Part two...
The Evidence
The most intriguing argument, to me, in the six listed above was item number two. The word “Sabbath” appears in more than 100 passages of scripture. It seems, at first thought, that if not one of those can be shown to fall on the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th, 13th, 14th, etc., day of the month, that that would be fairly significant evidence in favor of the lunar Sabbath theory.
Here are the facts:
There are many passages that refer to the Sabbath in a precept in such a way as to provide no precise and certain information regarding the correlation of days with months.
See Ex 20:8-11; De 5:12-15; Ex 31:14-16; Ex 35:2-3; Le 24:8; Nu 28:9-10; [Neh 9:14]; [1 Chr 9:32]; Ps 92:1; Amos 8:5; Jer 17:21-27; Is 56:2, 6; Is 58:13; Matthew 24:20; John 7:22-23; Colossians 2:16
There are 20 Stories in scripture that refer to the Sabbath, but without dating it in terms of a day of the month.
See Nu 15:32; 2Ki 11:5-9, 2Chr 23:4-8; 2Ki 16:18; Neh 10:31; Neh 13:15-22; Matthew 12:1-12, Mark 2:23-3:4, Luke 6:1-9; Mark 1:21; Mark 6:2; Luke 4:16; Luke 4:31; Luke 13:10-16; Luke 14:1-5; Acts 1:12; Acts 13:14-44; Acts 15:21; Acts 16:13; Acts 17:2; Acts 18:4; John 5:9-18 ; John 9:14-16 .
There are only two stories in all of scripture that mention Sabbath in a context that can be certainly dated in relation to a day of the lunar month. These are the first giving of the manna and the death and resurrection of Jesus.
See Ex 16:23-29 and Mt 28:1; Mr. 15 42; 16:1; Lu 23:54-56; Jo 19:31.
So how many Sabbath stories in scripture are really datable? Two.
This fact neutralizes the first two arguments.
(In the appendix I address other passages that are asserted to be dateable correlations between the lunar calendar and days of the week.)
Regarding the third point, it is obviously true in scripture the Jewish feast daysii were calculated based on the Jewish lunar calendar.
But the extrapolation that says “if dates of the year must be calculated on an annual calendar, therefore days of the week must also be so calculated” is unwarranted. No prophet says anything of the kind. History does not back it up. Muslims today use a lunar calendar but keep a weekly day as honored. The argument that a continuous weekly cycle is Biblically inconsistent is purely speculative. And that is the polite way to say it.
The fourth point, strictly speaking, is not a Biblical one. But the history is faulty. The fact is that from Paul’s day (in the book of Acts) there were Jews in “every city” that read the Torah on Sabbath.
Acts 15:21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.
Jews had been scattered by Assyria and Babylon, long before the rise of the Romans. They were important persons in Persia and in Africa in lands not subject to Rome. Now think this through: There is no way that one million Jews scattered all over the world could, simultaneously, be convinced to change their method of Sabbath keeping without abundant historical evidence being left behind to prove it.
But more than this, the gospel was carried to every part of the known world during the first century.
Colossians 1:23 If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;
Lunar weeks predict that when the apostles traveled to India, Ethiopia, and the British Isles, that these places began keeping lunar Sabbaths. None of these were under the influence of Rome by the 3rd century. This is why they kept the Seventh-day Sabbath so many centuries after Rome had stopped.
And there is no way that Christians around the world, faithful Sabbath keepers, could be convinced to change their day of worship without it showing up in history. The change of the Sabbath to Sunday shows up abundantly in history and proves, by this very appearance, that the other change never occurred.
The fifth point is circumstantial. If someone gathers by complicated reasoning that such a story must have happened on such a day of the month, their conclusion is suspect. See the footnote regarding John 9 for example of what I mean.
Further, we do not want to ever turn an observation of practice into a command. We want plain and direct commands for our practice. And no such command exists for the lunar Sabbath theory.
And even the observations are faulty as can be seen in the appendix where these stories are examined. If we were to admit circumstantial evidence we would have to observe that the first day of the month was not treated as holy in the following passages:
Genesis 8:13 Noah removed the covering of the ark, a great feat.
Numbers 1:1 The men of Israel were counted on the first day of the week.
Ezra 7:9 Ezra was traveling on two new moons.
The sixth point in the short list of lunar Sabbath evidences is based on a single verse in Ezekiel:
Ezekiel 46:1 Thus saith the Lord GOD; The gate of the inner court that looketh toward the east shall be shut the six working days; but on the sabbath it shall be opened, and in the day of the new moon it shall be opened.
The reasoning goes like this: If the gate is shut on the six working days and open on the new moon, then the new moon can not be one of the six working days. And since it is not one of the six working days, it must not be part of the week.
The fault lies in the fact that the verse is a perfectly natural way to write even if the new moons did occur on various days of the week. The inference that lunar Sabbath proponents make is unwarranted and stretched. It would be similar in character to reading “God loves a cheerful giver” and concluding that God doesn’t love other grudging givers.
The Bible is brief and well written. We can not impose on it a demand that enough details be given to prevent us from making false inferences.
Rather, we should demand a “Thus Saith the Lord” for our articles of belief.
Summary and Settling the Issue
Not one of the six primary lines of evidence for lunar Sabbaths holds up under investigation. That could settle the issue for me. No evidence for a life-changing idea is evidence enough that it is false.
But there are some facts that settle the matter more substantially. Let us consider them.
- The facts relating to the Mark of the Beast and the Seal of Godiii demand that the issue be one easy to settle on the basis of scripture. Simple minded persons must be able to stake their life on the fact that they are right. And simple minded persons the world over have flocked to the simple truth that showed their willingness to brave opposition to be faithful. But the Lunar Sabbath theory is not one that can be traced to a command or a simple statement. It is complex, and this is a sign itself that there is something fishy about it.
- The first week began in Genesis 1 before the moon began shining. This settles the fact that the week has always been independent of the lunar cycle.
- The phrase “seven weeks” should be 49 days by standard calendars. By a lunar-solar calendar, however, it would be 51-52 days. Leviticus 23 and Daniel 9 both establish that “seven weeks” are 49 days. And that simply disproves the lunar-Sabbath idea.
- The timing of the 1260 year prophecy (538 AD to 1798 AD) is entirely too late for changing the nature of the week.iv When the papacy was established as a civil ruler of the Roman empire it began a historically documented assault on Sabbath keeping. That assault eventually changed the way churches from India to Ethiopia to Ireland related to the Sabbath. Jews during that same period retained their Sabbath keeping through-out the papal states.
more to come...