Commentary on the UCG Doctrinal Paper: Should Christians Observe New Moons? (No. 124)

Introduction

The UCG doctrinal paper purports to examine the biblical position on New Moons and the ancient position on the Calendar as practised in the Temple period. The necessity for the paper appears to be to deal with the Churches of God, such as CCG, that do keep the New Moons. Indeed, it principally appears to be an apology to negate the doctrinal works of CCG. As such, it fails to examine the evidence presented by us, or others, or even mention such works. This is of itself incorrect and so leaves us with no option but to examine the matter in detail here. It is not as though the matter can simply be ignored. The UCG paper is a false analysis of a position taken by us with no reference to our presentations in this matter.

The UCG paper is correctly an appeal to ignorance. It ignores key evidence from Archaeology and Ancient History as well as biblical evidence, and runs contrary to the known position of the ancient Israelites and Judah and the nations that came into contact with them. It ignores recent finds that throw light on the knowledge and practices of the ancients and also ignores centuries-old historical evidence regarding their calendars and practices.

It is in effect an insult to the intelligence of the UCG members and to the other Churches of God seeking to follow the biblical instructions and the doctrines of the original Church.

[The UCG paper is reproduced as an appendix below.]

Divorcing the Molad from the Conjunction

UCG attempts to deal with the three new moons – the Astronomical New Moon, the molad and the crescent. They attempt to establish the molad as an early position used in precedence over the Astronomical New Moon. It is known that ancient astronomers certainly calculated the New Moon, but they did not use it to determine the molad until well after the Temple was destroyed. The Jews did not use that system until after the destruction of the Temple. The UCG paper quotes Jewish sources to establish a primary position which is contrary to known fact, and shown to be so within their own paper.

Molad is defined as the “birth” of the moon or month. There are eight phases to each cycle of the moon, and the molad falls during what is called the dark phase. This dark phase of the moon (when the moon’s dark side is facing the earth) can last between 1.5 days and 3 days, depending on the time of day that the conjunction occurs, before you will actually see a portion of the moon again. According to Rabbi Nathan Bushwick, “The molad is roughly in the middle of this period during which the Moon is not visible. Bushwick, Rabbi Nathan, Understanding the Jewish Calendar, Moznaim Publishing Corporation, New York, 1989.

UCG appeals to Maimonides. Thus, according to UCG, using rabbinical Jewish sources, we have a determination of the molad occurring sometime between the conjunction and this dark phase and the appearance of the moon again. This molad appears to be, and is, an arbitrary determination based on non-astronomical considerations. Why would one need or want to do that when we have the conjunction, which is a precise astronomical event? The New Moon is a precise astronomical event. It is perfectly calculable in advance to the second and was so calculated by the ancient civilisations, as we know from history.

The UCG Doctrinal Committee paper ignores all this ancient evidence and the system in use during the Temple period, and goes to a twelfth-century Jewish mystical philosopher, Maimonides. He was writing in the Dark Ages introduced by Trinitarian Christianity in a struggle for the control of the European feudal system and church. During this period, Judaism itself had been hopelessly compromised by Mysticism.

The great Jewish writer from the 12^th century, Maimonides, confirms the use of the calculations that have been used since ancient times to determine the date of the New Moon:

“…the Jewish court, too, used to study and investigate and perform mathematical operations, in order to find out whether or not it would be possible for the new crescent to be visible in its proper time, (but we know they did not use the new crescent in the time of the temple. This is the court of Jamnia that he is talking about which is the night of the 30^th day. If the members of the court found that the new moon might be visible, they were obliged to be in attendance at the courthouse for the whole 30^th day and be on the watch for the arrival of witnesses. If witnesses did arrive, they were duly examined and tested, and if their testimony appeared trustworthy, this day was sanctified as New Moon Day. If the new crescent did not appear and no witnesses arrived, this day was counted as the 30^th day of the old month…If, however, the members of the court found by calculation that the New Moon could not possibly be seen, they were not obliged to be in attendance on the 30^th day or to wait for the arrival of witnesses. If witnesses nonetheless did appear and testified that they had seen the new crescent, it was certain that they were false witnesses, or that a phenomenon resembling the new moon had been seen by them through the clouds, while in reality it was not the new crescent at all.” The Code of Maimonides, Book Three, Treatise Eight, “Sanctification of the New Moon,” translated by Solomon Gandz. Edited by J. Oberman and O. Neugebauer, Yale University Press: New Haven, CT, 1956.

So, according to Maimonides, we have an observation of the crescent occurring. This observation system did not exist during the Temple period. It was not necessary during the whole period of the world from the Babylonian dispersion – from the time of Noah, and, indeed, before the Flood – but rather was a religious affectation of the pagan Moon system (see the paper The Golden Calf (No. 222)).

Maimonides is referring to the practices as mentioned in the Mishnah and the Talmud (which is commentary on the former). It was during this time of Maimonides that the Karaite heresy arose in rejection of the Hillel calendar of 358 CE and later. The Jews of the twelfth century and later had to pretend that there was no more efficient system in place before Jamnia, in order to defend the false Hillel system that was based on calculations determined from 344 CE in Babylon, and introduced to Judaism generally under Rabbi Hillel II in 358 CE. That is the real and unstated reason the UCG paper begins with Maimonides and this fiction, because they themselves are bound to this false calendar of 358. The Hillel calendar was not really finalised until just before Maimonides in the twelfth century. The practices regarding witnesses and observations were introduced by the Court at Jamnia after the destruction of the Temple. They were never used in the Temple period. They were, in fact, designed to prevent the reintroduction of the ancient calendar by calculation based on the conjunctions. The Pharisees did not control the Temple or its calendar. That control was exercised by the Sadducees, except for a nine-year period over a century before Christ. That period was under Queen Alexandra.

As with the Sadducees, the Samaritans had a calendar based on the conjunction, and thus there was no dispute regarding the New Moons between the Temple system and the Samaritans until after the fall of the Temple. The Pharisees established the rabbinical system after the destruction of the aristocracy. The aristocracy underpinned the Sadducees, who observed only the written law, and fell with them in 70 CE along with the rest of Judaea. The Pharisees thus could introduce their traditions and pervert the calendar, which they could not achieve while the Temple stood.

The Mishnah, compiled around 200 CE, refers to the qualifications for witnesses in this process, and negatively refers to the Sunday Pentecost system which was also in effect during the Temple system under both the Sadducees and the Samaritans. The Samaritans sometimes differed because of their practice regarding the New Year. They placed it sometimes in the second month and the Feast of Tabernacles in the eighth month, although they never differed on the determination of the New Moon itself (see the papers The Moon and the New Year (No. 213) and God’s Calendar (No. 156)).

It was not until Jamnia that the New Moon beacons became misleading, because it was the Pharisees that altered the determinations and the Samaritans were forced to light other beacons a day or so earlier. We know from the evidence of Philo that the conjunction was used to determine the New Moon. The Bible provides other evidence from which we can make inferences and deductions. Philo says:

“This is the New Moon, or beginning of the lunar month, namely the period between one conjunction and the next, the length of which has been accurately calculated in the astronomical schools.” (Judaeus, Philo, The Special Laws, II, XXVI, 140, Treatise by F.H. Colson, Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, 1937.)

UCG quotes Philo here but then fails to make the obvious conclusions or look for other evidence that supports what he has to say or how that affects the calendar. They start with Maimonides determining the crescent as the correct position and then go back over 1200 years to Philo (writing in the time of the Temple period of Alexandria), who says the exact opposite of their premise concerning Maimonides.

So the astronomical schools are acknowledged to be in existence by Philo, who is an impeccable authority on Judaism up to the Christian period. The ancients calculated the length of the month quite accurately. The conjunctions are calculated in the astronomical schools and there is no need for witnesses in observation. UCG are forced to acknowledge Philo in this document but only after they have established this false position with Maimonides, so they can maintain their erroneous position. They could have, and should have, started with Philo and established that there was no such system. So UCG have already contradicted themselves in their own paper in their first two references. These astronomical schools were obviously extremely important.

Philo shows that the Temple calendar was based on the conjunction and not on observation. However, the comment is left hanging as it were. No mention is made of the text in Josephus, which shows that the New Moons were kept during the Temple period. Josephus in his Wars of the Jews shows that it was regarded by the priesthood on a level with the Sabbath, and the High Priest robed and officiated in the Temple on both the Sabbath and the New Moon, as well as on the Feast days (W.J., 5:5:7). The New Moon was thus treated on the same level as the Sabbath and the Holy Days of the Feast. UCG could have and should have quoted that reference as well, and that would have substantiated what Philo was saying in the first century. So, we have a witness in the first century who was alive at the time of the Temple, and two witnesses who saw the Temple (and saw it destroyed) and knew what its system was. Two Jewish witnesses at the end of the Temple period wrote on the Calendar and established that the New Moons were determined by conjunction by the astronomical schools, and that they were used as a day of worship on which the High Priest formally robed. As mentioned, he did that only on Sabbaths, New Moons and Feasts.

In addition to this quote there is another text dealing with the New Moons and their determination that deals with the exact day of the New Moon and which is being misquoted so as to contrive to commence the New Moon on the day after the conjunction. Another erroneous interpretation commences the month a day before the conjunction. These interpretations are made impossible if we use both the quotations of Philo.

In dealing with the Feasts under the Fourth Commandment we read Philo to say:

THE SPECIAL LAWS, II*

{**Yonge's title, A Treatise on the Special Laws, Which Are Referred to Three Articles of the Decalogue, Namely the Third, Fourth, and Fifth; About Oaths, and the Reverence Due to Them; About the Holy Sabbath; About the Honour To Be Paid to Parents.}

....

Yonge's translation includes a separate treatise title at this point: On the Number Seven. His next division begins and ends with roman numeral I (= X in the Loeb). The text follows the Loeb numbering.

X. (39) The next commandment is that concerning the sacred seventh day, in which are comprehended an infinite number of most important festivals. For instance, there is the release of those men who by nature were free, but who, through some unforeseen necessity of the times, have become slaves, which release takes place every seventh year. Again, there is the humanity of creditors towards their debtors, as they forgive their countrymen their debts every seventh year. Also there is the rest given to the fertile ground, whether it be in the champaign or in the mountainous country, which also takes place every seventh year. Moreover, there are those ordinances, which are established respecting the fiftieth year. And of all these things the bare narration (without looking to any inner and figurative signification) is sufficient to lead those who are well disposed to perfect virtue, and to make even those who are obstinate and stubborn in their dispositions more docile and tractable. (40) Now we have already spoken at some length about the virtue of the number seven, explaining what a nature it has in reference to the number ten; and also what a connection it has to the decade itself, and also to the number four, which is the foundation and the source of the decade. And now, having been compounded in regular order from the unit, it in regular order produces the perfect number twenty-eight; being multiplied according to a regular proportion equal in all its parts, it makes at last both a cube and a square. I also showed how there is an infinite number of beauties which may be extracted from a careful contemplation of it, on which we have not at present time to dilate. But we must examine every one of the special matters which are before us as comprehended in this one, beginning with the first. The first matter to be considered is that of the Festivals.[Yonge's translation includes a separate treatise title at this point: To Show That the Festivals Are Ten in Number. This "treatise" begins with roman numeral I (= XI in the Loeb), enumerates each of the ten festivals individually, and extends through Loeb number 214. The text follows the Loeb numbering.]

XI. (41) Now there are ten festivals in number, as the law sets them down.

The first is that which any one will perhaps be astonished to hear called a festival. This festival is every day.

The second festival is the seventh day, which the Hebrews in their native language call the sabbath.

The third is that which comes after the conjunction, which happens on the day of the new moon in each month.

The fourth is that of the passover which is called the passover.

The fifth is the first fruits of the corn--the sacred sheaf. [Note the Wave Sheaf is one of the Ten]

The sixth is the feast of unleavened bread, after which that festival is celebrated, which is really

The seventh day of seventh days.

The eighth is the festival of the sacred moon, or the feast of trumpets.

The ninth is the fast.

The tenth is the feast of tabernacles, which is the last of all the annual festivals, ending so as to make the perfect number of ten. We must now begin with the first festival.

We notice here that in the introduction in dealing with the third Feast, namely the New Moon, Philo uses the term which has been rendered after the conjunction and some others have rendered as following in the sense of “according to” or “as determined by” the conjunction. However, he qualifies this matter by saying which happens on the day of the New Moon in each month. The text is thus quite clear that the New Moon is the day on which the conjunction occurs. In the later explanations Philo then goes on to state that the month is from one conjunction to the next as determined in the astronomical schools, as was quoted above.

There can thus be no error. The New Moon is on the day of the conjunction as determined by the schools from Jerusalem. To postpone the New Moon as is done by Judaism is to postpone all the festivals and make them of no value. It is simply thumbing one’s nose at God and His Laws. On the New Moon hang all the subsequent festivals.

Yonge’s translation lacked part of 140 and the texts of 142-144 (which is supplied here) and explains the timing and the theology behind the New Moon and why it runs according to the conjunction and the New Moon day is the day of the conjunction.

THE THIRD FESTIVAL

XXVI. (140) Following the order which we have adopted, we proceed to speak of the third festival, that of the new moon. First of all, because it is the beginning of the month, and the beginning, whether of number or of time, is honourable. Secondly, because at this time there is nothing in the whole of heaven destitute of light. (141) Thirdly, because at that period the more powerful and important body gives a portion of necessary assistance to the less important and weaker body; for, at the time of the new moon, the sun begins to illuminate the moon with a light which is visible to the outward senses, and then she displays her own beauty to the beholders. And this is, as it seems, an evident lesson of kindness and humanity to men, to teach them that they should never grudge to impart their own good things to others, but, imitating the heavenly bodies, should drive envy away and banish it from the Soul.{17}{sections 142-144 were omitted in Yonge's translation because the edition on which Yonge based his translation, Mangey, lacked this material. These lines have been newly translated for this volume.} (142) The fourth reason is that of all the bodies in the heaven, the moon traverses the zodiac in the least appointed time: it accomplishes its orbit in a monthly interval. For this reason the law has honored the end of its orbit, the point when the moon has finished at the beginning point from which it began to travel, by having called that day a feast so that it might again teach us an excellent lesson that in the affairs of life we should make the ends harmonious with the beginnings. This will happen if we hold the reins on our first impulses with the power of reason and do not permit them to refuse the reins and to run free like animals without anyone in charge of the herd.

http://www.earlyjewishwritings.com/text/philo/book28.html

Note, as we said above, Yonge does not have the full text of 140 as Colson does and does not have 142-144, which appear to have been lost or removed to obscure the exact nature of the New Moons. However. the earlier section above still leaves no room for doubt as to when it was and how it was determined.

They could also have referred to Tertullian (On Idolatry, ch. XIV, ANF, Vol. III, p. 70) writing at the beginning of the third century, who acknowledges the Jews kept the Sabbaths, New Moons and Feasts – and they were beloved of God. However, the Jews later corrupted the Holy Days. The only argument advanced by later erroneous Christians, such as the Montanists, was that the Sabbaths, New Moons and Feasts were temporary (An Answer to the Jews, ch. IV, ibid., pp. 155-156) and need not be kept by Christians. This argument is false. It is completely rejected by the Churches of God, and is not open to UCG to decide.

Tertullian and the Montanists were of the view that, because the Church and the Jews in their first century at Jerusalem and elsewhere zealously kept the Sabbaths, New Moons and Feasts, Isaiah 66:23 had been fulfilled. In view of this they then decided that they no longer needed to keep them, which is incorrect reasoning.

No other evidence is mentioned regarding these matters, and then the article goes on to establish another myth that flowed from the rabbinical system and Maimonides, as we saw above. The rabbis are the successors of the Pharisees when they gained control at Jamnia. These traditions were condemned by Christ. Judah was sent into captivity because of them and yet here we see a Church of God supporting the very errors and traditions that Christ condemned so roundly. The UCG Doctrinal Committee is forced to do this because embracing the New Moons as they were kept in the Temple system would lead to the rejection of the Hillel calendar system, which they follow. They would then have to admit that the WCG system was wrong concerning the Calendar, and then be faced with the fact that Herbert Armstrong was wrong, and thus not inspired by God in this matter. So they would have to effectively kill the goose that laid their golden egg.

UCG advances another myth while referring to a modern authority, namely, the US Naval Observatory.

They concede that the New Moon is defined as the conjunction “which is called the Astronomical New Moon to separate it from the Molad or the First Crescent” (UCG, ibid.). This is a claim that is incorrect. The US Naval Observatory is never in any doubt as to the New Moon. It merely makes comment as to the variable times that the moon becomes observable after this precise event. No observatory anywhere is in any doubt as to the exact time of the New Moon.

“The Date and Time of each New Moon can be computed exactly (see, for example, Phases of the Moon 1990-2000 in Data Services) but the time that the Moon first becomes visible after the New Moon depends on many factors and cannot be predicted with certainty…Generally, the lunar crescent will become visible to suitably located experienced observers with good sky conditions about one day after the New Moon.” (USNO Astronomical Applications Department Article)

The admission is here clearly made, and published by UCG, that we can’t see the crescent until after the New Moon, so observation is not the system that will enable any calendar to operate. Such a system could not have operated because there were at least two functioning Temples that we know of and a multitude of synagogues throughout the world, all operating on a universal calendar. Philo tells us that observation was not the system because the astronomical schools calculated the conjunction precisely. So we know that the New Moon is not the thing that is observed. It was not the basis of the Temple calendar. Why was it observed?

Note here that we see the Naval Observatory in the US is placed, by UCG, as defining the New Moon as the conjunction, seemingly to differentiate it from the molad referred to by the Judaica and themselves above. They neglect to mention that the New Moon is defined as the conjunction in every system in every nation and it is an exact event calculated by all nations and systems with the exception of the pagan religious systems which placed emphasis on it, usually as the crescent, and which entered Judaism after the Temple period, and also later Islam due to the same influences which had been rejected by Israel under Moses. In trying to place the determination of the Calendar with the priesthood, and thus UCG themselves, now in alignment with post-Temple Rabbinical Judaism, another fiction is introduced. This is that the Calendar was entrusted to the Levitical priesthood, and that it was their responsibility to calculate and declare the New Moons, and that such activity was an essential part of Israel’s calculation of the annual Holy Days. This system allegedly continued until the Babylonian captivity. UCG then claims, without any evidence, that Israel based this declaration on both observation (looking for the first crescent, ibid.) and calculation. This assertion is entirely false.

If we base it on observation we have missed the boat, for that will be the day after the New Moon. The priesthood did not do that at all; they did it entirely by calculation.

UCG then advances a major conclusion without evidence. They say:

“The key here isn’t the method that was used but the fact that the authorities declared to the Jews the first day of each month. Today, the calendar is fixed and there is no need for physical observation.”

Fixed by whom? It is fixed by calculations made in the fourth century, and the system of observation of the Hillel calendar was never in place anyway.

The comment here is a false statement. Of course it matters what system was in use. The declaration of the New Moon was never an important part of the Holy Days. The determination of the New Moon was the critical factor and it was always determined in advance. We know for a fact from archaeological evidence that during the Babylonian captivity, the Passover festival (referred to in Ezra and Nehemiah) was determined well in advance. A decree to keep it in the Temple system in Egypt and at Elephantine was given by the Satrap in command in Egypt (see The Sign of Jonah and the History of the Reconstruction of the Temple (No. 13)).

The Bible is quite clear that the New Moon was known in advance, and we see that David and the army under Saul were quite aware when the New Moon was to occur (cf. 1Sam. 20:5,18, 24; cf. also 2Kgs. 4:24). They knew in advance when the New Moon was, hundreds and hundreds of years, centuries and millennia before Christ. What then follows is a blatantly false statement.

They say that the Hebrew calendar relies on the calculation of the molad.

“The Hebrew Calendar relies on the calculation of the molad. These calculations for the molad have been understood for many centuries by the astronomers. The use of witnesses during the second temple period, since there is no evidence of such in the Old Testament, appears to have been more of a formality, as shown by Maimonides. The actual dates had already been established by calculation. The key in understanding the calendar lies in the authority given to the Levites to declare the dates.’’

The Hebrew calendar never relied on calculations of the molad. The molad of Tishri was calculated from the third century CE and accompanied the introduction of Rosh Hashanah into Judaism from Babylon. Rabbi Kohn, Chief Rabbi at Buda and Pest, states this in his work Sabbatarians in Transylvania (see Eng. Tr., CCG Publishing, 1998).

There is no evidence of witnesses in the Old Testament. It seems to have been a formality of post-Temple Judaism. This is not clearly shown by Maimonides, who seems intent on placing a Temple period situation for his observation scenario.

UCG continues:

“The actual dates had already been established by calculation …”

So UCG then goes on to admit the system had already been established by calculation and yet the naval observatory says we can’t calculate it accurately unless we are using the conjunction. We have just read that.

UCG proceeds to an appeal to a declaration of Levi.

“The key in understanding the calendar lies in the authority given to the Levites to declare the dates.”

We will see that this is a false statement and one on which they rest their case, or part of it, as convenient.

UCG proceeds in this section to admit that there is an established calendar at the time of Moses. We agree with this position and claim it is the conjunction-based calendar, which has not changed and did not change during the Temple period in Israel.

UCG further states:

“There have been changes and adjustments made to this calendar over the many centuries, but it is still preserved by the Jews and used to this day for the purpose of observing the annual festivals.

To summarize, for the purpose of this paper, the New Moon is defined as the first day of the month as determined by the molad.”

What they really mean is the molad of Tishri, the Seventh month. The calendar used by the Jews today is not the Hebrew calendar. The Hebrew calendar was never determined by molad under observation. That’s why there is no record or comment of anyone ever observing the New Moon in the Old Testament. It shows us that it did not take place. As we see from Philo above, it was by conjunction. So, we have one of the greatest historians in the world, a Jew at the time when the Temple was still standing, saying specifically that the system of the New Moon was by conjunction determined by the astronomical schools. The conjunction system was the case for the entire Second Temple period. One would think that evidence would be enough, and that the compelling account by a world-recognised historian would be enough, but it is not enough for UCG because it means that they would have to change their system.

The Hillel calendar – which was not the Hebrew calendar at all, but a fourth century fiction determined by calculation based on the system given to Hillel II by the Babylonian rabbis in 344, and proclaimed as a system in 358 for Rabbinical Judaism – is the calendar which relies on this system. That is a Babylonian/Jewish calendar. The Hebrew calendar was a calendar by conjunction, which was kept by all the ancient Hebrews and extended way beyond the Jews. The Hillel calendar is the calendar which relies on this system of molad determination based on calculation for Tishri, and not on the conjunction of the New Moon. It was never kept by Christ and the Apostles or the Church, and has no biblical basis or authority; it actually runs contrary to the express Laws of God. Most interestingly, the Hillel calendar does not determine the First day of the year; rather, it determines the molad of Tishri. That is a pagan system of Rosh Hashanah, which entered Judaism in the third century.

Under Hillel, the date of the New Year is determined from the molad of Tishri with no direct reference to the actual New Moon of the First month. So they determined by counting back from the molad of the Seventh month under a pagan festival Rosh Hashanah, and which the Jews themselves admit has no basis in ancient Temple Judaism. Rosh Hashanah is a false system introduced in the third century. We will see that the chief Rabbi of Budapest admitted that in his work, The Sabbatarians in Transylvania, which we have translated from the German and published with a commentary. R. Kohn says that some of the later Sabbatarians in Siebenburgen referred to Rosh Hashanah. He shows that they had to be involved with the Jewish calendar because the ancient Temple calendar did not have it and Rosh Hashanah did not enter Judaism until the third century. Kohn quotes it as their influence because Rosh Hashanah had nothing to do with the ancient Temple calendar, and they certainly did not calculate the First month of Abib from the Seventh month.

The knowledge of the times were entrusted to the wise men, as we see from Esther (Est. 1:13) This idea of Levi being entrusted with the calendar is not what the Bible says. Also we know that it was Issachar that was relied on for the determination of the Calendar or the times in ancient Israel (1Chr. 12:32; see also the paper Calling the Peoples to Jerusalem (No. 238)). The argument that the Oracles of God have been committed to Judah (and Levi) is false (see the paper The Oracles of God (No. 184)). If these people in UCG believe it was given to Levi to determine, why don’t they follow the (Jewish) Hillel calendar fully? We know they don’t; instead they (correctly) keep a Sunday Pentecost, although at one time they kept a Monday Pentecost. The same people even kept a Tuesday Pentecost. So they went from Sivan 6 to Monday to Sunday, and if they really believed what they are saying here (that only Levi was responsible for the Calendar) then they would keep Sivan 6, would they not? The answer is they don’t, and they don’t believe it. They just say it for convenience.

We see here from the Bible text that the wise men of Issachar had a council of 200 who had the understanding of the times to know what Israel ought to do. Why would they be telling Israel what they ought to do from the times? They obviously determined the Calendar. So, the Calendar did not rest in Levi, it rested in Issachar. Thus, the assertion is a false statement. So, the UCG Committee just ignores another text of the Bible that shows that the Calendar was determined by the wise men of Issachar, supported by the entire tribe. So it appears this is a case of quoting what suits them and ignoring what’s inconvenient.

We are able to determine what the ancient systems were with absolute certainty. Their knowledge is quite astounding given the silly and puerile examinations of their systems proffered by today’s religious people. The people who know nothing are not the ancients – the people in the second or first Temple periods – but the religious bigots of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, who don’t understand what they are talking about. They literally "withhold the truth in unrighteousness" and the wrath of God is revealed from Heaven against them (see Romans 1). The UCG paper might have examined some of the evidence that showed that the nations kept the conjunction from the earliest times.

The Bible states quite clearly that the celestial systems were used to determine the signs and times and the seasons and days and years (Gen. 1:14). We know beyond doubt that Noah determined the days and the months and the years from the Ark, and the Calendar was fixed then. It wasn’t that they did not have the Calendar fixed, or that Noah and the ancients did not know the Calendar – they all knew the Calendar. Everybody understands it except the people writing to wrest or obscure the truth and establish this Jewish calendar. Everyone understands what the ancient systems were except these ministers trying to enforce the Hillel calendar on the Church of God. They have to resort to these false statements to do it.

What evidence is there that this system was known and retained over time? What do we have in history? Is there any evidence that these people could turn to if they had bothered to blow the dust off one of the historical reference works rather than reading fictional novels? What examples are available to them? There are two examples: in history and in modern archaeology. Modern archaeology shows us some quite astounding things. The history of ancient China will show us that we never lost the New Moons. The New Moons were kept by the ancient Chinese from the time they left the Middle East or Asia Minor after the Flood.

Ancient China

From its earliest times China has observed the New Moons. Originally it was a monotheist system that worshipped God on the New Moons. Later this fell into ancestor worship and idolatry, but the fact remained that the New Moon was kept intact for the entire period until the present. However, they might have worshipped different deities on the New Moon. Later China also started to reverence Kuan Kung and the goddess of mercy, Guan Yin. Kuan Kung was a general in ancient China. They might have started to reverence Confucius, or Kung fu tzu, but they never lost the New Moons, known as Choy Yat.

One of our people in the churches in Asia tested CCG's New Moon calendar by placing it over that of the ancient Chinese system and found that it corresponded exactly. Why? It is because we both follow the conjunctions. The Chinese start the New Year a month earlier because they introduced the pagan system, but they still keep the New Moons. They used to worship God on the New Moons; now they worship their ancestors. However, the conjunctions and the eclipses were determined by their astrologers.

Astronomy is a relatively new term. Astrology was the term given from ancient times to the science of measuring the heavens. The distinction between astrology and astronomy was made more recently in order to determine a science and extract it from the mythical system that had been developed around astrology. The ancient astrologers, or astronomers, were required to determine the New Moons and the eclipses in advance continually.

The New Moons were determined according to the conjunction (as Israel did in its system) from the beginning of the second millennium BCE. When they left the Middle East (the mountains of the west) and went into the bend of the Yellow River and established China, they took with them the system of determination of the New Moons according to the conjunction. They were able to do that 2000 years before Christ. Not only did the Chinese determine the New Moons by conjunction from the beginning (after their move from the Middle East), they punished the astrologers for failing to do so, as the Annals record. These Annals were written under Prince Ti very early in their history, i.e. around the beginning of the second millennium BCE. Prince Ti was dispatched to deal with the astrologers who failed in one year to calculate the eclipses and the New Moons as they should have done, and correctly – and he punished them. In those days they normally hacked a few heads off as a way of getting the message across to the rest. We have a record of that happening for over 3000 years. So, all these masters of the UCG Doctrinal Committee had to do was look at ancient history and put their historical records in order.

The crescent moon was referred to in Ancient China as “The Emperor’s Shame” because if it appeared before the New Moon conjunction had been declared and celebrated, then it was seen that the emperor, as the instrument of Heaven or “Son of Heaven”, had lost divine authority and thus could be overthrown. It was thus imperative that there was never any doubt as to the true New Moon.

We might perhaps excuse our intrepid Doctrinal Committee for not understanding the Chinese Annals and religious system even though the records have been with us for centuries, indeed, millennia. However, we might see more persuasive evidence that the systems were on a worldwide basis and known to the ancient world, and Israel, from the evidence right under their eyes in the USA. Yet, even this omission will highlight another doctrinal problem in UCG and the WCG offshoot system.

They might object and say that was only in China, and maybe that was a pagan system anyway; however, it wasn’t so in the beginning – it was monotheist. We know that from the development of the Chinese language. Kang and Nelson have written a book on the Chinese language and the Genesis origins in that language. They carry the Genesis account in the development of their linguistic process, but that’s another story.

We have evidence that they had astounding astronomical knowledge in the ancient world, from Iberia (ancient Spain) and Britain where they had had the monuments such as Stonehenge and the other great stone circles all over England, which were used for precise astronomical calculations. So, these 'calculators' are all over Europe, particularly in the British Isles and Iberia and to a certain extent in France; but they also existed in America. The same system was taken by the same people to North America about the time the Chinese moved to China following the Babylonian dispersion.

The UCG headquarters is in Cincinnati, which is merely some six hundred or so miles from some of the most important archaeological finds in the New World. These are the ancient Celtic stone systems in New England at Mystery Hill and Le Blanc Park. These sites show us clearly the astounding knowledge and spread of the ancient Celts, but the UCG could not refer to these because it might seemingly destroy another myth, namely, that the Celts are part of the lost tribes of Israel. They might indeed be part of the Israelite peoples but not for the reasons espoused by UCG, and this presents them with problems if they even know of the finds there. Even if we disagree that they are true Celts, which is difficult, it still presents us with evidence that the Americas had the same calendar and writing systems (i.e. the ogham script) we find in ancient Britain, Ireland and Iberia or Spain – and this preceded Christ by 2000 years. So we have to ask: did these people have the knowledge to determine the conjunction? Did they need to go out and look at the moons and observe a crescent to work out when the months started? These ancient people could determine the helical rising of the star Sirius thousands of years in advance. Do we think they needed to watch the New Moon crescent? Let us look at the evidence. Web site comments follow.

Mystery Hill Vermont

The calendrical orientations of the slab-roofed chambers, it would seem, would rule out these structures being constructed as root cellars by early American colonists or the woodlands Indians of the northeast as neither were concerned with alignments that coincide with the most important of yearly Keltic celebrations. Further, noted archaeo-astronomer Byron Dix has determined that New England is replete with underground chambers. He says, “ . . . there are some 105 astronomically aligned chambers in Massachusetts, 51 in New Hampshire, 41 in Vermont, 62 in Connecticut, 12 in Rhode Island, and 4 in Maine. Suffice it to say, it is obvious that the alignments found at Mystery Hill, and other sites are not random.

So there are astronomical calculators all over New England, as there was a Celtic society in New England anciently.

According to Charles Pearson, who surveyed the complex in 1987,

. . . the number of very large and prominent stones is limited and those very large stones happen to be the ones that make up the significant astronomical alignments. To state that this site is a calendar by statistical probability or by "accident" and not by design demonstrates a complete misinterpretation of the obvious physical evidence at the site, and a misrepresentation of the facts located at the site. Comments were made indicating that with over 100 standing stones and the freedom to adjust the observation center of the site to any location desired, that purely by chance one could demonstrate a calendar site at any location. This is obviously not the case at Mystery Hill.

We can see from this site that the Beltane Stone at Mystery Hill, Vermont, sets May Day, allegedly in Christ's time, by the builders of the astronomy, 39 days from the equinox (which was the Celto-Greek New Year) at that time. Now it is 45 days later due to the precession of the equinox. Barry Fell in his work America B. C. (Artisan Publishers, Muskogee, OK, 2001 ed.) refers to the Beltane Stone and shows that it is annotated in relation to the Julian calendar, showing that the stone had a post-43 BCE connection with the Romanised world following the Roman system to facilitate business (ibid., p. 200). These monoliths were built and set when the equinox was 25 March, that is, post-300 BCE at the close of the Old Testament Canon and on through the Temple period into early Christianity. This is the date that froze the Samaritan calendar and also became the New Year of the Anglo-Saxons up until the 17^th century.

The Anglo-Saxon people did not have 1 January as the New Year. Up until the 1700s our New Year was on 25 March.

There were numerous astronomy sites in New England over 2000 years ago.

(From the Mystery Hill site data on http://www.crystalinks.com/mysteryhill.html.)

This is more at the time of Christ because the equinoxes were around March 23/22 from the early second century. This site in 600 CE is well after the fall of the Temple and they are still calculating and creating these crypts, and knowing exactly when the sun is going to pass through a hole to strike a particular point in only two days in the year. Do we think these people needed to work out the calendar by observation? We know for a fact that these dates run through from 2000 BCE to 600 CE. So, the Celts were in America from 2000 BCE to 600 CE.

Sites in Massachusetts

The site at Le Blanc Park in Lowell, Massachusetts is an ancient circle of megalithic stones that is an exact astronomical calendar. James Whittall had this to say about this astonishing megalithic site, as recorded on the website given below:

"There I saw a sight I had not seen since my travels in the British Isles. Situated on a mound were weathered megalithic stones. I was filled with disbelief—it just couldn't be, Western Europe, yes, but here in Massachusetts, no. The reality of the scene was astonishing."

This oval mound was measured at 112 feet long by 56 feet wide. And the stones, as Whittall predicted, provided astronomical alignments. The monoliths were oriented east to west, and bearings of the sight indicated that it had been used to observe solar events. The first observation was made on September 22nd, the fall equinox, from the highest stone on the western side from the peak of the eastern most stone. The sun set behind stone number four just as Whittall had surmised.

"On November first we returned to the sight, primarily because it was the ancient Keltic ritual day of Samhain, and we got a perfect alignment of stone nine over stone six and we had a setting alignment. At the Winter solstice observations were made again and stone one and stone ten aligned. The red disk of the sun slowly descended in a long arc towards the point on the monolith until it split the disk. This site had been known for generations as Druid Hill.”

Taken all together, these megalithic carvings, buildings, monoliths, calendar circles, stone phalli, fertility fetishes and other striking stone monuments, all so reminiscent of those in Europe, might be enough to infer an ancient European culture had built them (ibid).

http://www.barnesreview.org/html/oct1997lead.html

These sites are ancient. They are not reconstructions of European sites and they are all there within 600 miles of Cincinnati, where this doctrinal paper was written. Why didn’t they mention it? Because they would then have had to face the fact that their understanding of the origins of the Celts is wrong. Who are the Celts or Kelts? How did they come to be aligned with Israel? How did they even come to be part of the system and develop it? This is the ancient Babylonian system. How did it get to America? The systems are on precise astronomical calculations, and we know these people had quite sophisticated knowledge of the movements of the heavens.

We also have evidence cited by Professor Cyrus Gordon (in Before Columbus) that shows that the bar Kochba rebels went to America after their defeat. We have precise evidence under their noses that the complex calculations of the equinoxes and New Moons (determining the months of the lunisolar year) and helical risings, as well as the entire Aryan system of the Ancient Sea Kings (i.e. of the worship of the golden calf and the Druidic sacrifices), were present all along, even in the USA. They had precise knowledge of the helical risings of many stars and systems and also they understood the nature of the Pole Star, Thurban, ca. 2000 BCE.

Other systems in North America show advanced astronomical knowledge. The site in Chaco Canyon shows complex solar and lunar calculations in a system built a thousand years ago. The system is a city of buildings miles apart showing the complex calculations of the equinoxes and solstices with the complete cycle of the moons over 18.6 years. From linguistic analysis of the Zuni, the tribes there show connection with the Libyan ancestors from the Middle East, and the complex knowledge was indicative of that at the time of their movement to North America. These widespread instances of Libyan and Iberian Punic scripts reveal a complex knowledge and trade (cf. Fell, ibid., pp. 157-191).

One of these sites in New England was aligned on Thurban when it was the Pole Star ca. 2000 BCE. So the people who made this site and aligned it to Thurban must have got there using the Pole Star as their point of navigation post-2000 BCE. Now all of this we know. We can actually calculate when they came and the day they set up the site by reference to the precession of the equinoxes. They were able to calculate these things with absolute certainty. We also know from some of the maps of the Ancient Sea Kings that the seafarers had mapped Antarctica before Christ.

Today we have a group of people as a Doctrinal Committee trivialising ancient understanding of knowledge. Perhaps they haven't got the knowledge themselves to analyse and explain what is there. That appeal to ignorance may well be based on ignorance. They can neither understand nor explain it themselves and then infer or imply ignorance on the part of their ancestors, who were far more educated than they are. The fact of the matter is that the ignorance or our society stems from a dark age inflicted on us by the European church, and the Dark Ages came to us from European Trinitarian Christianity and mindless religious bigotry. It may well be that the attempt to cut out human sacrifice in the golden calf system was behind the suppression of references to it, but that is a feeble excuse for the suppression of knowledge and the Dark Ages. We will never overcome and learn while we have our knowledge determined by people who themselves are ignorant of the origins.

We will go through and look at some of the points in this doctrinal paper and deal with the comments in each section.

The New Moon Instructions in the Bible

The UCG paper now proceeds to deal with the Bible instructions for the New Moon, minimising their impact in Scripture. This trivialising of the New Moons is incorrect. Let us look at the facts of the New Moons in comparison to their comments.

The First day of the First month is the New Year and a solemn Feast day (Psalm 80[81]: 3-5).

Ps. 80[81]: 3-5 Blow the Trumpet in the new moon at the glorious day of your feast. For this is an ordinance for Israel and a statute of the God of Jacob. He made it to be a testimony in Joseph, when he came forth out of the Land of Egypt: … (Brenton, Hendrickson, 1992 print).

The New Moons were kept as Sabbaths in ancient Israel. The New Moons are all significant and important days; they are days of sacrifice and of worship. As we have seen above, the First New Moon of the year is a solemn Feast day. Thus one of them is a Sabbath at the very least. The New Moon of the Seventh month is also the Day of Trumpets and hence also a solemn Feast day.

We will see from other texts that the New Moons were days of assembly, and God dealt with Israel and the world on these days. He spoke through His servants the prophets on the New Moons.

The clearest texts are in Exodus at the Sanctification of the Temple, as a Day of Solemn Assembly. Amos castigates Israel for wanting the Sabbath and New Moon to be ended so that they could commence trading (Amos 8:5). They were keeping the New Moons, but God was unhappy that they were not keeping them with a whole heart, as they wanted them to end so they could begin trading again.

Amos 8:5 saying, "When will the new moon be over, that we may sell grain? And the Sabbath, that we may offer wheat for sale, that we may make the ephah small and the shekel great, and deal deceitfully with false balances, (RSV)

There is nothing in Amos 8:5 to indicate that it is dealing with any specific harvest or the Day of Trumpets. Therefore, the text should be read as it is written, as a general statement in relation to New Moons and Sabbaths. Taking the verse in context, the chapter is dealing with God’s displeasure with His people. He is angry that the Sabbaths, New Moons and Feasts are not being kept correctly and that the people are not dealing justly with each other.

Numbers 10:10 states that the trumpets should be blown at all New Moons.

If we look at history we see that there was only minimal activity done on these high days. If we can’t go to work in the middle of Tabernacles, then we certainly can’t go to work on the New Moons either. That is the way it was viewed anciently.

Exodus 40:2-16 deals with a ceremony that needed to take place on the first Holy Day of the Sacred Year, the First day of the First month. The Tabernacle was to be prepared so that the items inside the Tabernacle could be sanctified, and then the ordination of Aaron and his sons took place whereby they were anointed into the priesthood.

It was not a normal trading day. It was the preparation of the Tent of Meeting in order to hold the services of the day. The work for the Tabernacle had been taking place all year. This was the final putting together of the Tabernacle, and on this occasion it was readied for the Presence or the Glory of God. Again, this was not the weekday work, but the readying of the place of meeting (Ex. 40:17-35).

This text shows that they were assembled for the object of worship at the Tabernacle. It is actually a proof text for the keeping of the New Moon as a Day of Assembly and dedication to the Lord, as part of the Sanctification of the Tabernacle. This was all about Christ and the cleansing of the Temple (which Temple we are) prior to the Passover.

There are many examples in the Bible of significant events taking place on a New Moon. After the Flood, the waters were first seen to be abating on the First day of the Tenth month (Gen. 8:5).

In the year 601, on the First day of the First month, the land became dry and the Ark could be opened up (Gen. 8:13).

Moses was given charge of the Tabernacle and the instances of its control and use in the wilderness, beginning on the New Moon (Ex. 40:2,17).

The Feasts are major examples: the New Year in the First month (Ps. 81:3); the Day of Trumpets in the Seventh month (Lev. 23:24; Num. 29:1); for the Sanctification of the Temple (2Chr. 29:17).

The Temple was sanctified for seven days and on the 7^th day they sanctified the Simple and the Erroneous of Israel. They then proceeded for the next period to the Passover from the 8^th day to the 10^th day, on which they laid aside the Passover Lamb. Then on the 14^th they went out of their gates (Deut. 16:5-7) and all Israel kept the Passover from the beginning of the 14^th day and through the night of the 15^th day in watching. On the Holy Day of the 15^th, they kept service and sacrifice and completed that evening on the 16^th day. Unleavened Bread continued then for another six days, with the 21^st or last day being a Holy Day.

The New Moon of Trumpets was also used as a day of restoration of the Law of God (Neh. 8:2). The New Moon was also as a focal point for the assembly of the army of God (Num. 1:18). This highly significant event took place on a New Moon and God spoke through Moses to Israel in common assembly (Num. 1:1-5). This was a day used for prophecy (Deut. 1:3), and many other significant activities took place on this day (Ex. 19:1). During the Exodus, Israel stops travelling and Moses goes up the mountain to talk to God. Having received his instructions, Moses speaks to the people on this day.

Aaron was also taken to God on the New Moon of the Fifth month of the 40^th year of the Exodus (Num. 33:38). The restoration of the building of the Temple, like the restoration of the Law, took place on the New Moon of Trumpets (Ezra 3:6).

The commencement of the restoration journey of Nehemiah began to take place on the New Year, at the New Moon. Thus he did not simply set out, he began. Like all major restorations it was affected by and on these New Moon ceremonies (Ezra 7:9).

He arrived on the New Moon of the Fifth month. Are we to assume no significance in this event and simply say that he happened to travel, or are we to assume it was a day of assembly and he timed his arrival for this event? Nothing is without consequence or symbolism in the Bible narrative (Ezra 10:16-17), so we can assume the latter was the case.

It is a day when Ezra and the selected men were not at their weekday work, but were dealing with the matter of the Church. They commenced on the New Moon then and by the New Year they had Israel ready for the Sanctification of the Temple of God. Here we see Nisan or Abib again listed as the First month (cf. Est. 3:7, 12).

The Book of Ezekiel is clear that it was this First day of a month that God spoke to him (Ezek. 26:1). God speaks to us when we are able to listen, not when we are busy with the everyday affairs of our lives.

Ezekiel was before God on the New Moons and was then given prophecy because he was obedient to God (Ezek. 32:1; 29:17; 31:1, RSV). The same applies to Haggai (Hag.1:1, RSV).

Why was Zerub’babel, prince in Judah, consulting a prophet on the New Moon? It was because they went before God on these days and He gave revelation through the prophets on these days.

The entire system of worship in Israel was based around the Tabernacle and the Temple. This physical Tabernacle and Temple was a copy of the Heavenly structure, which is a spiritual edifice; and Moses was shown a plan on which to build the physical Tabernacle.

The worship of God had to be pure and He desired to be worshipped in spirit and in truth. The physical system pointed towards Messiah and the Spiritual Temple, which is the Church.

The physical had to be cleansed and the priesthood made ready for the Passover, as we have to be cleansed and made ready for the second Sacrament. Only those who have been baptised as repentant adults into the Body of Christ are able to partake of the first (and Lord’s Supper) element of the Passover.

This was the significance behind Christ cleansing the Temple, both at the beginning of his ministry and before the Passover of his death, when he established the Lord’s Supper on the Preparation Day of the Chagigah Day meal.

Thus, the physical cleaning pointed towards us as the spiritual Temple of living stones. It began the process of reconciliation of man to God. We, by our actions, intercede for the simple and erroneous of Israel and thus assist in the protection of the nation. We assist in the spiritual cleansing of the Temple and so help to sanctify the nation in which we reside.

The New Moon of the First month is the starting point of this process, where the moon represents the Church. The cleansing begins with us as the spiritual Temple on the first New Moon of each year. It then goes on throughout the year from New Moon to New Moon. This will continue in the Millennium (Num. 28:11-15). Judaism negates God's Law in this regard also, by their Babylonian practice of Rosh Hashanah in Tishri.

These New Moons stand with the Sabbaths and Feast Days forever, or continually before the Lord (1Chr. 23:31). This process continues in the three Feasts. Trumpets is a New Moon and hence only Atonement is left out here, as it is a fast day (2Chr. 8:13). To argue that the New Moons were eliminated with the sacrifice is to argue the elimination of the Fourth Commandment, which is plainly false.

The Bible is written so that people not called into Israel will not understand. That is why Christ spoke in parables (Mat. 13:10-14; 10:34-35; Mk. 4:11). God hates the corruption of His Holy Days (Isa. 1:13; 47:13, RSV).

The false prophets corrupted prophecy with star-gazing and divination. God then said He would put an end to those sorts of feasts, New Moons and Sabbaths. Did that mean God would eliminate the Sabbath or New Moons or Feasts? No, it meant He would eliminate false worshippers from keeping them (Hos. 2:11).

Amos is clear that the populace saw the New Moons and Sabbaths as an impediment to their worldly trade and duties (Amos 8:5). God does not allow most people to keep His Feasts and New Moons and proper Calendar because they are false worshippers, and only those of the First Resurrection Church of God are allowed to keep them. The rest worship false gods on false days, under a false calendar, and know no better. They are simply not under judgment now.

God condemned them through the prophet Amos for such activity. How much more in condemnation are those who keep banquets or special meals, acknowledging them, and yet still trade on the Sabbath or the New Moon? Would any argue that they could trade on the Sabbath, because they had a special meal on the Sabbath evening? How then can such logic apply to the New Moon?

The Sabbaths and New Moons will be kept during the Millennium (Isa. 66:23). The New Testament also mentions them. This is not stating an option as to whether they are kept or not, but simply the manner in which they are kept. However, the injunction to keep them with the Law is clear from previous Scriptures (Col. 2:16, RSV).

The New Moons were kept as Sabbaths in Ancient Israel. The clearest texts we have are in Exodus at the Sanctification of the Temple as a Day of Solemn Assembly, and also in Amos 8:5.

Christians today need to keep the New Moons as Sabbaths, i.e. no servile work to be done, and gathering with others if this is possible. When Messiah returns, he will reintroduce and enforce them with the Sabbath (Isa. 66:20-23) together with the other Feasts of God (see Zec. 14:16-19).

The UCG paper goes on to claim there was no biblical direction to keep the New Moons and thus Israel was left to develop its own approach. They go on to cite Geoffery Widoge, in the Encyclopedia of Judaism, to support this lack of special instruction. Instead of noting that Judaism did in fact keep the New Moons, as we see from history, they seek to negate them.

Yet the Jewish people did keep the New Moons, as did the Church. The general populace, however, was spasmodic in observance and looked to trade as they also did with the Sabbaths and the Feasts (Amos 8:5).

To the Jews, the Sabbath became the most important day in the year. In fact, Diana Engel says that the Sabbath day became:

more than just another day or another commandment. It epitomised for them much of what they believed in and stood for. ... It is impossible to overemphasize how much the Sabbath meant to Israel, how they looked forward to it and glorified it. (The Hebrew Concept of Time and the Effect on the Development of the Sabbath, by Diana R. Engel, The American University, Washington, 1976, p. 83.)

However, they did not understand the spiritual significance of the Sabbath as they did not understand the New Moons. Rabbinical Judaism had reduced the importance of the New Moons because they threatened the postponement system itself. It could not be removed completely as the Bible is too clear on the subject, and thus had to be reduced in importance so the false calendar could be introduced. This was all done after the Temple was destroyed.

UCG goes on to make the false assertion that there were no references to a New Moon celebration at the time of Christ. They falsely claim that the New Moon celebrations had virtually become non-existent at the end of the Second Temple period, yet we know from history that they were kept faithfully by Judaism up until the destruction of the Temple. Christianity kept them, as we see from Colossians 2:16 and continued to keep them, as we also see from the records of the end of the Waldensian system in Europe in Transylvania (see Sabbatarians in Transylvania, ibid.).

The New Moon Celebration in Israel’s History

In this section UCG attempts to minimise the instances of the New Moons in 1Samuel 20:5, 18,24 regarding David and Saul, and the New Moon Feast, and the visits to the prophets we see from 2Kings 4:23. It uses Hastings’ Bible Dictionary to do this. The dictionary claims that no solemn convocation occurred on the New Moon despite the biblical evidence of the New Moon of the New Year at least, and the historical record of Josephus. It does admit that 1Chronicles 27:1 was the time for changing David’s officials. 1Chronicles 27:1-22 shows that the months or New Moons were the basis for the administration of the entire nation of Israel. That is hardly a measure of their unimportance. Nor is it a measure of their uncertainty by observation. One does not run an army and a national administration on vagaries and the nonsense of Karaite observation theories. That was left to the haggling of Jamnia and the ignominy of dispersion.

These Scriptures clearly show that the New Moons were important in Israel – all through its history. We know from Josephus that they were kept during the entire Temple period, and the High Priest attended in the Temple on the New Moons and Sabbaths. The New Testament Church also understood them. It was not addressed in the New Testament because it was not an issue. All the epistles of the Apostles deal with the problems that arose in the various churches. The Church of God has kept the correct Calendar for centuries. We know for a fact that at the Reformation the Church was keeping the entire Calendar intact as it was in the Temple period. The New Testament is commentary on the Old Testament. The New Moons fell into disuse, as did the Feasts, prior to the Council of Nicaea in the general church. However, that does not mean that they were not kept.

UCG claims that there is no indication from Scripture that there was a nationwide festival being observed, and states that (as Hastings has pointed out) the feast of David could have been a “family feast on the New Moon”. If that is so then it was also a family feast of the king in which he expected all his officers to attend, and they feared punishment if they were not there.

Yes, it was usual to seek guidance from the prophets on the New Moons and Sabbaths. However, this cannot be done if one is working that day (2Kgs. 4:23).

On the contrary, we see from David and Jonathan that the New Moon was a compulsory banquet in Israel. David knew that the only valid excuse he would have for not being there at a compulsory event known well in advance, was to be keeping it with his family in another location in Israel (1Sam. 20:4-18,24). Obviously, the New Moons were known days in advance and people were punished for not attending. It was the very practice of having these observatory meals and then trying to resume normal duties and trade on the Sabbaths and New Moons that Amos is specifically condemning. These people referred to by Amos were keeping the New Moons, but they were trying to end the day quickly so they could trade. There is no suggestion of such laxity here on the part of David or Jonathan.

UCG claims here that: “The Scriptures suggest that Saul invited David to a peace offering meal on the New Moon”.

The Scriptures suggest no such thing. David was expected to be at the king’s table as one of his senior officers because it was a New Moon. That is the clear word of Scripture.

This reflects the very orders in Ezekiel 45:17 regarding the Prince’s Levy in providing sacrifices for the New Moons.

The legislation regarding peace offerings (Lev. 7:18, and drawing on Num. 10:10) is then advanced by UCG as the reason for the references to the days in regard to David and Jonathan shooting the bow on the third day to warn him (1Sam. 20:5). This is an ingenuous fiction crafted to wrest Scripture. Saul asked why David had not come either yesterday or today (1Sam. 20:27) because he left on the day before the New Moon and was absent the entire New Moon. The UCG reasoning is advanced that “if this is correct then Saul knew he would have to conjure up another plan to kill David since the New Moon peace offering could not be eaten on the ‘third day’”.

They then follow on with: “Of course, today, peace offerings are not commanded, therefore there’s no reason for us to hold such a feast on the New Moons”. What silly reasoning from a false premise above. If we applied this argument to the Sabbath and said that offerings were not commanded on the Sabbath, and therefore there was no reason to hold a Sabbath Feast or an annual Holy Day Feast, we would all laugh in derision. However, this assertion appears to have gone unchallenged. David also carried on the practice of the importance of New Moons in the administration, as we see from 1Chronicles 27:1-22.

UCG identifies 2Kings 4:22-23 as being proof that the New Moons were times that people sought instruction of “priests”. No doubt they said priests and not prophets from their own control systems rather than the facts of biblical history. The text mentions Sabbaths and New Moons and the woman was going to see a prophet (Elisha) on an urgent matter. Prophets and priests were both consulted on Sabbaths and New Moons and worship was undertaken on these days, as we know from Josephus.

UCG mentions a most important text in relation to the New Moons in 2Chronicles 2:4. King Solomon said in the Spirit:

Behold I build and house to the name of the Lord my God, to dedicate it to Him, and to burn before Him sweet incense, and offerings morning and evening, on the sabbaths and on the new moons and on the solemn feasts of the Lord our God. This is an ordinance forever to Israel.

Now, one would think that was a persuasive argument. The ordinance was forever, and it involved worship of the House of God on Sabbaths, New Moons and annual Feast Days – forever. As we are now the Temple of God, one would imagine that if the Sabbath is binding forever, as stated here, so too are the New Moon and the Feast Days. UCG then sets about trying to combine the text with 2Chronicles 31:3 and 1Chronicles 23:30-31.

They then claim that the passages do not raise the New Moons to set Feasts and Sabbaths which is the exact opposite of the conclusion to be drawn. The priesthood are ordered in these texts to present the offerings on the Sabbaths, New Moons and Feasts, and it is a fact that they are mentioned as weekly, monthly and annual offerings. They stand in equality, and if one is kept all are kept. It is sheer insanity to argue that weekly and annual Sabbaths are kept and then negate the New Moons in the same texts.

In Ezra 3:5 we see that the New Moons are listed and kept. UCG quotes Ezra and says:

During the rebuilding of the temple, Ezra writes that these customs were still followed. “Afterwards they offered the regular burnt offering, and those for New Moons and for all the appointed feasts of the Lord that were consecrated”

So we see that the New Moons were kept from Moses, and were kept by Solomon. They were reinforced by Ezra and were still being kept at the time of Christ until the destruction of the Temple. Well done, UCG! We have demonstrated that they have been kept continually by Israel during the entire history of the Tabernacles and the Temples of Israel.

UCG goes on to mention Nehemiah 10:32-33, which shows that the Temple tax was taken up for the offerings of shewbread and regular grain offerings and the burnt offerings of the Sabbaths, New Moons and the set Feasts, and for all the work at the House of the Lord. There is never any suggestion that these aspects are less important than each other; they were all carried out with due diligence on the appointed days.

UCG then makes a strange and puerile observation.

As in the other passages, the subject is the sacrificial system of the temple. If the collection of a temple tax for new moon rituals raises the New moons to the level of a Sabbath, then it would be just as important for Christians to observe all the offerings and maintain the “holy things” also mentioned in these verses.

No one of that organisation would advance such an argument for the Sabbath mentioned in those texts. Presumably they have read the Book of Hebrews regarding the sacrifices. We are the Temple, and the sacrifices were fulfilled in Jesus Christ. The Sabbaths and the set Feasts were not eliminated with the sacrifices, so why would we assume that the New Moons were eliminated and the others were not?

Nehemiah 10:31 talks about not trading on Sabbaths and Holy Days, but does not mention New Moons. Then two verses later it talks of the sacrifices and mentions the New Moons with the Sabbaths and Holy Days.

To understand Nehemiah 10:31 we have to first look at Exodus 3:5 and all verses dealing with this, from Nehemiah 10:31-33 as a block.

Exodus 3:5 And he said, “Draw not nigh hither: put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for this place whereon thou standeth is holy ground.”

Nehemiah 10:31-33 And if the people of the land bring ware of any victuals on the sabbath day to sell, that we would not buy it of them on the sabbath, or on the holy day: and that we would leave the seventh year, and the exaction of every debt. ³²Also we made ordinances for us, to charge ourselves yearly with the third part of a shekel for the service of the house of our God; ³³ For the shewbread, and for the continual meat offering, and for the continual burnt offering, of the sabbaths, of the new moons, for the set feasts, and for the holy things, and for the sin offerings to make an atonement for Israel, and for all the work of the house of our God.

The word used for holy (hodes, SHD 6944) means set apart, as separated and refers to all days set apart to the Lord and is not simply a reference to the high days of the Feast – it has to be taken to include New Moons and Atonement. We see this by the Sabbath year being included in the reference and in 10:32 there is direct reference to Atonement. In 10:33 the entire structure of the Sabbaths, New Moons and Feasts is incorporated, thereby showing that the text in 10:31 is specifically explained in the subsequent two verses, to incorporate all the Holy Days as well as New Moons and Feasts.

This should be taken as further proof that the restoration of the Law under Nehemiah also involved the New Moons. We know this to be an historical fact, as the New Moons were kept from Nehemiah’s time right through to the destruction of the Temple in 70 CE. We know they were also kept by the early Church at the same time (Col. 2:16-17). This is a second witness to Amos 8:5.

Is the New Moon a Holy Day?

PO Box 369, WODEN ACT 2606, AUSTRALIA