Interacting With the "Special Day" Verses

[Ryan&Amber2013]

Because of the timely discussion lately on Christmas, for my own benefit, and possibly for others, I thought it might be beneficial to talk about the meaning of the common passages in the Bible used to defend the stances on special days. Ultimately, Scripture is what we must be convinced by. When interpreting the Bible, I try to look at the plain meaning of a text and try not to insert my own doctrine into it. For any of you that would like to give your interpretation, please do. Here are the three most common verses I can think of:

1. One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God.
Romans 14:5‭-‬6

To me, the plain teaching of this text is that we have a Christian freedom when it comes to observing special days.

2. Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.
Colossians 2:16‭-‬17

To me, the plain understanding of this text is that we should not be bound by others to observe certain days. We have been set free from such binding, and it would be wrong for someone to tell us that we must keep them.

3. You observe days and months and seasons and years! I am afraid I may have labored over you in vain.
Galatians 4:10‭-‬11

This passage seems to be talking about not binding ourselves to certain special days in regards to finding righteousness in God by such things.

 

[NaphtaliPress]

Moved to the church calendar and pretended holy days subforum.

 

[Northern Crofter]

When interpreting the Bible, I try to look at the plain meaning of a text and try not to insert my own doctrine into it.

First, I look to those who have gone before me and studied much more than I have. I think it can be dangerous to try to find the "plain meaning of a text" without looking to the doctrine of our forefathers in the faith. "All things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, nor alike clear unto all" (WCF 1.7).

Secondly, the 3 passages you offered are seen by most as referring to Paul's efforts to counter the Judiazers in his day. I am not sure they apply to pagan festivals (or later syncretic attempts to "Christianize" them). I believe Paul is referring to observances from the previous dispensation of grace and his words should be considered in the context of the era of the Jerusalem Council. That does not mean they do not have application to today. But often these can be misapplied and produce error (such as saying the Sabbath no longer needs to be kept). "The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself; and therefore, when there is a question about the true and full sense of any scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it must be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly." (WCF 1.9).

 

[Ryan&Amber2013]

First, I look to those who have gone before me and studied much more than I have. I think it can be dangerous to try to find the "plain meaning of a text" without looking to the doctrine of our forefathers in the faith. "All things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, nor alike clear unto all" (WCF 1.7).

Secondly, the 3 passages you offered are seen by most as referring to Paul's efforts to counter the Judiazers in his day. I am not sure they apply to pagan festivals (or later syncretic attempts to "Christianize" them). I believe Paul is referring to observances from the previous dispensation of grace and his words should be considered in the context of the era of the Jerusalem Council. That does not mean they do not have application to today. But often these can be misapplied and produce error (such as saying the Sabbath no longer needs to be kept). "The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself; and therefore, when there is a question about the true and full sense of any scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it must be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly." (WCF 1.9).

That's good stuff, brother. Thanks! Sorry, I didn't mean to make it sound like I don't read commentaries. I definitely do. I think what I was getting at is that sometimes it is so obvious how people try to fit passages into their systematic theology. For example, with Jehovah's witnesses and the doctrine of the Trinity. They will write these long articles to try to explain why the text isn't saying what it clearly seems to say. At that point, the red flags are going up for me.

 

[Eyedoc84]

Because of the timely discussion lately on Christmas, for my own benefit, and possibly for others, I thought it might be beneficial to talk about the meaning of the common passages in the Bible used to defend the stances on special days. Ultimately, Scripture is what we must be convinced by. When interpreting the Bible, I try to look at the plain meaning of a text and try not to insert my own doctrine into it. For any of you that would like to give your interpretation, please do. Here are the three most common verses I can think of:

1. One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God.
Romans 14:5‭-‬6

To me, the plain teaching of this text is that we have a Christian freedom when it comes to observing special days.

2. Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.
Colossians 2:16‭-‬17

To me, the plain understanding of this text is that we should not be bound by others to observe certain days. We have been set free from such binding, and it would be wrong for someone to tell us that we must keep them.

3. You observe days and months and seasons and years! I am afraid I may have labored over you in vain.
Galatians 4:10‭-‬11

This passage seems to be talking about not binding ourselves to certain special days in regards to finding righteousness in God by such things.

Romans 14: The church situation there was that it had most likely been established as a Jewish congregation (Acts 2), became a mix of Jew/Gentile, then became mostly Gentile (Acts 18), and was at the time of the letter reincorporating Jews. Paul, remember, has never been with them or taught them. Here in chapter 14, you have “weaker brothers” who still feel bound to dietary laws and holy days as instituted by God but now going through transition where they are being told by men otherwise, and you have “stronger brothers” who know they are not bound by such things under the full light of the gospel. He is exhorting both to be patient with the other.

Colossians 2: He is telling Gentiles to NOT let themselves be judged by those trying to impose the ceremonial law on them. Those were only shadows, but now the substance has come. They are not to keep the ceremonial law anymore. He also touches on certain pagan ascetic practices. If they are no longer bound by what God had formerly commanded, how much less so to the commandments of men!

Galatians 4: He is plainly teaching them NOT to observe the ceremonial law in very strong terms.

I think Paul’s differing approach with these congregations has to do with who and where they were in their spiritual journeys and his previous relationship with them or lack thereof.

This of course built upon the foundation of the OT teaching over and over again that we may not approach God in ways not prescribed. I do not believe Christ came to set us free to approach him however we wish so as to overthrow the foundation of the first table of the law.

 

[Ryan&Amber2013]

Romans 14: The church situation there was that it had most likely been established as a Jewish congregation (Acts 2), became a mix of Jew/Gentile, then became mostly Gentile (Acts 18), and was at the time of the letter reincorporating Jews. Paul, remember, has never been with them or taught them. Here in chapter 14, you have “weaker brothers” who still feel bound to dietary laws and holy days as instituted by God but now going through transition where they are being told by men otherwise, and you have “stronger brothers” who know they are not bound by such things under the full light of the gospel. He is exhorting both to be patient with the other.

Your reply is awesome. Thanks! I can see this in regards to Romans 14. This is probably the most important one for me.

But I wonder, why did Paul not correct the weaker? Instead, he says each should be convinced as if both sides are permissible. I would say I'm in the camp of being free from special days. But can I according to Paul, say someone is wrong who does it for the Lord?

 

[Northern Crofter]

You're reply is awesome. Thanks! I can see this in regards to Romans 14. This is probably the most important one for me.

But I wonder, why did Paul not correct the weaker? Instead, he says each should be convinced as if both sides are permissible. I would say I'm in the camp of being free from special days. But can I according to Paul, say someone is wrong who does it for the Lord?

The weaker here are not adding to God's Law. They are not sinning by continuing to keep some of the old ways (as long as they are not relying upon such keeping for their own righteousness). Adding or inventing "special days" would seem to be adding to God's Law - or at least saying what God has provided in the Sabbath and the sacraments is not sufficient. This would run counter to sound doctrine such as found in WCF 21. This does not mean that Churches cannot set aside (make "holy") exceptional times such as often occurred in the previous dispensation (special sacrifices after Divine deliverance, for example) or the present (congregational or national days of fasting or thanksgiving, for example).

 

[Ryan&Amber2013]

The weaker here are not adding to God's Law. They are not sinning by continuing to keep some of the old ways (as long as they are not relying upon such keeping for their own righteousness). Adding or inventing "special days" would seem to be adding to God's Law - or at least saying what God has provided in the Sabbath and the sacraments is not sufficient. This would run counter to sound doctrine such as found in WCF 21. This does not mean that Churches cannot set aside (make "holy") exceptional times such as often occurred in the previous dispensation (special sacrifices after Divine deliverance, for example) or the present (congregational or national days of fasting or thanksgiving, for example).

Man, I think you nailed it! That's totally believable and seems to be correctly dividing the Scriptures.

 

[Eyedoc84]

Your reply is awesome. Thanks! I can see this in regards to Romans 14. This is probably the most important one for me.

But I wonder, why did Paul not correct the weaker? Instead, he says each should be convinced as if both sides are permissible. I would say I'm in the camp of being free from special days. But can I according to Paul, say someone is wrong who does it for the Lord?

A couple of points: 1) those days had been commanded. 2) I think the context is big here in that this was not one of Paul’s churches that he had more fully instructed. Look at how he handles the Colossians and Galatians, and how the Hebrew church was dealt with w/r/t to being weak, babes, having been fully instructed but still wanting to slide back to the shadows that were never intended to save.

 

[Northern Crofter]

Man, I think you nailed it! That's totally believable and seems to be correctly dividing the Scriptures.

Glad it was helpful!

 

[JH]

Ryan, you may or may not find these short excerpts helpful:

1) https://askfortheoldpath.wordpress....n-of-christmas-easter-and-all-false-holydays/

Showing the difference between the Jews holydays instituted by God himself, and ours that are contrived of our own bare and naked will: "Ours, are the accursed monuments of Popish Idolatrie, to be ejected with detestation: Theirs, were the memorials of Mosaical policy, to be buried with honour."

2) https://askfortheoldpath.wordpress....umstantial-observance-of-ceremonies-and-ours/


Gillespie has been a breath of fresh air, and his work Disputes was a paradigm shift for me.