Why the Same Days of Worship?
The Roman Catholic Church makes use of the Roman calendar, in which the day begins at midnight. In contrast to this, the Hebrew calendar day begins at evening. For example, Genesis 1:31 tells us:
31 And the evening and the morning were the sixth day. [Genesis 1:31]
Leviticus 23 verifies this, telling us that the Hebrew day lasts from evening to evening:
32 On the ninth day of the month, at evening, from evening to evening, you shall observe your Sabbath.”
[Vayiqra (Leviticus) 23:32]
We will see that the Apostles continued to worship on the Jewish-Israelite calendar (which is why Shaul went up to Jerusalem, for the Pentecost). However, the Roman Church uses certain passages in the New Covenant to justify their switch to the Roman calendar, in which the primary days of worship have always been the Sun-day, Christmas, and Easter.
Since the Nazarenes lived in First Century Judea (which was under the subjection of the Roman Empire), did the Nazarene Apostles use the Roman calendar primarily? Or did they (rather) continue to use the Scriptural Hebrew calendar, since this was the calendar commanded in Torah?
One passage the Church has traditionally used to justify Sun-day worship is Acts 20:7:
7 Now on the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Shaul, ready to depart the next day, spoke to them and continued his message until midnight.
8 There were many lamps in the upper room where they were gathered together.
9 And in a window sat a certain young man named Eutychus who was sinking into a deep sleep. He was overcome by sleep; and as Shaul continued speaking, he fell down from the third story and was taken up dead.
10 But Shaul went down, fell on him, and embracing him said, "Do not trouble yourselves, for his life is in him.”
11 Now when he had come up, had broken bread and eaten, and talked a long while, even till daybreak, he departed. 12 And they brought the young man in alive, and they were not a little comforted. [Acts 20:7-12]
According to the Church, the disciples met to eat on Sun-day morning, listened to Shaul until midnight (when Eutychus fell out the window), and then, after eating again, they continued until daybreak (Monday).
This interpretation might seem to make sense, except why were there so many lamps in the room, if the disciples initially met during daylight hours? And why did they skip lunch and dinner?
When we examine this passage with the assumption that the Apostles were keeping the Hebrew calendar, then it makes much more sense.
Jewish custom is to worship at the synagogue (or at the Temple) during the Sabbath, and then to go over to a friend’s house after sundown, in order to stretch out the day of worship and rest as long as possible. When gathering for this after-Sabbath festivity, the Jewish people usually also share a communal meal. In the Hebrew idiom, this custom is known as ‘breaking bread.’
If we assume that the disciples gathered after the Sabbath was over (just after sundown) and ate such a communal dinner together, this would explain why they needed so many lamps. Also, they would have been enjoying a traditional Jewish time of worship and celebration by eating (rather than going hungry).
This very same kind of post-Sabbath friendship-and-fellowship bread-breaking also appears in the Good News, in the Book of John:
19 Then, the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled (for fear of the Jews) Yeshua came and stood in the midst, and said to them, "Peace be with you.” [Yochanan (John) 20:19]
Yeshua was crucified (or impaled) at the spring festival of the Passover. Jerusalem can already be hot by that time; and if it was hot, then the logical thing would have been to leave the doors open. However, since there was indeed persecution, the disciples had to close their doors. Thus, the only thing really unusual was Yeshua’s appearance.
The Christian Church, however, uses these two passages to justify Sun-day worship. This is curious, considering that the Book of Acts specifies that the Apostle Shaul’s custom was to go into the Jewish synagogues on the Day of the Sabbath:
14 But going through from Perga, they arrived to Antioch-Pisidia, and going into the synagogue on the day of the Sabbath, they sat down.
15 And after the reading of the Law, and of the Prophets, the synagogue rulers sent to them, saying, “Men, brothers, if there is any word of exhortation to the people, speak!”
16 And rising up and signaling with his hand, Shaul said, “Men, Israelites, and the ones fearing Elohim, hear!”
[Ma’aseh (Acts) 13:14-16]
Shaul indeed went throughout the known world, trying to persuade those in the synagogues to believe on Yeshua. However, Shaul never ‘planted a Church.’ About the closest he ever got was when he was thrown out of the synagogue in Corinth, and had to establish a Nazarene synagogue next door:
5 When Silas and Timothy had come from Macedonia, Shaul was compelled by the Spirit, and testified to the Jews that Yeshua is the Messiah.
6 But when they opposed him and blasphemed, he shook his garments and said to them, "Your blood be upon your own heads; I am clean. From now on I will go to the Gentiles.”
7 And he departed from there and entered the house of a certain man named Justus, one who worshiped Elohim, whose house was next door to the synagogue.
8 Then Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue, believed on YHWH with all his household. And many of the Corinthians, hearing, believed and were immersed (or baptized).
[Ma’aseh (Acts) 18:5-8]
Crispus was apparently also expelled from the main synagogue after coming to believe on Yeshua, as verse 17 (not shown) identifies another man named Sosthenes as the new ruler of the (main) synagogue.
However, as the next chapter will show, though Shaul founded a new assembly at Corinth, it would not have been called a ‘Church’ (at least by its attendees); but it would have been called a synagogue.
More importantly, this fellowship would not have met on Sun-day. Shaul would have established it as a Sabbath-keeping congregation, since Shaul followed Yeshua, and his custom was the same as Yeshua’s:
16 So (Yeshua) came to Nazareth, where He had been brought up. And, as His custom was, He went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and stood up to read. [Luke 4:16]
So why does the Christian lore tell us the Apostles began to keep new and different festival days after Yeshua’s death, when a responsible examination of the New Covenant shows no such evidence?
The word ‘Easter’ appears in the King James Version at Acts 12:4, but this is only because the King James translators incorrectly rendered the Greek word Pascha (meaning the Passover) as ‘Easter’:
4 And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter (sic) to bring him forth to the people.
[Ma’aseh (Acts) 12:4 KJV]
All major versions since the King James have corrected this error. Even the New King James reads:
4 So when he had arrested him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four squads of soldiers to keep him, intending to bring him before the people after Passover.
[Ma’aseh (Acts) 12:4 NKJV]
There are several other references to the Passover in the New Covenant. All these indicate that the Apostles were still keeping the Hebrew calendar, many years after Yeshua’s Ascension:
6 And we sailed away after the Days of Unleavened Bread (meaning, the Passover). [Ma’aseh (Acts) 20:6]
There are also numerous references telling us that the Apostles continued to observe the Festival of the Pentecost:
8 But I will remain in Ephesus until Pentecost. [1st Corinthians 16:8]
And, as mentioned before, we know that this was still the Hebrew Pentecost, because the Apostle Shaul was hurrying to observe this festival in Jerusalem (rather than Rome):
16 For Shaul had decided to sail by Ephesus, so as not to spend time in Asia, for he hastened if it was possible for him to be in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost. [Acts 20:16]
Many Christians also miss the reference to the Day of Atonement in the New Covenant. It is called ‘the Fast’ at Acts 27:9, because the Day of Atonement is traditionally observed by fasting:
9 And much time having passed, and the voyage already being dangerous because the Fast had now gone by….
[Ma’aseh (Acts) 27:9]
Boat travel was dangerous because weather in the Mediterranean can be turbulent after the Fast, which is always held in fall. The main thing to notice, however, is that the authors of the New Covenant used idiomatic language (slang).
Even though the word ‘Fast’ is translated perfectly from Greek into the English, unless one understands that it was a slang reference to the Day of Atonement, one can easily miss the fact that the Apostles were still using the Hebrew calendar.
Christian scholarship appears intent on ignoring Yeshua’s caution not to think He had come to destroy either the Law, or the Prophets:
17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law, or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy (them), but (only) to fulfill them.
18 For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, nothing at all will pass from the Law, until all is fulfilled.
19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
[Mattithyahu (Matthew) 5:17-19]
Even though Yeshua said not to think He came to destroy the Law or the Prophets, many Christians think just exactly that. They suggest that because Yeshua came in fulfillment of the Festivals, one is no longer required to keep them.
These Christians suggest that the Law is like a bank loan: Once you have paid your loan, the loan is now ‘Paid in Full’; and therefore this loan is ‘fulfilled.’ Once it is fulfilled, it has become void; and they suggest that it is likewise this way with the Law.
But are laws like a loan? And, if you repay a loan, does that mean you will no longer have to obey any of the laws that govern banking?
At Luke 4:18, Yeshua stood up in front of the synagogue at Nazareth to say that He had come to fulfill the first part of the prophecy at Isaiah 60-61:
16 So He came to Nazareth, where He had been brought up. And as His custom was, He went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and stood up to read.
17 And He was handed the book of the prophet Isaiah (or Yeshayahu). And when He had opened the book, He found the place where it was written:
18 "The Spirit of YHWH is upon Me, because He has anointed Me to preach the Good News to the poor. He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, and 19 “to proclaim the acceptable year of YHWH….” [Luqa (Luke) 4:16-19]
In Yeshayahu (Isaiah), the passage continues:
2 And the Day of Vengeance of our Elohim. [Yeshayahu (Isaiah) 61:2]
Even though Yeshua does not intend to fulfill Isaiah 61:2 until His Second Coming, still He said He was sent to fulfill the first part of it (Isaiah 61:1):
20 Then He closed the book, and gave it back to the attendant and sat down. And the eyes of all who were in the synagogue were fixed on Him. 21 And He began to say to them, "Today this Scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.”
[Luqa (Luke) 4:16-21]
Yeshua fulfilled Isaiah 61:1, but He must return to fulfill Isaiah 61:2 (the Day of Vengeance of our Elohim, above). Both the Law and the Prophets speak of Yeshua’s eventual return; but if the Law and the Prophets are now destroyed, then how will Yeshua ever return to fulfill the second half of this prophecy?
Is this what the Christians really want? Do the Christians hope Yeshua will not be able to return and fulfill the second half of the Prophecies? Is that why they want to see the Law and the Prophets destroyed?
If the Christian hypothesis is true (that the Law and the Prophets were annulled), then why does the Apostle Shaul tell us (below) that the festivals are shadows of things still to come? That is precisely what Colossians 2:16-17 says, although most people do not realize it, because of major errors in most of the English translations.
For example, the King James Version reads:
16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moons, or of the sabbath (days): [17] Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body (is) of Christ.
[Colossians 2:16-17, KJV]
The King James makes it appear as if we should never let anyone judge us according to what we eat or drink, or what days we keep in worship. It also seems to suggest that it makes no difference whether we keep the same days of worship the Apostles kept, or whether we keep the Sun-day and Easter, because (after all) the Body is of Messiah.
However, this rendering has some problems.
When we take this back to the Greek Texts, we find that the words in parenthesis, (days) and (is) do not appear. They appear in the King James only because the translators added these words, in order to make the passage harmonize with the popular view that the Law and the Prophets had been abolished.
However, since we are not supposed to add to the Word (Deuteronomy 4:2, Proverbs 30:6, etc)., once we realize that the words (days) and (is) do not belong in this passage, we need to take them out, and see what kind of difference it makes.
Here is the exact same passage, but with the supplied words (days) and (is) taken out:
16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moons, or of the Sabbath; which are a shadow of things to come; but the Body of Christ [Colossians 2:16-17]
If we read this passage closely, we will see that there are three main ideas mentioned here (1-2-3):
1. Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moons, or of the Sabbath;
2. which are a (prophetic) shadow of things (still) to come;
3. but the Body of [Messiah].
If we rearrange the clauses to make the English read better (3-1-2), we find that Shaul was actually telling us that the festivals are still prophetic shadows:
16 Let no man but the Body of Messiah judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moons, or of the Sabbath; for the festivals are shadows of things (still) to come. [Colossians 2:16-17]
Rather than telling us that the festivals do not matter, Shaul is actually telling us that we should keep the Sabbath, the Festivals and the New Moons, because they are prophetic shadows of future events.
Shaul’s true meaning, however, is not at all reflected in the New International Version, which reads:
16 Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day.
17 These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.
[Colossians 2:16-17, NIV]
The NIV tells us that these prophetic shadows of future events are now all discarded, or irrelevant. The NIV further suggests that as long as one believes that Yeshua is the Messiah, it no longer makes any difference what one might eat or drink, or what days of worship one might decide to keep (if any).
However, the idea that the Festival Days are important prophetic shadows of future events did not originate with Shaul. Yeshua came in prophetic fulfillment of the Passover; and it was important for the faithful to be in the Temple in Jerusalem on the Day of the Pentecost, even after Yeshua’s Ascension:
1 And in the fulfilling of the Day of Pentecost, (the faithful) were all with one mind, in one place.
2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven, as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled the whole House where they were sitting. [Acts 2:1]
If Yeshua’s death was really the clear-cut turning point that the Church Fathers claim, then it would not have mattered whether the faithful were in the Temple in Acts Chapter 2, or not. Instead, the Spirit would have been poured out on them no matter where they were.
Christianity counters by saying that the Law and the Prophets were not abolished instantaneously; but that Yeshua’s death ushered in a three-to-four-hundred-year period of change, in which authority was given to the Church Fathers to make all sorts of sweeping changes to the faith.
Christianity further asserts that these changes were all legitimate and valid, even though they directly conflict with the Bridal Contract, the Prophecies, Yeshua’s Words, and the Apostles’ writings.
The Church asserts that the First Century was a special time; and that the reason the Apostles still observed the Festivals was simply because they did not know any better.
The Church suggests that the Apostles had no idea that the Church Fathers would make such wonderful improvements on YHWH’s Covenant, or else they would have abandoned it while the Book of Acts was still being written.
In contrast, Jews have always taught that major prophetic events always occur on the Festival days.
The Torah is essentially a codification of YHWH’s Spirit, made into a list of Instructions. This codification was first given to the children of Israel at Mount Sinai (Horeb) on the Pentecost, fifty days after they left from Egypt (after the Passover).
Thousands of years later, the Spirit was again handed down at Pentecost, this time in Acts Chapter Two. The main difference was that this time, instead of just giving a codification of the Spirit’s guidance, the faithful were given the Spirit itself.
Thus, in actuality, there have already been two fulfillments of the Feast of the Pentecost. Therefore, while the pattern is one of repeated fulfillments, the Church tells us that there will never be another fulfillment. But is this really true?
Consider for a moment that Israel’s children already fulfilled the Feast of Tabernacles once, when they dwelt in tabernacles (or booths) in the Wilderness in Sinai.
The second fulfillment came when Yeshua was born. While the Christians tell us He was born on December the 25th, the truth is that He was born on the first day of the Fall Festival of Tabernacles, which is why Yochanan (or John) tells us:
14 And the Word became flesh, and tabernacled among us. [John 1:14]
Other versions read “and pitched His tent among us”, which gives essentially the same meaning.
Christianity teaches that Yeshua was born in a manger on December the 25th, with donkeys and horses looking on, and Yeshua swaddled in a crib, on the hay. As romantic as this Roman Church version of the story sounds, it is far from the truth.
Since Christianity does not value the Hebrew language, most Christians do not realize that in Hebrew, the word for a manger is the same as the word for a tabernacle. Thus, the account of Yeshua’s birth should actually read:
7 And she brought forth her firstborn Son, and wrapped Him in swaddling cloths, and laid Him in a tabernacle, because there was no room for them in the inn. [Luqa (Luke) 2:7]
To a Hebrew, it is only fitting that the honor of raising the Messiah should have been given to a devout couple who kept the Commandments. This describes Joseph and Mary (or Miriam) exactly.
Joseph and Miriam (or Mary) had come up for the pilgrimage feast in Jerusalem, in keeping with the Commandment that all males who wished to continue to be thought of as Israelites should make the pilgrimages to Jerusalem three times a year.
The commandment specifies that all native-born Israelites must dwell in tabernacles (i.e., temporary dwellings) for seven days, in keeping with the Command in the Torah. In Hebrew, these dwellings are called sukkot. In English, these tabernacles are sometimes referred to as ‘booths’:
42 You shall dwell in booths for seven days. All who are native Israelites shall dwell in booths, 43 that your generations may know that I made the children of Israel dwell in booths when I brought them out of the land of Egypt: I am YHWH your Elohim’.”
[Vayiqra (Leviticus) 23:39-43]
While Joseph and Miriam had come up to Jerusalem in obedience to the commandment in Torah, they originally intended to stay at an inn. This is because, while the Jewish rabbis teach the importance of keeping the commandments, they also teach that the highest commandment is the preservation of human life.
The rabbinical ruling in that time was the same as it is today; that at any person who was pregnant, old, or sick did not actually have to sleep in a tabernacle (or a booth, or a ‘manger’), but that for health and safety’s sake, they could rent a room at an inn. However, we know from Scripture that there was no room at the inn; and therefore even though Miriam was pregnant, Joseph and Miriam had to dwell in a Tabernacle (or a booth, or a ‘manger’).
All of this came to pass so that Yeshua might be born in a tabernacle on the first day of the Fall Festival of Tabernacles, in prophetic fulfillment of the Command. Thus, just as the Jews have always taught, important prophetic events in Israel happen only on the festival days, in prophetic fulfillment of these festivals.
But lest we believe that there are no more fulfillments of these Festivals, Zechariah 14 prophesies a third fulfillment of the Feast of Tabernacles, which is still to come:
16 And it shall be, everyone who is left from all the nations which came up against Jerusalem shall go up from year to year to worship the King, YHWH of hosts; and to keep the Feast of Tabernacles. 17 And it shall be, whoever will not go up from the families of the earth to worship the King, YHWH of hosts, there shall even be no rain on them. [Zech. 14:16-17]
And there is also a fourth fulfillment, which is prophesied in the Book of Revelation:
3 And I heard a great voice out of Heaven, saying, “Behold, the Tabernacle of Elohim is with men!” And He will tabernacle with them, and they will be His peoples, and Elohim Himself will be their Elohim.
[Revelation 21:3]
Contrary to Roman myth, Yeshua could not have been born on December the 25th. In the first place, December the 25th is the Roman festival of Saturnalia (or Bacchanalia). The Roman Church supposedly re-named this festival in honor of the Messiah, but this does not alter the fact that it is still a pagan festival; and the observance of even a re-named pagan festival is strictly prohibited by the Marital Covenant (Deuteronomy 12:30).
Second, if the Apostles had observed December the 25th, it would have been recorded. However, the word ‘Christmas’ appears nowhere in Scripture.
Third, ‘December’ is not even a month on the Hebrew calendar. Why would the Apostles have kept a pagan festival date that does not even show up on their calendar?
Fourth, if the Father designated certain days for worship and rest at the time of the Creation (and then banned the keeping of all other festival days) then why would those days have changed at the coming of the Messiah? Indeed why, when none of the Prophecies speak of a change in the days of worship?
Yeshua tells us that He went to prepare a place for His bride, in His Father’s House:
2 In My Father's house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you.
I go to prepare a place for you.
3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also. [Yochanan (John) 14:2-4]
Yeshua is surely a good Son. If He intends to bring His bride back to His Father’s House, then why would He take a bride, who insists on worshipping and resting on those pagan festival days that His Father always said He hated?
Why indeed, when other virgins love Him, and want to keep all of His Father’s Commandments?