An Answer to a Sermon by Vance Stinson
of the
PENTECOST –
"Sunday Or Sivan 6"?
International
gave a sermon entitled "Sunday Or Sivan 6,"
in which he
attempted to refute the Sivan 6 date for this
holy day of
God. In this article, Nick Wood in
answers
Stinson's arguments and draws attention to the
REAL issues, as
opposed to "smokescreen" arguments!
Nick Wood
The
incredible revelation in the sermon of Vance Stinson entitled "Sunday Or
Sivan 6" is the almost complete acknowledgement that the vast majority of
the Jews at the time of Christ, were keeping Pentecost on Sivan 6 according to
the Pharisees reckoning. This is at
least a step in the direction of TRUTH.
The whole issue then hinges on the question -- "Where the Pharisees
correct in their reckoning?"
Vance
makes much in his sermon of the following point: -- "If all there was to
go on in determining Pentecost was Leviticus 23, then we would all be forced to
conclude that Pentecost was on a Sunday."
Very
well, let us try and be fair and reasonable as well as open-minded and
acknowledge that this may be so with one important qualification. If all there was to go on in determining
Pentecost was Leviticus 23 in the KING JAMES version, then yes, I can see how
Sunday is arrived at, and of course I myself accepted this teaching without
question for many years, I freely admit.
To
make the statement, as Vance does, that the Hebrew word "SHABBAT" can
only ever be translated
"Sabbath" and never "Week," is entirely a matter of opinion
which many eminent Hebrew scholars have argued for generations. The fact is of course that besides the King
James version we have many other translations of the Bible into English. Some of these in Leviticus 23:15-16 translate
"SHABBAT" as "Sabbaths" (ie., New King James), while others
translate "SHABBAT" as "Weeks" (ie., NIV, RSV, GNB as well
as the Jewish Tanakh). To simply say
that all these modern translations are wrong and leave it at that WITHOUT
CONCLUSIVE PROOF is just not good enough.
Of
course Vance is perfectly
entitled to HIS OWN OPINION just like anyone else, but with all due respect to
him, I for
What
does all this haggling and disputing over the Hebrew word "SHABBAT"
really prove anyway? Absolutely nothing,
except that there is a continuing dispute and always has been over the exact
meaning of this Hebrew word. Let us all
calm down and step back a moment and remember Paul's warning in II Timothy
"Warn
them before God against quarrelling about WORDS;
it
is of no value, and only ruins those who listen."
Sound
advice, so let us all pay heed to it and get away from this useless
dispute. Besides, why do we just have to
concentrate on Leviticus 23? The first
rule of Bible study is to get together ALL the Scriptures bearing on a
particular subject.
".
. . Here a little, there a little" (Isaiah 28:10, NKJV). By applying this rule fairly and consistently
we can come to a definite conclusion and a full understanding of the TRUE day
of Pentecost.
Opponents
of a Sivan 6 Pentecost find the inspired words of Scripture in Matthew 23:3
difficult to handle. They seek, as Vance
does, to place their own human interpretation upon it, simply because it is so
powerful and decisive a Scripture regarding this whole issue. They level the charge at Sivan 6 observers,
of "following the Pharisees," seemingly oblivious of the fact that it
was Our Lord And Saviour JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF who uttered these words: --
"The
scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat.
ALL therefore
whatsoever
they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do
not
ye after their works, for they say and do not" (Matt.23:3).
Instead
of trying to bend and distort this verse and PRETEND that it doesn't really
mean what it plainly says, let us all be honest with the Word of God and accept
and believe it, even if we sometimes don't like to admit that maybe, JUST
MAYBE, our preconceived ideas may be wrong.
A very plain and simple expounding of this verse can be found in the Jamieson,
Fausett and Brown Commentary: --
"THE
SCRIBES AND THE PARISEES SIT" -- The Jewish
teachers
stood to read, but sat to expound the Scriptures, as will
be
seen by comparing Luke 4:16 with v.20.
"IN
MOSES' SEAT" -- ie. as interpreters of the law given by Moses.
"ALL
THEREFORE" -- ie. all which, as sitting in that seat and teaching
out
of that law.
"THEY
BID YOU OBSERVE, THAT OBSERVE AND DO" -- The
word
'therefore' is thus, it will be seen, of great importance, as limiting
those
injunctions which He would have them obey to what they fetched
FROM
THE LAW ITSELF (emphasis mine) . . . . but He who denounced
the
TRADITIONS (emphasis mine) of such teachers cannot have meant
here
to throw His shield over these."
In
other words, as long as the Pharisees were teaching and expounding from the LAW
OF MOSES, which included the Holy Days (ie. PENTECOST), the people were to
"OBSERVE AND DO" what the Pharisees taught.
SO
SAYS THE UNBREAKABLE WORD OF GOD.
Of
course anything above and beyond the LAW OF MOSES, was a teaching or tradition
of men and OBVIOUSLY not covered by this
COMMAND of JESUS CHRIST. Notice
very carefully to whom this DIRECT COMMAND was given in Matthew 23:1 --
"THEN
JESUS SPOKE TO THE MULTITUDES AND
TO
HIS DISCIPLES" (New King James
Version).
Vance
winds up his sermon with an ingenious interpretation of Acts 2:1 -- "When
the day of Pentecost had FULLY COME . . ." He postulates that as there were TWO
Pentecosts, one Sadducean and the other Pharisaic, then the phrase FULLY
COME must mean -- "When the day
of the True Pentecost had come a few days AFTER the False Pentecost." In the crucifixion year of 31 A.D. he
correctly states that the Sadducean Pentecost would be on a Sunday (as it
always was), and the Pharisaic Pentecost would come 2 days earlier on the
Friday. Vance then takes a quantum leap
and suggests that Pentecost had only FULLY COME on the Sunday. There is however a much better and clearer
definition of that phrase's TRUE meaning, without resorting to
speculation.
Strong's
Exhaustive Concordance gives the Greek word -- SUMPLEROO rendered "FULLY
COME" in the King James version
as meaning: --
"To
Implenish Completely,"
"To
Accomplish,"
"To
Be Complete."
A
marginal note in the New American Standard version gives the literal meaning of
the phrase as -- "Was Being Fulfilled."
This
is surely the TRUE meaning of Acts 2:1 -- "When the day of Pentecost had
FULLY COME (or HAD COME TO BE FULFILLED)."
Vance
concludes by saying that he needs much more proof before he is willing to
'repent and change.' I am puzzled by
this statement because the 37 page article which he continually referred to,
[must have] contained just what he was asking for, MUCH MORE PROOF, most of
which he never addressed or even referred to in his sermon. [Aside from that article, whatever it was, I
would be happy to send Vance, or anyone else who is interested, my own articles on this subject. They are:
"Pentecost -- The Final Answer!", "How Should We Count
Pentecost?", "Pentecost -- The Untold Story," "Pentecost --
the Plain Truth!", "The Incredible Truth about Pentecost," and
"Pentecost -- The Bottom Line!" -- Editor.] To be absolutely fair to Vance though, he was
constrained in his sermon by the time factor.
The Scriptures which were never addressed or referred to, actually provide
the clinching proof of a Sivan 6 Pentecost.
Paul
addressing the Sanhedrin: --
"Then
Paul, knowing that some of them were Sadducees,
and
the other Pharisees, called out in the Sanhedrin, 'My
brothers,
I AM A PHARISEE, the son of a
Pharisee' "
(Acts
23:6, NIV).
Notice
the use of the PRESENT tense "I AM A PHARISEE." Paul DID NOT say I WAS A PHARISEE, because
although a Christian, he still considered himself to be a TRUE Pharisee.
Just
prior to this, Paul had been proclaiming to the mob in Jerusalem which was
baying for his blood: --
"I
am a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but brought up in this
city,
UNDER GAMALIEL I was THOROUGHLY TRAINED
in
the LAW of our fathers . . ." (Acts
22:3, NIV).
Gamaliel
was a PHARISEE, a teacher of the LAW held in respect by all the people -- Acts
5:34. Most commentators believe that he
was a grandson of the great Rabbi Hillel, who gave his name to one of the two
main "Houses" of Phariseeism, the House of Hillel; the other being
the House of Shammai. Eventually
Gamaliel himself became the "Elder" of the House of Hillel. Although there were certain differences
between these two "Houses" -- the House of Hillel being, in most
cases, more moderate and compassionate than the House of Shammai -- they were
totally united on the issue of counting Pentecost from the day on which the
"Wave Sheaf" was offered, the day after THE ANNUAL SABBATH. Although like anyone else I stand open to
correction, I challenge the opponents of a Sivan 6 Pentecost to produce any SOLID
evidence to the contrary. While
searching for it my hope and prayer would be that they themselves would become
convicted by the PLAIN, SIMPLE, PROVABLE TRUTH.
Paul
before King Agrippa: --
"THE
JEWS ALL KNOW THE WAY I HAVE LIVED ever
since
I was a child, from the beginning of my life in my own
country,
and also in Jerusalem. They (ie. ALL THE
JEWS) have
known
me for a long time and can testify, if they are willing, that
according
to the strictest sect of our religion, I LIVED AS A
PHARISEE" (Acts
26:4-5, NIV).
This
is all so very plain and clear that Paul was extremely well known to ALL THE
JEWS, and that he had lived as a STRICT PHARISEE ALL HIS LIFE, one very
distinct hallmark of this being a SIVAN 6 PENTECOST. Vance was honest enough to acknowledge that
the vast majority of Jews at the time of Christ, were keeping Pentecost on
Sivan 6 according to the Pharisees' reckoning.
The Scriptures leave us in no doubt that the Apostle Paul had lived as a
STRICT PHARISEE all his life, and apart from those who do not wish to see,
everyone must acknowledge that Paul also kept Pentecost on Sivan 6, at least up
until the time of his conversion.
COULD PAUL HAVE BEEN IN ERROR ALONG WITH THE PHARISEES, IN
KEEPING PENTECOST ON SIVAN 6? ON THE ANSWER
TO THIS QUESTION HINGES THE WHOLE CONTROVERSY.
LET THE INSPIRED AND PERFECT WORD OF GOD GIVE US THE TRUE AND ONLY
ANSWER.
Paul's
Letter to the Philippians: --
"If
anyone else thinks he has reasons to put confidence in the flesh,
I
have more: circumcised on the eighth
day, of the people of Israel,
of
the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of the Hebrews; IN REGARD
TO THE LAW A PHARISEE ; as for zeal, persecuting the church;
AS
FOR LEGALISTIC RIGHTEOUSNESS, F A U L T L E S S"
(Philippians
3:4-5, NIV).
This
is so important here is the same Scripture in the NEW KING JAMES VERSION.
"If
anyone else thinks he may have confidence in the flesh, I more so:
circumcised
the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Ben-
jamin,
a Hebrew of the Hebrews; CONCERNING THE LAW, A
PHARISEE ; concerning zeal, persecuting the church; CONCERNING
THE RIGHTEOUSNESS WHICH IS IN THE
LAW, B L A M E -
L E S S."
Dare anyone refute
the inspired words of the Apostle Paul in which he claimed to have observed THE
LAW WITHOUT FAULT? If the Sadducees were
correct in reckoning Pentecost and the Pharisees WERE IN ERROR, then this
Scripture could never have been inspired.
I
call upon my brothers and sisters in the Church of God International [and
Worldwide Church of God, and other splinter groups! -- Editor] to NOW SERIOUSLY
ADDRESS THIS QUESTION, PLEASE.
I
would like to end on a conciliatory note and reveal that I have just recently
read an article by Vance Stinson, refuting the abominable doctrine taught by
some, that the Jews are actually the offspring of Satan. Vance does an excellent job of demolishing
this "Doctrine of Demons" and I thank him for it. But stop one moment and consider. Why is it that of all peoples on the earth
the Jews have been singled out time and time again for the most horrific
persecution and suffering that demoniacally influenced minds can devise? Simply because they and they alone have
preserved the LAW OF GOD, including the Holy Days and the sacred calendar, to
this very day. Satan hates them terribly
for this. The Jews today keep Pentecost
on Sivan 6.
"What
advantage then has the Jew, or what is the profit
of
circumcision? Much in every way! Chiefly because
TO
THEM WERE COMMITTED THE ORACLES OF
GOD" (Romans
3:1-2, NKJV).