debtor to keep the whole law.” After that, getting circumcized is basically an excommunication.

          Also, I don’t care about your Papist traditions claiming the Judaizing apostles went to Gentile regions. These are made up by Rome to hide that they are descendants of the Judaizing line by pretending its not a Judaizing line.

          Paul and the 12 split because God phazed the 12 out for their disobedience and recalcitrance in trying to cling to Judaism. This results later in the Quartodeciman Controversy, where those of the line of the 12 are trying to keep the Jewish Passover instead of celebrating the Sunday that Jesus resurrected. And Rome, as Judaized as it was, still was able to side with Paul at least on that one thing.

          The Judaized church of the “pillars,” Peter, James, and John, tried to turn Christianity into COMMUNISM, founding a commune in Jerusalem where everyone had to sell all their property to join, and give the money to the apostles, and the apostles used the money to feed everyone. But this FAILED, and Paul had to attempt to bail them out as they ran out of money and were starving. For this purpose Paul took up a collection from the Gentile churches to go buy food for the communist losers who wanted to continue circumcision. But a one time collection was not enough to save this failed form of Christianity, which later morphs into Ebionism that denies Christ’s divinity, and by the 5th century is completely gone. Paul ends up writing 3/4 of the New Testament; he is the chosen vessel with which God replaced ALL 12 of the 12, and founded the church as he always intended it to be. But Papists want to follow Peter, and inherit his denial of Christ and his Judaizing; and Eastern Orthodox to follow John in similar things. We should follow Paul, as he follows Christ. Let the Jews have their Judaized “churches” of Rome and Instanbul; for us Gentiles there is only ONE church, Paul’s church.

          1. Joe, you’re trying to take it out of context, including out of context with all that Paul himself wrote on the subject. I just told you that Paul said that those who claimed circumcision was REQUIRED, were back under the law. Then you quote the very same scripture back to me as if that’s some sort of refutation.

            He is talking to gentile converts, and he is warning them not to go through the ritual of circumcision as if it were required, because it is not required.

            And this is exactly what Peter and all the other Apostles said about it. Peter, in Acts 15:6-11. He reiterates that we are saved by grace alone. James in Acts 15:13-21

            All present, including Paul and Peter and James, were in agreement on the letter they wrote and sent, recorded in Acts 15:22-29.

            What does it say? THEY ALL AGREED … verse 22.

          2. You do understand there is no such thing as a Jewish convert to Christ, who isn’t circumcised? They were already circumcised.

            Peter, James, and other were not saying that it is required for Jewish converts. Because, well, that would just be plain stupid, since they all already were. It was moot. It was entirely irrelevant. And that is why it isn’t addressed. The Author of the Bible expects you to exercise a little bit of intelligence. And wickedness in your heart will blind you to the truth. If you approach it with wickedness in your heart, you will not understand it. And God made it work that way, on purpose.

            Your hatred of Jews is causing you to miss the most simple and obvious. Wickedness of the heart will make you stupid. It’s not stupidity that is making you stupid. It’s your wicked fixation on the Jews that is making you stupid. And that sort of wickedness can reach a point where you could deny the entire Gospel. If you claim Jews are the problem with the world, rather than sin entering the world through one man Adam, then you have denied the entire Gospel. Of course, that’s exactly one reason why all the nazified sorts would rather worship Darwin – because that better suits their purposes.

        2. Paul also plainly says in Galatians that continuing to keep the Jewish festivals is “going back to the weak and beggarly elements of the world which you were freed from” when leaving paganism, or in other words, its equivalent to going back to paganism. The Jewish festivals worship the same principalities and powers, fallen angels, as does paganism. Read Galatians. Having a Seder is worshiping fallen angels.

          1. See, this notion of yours that the Jewish festivals, holidays, ceremonies, rituals, somehow worship Satan, is nowhere to be found in scripture.

            It’s the opposite of what’s found in scripture, Joe. In most all cases God commanded them to have those festivals, rituals, and ceremonies.

            Your extreme hatred of Jews is severely compromising your thinking, and it is causing you to severely warp the scripture.

            When you start calling things that God commandment, satanic rituals, then it should dawn on you that you’ve strayed way … way way way … light years … off track.

  9. Also, see Galatians 4.

    KJV Galatians 4:8-11 “8 Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods. But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain.”

    It would also be on point to look at Colossians 2.

    Col 2:14-19 “Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it. Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, And not holding the Head, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God.”

    Notice that there is:

    (1) an implication that the “principalities and powers” own the “handwriting of ordinances” which is plainly defined as “holyday(s), or of the new moon(s), or of the sabbath days” etc. and

    (2) an accusation that those who keep these things of “worshiping angels.”

    (3) That when he says “Let no man therefore judge you” regarding these things, he doesn’t mean you have freedom to keep the Jewish ceremonies. He means that since Christ nailed the document that is owned by the principalities and powers to the cross, and thereby defeated them. And this means no Jew or Judaizer can CONDEMN you for NOT keeping them. He is NOT defending those who keep these things AT ALL.

    (4) that he is not saying you have freedom to keep these ceremonies is clear when he accuses all who keep them of “not holding the Head, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God.” He is saying that keeping the kosher, passover, new moons, sabbaths, etc. amounts to a DENIAL OF CHRIST as the head.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *