Comments on: Sabbath Day/Year Commandments – Six Days/Years of Work/Sowing Required?

By: Chuck

Chuck — Sat, 17 Jul 2010 04:19:15 +0000

I agree with you on the 49 year cycle. I have a chronology book by Dr. Floyd Nolen Jones that I highly recommend called The Chronology Of The Old Testament, which I found to be a gold mine of information. He also agrees with the 49 year cycle.
To add to what you wrote above; when we observe Pentecost on the 1st Day of the week we can only work 5, not 6 days until the next Sabbath Day. So 5 years of sowing does not break the Sabbatical Year command either. And the same logic applies to Annual Holy Days wherein no servile work was to be done.

By: Tim McHyde

Tim McHyde — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 22:13:43 +0000

I don’t consider it a limit I am “imposing”. I’m just reading the text at face value. 1) It says every 7th year is a sabbath year. 2) It says jubilee years follow every 7th sabbath year. 3) There is no mention anywhere of “except do not count the Jubilee year when you count the sabbath year.” That’s a rather major omission, akin to the missing mention of the moon in the sabbath day instruction that Lunar Shabbatniks do not want to talk about.

FYI, the annual holy days are not considered “sabbaths”. The only one that is called that is Yom Kippur because it is fast day, not a feast day. See http://www.karaitekorner.org for more.

By: anonomous

anonomous — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 18:53:55 +0000

Tim,

I read your article on the Jubilee Year Cycle and found it interesting;
but I disagree with your arguments and findings.

In your article you seam to argue the point that the Jubilee cycles “must” repeat in 49 year cycles simply because it is in sync and that by adding one year after 49 years the cycle drifts by one year. Your words were “A Jubilee cycle of 50 years falls out of sync with the Sabbath year cycle since 50 is not a multiple of seven.” This requirement of yours that the “Sabbath of weeks of years” must be in sync with the “Sabbath of years” is the basis for your argument; but this interpretation of yours is a self imposed and self created constraint to prop up your conclusion that has no scriptural basis. It is an interesting argument; but using a comparison to other Sabbaths is not a conclusive argument. It is an interesting comparison but not positive proof. For instance, the Feast days of Israel are considered Sabbaths but by using your reasoning that the Sabbath must follow a continual 7 + 7 + 7 + … cycle, there would be no way to include the Feasts as a Sabbath. The Feasts by your reasoning would disrupt the neat 7 + 7 + 7 + … flow that you have self imposed. I suspect you would argue that even with the inclusion of the Feast days, the end of week Sabbath day is still on the same calendar day every week. Again, I would say
that is an interesting fact; but is not proof that the “Sabbath of weeks of years” must do the same. Since God defined the Feast Sabbaths as falling on varying days of the week, it is possible that God intended the “Sabbath of weeks of years” to fall on varying calendar “cycle” years.

In my opinion, the scriptures do not say that the “Sabbath of weeks of years” must remain in sync with the “Sabbath of years”. If you count 49 years + 1 year and repeat that sequence and argue that 50 year cycles are God’s intended plan, than that argument is just as valid at “face value” as your argument that the cycle is 49.

You also make an argument that “inclusive reckoning” as a counting practice is the norm in the Bible.

It is not. There are instances of the use of inclusive reckoning such as the counting of generations by Mathew in 1:17 but that is in the minority of uses. Most often counting is performed as is normally performed today. As an example, Christ rose on the third day. By your assertion, Jesus would have been in the tomb for two days. There are numerous other examples I could give.

Thanks for the interesting article,

Anthony

By: Tim McHyde

Tim McHyde — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 14:50:55 +0000

Jim, again, nowhere is “six years of planting” given as a “requirement”. It says “may” (see above the sabbath year verse quote from the HCSB). The only requirement is to leave land fallow in the 7th year. You never see people in Scripture punished for not planting but Judah was exiled for 70 years, one year for every sabbath year they did not keep.

There is no proof in the Bible that Wormwood has passed before at all, let alone being responsible for the Exodus plagues or Noah’s flood. However, if the Sumerians knew about this 10th planet, perhaps it had to pass before. Regarding the flood, the best explanation I have found is a passby with Mars. Read this fascinating book that explains how we lost the 360 day calendar that Genesis records “in the beginning”: http://www.creationism.org/patten/PattenMarsEarthWars

By: Jim Fincham

Jim Fincham — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 23:03:23 +0000

Shalom Tim; My take on the 50 year cycle is that counting the 50th year as the second sabbatical year is then followed by the required 6 years of planting etc etc. In this manner there is a 50 year cycle which does not infringe on the next 50 year cycle. There may be some obvious reason that this is not the case, but I am not aware.

I am presently studying the Planet X Survival Guide and am surprised to find that the authors, claiming Planet X comes only every 3300 years or so, could possibly think that it came both at the time of Noach and Moses as these events are only 1000 or so year apart, according to geneaology statistics. I can accept one or the other (probably Noachs time), but certainly not both. Or the orbit of Planet X is extremely unstable. What do you think?

Jim Fincham