New Moons
Are They Holy Time?
For those keeping the Jewish Calendar, the question of whether the New Moon is holy or not is a mute point because the Rabbinical Jews have never considered them to be holy. For them, the entire situation is merely a matter of determining what the calculations have ordained and then following the procedures that Hillel II mandated. More often than not, the day that they ascribe to be the New Moon, or the first day of the month, deviates from the actual physical new moon by one or even two days. Therefore, unwittingly, holiness is not even a consideration for anyone keeping the Jewish Calendar! However, for many of us, who are keeping God’s Calendar, as we understand it from the pages of the Bible, a nagging question tends to pervade our thoughts. We wonder if the First Day of the Month is Holy. If that is a question which you have wondered about, or been concerned with, then this article will provide you with the clear and unmistakable scriptures necessary to make that important determination.
Part 1
To begin with, let’s look into the typical "argument" supporting the assertion that the day of the New Moon is holy time. Although there are variations on this theme, the following points should be broad enough to address any differing approach to this subject, while being specific enough to answer virtually any question which might be asked. There are two basic pillars used to support a "holy new moon" day.
Pillar #1:
Holy by association?
The new moon is a "part" of a "three-fold" package", The Sabbath, new moon, and Holy Days.
The following scriptures are primary examples of the "evidence" presented supporting "holy new moons". Each scripture contains the "new moon" as well as the "Sabbath", or it is even associated with both the "Sabbath" and "Feast" Days. The fact that the "New Moon" is associated with each of these scriptures is used by advocates of the holy New Moon Day to support this claim of "holiness". These scriptures are followed with a bit of commentary.
I Chronicles 23:30-31
30 And to stand every morning to thank and praise the LORD, and likewise at even;
31 And to offer all burnt sacrifices unto the LORD in the sabbaths, in the new moons, and on the set feasts, by number, according to the order commanded unto them, continually before the LORD:
This is part of a list of Levitical duties which began in verse 28. It is worth noting that the "daily" was daily and would therefore also be performed on the Sabbath, new moon and Holy Days.
II Chron. 2.4
Behold, I build an house to the name of the LORD my God, to dedicate it to him, and to burn before him sweet incense, and for the continual shewbread, and for the burnt 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 for ever to Israel.
A closer look at this scripture reveals a "package of four" rather than just "three" elements. The burnt offerings are to be performed for the #1) morning and evening, #2) Sabbaths, #3) new moons, #4) solemn feasts (annual Holy Days)
II Chron 8.13
Even after a certain rate every day, offering according to the commandment of Moses, on the sabbaths, and on the new moons, and on the solemn feasts (Strong’s # 4150 mow’ed), three times in the year, even in the feast (Strong’s # 2282 chag) of unleavened bread, and in the feast of weeks, and in the feast of tabernacles.
Again, there is an extra item included in the package. The certain rate "every day" (the daily sacrifice, most likely?) is a part of the flow of this verse. The offering, according to Moses, lists only three times to perform these burnt offerings. Also, in this verse the "Seven Annual Holy Days" are referred to as "solemn feasts", while three particular times are set apart, even from these, as "chag" Feasts. These "chag" feasts were required festivals. All seven of the Holy Days are holy "mow’ed"s, but only three times (technically four days) are they also "chag" days that are days directly referred to as "feasts" (Note: In the Greek there is only one word, "heorte" for both of these two Hebrew words. "Which" meaning of "heorte" (mow’ed or chag) that is to be applied is simply determined by the context.) Although this is very similar to Leviticus 23, and we will address this point in more depth later, for now notice that the "new moon" is NOT included with the "mow’ed"s or "chag"s.
Ezra 3.1-5
And when the seventh month was come, and the children of Israel were in the cities,
the people gathered themselves together as one man to Jerusalem.
2 Then stood up Jeshua the son of Jozadak, and his brethren the priests, and
Zerubbabel the son of Shealtiel, and his brethren, and builded the altar of the God of
Israel, to offer burnt offerings thereon, as it is written in the law of Moses the man of
God.
3 And they set the altar upon his bases; for fear was upon them because of the
people of those countries: and they offered burnt offerings thereon unto the LORD, even
burnt offerings morning and evening.
4 They kept also the feast (#2282 chag) of tabernacles, as it is written, and
offered the daily burnt offerings by number, according to the custom, as the duty of every
day required;
5 And afterward offered the continual burnt offering, both of the new moons, and of all the set feasts (#4150 mow’ed) of the LORD that were consecrated, and of every one that willingly offered a freewill offering unto the LORD.
Here, the "package" is missing the Sabbath, but other things are mentioned. Again, notice that the new moons are not considered to be either a "mow’ed" or a "chag".
Neh. 10. 32-33
32 Also 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 (#4150 mow’ed), 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.
In this instance we have the "package" (of 3), plus shewbread, meat offering, holy things, & sin offerings. Also, the "new moons" are still not a "mow’ed" or a "Sabbath".
Eze. 45.16-17
16 All the people of the land shall give this oblation for the prince in Israel.
17 And it shall be the prince’s part to give burnt offerings, and meat offerings, and drink offerings, in the feasts, and in the new moons, and in the sabbaths, in all solemnities of the house of Israel: he shall prepare the sin offering, and the meat offering, and the burnt offering, and the peace offerings, to make reconciliation for the house of Israel.
Here we have the "package" along with "feasts" (#2282). The "solemnities" (#4150) are the "seven" annual holy days, but what are these "feasts"? They are simply the "Feast of Unleavened Bread", the "Feast of Weeks", and the "Feast of Tabernacles". Now this brings up an interesting situation. One of the "main" tenets for the acceptance of the new moon days being holy is that they are always mentioned or listed next to other "known" Holy Days. Thus, they are believed to be holy because the other days that they are mentioned with are Holy Days. In this millennial scripture, which many consider to prove that the new moon will be "restored" to holiness, eleven days are included which are never new moons and never Holy Days, unless one of them happens to fall on a weekly Sabbath. This presents a problem for the holy new moon day advocate who typically relies solely on the new moon's association with "Holy Days". What are the eleven days that are "never" Holy Days and are never new moons, you ask? They are the second through the sixth days of the Feast (#2282) of Unleavened Bread and the second through the seventh days of the "Feast" (#2282) of Tabernacles!
Consider that Exodus 34:18 states: The feast <02282> of unleavened bread shalt thou keep. Seven days thou shalt eat unleavened bread, as I commanded thee, in the time <04150> of the month Abib: for in the month Abib thou camest out from Egypt. Likewise, Numbers 29:12 states, And on the fifteenth day of the seventh month ye shall have an holy convocation; ye shall do no servile work, and ye shall keep a feast <02282> unto the LORD seven days: Thus, with these and other scriptures, we certainly appear to have "Festival days", within "Festival time", which are not holy, but are still a part of "the Feast".
Next examine Deuteronomy 16:13. It states that you are to "observe the feast (#2282) of tabernacles seven days." Only day "One" of the "feast of tabernacles" is a holy convocation. But all seven days of the feast comprise the "chag" of tabernacles. This makes the other six days "feast days" or "chag" days, but not Holy Days. Obviously, since they are always the 16th through the 21st of the month they can never be new moon days.
Briefly, the Hebrew word "MOW'ED" refers to: a gathering, or a getting-together. Today this would typically be for a "church service". The Hebrew word, "mow’ed" has to do only with the fact that there is to be a gathering of some sort. It neither refers to a "Feast" nor even has anything to do with "a Feast." The Hebrew word, "CHAG" on the other hand, does refer specifically to: feasting, a festival, a celebration, etc.
The seven "mow’ed"(s) of Leviticus 23, and elsewhere, are also designated as "holy convocations". A "mow’ed" is NOT automatically "holy" or a "holy convocation". The only "mow’ed"(s) that are holy are the ones designated to be such by God in the scriptures. In this light, it is interesting to note that neither the "new moon" nor the "new moon day" are ever called a "CHAG" in the Bible. Only one new moon is ever designated to be a holy "MOW’ED" and that is, of course, the one that is the first day of the seventh month. Interestingly enough, the "Day of Trumpets" is NOT actually a "feast" (chag) day, it is only a "mow’ed", which is also holy in this case. The same is true for the Day of Atonement and The Last Great Day. As clear as God has been concerning just what He requires of us in the observance of the specific "mow’eds" and "chag’s", the new moon never shows up as either a "mow’ed" or "chag" anywhere in scripture! A quick look at Isaiah 1:14 reveals something interesting.
Isaiah 1:14 Your new moons <02320> and your appointed feasts <04150>(mow’ed) my soul hateth: they are a trouble unto me; I am weary to bear them.
In this verse we see God telling Judah and Jerusalem that He is very displeased with their behavior and attitude as they relate to two "different" things, "new moons" and "mow’eds". Notice that these new moons are not mow’eds per God’s Word. They are placed in an entirely different category, their own. If new moons were "mow’eds" then they would not be mentioned separately and only the "appointed seasons would need to be stated. Judah and Jerusalem did do many things wrong which did not involve "holy" days, couldn’t the new moons just be one more?
Let’s continue.
Hosea 2.9-11
9 Therefore will I return, and take away my corn in the time thereof, and my wine in the season thereof, and will recover my wool and my flax given to cover her nakedness.
10 And now will I discover her lewdness in the sight of her lovers, and none shall deliver her out of mine hand.
11 I will also cause all her mirth to cease, her feast days, her new moons, and her sabbaths, and all her solemn feasts.
The "package", plus …mirth to cease… Again notice that the Bible spells out exactly what is meant and leaves nothing to chance. God even included a reference to the "chags", which would include the "non-holy" days within the feast, as well as the "mow’eds", which are "holy convocations".
So, do the above scriptures "prove" that the new moon is holy? It would be difficult, using these scriptures, to claim that it does, as their "association" with these various times contain some Holy Days and some days that are not holy. The point being made is that these scriptures, by themselves, cannot be used to "prove" that the new moon day is holy. At the same time, these scriptures do provide a strong indication that the "package" (of three) does not exist!
Pillar #2: Holy by example?
Amos 8:5-6 and Ezekiel 46 "Prove" that the new moon is holy because in one example "work" is forbidden, and in the other one "worship" is actually required.
Amos 8.5-6
5 Saying, When will the new moon be gone, that we may sell corn? and the sabbath,
that we may set forth wheat, making the ephah small, and the shekel great, and falsifying
the balances by deceit?
6 That we may buy the poor for silver, and the needy for a pair of shoes; yea, and
sell the refuse of the wheat?
One explanation which has been offered maintains that this is referring to "shop" owners who can’t wait till the new moon and Sabbath are over to sell their produce, grain, shoes, etc. Is that correct?
Let’s look at Amos 2.6. Here God states: …"because they sold the righteous for silver, and the poor for a pair of shoes.…"
First of all, notice that the sins of Israel listed here are totally different than those listed for Judah. Judah is condemned for despising God and not keeping His commandments. Israel is condemned for oppressing it’s own people. This is a scriptural characteristic that is noted in other books of the Bible as well, not just in Amos 2. If the new moon were holy, then why not include it somehow. Yet it is Judah which is being condemned for not keeping God’s law, and this by default, includes failing to keep holy what is holy. Might it also include, claiming something to be "holy" which God did not make holy? Remember, we are not to add to or take away from the word of God, which is His instruction for His people!
Now, back to the "shoes" of the "shop" keeper. The problem is one of national leadership, not of merchants in a local "mall". Furthermore, this does not appear to be a reference to shoes, but rather, a reference to something entirely different, as is so often the case in the Bible. The "shoes" represent something of a far more serious nature. Please consider Lev. 25.39 and Deut 15.12, as well as II Kings 4.1 and Neh. 5.5.
Leviticus 25:39-40
39 And if thy brother that dwelleth by thee be waxen poor, and be sold unto thee; thou shalt not compel him to serve as a bondservant:
40 But as an hired servant, and as a sojourner, he shall be with thee, and shall serve thee unto the year of jubilee:
Deuteronomy 15:11-15
11 For the poor shall never cease out of the land: therefore I command thee, saying, Thou shalt open thine hand wide unto thy brother, to thy poor, and to thy needy, in thy land.
12 And if thy brother, an Hebrew man, or an Hebrew woman, be sold unto thee, and serve thee six years; then in the seventh year thou shalt let him go free from thee.
13 And when thou sendest him out free from thee, thou shalt not let him go away empty:
14 Thou shalt furnish him liberally out of thy flock, and out of thy floor, and out of thy winepress: of that wherewith the LORD thy God hath blessed thee thou shalt give unto him.
15 And thou shalt remember that thou wast a bondman in the land of Egypt, and the LORD thy God redeemed thee: therefore I command thee this thing to day.
II Kings 4:1
Now there cried a certain woman of the wives of the sons of the prophets unto Elisha, saying, Thy servant my husband is dead; and thou knowest that thy servant did fear the LORD: and the creditor is come to take unto him my two sons to be bondmen.
Nehemiah 5:5
1 And there was a great cry of the people and of their wives against their brethren the Jews.
2 For there were that said, We, our sons, and our daughters, are many: therefore we take up corn for them, that we may eat, and live.
3 Some also there were that said, We have mortgaged our lands, vineyards, and houses, that we might buy corn, because of the dearth.
4 There were also that said, We have borrowed money for the king’s tribute, and that upon our lands and vineyards.
5 Yet now our flesh is as the flesh of our brethren, our children as their children: and, lo, we bring into bondage our sons and our daughters to be servants, and some of our daughters are brought unto bondage already: neither is it in our power to redeem them; for other men have our lands and vineyards.
It would appear that the reference to "shoes" may have more to do with a national custom involving "title deeds", or mortgages for houses and land. (Remember Ruth 4.7, too. Now this was the manner in former time in Israel concerning redeeming and concerning changing, for to confirm all things; a man plucked off his shoe, and gave it to his neighbour: and this was a testimony in Israel.). Now consider verse 4 of Amos 8: " Hear this, O ye that swallow up the needy, even to make the poor of the land to fail,". Doesn’t this appear to be the national problem just described? While all of this is interesting, it does not answer the question of whether the new moon is holy or not. Instead, this seems to upset the explanation typically given from the pulpit by those who teach that the new moon is holy. What about the setting forth of the wheat? That may actually be more in reference to opening the granaries as opposed to "shops". The Hebrew literally means to, "open out stores of wheat for sale". A "store of wheat" is not a merchant’s shop for the sale of wheat, rather, it is a granary of some sort where large quantities of grain are stored.
Here is one further point from Amos, although more points could be found. At what time was the harvested grain sold? God specified that if the Feast of Tabernacles, then only observed in Jerusalem, was too far away, that the feast goers should sell some grain to obtain money for attending the Feast. This must occur before the pilgrimage to the Feast. This means that the actual harvesting and gathering would be nearing completion around "Trumpets", a new moon day which actually is holy, and that the selling of the harvest would begin just prior to Trumpets and extend until possibly Atonement. That particular new moon, the one starting the seventh month, is holy, but again, that does not prove that any other new moon is holy.
Here is a final consideration, let’s suppose that this is not a reference to "Trumpets". After all, there was more than one harvest in Israel, there was also an early harvest in the "first" month. Then the question concerning Amos 8:5-6 becomes, "which month was it?" Just because there "might have been" be a month available in which they might have wanted to open up the granaries to sell off inventory and make money, unless there was a limiting factor, this scripture would have to have been applicable to ANY month of the year. How likely would it be for this to be a reference to the winter months, or even to the first month? Doesn’t it seem that Amos was pretty definitive about everything else he was throwing at these Israelite leaders. They would have known exactly what Amos meant. Consider the context of Amos 8 itself. Amos referred to a basket of summer fruit that was rotting or rotten. When does "Trumpets" occur, at the very end of summer or very early fall, right? Does verse 9 appear to be the "Day of Trumpets"? I realize that Israel must enter the "Time of Jacob’s Trouble", which is prior to the Day of the Lord, but can anyone guarantee that verse 9 is not a reference to "Trumpets"? It would seem that no one could "guarantee" that any of these verses are a reference to any particular month or day. Therefore, should we ignore the timing of the new moon of the seventh month in order to give the new moon of Amos 8:5-6 a "holy" status, simply because this particular new moon "might" not be "Trumpets"? Let’s continue.
Finally, a reference to God’s future Temple. Eze. 46.1
Thus saith the Lord GOD; The gate of the inner court that looketh toward the east shall be shut the six working days; but on the sabbath it shall be opened, and in the day of the new moon it shall be opened.
The new moon is NOT equated with the Sabbath in this verse, nor is it a part of the "Sabbath" mentioned. The "Sabbath" in verse one is "limited" to the seventh day Sabbath ONLY. It does not even include the annual High Days. The contrast here is between "the SIX" working days of the WEEK, which would only leave the seventh day for the Sabbath. Why are the annual days not included in the "open door" days? Could it have something to do with the fact that it is the new moon that determines when the annual days are observed?
In addition, this is referencing the worship of God "in" the Temple. The entirety of Israel will not possibly be able to enter or leave the temple every Sabbath and new moon on each occurrence. So there is no evidence that Israel will be worshipping God on the new moon if they are not in the Temple. Please notice that this worshipping in the Temple on Sabbaths and New Moons is "before the Eternal". Could that be the reason for the worshipping on the new moon, and not because it is holy? Compare verse 9 of the same chapter. In this verse those who come into the Temple on "mow’eds" will worship "before the Eternal" and their entry and exit is different from that of the Sabbath and New Moon days. Once more the new moon is not considered to be a Sabbath or "mow’ed" as the reference to the new moon isolates it from both. The Sabbath does not, of itself, have any bearing on when Israel will worship God during the rest of the week.
Part 2
In this part, we will examine several scriptures which are typically not addressed or considered by most people when deciding if the new moon is holy time. This is not to say that this is all that there are, but these should be sufficient to enable us to determine whether or not new moons are holy days.
First read Exodus 40, then notice verses 1-2, and 16-18 in particular.
1 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
2 On the first day of the first month shalt thou set up the tabernacle of the tent of the congregation.
16 Thus did Moses: according to all that the LORD commanded him, so did he.
17 And it came to pass in the first month in the second year, on the first day of the month, that the tabernacle was reared up.
18 And Moses reared up the tabernacle, and fastened his sockets, and set up the boards thereof, and put in the bars thereof, and reared up his pillars.
The Tabernacle was completely "erected" on the new moon, the first day of the first month of the second year in the wilderness! In Ex. 40:33 it states, "… So Moses finished the work.". If new moons are holy, then surely an exemption for the death penalty for "working" on the Sabbath would have been necessary. Notice all of the "work" that Moses performed that day. Moses was not the High Priest, nor was he a priest. He was the leader of Israel. Would he have labored, in service of the temple, as later required of the Levites? It doesn’t make sense that he would have. Notice, in verse 18, that the work included fastening sockets, setting up boards, putting in the bars and rearing up pillars. That is manual labor which would have taken all day. There must have been a lot of "sweat" poured out that day. Temple service "work" was Levitical or priestly work, and was acceptable on the Sabbath, but notice the circumstances in which Levitical Sabbath work was and was not acceptable, what was included and what was not included.
Next read, II Chron 29. 3 & 17.
3 He in the first year of his reign, in the first month, opened the doors of the house of the LORD, and repaired them.
17 Now they began on the first day of the first month to sanctify, and on the eighth day of the month came they to the porch of the LORD: so they sanctified the house of the LORD in eight days; and in the sixteenth day of the first month they made an end.
"Cleansing" was not just a ceremonial function. Cleansing was also "cleaning", which is work, is it not? Verse 3 mentions "repairs", which are definitely work. All of this started on the first day of the month. Wouldn’t something have to be repaired before it could be sanctified? Notice verses 18 and 19.
18 Then they went in to Hezekiah the king, and said, We have cleansed all the house of the LORD, and the altar of burnt offering, with all the vessels thereof, and the shewbread table, with all the vessels thereof.
19 Moreover all the vessels, which king Ahaz in his reign did cast away in his transgression, have we prepared and sanctified, and, behold, they are before the altar of the LORD.
The "house" was cleansed (cleaned), along with the altar and its vessels and the table and its vessels, while other vessels were prepared and sanctified. But, can it be said that "working" on the temple is acceptable on the Sabbath, not considered to be ordinary "work"?
Next see II Chron 24.12.
And the king and Jehoiada gave it to such as did the work of the service of the house of the LORD, and hired masons and carpenters to repair the house of the LORD, and also such as wrought iron and brass to mend the house of the LORD.
This scripture is very interesting because we find that the "work of the service" is contrasted with paid "work". These "hired" hands surely did not "work" for God on the Sabbath, did they? Notice also that they were masons and carpenters, not priests performing ceremonial functions or Levitical "work". So here is the problem: "repairs" to the temple are unquestionably servile "work", not legal for the Sabbath. Why then would the "repairs", ordered on the first day of the month under Hezekiah, (II Chron. 29) be any different? Furthermore, if it had been a "holy" day, then why would Hezekiah on the Sabbath even have issued "work" orders? Would any of you hire a carpenter to renovate your home DURING THE TIME that you were in the other room holding a church service (as many of us do today) and "keeping" the Sabbath? Would it be all right for the carpenter to work on the Sabbath, if he were building the additional room to hold Sabbath services in? Would you saw and hammer then? Does this not raise serious questions regarding any alleged holy time?
Part 3
Here are some additional points of just "logic".
Point #1
It is often presumed that the "re-creation" account of Genesis 1 had it’s "beginning" on the first day of the first month of the first year of the plan of God for mankind (roughly stated). Perhaps it was, perhaps it was not, but it seems quite reasonable that God would have planned it that way. Do you see the problem? Day one was a "work" day contrasted with Day 7, which was a Sabbath. If the re-creation had begun on a new moon, then the new moon could not have been holy because it was a workday. This is significant and worthy of notice because of what is implied. It sets the timing for the seven annual Holy Days which portray the plan of God. Why wouldn’t the first "evening and the morning" come into existence on Day one? The Holy Days would be set for the first month even before the first Sabbath had been made and observed. Does this allude to the importance that God placed on HIS calendar and HIS Holy Days and why the burnt offerings were scheduled as they were, relevant to the Sabbath, etc.?
Point #2
What about those who lived two hundred to three hundred miles from Jerusalem? How soon did they find out when the new moon was declared, especially if for some reason their view was obstructed? It could have been days later. Were they to just assume that certain time was holy every moth, or any month, until they heard the news from Jerusalem. Is it not the reasoning used by the Jews for keeping Rosh Hashanah (the 7th month, 1st day, and for purposes of this discussion the equivalent of our Day of Trumpets) two consecutive days? Even those much closer, who saw the fires that same night, would have been in limbo until they spotted the fire signal that might have been a few hours later. Then, if they looked for the signal, but it was not observed that night, was it just to be considered "practice" holy time?
No one would have a problem with any Sabbath because all they had to do was count sundowns, nor with any Holy Day, except Trumpets. Isn’t it odd that there is no mention of a problem involved with keeping extra holy (not working) new moons, other than on Trumpets, just to be on the safe side?
Lastly, just as a point of interest, list all the scriptures where any day is commanded to be kept holy and a Sabbath. Num. 28 specifies that the Annual High Days are Sabbaths.
Look closely at Nehemiah 10:28-31.
28 And the rest of the people, the priests, the Levites, the porters, the singers, the Nethinims, and all they that had separated themselves from the people of the lands unto the law of God, their wives, their sons, and their daughters, every one having knowledge, and having understanding;
29 They clave to their brethren, their nobles, and entered into a curse, and into an oath, to walk in God’s law, which was given by Moses the servant of God, and to observe and do all the commandments of the LORD our Lord, and his judgments and his statutes;
30 And that we would not give our daughters unto the people of the land, nor take
their daughters for our sons:
31 And if the people of the land bring ware or 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.
Nehemiah makes no mention of the new moon at a very critical juncture, yet the other two items of the "package" are mentioned. At any rate, isn’t this a glaring void regarding the "holy new moon"? Why the void? The traditional "proofs" offered do not stand the test of scripture.
Point #3
This point of logic concerns the weekly Sabbath. The weekly Sabbath is a "holy" day and it is a "mow’ed"! According to Leviticus 23:1-3 it is a Sabbath (#7676) and a "holy convocation", and a "mow’ed". Perhaps even more importantly, as it relates to this new moon issue, it clearly states in verse 2 that God wants for these holy mow’ed’s" to be PROCLAIMED to Israel (which includes us today, does it not?). Lev. 23:2, Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, Concerning the feasts <04150> (mow’ed) of the LORD, which ye shall proclaim to be holy <06944> convocations <04744>, even these are my feasts <04150>. Then in verse 4, the Bible states: These are the feasts <04150> of the LORD, even holy convocations, which ye shall proclaim <07121> in their seasons <04150>. Why does verse two instruct that these days are to be proclaimed to Israel and it then give instruction about the weekly Sabbath, while in verse 4 it seems to start all over with the proclaiming of the seven annual Holy Days? Why is the Sabbath isolated from the annual days? The simple explanation is that the method of determining them is different. The Sabbath is arrived at by counting sevens, while all the other "Holy Days" are arrived at via particular days of a month during the year. The new moon is completely irrelevant in determining the weekly Sabbath. On the other hand the new moon is completely essential in order to determine the seven annual Holy Days. Just being instrumental in determining when to observe the Holy Days does not make the new moons holy "mow’ed" in themselves.
Furthermore, by commanding that these "Holy Days" be proclaimed in Israel, would God then "hide" or somehow obscure the "fact" that Israel was to include the new moon day as a mow’ed, or some kind of Holy Day? I simply cannot imagine that being the case.
Hopefully, it can be seen that there is absolutely no evidence suggesting that the new moon day is holy. The traditional scriptures used in support of day of the new moon being a Holy Day neither "prove" nor "disprove" it. On the other hand, a closer examination and comparison of the several scriptures presented here pertaining to either the first day of the month or work, presents serious problems for the "Holy Day" advocate. How does one circumvent the "working" that took place on the new moon days? Surely with Sabbath breaking being a capitol punishment crime, this would have been an issue worthy of being mentioned! It was not Levitical temple work, which was normal and acceptable for a Holy Day, which was granted special consideration.
In conclusion, could the reason for there being a glaring void in the scriptures, regarding evidence and proof of a holy new moon, be because they are not holy? I was once told by a former long time minister (who, as of this writing, still keeps the new moon day "holy"), that it does not matter whether the Bible does or does not indicate that the new moon is holy. He said that the reason for this was because God had revealed it directly to him and that therefore it was holy. He also said that God had kept this truth a secret, even from His own Church, until the "end time". Brethren of God, is that how God operates? When I first faced with the issue of whether to keep the new moons "holy" or not, my conscience would not allow me to postpone a decision. Prior to that I had been of the opinion that it might be "safer" to keep it "holy" because I was not sure. After all, better to "err" on the side of caution I thought. Fortunately for me, I was forced into a position where I had to comply with my minister’s doctrine or face his scorn. I then embarked on a relatively in-depth study into the subject. I had already read information from various other Churches of God, which presently keep the day "holy" as well as material from those that don’t. None of their commentaries appeared to be completely resolve the matter. Both camps seemingly had good points and made reasonable sounding arguments. My unique approach was simply to see if any work had been performed on the new moons which was not sin. It took a little digging and some cross comparison, but you have read the results. I have not tried in this article to resolve every disagreement, but please feel free to explore the issue on your own as there are certain to be more and deeper points to be uncovered. If there is a point or proof that you feel would demonstrate that the new moon day is holy then please notify me of it at once. I sincerely mean this. We are all just trying to do the best we can. Although it is obvious that so far I have not found any proof, or even circumstantial evidence, that such is the case, I realize that I am human and subject to inherent limitations and shortcomings. I hope that you have enjoyed this article and if you have any comment or ideas please forward them to this e-mail address. rfix@hyperusa.com
Richard L. Fix
January 7, 2002
Last updated Mar. 2002