"Six Days Shalt Thou Labor"

[Tom Hart]

Except the same Decalogue that gave that command also commanded Feast Days, which meant there would be days that you wouldn't labor. I'm not saying those days are binding, but the command did allow for exceptions.

If I understand correctly, @Henry Hall is not saying there are no exceptions, only that Thanksgiving is not such an exception.

 

[RamistThomist]

If I understand correctly, @Henry Hall is not saying there are no exceptions, only that Thanksgiving is not such an exception.

His post was a disjunctive syllogism (p V q; ~p; therefore q). By definition they do not admit exceptions (though I will grant that he probably intended them.

 

[nickipicki123]

Is there any real purpose to this post? I've read through the comments and still don't understand the point.

 

[Henry Hall]

because some of the Jews (not the Romans obviously) had practiced observing special days before Christ they and only they were allowed to break the 4th Commandment (labor 6 days) in order to observe a special day that was no longer important or holy? That doesn't sound in keeping with sound doctrine to me

First one I checked: Matthew Poole
"One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike: there were differences in the church of Rome about the observation of days, as well as the choice of meats; and in this he endeavours an accommodation as well as in the other. The converted Jew was of opinion, that the festival days appointed in Moses’s law, were holier than other days, and that they should still be observed: see Galatians 4:10 Colossians 2:16. On the other side, the believing Gentile was of opinion, that the difference in days under the Old Testament was now ceased, and he (the text says) esteemed or approved of all days. The word alike is not in the original, but it is aptly supplied by our translators."
Do you think Matthew Poole thought that this was a permanent situation?

 

[Henry Hall]

because some of the Jews (not the Romans obviously) had practiced observing special days before Christ they and only they were allowed to break the 4th Commandment (labor 6 days) in order to observe a special day that was no longer important or holy? That doesn't sound in keeping with sound doctrine to me

Second one I checked: Calvin
"...the Jews, who had been brought up from their childhood in the doctrine of the law, would not lay aside that reverence for days which they had entertained from the beginning, and to which through life they had been accustomed; nor could they have dared to touch these meats from which they had so long abstained. That they were imbued with these notions, was an evidence of their weakness; they would have thought otherwise, had they possessed a certain and a clear knowledge of Christian liberty. But in abstaining from what they thought to be unlawful, they evidenced piety, as it would have been a proof of presumption and contempt, had they done anything contrary to the dictates of conscience."

With respect to the uniqueness of the time period, more Calvin on Romans 14:

"...Now, that he who was held fast by this superstition, dared not to violate the solemnity of a particular day; this was approved by God, because he dared not to do any thing with a doubtful conscience. What indeed could the Jew do, who had not yet made such progress, as to be delivered from scruples about days? He had the word of God, in which the keeping of days was commended; there was a necessity laid on him by the law; and its abrogation was not clearly seen by him. Nothing then remained, but that he, waiting for a fuller revelation, should keep himself within the limits of his own knowledge, and not to avail himself of the benefit of liberty, before he embraced it by faith. [419]
That fuller reveation would come, at which time the Christian Jews would be expected to put away the shadowy rudiments.

 

[Henry Hall]

He probably means all the intellectual descendants of Abraham Kuyper.

As someone who has been on the inside for almost 2 decades, I've never heard that definition.

@Reformed Covenanter Is Brian Schwertley one of those "Christian worldview thinkers"?

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

@Reformed Covenanter Is Brian Schwertley one of those "Christian worldview thinkers"?

For whatever reason, the moderators do not permit discussion of that person's views on the PB, so I will say nothing further on the subject.

 

[Henry Hall]

OK, thanks. Let me know if I've got this.

We must labour six days a week unless there's a "special emergent occasion". Since Thanksgiving is not such an occasion, it is not legitimate to take a day off.

On top of that, Thanksgiving is a pretended holy day, right?

You've got it.

 

[RamistThomist]

As someone who has been on the inside for almost 2 decades, I've never heard that definition.

Seriously? Bahnsen draws the connection in his lecture on Warfield and Kuyper. I didn't mean it as an insult. I thought you presup types liked being labeled as antithesis. I cants win for losin'

 

[arapahoepark]

Is there any real purpose to this post? I've read through the comments and still don't understand the point.

Similar to the cage stage PRCA threads as of late by supposedly, much older 'adults.'

 

[NaphtaliPress]

MODERATING. Folks, let the moderators moderate. And let me say, it is simply bad form to discuss other members in front of their faces so to speak. If you have a problem with the member address them directly or just let the moderators handle things. Thread closed for the Lord's day.