A calendar holiday rather than a biblical one. Scripture records plenty about the Sunday and nothing at all about the day after it.
The Easter Monday meaning is simple and slightly deflating. It is the day after Easter Sunday, and Scripture records nothing that happened on it.
The Gospels are detailed about the Sunday and silent about the Monday. The day exists because the church historically stretched the celebration across a whole week, and in many countries that second day became a public holiday.
None of which makes it a bad day. It just means anything you have been told it commemorates came from somewhere other than the Bible.
Early Christian practice treated the resurrection as an occasion too large for one morning, and the celebration ran across the following days as a single extended feast.
It is a public holiday across much of Europe and the Commonwealth, and generally not one in the United States, which is why many American readers have barely heard of it.
Egg rolling in parts of Britain, water pouring in Poland and neighbouring countries, outdoor gatherings elsewhere. Regional traditions attached to a free day.
None of them are re-enactments of a biblical event, because there is no biblical event to re-enact. They are folk traditions grown around a holiday.
A church that could not fit the resurrection into one Sunday is a reasonable instinct. The day is a consequence of taking the event seriously rather than an addition to it.
The empty tomb, the women, Peter and John running, and the first appearances. All four Gospels concentrate on this one morning in detail.
The road to Emmaus. Luke 24:13 says that same day, and verse 33 has the two walking back to Jerusalem that same hour. It is not a Monday story.
John 20:19. On the evening of that first day of the week, with the doors locked, Jesus came and stood among them. Still Sunday.
John 20:26. The next dated appearance is eight days on, when Thomas is present. Between those two points the record is empty.
After that it is Galilee and the lakeside breakfast in John 21, and Acts 1:3 summarising forty days of appearances without a calendar. The Monday is simply not there, and nobody in the New Testament seems to have noticed the gap.
Every post here is free to read. If this one helped you, you can help keep it that way. Pick an amount and finish on Stripe's secure checkout.
Change your amount, update your card, or cancel anytime. Enter the email you give with and Stripe sends you a secure link.
Manage My Giving"Each of you should give what you have decided in your heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver."2 Corinthians 9:7
This comes round every spring, usually as an image with three photographs and a confident caption, and it is worth settling.
Easter is named after Ishtar, a Mesopotamian fertility goddess. The holiday is pagan, and the eggs and rabbits prove it.
Bede, writing around 725, records that the month was “once called after a goddess of theirs named Eostre”.
Eostre is Anglo-Saxon and the name traces back through Proto-Germanic to a root meaning dawn, which is the same root behind the word east. Ishtar is Mesopotamian, separated by thousands of miles and thousands of years, and the two words only sound alike in modern English. The resemblance is a coincidence of pronunciation and nothing else.
And here is the detail that ends the argument. In most of the world the festival is not called Easter at all. It is Pascha in Greek and Latin, Pâques in French, Pascua in Spanish, Pasqua in Italian, Påsk in Swedish, every one of them from the Hebrew Pesach, Passover. English and German are the outliers. If the name proved the holiday were pagan, the holiday would have to be pagan only in two languages, which is not how anything works.
We spend the time on this because it is the same failure we keep naming elsewhere. A claim that sounds devastating, spreads because it is memorable, and collapses the moment anybody checks. Christians pass these around in both directions, and the habit of accepting a striking claim without checking it is the actual problem rather than any particular claim.
What is true and worth saying is smaller. The English name for the festival came from the season rather than from the event, most of the world named it after Passover, and the eggs and the rabbits are folk customs that nobody is required to attach any meaning to.
What do most languages call the festival?
Pâques, Pascua, Pasqua, Påsk and Pascha all descend from Pesach. English and German took a seasonal name instead, which is why the etymology argument only exists in those two languages.
“On the first day of the week we came together to break bread.”
Acts 20:7The New Testament shows believers gathering on the first day of the week. 1 Corinthians 16:2 assumes the same rhythm when Paul gives instructions about collections.
Scripture never establishes a yearly resurrection festival. What it shows is a weekly one, and the annual celebration developed afterwards.
The Lord's Day, named as such, which suggests the weekly observance already had an identity by the time that was written.
One person considers one day more sacred, another considers every day alike. Each should be fully convinced in their own mind, and Paul leaves it there.
So the earliest pattern is every Sunday rather than one weekend a year. That does not argue against celebrating Easter, and it does put the whole question of which days matter in the category Paul left open.
There is something worth noticing in the fact that the Gospels do not record the Monday.
The resurrection is not presented as an anniversary to be observed. It is presented as a permanent change of situation, after which the disciples simply keep living in a world where it has happened. Nobody in Acts marks the date. They preach the fact.
Which is the most useful thing about an ordinary Monday. The weekend is over, nothing is different in the room, and the claim is still either true or not.
So take the holiday if you have one. Roll the eggs, pour the water, sleep in. And then Tuesday arrives, and the thing the Sunday was about is still the case, which is the part the calendar was never able to carry anyway.
For related ground, see Easter, what the resurrection is, the Roman guard, when Jesus died, what day the Sabbath is, what Noel means and when Jesus was born.
The day after Easter Sunday with no biblical event attached, produced by a church that celebrated the resurrection across a week, turned into a public holiday with local customs, carrying an English name from a season rather than from Ishtar, while most languages call the festival Passover.
It circulates every year and the real history is more interesting. Send your questions in and somebody at Sound of Heaven will work through it with you.
It is the day after Easter Sunday, and it has no biblical content of its own. Scripture records nothing that happened on it. The day exists because the church historically celebrated the resurrection across a whole week rather than a single morning, and in many countries that second day became a public holiday with its own local customs. It is a calendar observance rather than a biblical one, which is not a criticism of it.
Nothing is recorded. The Gospels are detailed about the Sunday itself, including the empty tomb, Mary Magdalene, the disciples running, the road to Emmaus and the evening appearance behind locked doors. Luke 24 explicitly places the Emmaus walk on that same day, not the next one. After Sunday evening the next dated event in John is a week later, when Thomas is present.
No. The claim circulates widely and the etymology does not support it. Writing around 725, Bede says the month was once called after a goddess of theirs named Eostre, and that name traces back through Proto-Germanic to a root meaning dawn. Ishtar is Mesopotamian and unrelated, and the resemblance exists only in modern English pronunciation.
In most languages it is essentially called Passover. Pascha in Greek and Latin, Pâques in French, Pascua in Spanish, Påsk in Swedish, all from the Hebrew Pesach. English and German are the outliers, having taken a name from the season rather than from the festival. That is a historical accident of language rather than a statement about the meaning of the day.
There is nothing wrong with doing so and nothing wrong with not. Romans 14:5 says one person considers one day more sacred than another and another considers every day alike, and instructs each to be fully convinced in their own mind. A public holiday spent with family is a good thing. It simply does not carry any weight Scripture assigned to it.