The church year and the fourth day of creation

[Sam Jer]

Does the interpetation of "signs and seasons" (otot umoadim, אותות ומועדים) require an allowence for annual church events (such as the celebration of the Lord's nativity, circumcision, passion, ressurection, ascension, and the sending of the Holy Spirit), as this article suggests?
In general, how would the anti-calendar position answer the arguments in the article?

The text says they are for “signs and seasons, and for days and years.” Why is the word “signs” in with “seasons, days, and years”? It seems to show that the heavenly bodies will not just mark the passage of time, but that they serve as important markers throughout the year. The word sign used there appears several times in the Old Testament, but two of its usages are as a pledge of the covenant (circumcision, rainbow, and Passover are all signs) or as a marker of divine action. One way to think of these celestial signs are as creational ebenezers, heavenly stones of remembrance, that move us to mark the mighty deeds of the Lord in worship as we move through each year of our lives. Further, the word used for “seasons” here is almost always used in the Old Testament with a connection to worship. It can mean an “appointed place,” in which case it almost always refers to a particular spot in the Temple/Tabernacle, or to the Tent of Meeting itself. As an appointed time, it most regularly refers to the time for appointed feasts. This is how the BDB Hebrew Lexicon defines this usage in Genesis 1, preferring the translation, “for signs and sacred seasons.” This is also the case in Psalm 104: 19, which should be translated, “He made the Moon to mark the sacred seasons.”

 

[NaphtaliPress]

Imaginative interpretations do not get around the fact that the church has no authority to appoint and bind pretended holy days. And it is the case of tomorrow that private observance of that day initially, led to group observance that led to will worship and superstition, which is why it and other such pretended holy days were cast out as idols and monuments of idolatry at the reformation. Funny how it is never new days; but it is always the old idols folks want to dig up. All this is covered in standard literature. Bannerman on church power comes to mind. Certainly you see it polemically addressed in George Gillespie's English Popish Ceremonies. Authority, binding the conscience, monuments of idolatry. Others with more time may wish to try to tackle the actual interpretation he's attempting but the execution of it is prohibited by the fact the church has no authority to do this. When the church was freed from the multitude of OT holy days and ceremonies and would seek to bind themselves to such again, Paul said "I fear for you."

 

[Poimen]

Assuming that Genesis 1:14 refers, in part, to a sacred day it still begs the question as to whether or not: 1) liberty is granted to man to create his own holy days as such and, if so, 2) such liberty would continue after the fall. I think that Genesis 1&2 bear forth the liberty of God to direct man in his sufficient counsel.

Consider that God himself grants (creates) the sabbath at the end of the creation week. Does that not imply the opposite? The signs and seasons direct man's earthly or daily behaviour but not his heavenly or Godward?

Indeed, the signs are God appointed since he made them and controls them. They are not derived from man so they originate from the creator. If God was directing man to some kind of gathering it comes directly from his hand. Furthermore we cannot assume that the revelation of creation holds forth the same clarity after the fall due to its innate corruption as well as the corruption of its beholder. And one wonders, besides the sabbath, what holy gatherings man would have sought in this context when no redemptive events could be anticipated.

Moreover, the fall of man was his attempt to establish his own will regarding the commandments of God and that soon after that Cain is corrupting the worship of God. Scripture from that point on forbids worship according to the imagination of man, including the appointment of holy days no matter what wisdom or revelation may dictate to their hearts. This is thoroughly demonstrated by God's appointment of such holy days in addition to the sabbath, his condemnation of those who pervert their appointment (i.e. claiming lordship over them: Galatians 4:9-11 & Colossians 2:16ff.), and his disapproval of those who appoint their own (1 Kings 12:33).

By the way, I disagree with his interpretation of moed in Psalm 104:19 since, in context, it has nothing to do with sacredness for the entire Psalm is about God's created order as we also see from its usage in Jeremiah 8:7. The same context would is in play in Genesis 1 for though all creation was good, it was the sabbath that God made for a sanctified purpose (Genesis 2:3).

 

[arapahoepark]

That is a rather far fetched interpretation...it seems more likely that it refers to signs in the heavens like an equinox or conjunctions, not necessarily anything to celebrate.

 

[Northern Crofter]

Does the interpetation of "signs and seasons" (otot umoadim, אותות ומועדים) require an allowence for annual church events

Yes.

(such as the celebration of the Lord's nativity, circumcision, passion, ressurection, ascension, and the sending of the Holy Spirit)

No.

 

[Sam Jer]

Yes.

could you explain?

 

[Northern Crofter]

could you explain?

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "require an allowence for annual church events," but the Church, in the previous dispensation of the covenant of grace, was required to observe certain annual (as well as weekly and "monthly") events which were tied to the orderly and timely movement of the lights in the firmament of the heaven (sun, moon, and stars). These annual ordinances all pointed to Christ and were fulfilled and erased ("blotted out") in Him: "And putting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, he even took it out of the way, and fastened it upon the cross.... Let no man therefore condemn you in meat and drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath days, which are but a shadow of things to come: but the body is in Christ." (Colossians 2.14-17). I believe the correct interpretation of this passage is that there is now no requirement for the Church to keep these days holy, therefore the Church cannot require them, though people may continue to personally observe them if they find it profitable.

The dates of the holy days in the previous dispensation were fixed and known because they were tied to the movements of the lights in the firmament. And, yes, based on knowing the date of Passover, we can annually determine the dates of things like Christ's death, resurrection, ascension, and pentecost, but we have no command to observe them in the Church. As for the dates of Christ's birth or circumcision, we have no idea. The Sabbath and Sabbath days are two different ordinances.

In my household, living in a temperate climate in the northern hemisphere, we "observe" each season by setting aside time in family worship to recognize the goodness of the Creator (like the days getting longer after the winter solstice, for example) and note some spiritual application. (We also set aside the national Thanksgiving Day and New Year's Day as days of intentional thanksgiving and have developed our own family traditions, but they are simply that). Maybe it's because of our agricultural environment living and working on a farm, maybe it's a bit of not wanting to surrender rainbows and solstices to perverts and pagans, but I like to think there is still something to looking up to the heavens every now and then and considering our place in God's creation and providence.