Continental Reformed and Festivals

[Reformed Covenanter]

Richard that is rubbish. The grounds for their condemnation was that they had done something in worship which God had not commanded them. That is what the text says.

The issue is that Jeroboam had done somthing against the explicit command of YHWH. That is what the text says.

And Jeroboam said in his heart, Now shall the kingdom return to the house of David: If this people go up to do sacrifice in the house of the LORD at Jerusalem, then shall the heart of this people turn again unto their lord, even unto Rehoboam king of Judah, and they shall kill me, and go again to Rehoboam king of Judah. Whereupon the king took counsel, and made two calves of gold, and said unto them, It is too much for you to go up to Jerusalem: behold thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt. And he set the one in Bethel, and the other put he in Dan. And this thing became a sin: for the people went to worship before the one, even unto Dan. And he made an house of high places, and made priests of the lowest of the people, which were not of the sons of Levi. And Jeroboam ordained a feast in the eighth month, on the fifteenth day of the month, like unto the feast that is in Judah, and he offered upon the altar. So did he in Bethel, sacrificing unto the calves that he had made: and he placed in Bethel the priests of the high places which he had made. So he offered upon the altar which he had made in Bethel the fifteenth day of the eighth month, even in the month which he had devised of his own heart; and ordained a feast unto the children of Israel: and he offered upon the altar, and burnt incense.​

It is indeed true that Jeroboam invented the date, but the festival was not an innovation. The sin was that he went against what YHWH commanded.

He invented the date of the festival, therefore, it was a human invention and a breach of the RPW. On an NPW basis you have no grounds for condemning him. Besides my comment was directed towards what you were saying in relation to Nadab and Abihu.

To change your position on a subject as serious as this so quickly strikes me as rash. Perhaps you should think for a longer period about matters before stating them publicly (that is not a command, just a suggestion). It is not good to be always changing your mind as it suggests instability.

 

[AV1611]

He invented the date of the festival, therefore, it was a human invention and a breach of the RPW.

The point is that whilst he invented the date of the festival, and yes it was a human invention, the problem was that it went against God's express commands about where and when males were to go to worship YHWH on the Feast of Tabernacles.

Hence this cannot be used to say that humans cannot set aside days to worship God. The parrallel is not setting aside the 25th Dec but rather Gordon Brown suddenly deciding that the sabbath was Tuesday.

On an NPW basis you have no grounds for condemning him.

Not convinced, after all he has transgressed a direct command from God.

To change your position on a subject as serious as this so quickly strikes me as rash.

Apologies for the confusion, I am still thinking it through. I have not yet changed my mind hence in post 9:

Daniel, These are the same answers to the above questions I would have used. Now if I may attempt a rebut to tease out these arguments.

One can only argue with oneself to a degree, after all, the easiest person to convince is oneself.

I still don't think that your argument regarding Jeroboam works. Incidently, what books have you read on the worship of Israel?

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

The point is thatwhilst he invented the date of the festival, and yes it was a human invention, the problem was that it went against God's express commands about where and when males were to go to the temple.

Hence this cannot be used to say that humans cannot set aside days to worship God. The parrallel is not setting aside the 25th Dec but rather Gordon Brown suddenly deciding that the sabbath was Tuesday.

You are correct that Jeroboam's intention was to keep people away from the true worship; but by merely setting apart the 15th day of the 8th month he was not going against God's commands from an NPW perspective. Moreover, the text teaches us that whenever men invent worship practices devised from their own hearts they will subtract from worship that has been appointed. Hence the invention of Christ-Mass detracts from the Sabbath as God's Holy Day.

Incidently, what books have you read on the worship of Israel?

Alfred Eerdsheim's book on the Temple, but that was years ago. However, Douglas Comin's book Worship: From Genesis to Revelation goes through each book the OT and NT so as to adequately cover it.

 

[AV1611]

by merely setting apart the 15th day of the 8th month he was not going against God's commands from an NPW perspective.

If NPW argues that "What is not forbidden (incl. by the implied negative of a possitive precept) is allowed" and YHWH set the feast of tabernacles for the 15th day of the 7th month then Jeroboam sins by changing the day from the 7th month to the 8th according to the NPW.

The question is not so much what does the text mean to NPW but what does it mean for the RPW. After all, Ursinus uses the case of Jeroboam to show that we cannot invent worship yet he does not see that this example forbids our celebrating the memory of the Lord's nativity, circumcision, passion, resurrection, and of his ascension into heaven, and the sending of the Holy Spirit upon his disciples.

Moreover, the text teaches us that whenever men invent worship practices devised from their own hearts they will subtract from worship that has been appointed. Hence the invention of Christ-Mass detracts from the Sabbath as God's Holy Day.

To be fair, that is your application of the text. The text does show that Jeroboam purposefully changed the worship of YHWH for his own political gains and introduces idolatry into the northern tribes.

Turretin noted:

"The question is not whether anniversary days may be selected on which either the nativity, or circumcision, or passion, or ascension of Christ, and similar mysteries of redemption, may be commemorated, or even on which the memory of some remarkable blessing may be celebrated. For this the orthodox think should be left to the liberty of the church. Hence some devote certain days to such festivity, not from necessity of faith, but from the counsel of prudence to excite more to piety and devotion. However, others, using their liberty, retain the Lord’s day alone, and in it, at stated times, celebrate the memory of the mysteries of Christ…we deny that those days are in themselves more holy than others; rather all are equal. If any sanctity is attributed to them, it does not belong to the time and the day, but to the divine worship. Thus, the observance of them among those who retain it, is only of positive right and ecclesiastical appointment; not, however, necessary from a divine precept".​

Alfred Eerdsheim's book on the Temple, but that was years ago. However, Douglas Comin's book Worship: From Genesis to Revelation goes through each book the OT and NT so as to adequately cover it.

I was thinking more along the lines of an historical book, including the analysis of their worship especially in its ANE context. Scripture is silent on what Israel were to do at many of these feasts hence we cannot say that the bible clearly teaches that a practice must be commanded in order for it to be acceptable. To argue that the water being poured out must have been commanded is simply assuming what you are defending. It can be easily shown that the vast majority of the Psalms originate from an autumnal festival (Mowinckel, Kraus and Weiser) and I would say specifically a festival celebrating the enthronement of YHWH including some form of covenant renewal.

 

[BertMulder]

OK, fellows...

HOLD IT!

The Dutch did not set aside HOLYdays for the days of Boxing day, Easter monday, etc, etc.

The Dutch decided it was a good idea to have worship services on those days. Those days, however, never did have, and where never meant to have the status of a 'sabbath'. Not much different than the practice in Geneva, where they had worship services pretty much every day of the week....

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

If NPW argues that "What is not forbidden (incl. by the implied negative of a possitive precept) is allowed" and YHWH set the feast of tabernacles for the 15th day of the 7th month then Jeroboam sins by changing the day from the 7th month to the 8th according to the NPW.

The question is not so much what does the text mean to NPW but what does it mean for the RPW. After all, Ursinus uses the case of Jeroboam to show that we cannot invent worship yet he does not see that this example forbids our celebrating the memory of the Lord's nativity, circumcision, passion, resurrection, and of his ascension into heaven, and the sending of the Holy Spirit upon his disciples.

Jerobaom was not forbidden from setting up alternative holy days. Yet the setting up of a holy day which he devised in his own heart was a sin. The Lord's Day is sufficient for celebrating the events in the life of Christ. Why can't people be satisfied with God's provision instead of resorting to Arminianism in worship?

To be fair, that is your application of the text. The text does show that Jeroboam purposefully changed the worship of YHWH for his own political gains and introduces idolatry into the northern tribes.

A bit like your beloved Stuart Kings.

 

[AV1611]

Jerobaom was not forbidden from setting up alternative holy days.

Jeroboam did not set up an alternative Holy Day. He ensured that the Feast of Tabernacles was moved back four weeks. It was not a new feast it was a different date. In so doing he transgressed God's law hence he sinned. It was as if he changed the sabbath from a sunday to a tuesday, not as if he devised a new day called Mayday.

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

Jerobaom was not forbidden from setting up alternative holy days.

Jeroboam did not set up an alternative Holy Day. He ensured that the Feast of Tabernacles was moved back four weeks. It was not a new feast it was a different date. In so doing he transgressed God's law hence he sinned. It was as if he changed the sabbath from a sunday to a tuesday, not as if he devised a new day called Mayday.

But he did; that is exactly what he did in order to corrupt the worship of God. Jeroboam did not forbid them to go down to Judah, instead by devising his own inventions he knew that would be enough to stop them going down, as corrupt worship triumphed over true worship. Much the same happens today as the significance of the Lord's Day is destroyed by Popish inventions like Christ-Mass.

 

[AV1611]

But he did

What new day did he set up? I am not talking about a new date but the day or festival.

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

But he did

What new day did he set up? I am not talking about a new date but the day or festival.

Since it was on a new date it was a new day, since days fall on dates (I mean calendar dates, not the pagan practice which is the opposite of courtship ).

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

OK, fellows...

HOLD IT!

The Dutch did not set aside HOLYdays for the days of Boxing day, Easter monday, etc, etc.

The Dutch decided it was a good idea to have worship services on those days. Those days, however, never did have, and where never meant to have the status of a 'sabbath'. Not much different than the practice in Geneva, where they had worship services pretty much every day of the week....

But they set aside sacred seasons to celebrate events in Christ's life; whether or not you call these holy days is not relevant, because that is what they are (even if done under another name).

 

[AV1611]

Since it was on a new date it was a new day, since days fall on dates.

Did Jeroboam, in moving the Feast of Tabernacles from the seventh month to the eighth month, violate an explicit command from God?

Lev 23:34-43 "Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, The fifteenth day of this seventh month shall be the feast of tabernacles for seven days unto the LORD. On the first day shall be an holy convocation: ye shall do no servile work therein. Seven days ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD: on the eighth day shall be an holy convocation unto you; and ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD: it is a solemn assembly; and ye shall do no servile work therein. These are the feasts of the LORD, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, to offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD, a burnt offering, and a meat offering, a sacrifice, and drink offerings, every thing upon his day: Beside the sabbaths of the LORD, and beside your gifts, and beside all your vows, and beside all your freewill offerings, which ye give unto the LORD. Also in the fifteenth day of the seventh month, when ye have gathered in the fruit of the land, ye shall keep a feast unto the LORD seven days: on the first day shall be a sabbath, and on the eighth day shall be a sabbath. And ye shall take you on the first day the boughs of goodly trees, branches of palm trees, and the boughs of thick trees, and willows of the brook; and ye shall rejoice before the LORD your God seven days. And ye shall keep it a feast unto the LORD seven days in the year. It shall be a statute for ever in your generations: ye shall celebrate it in the seventh month. Ye shall dwell in booths seven days; all that are Israelites born shall dwell in booths: That your generations may know that I made the children of Israel to dwell in booths, when I brought them out of the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God."​

Did Jeroboam, in moving the location of the Feast of Tabernacles from Jerusalem to Bethel and Dan, violate an explicit command from God?

Deut 16:16 "Three times in a year shall all thy males appear before the LORD thy God in the place which he shall choose; in the feast of unleavened bread, and in the feast of weeks, and in the feast of tabernacles: and they shall not appear before the LORD empty: Every man shall give as he is able, according to the blessing of the LORD thy God which he hath given thee."​

Jeroboam knew what YHWH had commanded and did his own thing, "Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law" (1 John 3:4).

 

[AV1611]

If it was not wrong for Israel to set aside a time of thanksgiving for God's providential goodness at harvest then how can it be wrong for the church to set aside a time of thanksgiving for God's providential goodness at harvest?

Maybe it's not.

If it is not wrong for the church to set aside a time of thanksgiving for God's providential goodness at harvest then how can it be wrong for the church to set aside a time of thanksgiving for God's love demonstrated through the birth of Christ?

"And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men." (Luke 2:10, 14)

The RPW does not only refer to explicit commands but legitimate historical examples (i.e. synagogue attendance). People who make this kind of criticism do not realize that every command did not have to be explicitly written down, as legitimate historical examples are Biblically sufficient to show us that something is acceptable.

How do you know that Easter was not commanded, but the command was not explicitly recorded - i.e. it was something based on a legitimate historical example?

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

If it was not wrong for Israel to set aside a time of thanksgiving for God's providential goodness at harvest then how can it be wrong for the church to set aside a time of thanksgiving for God's providential goodness at harvest?

Maybe it's not.

If it is not wrong for the church to set aside a time of thanksgiving for God's providential goodness at harvest then how can it be wrong for the church to set aside a time of thanksgiving for God's love demonstrated through the birth of Christ?

"And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men." (Luke 2:10, 14)

The RPW does not only refer to explicit commands but legitimate historical examples (i.e. synagogue attendance). People who make this kind of criticism do not realize that every command did not have to be explicitly written down, as legitimate historical examples are Biblically sufficient to show us that something is acceptable.

How do you know that Easter was not commanded, but the command was not explicitly recorded - i.e. it was something based on a legitimate historical example?

Point 1 - we celebrate events in the life of Christ every Lord's Day, therefore, there is no need to have different holy days to celebrate them. 52 holy days a year is enough. Moreover, on what authority do you presume to impose the observance of such festivals upon my conscience? Are you saying that I am sinning by refusing to observe them and by spending my time in dominion duties?

Point 2 - since there is not record of Easter being observed by the apostles, it is not a legitimate historical example. Easter (Passover) has been replaced with the Lord's Supper (which should be celebrated every Lord's Day).

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

Since it was on a new date it was a new day, since days fall on dates.

Did Jeroboam, in moving the Feast of Tabernacles from the seventh month to the eighth month, violate an explicit command from God?

Lev 23:34-43 "Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, The fifteenth day of this seventh month shall be the feast of tabernacles for seven days unto the LORD. On the first day shall be an holy convocation: ye shall do no servile work therein. Seven days ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD: on the eighth day shall be an holy convocation unto you; and ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD: it is a solemn assembly; and ye shall do no servile work therein. These are the feasts of the LORD, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, to offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD, a burnt offering, and a meat offering, a sacrifice, and drink offerings, every thing upon his day: Beside the sabbaths of the LORD, and beside your gifts, and beside all your vows, and beside all your freewill offerings, which ye give unto the LORD. Also in the fifteenth day of the seventh month, when ye have gathered in the fruit of the land, ye shall keep a feast unto the LORD seven days: on the first day shall be a sabbath, and on the eighth day shall be a sabbath. And ye shall take you on the first day the boughs of goodly trees, branches of palm trees, and the boughs of thick trees, and willows of the brook; and ye shall rejoice before the LORD your God seven days. And ye shall keep it a feast unto the LORD seven days in the year. It shall be a statute for ever in your generations: ye shall celebrate it in the seventh month. Ye shall dwell in booths seven days; all that are Israelites born shall dwell in booths: That your generations may know that I made the children of Israel to dwell in booths, when I brought them out of the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God."​

Did Jeroboam, in moving the location of the Feast of Tabernacles from Jerusalem to Bethel and Dan, violate an explicit command from God?

Deut 16:16 "Three times in a year shall all thy males appear before the LORD thy God in the place which he shall choose; in the feast of unleavened bread, and in the feast of weeks, and in the feast of tabernacles: and they shall not appear before the LORD empty: Every man shall give as he is able, according to the blessing of the LORD thy God which he hath given thee."​

Jeroboam knew what YHWH had commanded and did his own thing, "Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law" (1 John 3:4).

In short, he was not violating an explicit command but adding an additional date.

 

[AV1611]

In short, he was not violating an explicit command but adding an additional date.

It is clear from the biblical evidence I posted that he was violating an explicit command.

 

[NaphtaliPress]

George Gillespie, A Dispute Against the English Popish Ceremonies (Naphtali Press, 1993). The below is from sections online on the subject of holy days.
English Popish Ceremonies (Against Holy Days) | Naphtali Press
Part 1: Holy Days take away our Christian Liberty Proved Out of the Law (EPC 1.7 31-36) | Naphtali Press

The Bishop has yet a third dart to throw at us: If the church (he says)7 has power, upon occasional motives, to appoint occasional fasts or festivities, may not she, for constant and eternal blessings, which do infinitely excel all occasional benefits, appoint ordinary times of commemoration or thanksgiving? ANSWER. There are two reasons for which the church may and should appoint fasts or festivities upon occasional motives, and neither of them agrees with ordinary festivities. 1. Extraordinary fasts, either for obtaining some great blessing, or averting some great judgment, are necessary means to be used in such cases; likewise, extraordinary festivities are necessary testifications [testimonies] of our thankfulness for the benefits which we have impetrate [procured] by our extraordinary fasts; but ordinary festivities, for constant and eternal blessings, have no necessary use. The celebration of set anniversary days is no necessary mean for conserving the commemoration of the benefits of redemption, because we have occasion, not only every Sabbath day, but every other day, to call to mind these benefits, either in hearing, or reading, or meditating upon God’s word. I esteem and judge that the days consecrated to Christ must be lifted, says Danæus: Christ is born, is circumcised, dies, rises again for us every day in the preaching of the Gospel.8​

2. God has given his church a general precept for extraordinary fasts (Joel 1:14; 2:15), as likewise for extraordinary festivities to praise God, and to give him thanks in the public assembly of his people, upon the occasional motive of some great benefit which, by the means of our fasting and praying, we have obtained (Zech. 8:19 with 7:3). If it is said that there is a general command for set festivities, because there is a command for preaching and hearing the word, and for praising God for his benefits; and there is no precept for particular fasts more than for particular festivities, I answer: Albeit there is a command for preaching and hearing the word, and for praising God for his benefits, yet is there no command (no, not in the most general generality) for annexing these exercises of religion to set anniversary days more than to other days; whereas it is plain that there is a general command for fasting and humiliation at some times more than at other times.

7. Ib. p. 26, 27 [i.e. Pro. in Perth Assem., part 3, p. 13).

8. Apud. Bald., de Cas. Consc., lib. 2, cap. 12, cas. 1. Dies Christo dicatos tollendos existimo judicoque, says Danæus: quotidie nobis in evangelii prædicatione nascitur, circumciditur, moritur, resurgit Christus.
​

This is why Gillespie and the Westminster Assembly of divines classed occasions for fastings and thanksgivings as part of the special (occasional vs. regular) worship of God (WCF 21.5). The distinction between these valid and authorized aspects of public worship and the imposed holy days against which Presbyterians and Puritans contended is common Presbyterian doctrine, as a quote from Southern Presbyterian, William S. Plumer makes clear (William S. Plumer, The Law of God, As Contained in the Ten Commandments [Philadelphia, 1864]):

Even days of fasting or thanksgiving are not holy days; but they are a part of secular time voluntarily devoted to God’s service. And if we are to perform these things at all, we must take some time for them. Yet none but God can sanctify a day so as to make it holy. The attempt to do this was one of the sins of Jeroboam, 1 Kings 12:33.
​

See also, The Religious Observance of Christmas and ‘Holy Days’ in American Presbyterianism | Naphtali Press

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

In short, he was not violating an explicit command but adding an additional date.

It is clear from the biblical evidence I posted that he was violating an explicit command.

On an NPW basis there was nothing to stop him from adding another date. However, you are right that in some sense he was violating an explicit command, as to add to God's word in worship by inventing our own rites which God did not authorize, was explicitly condemned.

 

[AV1611]

we celebrate events in the life of Christ every Lord's Day, therefore, there is no need to have different holy days to celebrate them.

This does not mean that we are forbidden from setting aside days to celebrate specific events in the life of Christ.

on what authority do you presume to impose the observance of such festivals upon my conscience?

They are not to be imposed, you are at liberty to keep them or not.

since there is no record of Easter being observed by the apostles, it is not a legitimate historical example.

There is no biblical record for the pouring out of water during the Feast of Tabernacles yet it happened. How then is this a legitimate historical example?

Just because there is no record of Easter being observed by the apostles does not mean they did not do so.

Recall our previous conversation:

Was Israel wrong to celebrate harvest in the Autumn? No. Were they wrong to compose a hymn for this (Ps. 65)? No. Did they have any direct command from God to do this? No.

Issues concerning the harvest are complex; firstly, how do you know that the harvest was not commanded, but the command was not explicitly recorded - i.e. it was something based on a legitimate historical example.

There are no biblical commands for what Israel did content wise, yet you say it must have been commanded just not recorded. Well I could argue the very same thing about easter. It was commanded, it was just not recorded.

This is one of the big problems with your position as I see it. How do we know what Israel did in worship? How do we know what the apostolic church did in worship?

I certainly hope that you are consistent in your argument and so forbid the celebration of Reformation Day on the 31st October. After all, that was not commaned and it falls on the same day as Halloween!

 

[AV1611]

On an NPW basis there was nothing to stop him from adding another date.

Yes there was, YHWH commanded that the Feast of Tabernacles be held on the 15th day of the 7th month. therefore by changing the day Jeroboam went against the command of YHWH, and this the NPW would forbid.

However, you are right that in some sense he was violating an explicit command

I have demonstrated that YHWH gave Israel an explicit command. I have demonstrated that Jeroboam violated that explicit command.

 

[AV1611]

Yet none but God can sanctify a day so as to make it holy. The attempt to do this was one of the sins of Jeroboam, 1 Kings 12:33.

I find this interpretation of the text mistaken. The sin of Jeroboam was the moving a Feast of YHWH. YHWH commanded that the Feast of Tabernacles be held on the 15th day of the 7th month. Therefore by changing the day to the 15th day of the 8th month Jeroboam went against an explicit command of YHWH and thereby sinned. This does not therefore prove that only God can sanctify a day. Furthermore, as Turretin points out, "we deny that those days are in themselves more holy than others; rather all are equal. If any sanctity is attributed to them, it does not belong to the time and the day, but to the divine worship."

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

This is one of the big problems with your position as I see it. How do we know what Israel did in worship? How do we know what the apostolic church did in worship?

Richard, I am not going to waste my time going over the same old arguments again and again. I have had enough. You have been repeatedly given sound Biblical arguments and have refused to heed them.

The above quote shows that you simply do not understand the regulative principle; all we need in order to know how to worship the Lord has been recorded for us in Scripture. We do not need to go to extra-biblical sources to decide Christian doctrines. As I pointed out to you before in another thread on creation, your reliance upon extra-biblical literature is dangerous for the formulation of doctrine. After all, how do we know the apostles did not ascribe a lower form of worship to Mary? It is not explicitly forbidden and if you found some supposed historical evidence that they did, then you would have to say that this was acceptable. I exhort you as a brother in Christ to reconsider where you are going in your theology and tread more carefully.

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

On an NPW basis there was nothing to stop him from adding another date.

Yes there was, YHWH commanded that the Feast of Tabernacles be held on the 15th day of the 7th month. therefore by changing the day Jeroboam went against the command of YHWH, and this the NPW would forbid.

However, you are right that in some sense he was violating an explicit command

I have demonstrated that YHWH gave Israel an explicit command. I have demonstrated that Jeroboam violated that explicit command.

Look I have repeatedly pointed out that there was nothing to stop him from inventing an alternative date on an NPW basis as long as he did not abolish the date originally given. You are clearly clutching at straws.

 

[NaphtaliPress]

Jeroboam did not move a feast appointed by God, he set up a competing system.

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

Jeroboam did not move a feast appointed by God, he set up a competing system.

That would be the way I have always read the passage myself. But it seems that Richard differs.

 

[AV1611]

all we need in order to know how to worship the Lord has been recorded for us in Scripture

I agree. The problem is where the WCF states that God "may not be worshipped... [in] any other way not prescribed in the holy Scripture". By making the Scripture the sole rule of what we can do in worship, in terms of prescription, you run into all sorts of problems. Why? Because Israel did things in the worship of God that are unrecorded in Scripture and yet you yourself would not say was wrong. To my mind that is a major problem.

 

[AV1611]

Jeroboam did not move a feast appointed by God, he set up a competing system.

Matthew Henry notes that "The feast of tabernacles, which God had appointed on the fifteenth day of the seventh month, he adjourned to the fifteenth day of the eighth month (1 Kings 12:32), the month which he devised of his own heart, to show his power in ecclesiastical matters, 1 Kings 12:33. The passover and pentecost he observed in their proper season, or did not observe them at all, or with little solemnity in comparison with this."

Jamieson, Fausset and Brown write "he changed the feast of tabernacles from the fifteenth of the seventh to the fifteenth of the eighth month".

Keil and Delitzsch note that "Jeroboam also transferred to the eighth month the feast which ought to have been kept in the seventh month (the feast of tabernacles, Leviticus 23:34.)."

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

Jeroboam did not move a feast appointed by God, he set up a competing system.

Matthew Henry notes that "The feast of tabernacles, which God had appointed on the fifteenth day of the seventh month, he adjourned to the fifteenth day of the eighth month (1 Kings 12:32), the month which he devised of his own heart, to show his power in ecclesiastical matters, 1 Kings 12:33. The passover and pentecost he observed in their proper season, or did not observe them at all, or with little solemnity in comparison with this."

Jamieson, Fausset and Brown write "he changed the feast of tabernacles from the fifteenth of the seventh to the fifteenth of the eighth month".

Keil and Delitzsch note that "Jeroboam also transferred to the eighth month the feast which ought to have been kept in the seventh month (the feast of tabernacles, Leviticus 23:34.)."

Those quotes do not prove your point as they do not prove what they say from the text of Scripture. Moroever, the Matthew Henry quote is not consistent with your own Erastianism.

 

[NaphtaliPress]

all we need in order to know how to worship the Lord has been recorded for us in Scripture

I agree. The problem is where the WCF states that God "may not be worshipped... [in] any other way not prescribed in the holy Scripture". By making the Scripture the sole rule of what we can do in worship, in terms of prescription, you run into all sorts of problems. Why? Because Israel did things in the worship of God that are unrecorded in Scripture and yet you yourself would not say was wrong. To my mind that is a major problem.

Moderator hat on. On that note, it may be worth a reminder that while we often, seasonally it seems, discuss the church calendar, holy days, etc. the regulative principle of worship itself is accepted reformed doctrine on the Puritanboard. In discussing it be careful and don't pee in the pool (see http://www.puritanboard.com/f67/what-reformed-board-24779/).

 

[AV1611]

Those quotes do not prove your point as they do not prove what they say from the text of Scripture.

My point is simply that Jeroboam's sin is that he violated YHWH's commands regarding his worship. That what 1 Kings 12:32 is speaking about is his moving the Feast of Tabernacles. Those quotes prove that my view is not a novelty in reading it that way, indeed a Puritan and respected conservative scholars read it that way too.