|
|
|
Is the Seventh Day Eternal?
Using Hebrews to Deny
Genesis
By A.T. Ross
Many verses have been used by many people throughout time to try to
overcome the hurdle of the clear teaching of a literal week in Genesis.
One of these evidences is the claim that Hebrews 4: 1-11 teaches that
the seventh day (sabbath day) never ended, and extends up to the
present and into the far-reaching future.
Unfortunately for such people like progressive creationist (day-ager)
Hugh Ross who propagate such nonsense, the claim is patently false.
CLAIM: The Seventh day referred to in Genesis has
not ended, and continues up into the future. Hebrews 4: 1-11 clearly
teaches this.
RESPONSE: This
is a fundamental mis-interpretation of Hebrews and the claim that the
seventh day continues is contradicted by various other verses in
Scripture, including words spoken by Christ himself, indicating that
such interpretation of Hebrews is faulty. Logistically, for one to
believe that God has rested from everything since the seventh day is to
state that God did not perform any miracles, since that is interventive
work.
Scriptural
Refutation of Continuing 7th Day claim
The seventh day cannot be continuing past its normal, literal duration
during the Creation Week.
Genesis 2:2-3
“And on the seventh day God
ended His work which He had made. And He rested on the seventh day from
all His work which God created to make.
“And God blessed the seventh
day and sanctified it, because in it He had rested from all His work
which God created to make.”
The word “rested” is kalah
(the KJV translates it “ended”), and it is “Qal,” perfect, and in the
third masculine singular. It indicates thus a completed action of “God
rested,” in the past tense.
Gen. 2:3 states that God “blessed” (barak;
“Piel,” imperfect) the seventh day, and blessings are the polar
opposite of curses. But in Genesis chapter 3, we have the Fall of man
and the Curse. Of course, one cannot have a curse during a period which
God has declared Holy and blessed.
Gen. 2:3 also states that God “sanctified” (qadash; “piel,” imperfect, third
masculine singular) the seventh day. The word “sanctified” implies the
setting something apart from everything else as consecrated, holy, and
sacred, a dedication, if you will.
Authors Mark Van Bebber and Paul Taylor state:
“In this way, the seventh day
was set apart from all other days. The seventh day was sanctified,
unlike the days that had preceded it, or would come after it. It is
unlikely that the Fall of man and God’s cursing of nature occurred on
that special, holy and sacred day. Jews and the Church have
historically understood that these sad events came sometime after the
end of that day” (Van Bebber/Taylor, 1994).
Additional evidence from the Old Testament comes from Exodus 20:11.
It states:
“For [in] six days the LORD
made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and
rested the seventh
day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day, and sanctified it.”
Written in present tense, this verse indicates completed actions. It
sets the limits of what God created, and the straightforward
time-period in which He did so. It also explains the covenant system of
seven day weeks. Given that the six days of creation are here compared
to the literal work-week which the Hebrews used and the world continues
to use to this day, therefore in context there is no real way to
maintain long ages.
Van Bebber and Taylor state:
“Note that this was not simply
a memorial day to represent the Sabbath, it was a plan for the work
week that God had exemplified in His own creative work” (Van
Bebber and Taylor, 1994).
Some (Ross, 1994) have claimed that because the seventh day lacks the
qualifier of “evening and morning” which establishes the literal
meaning of the days in Genesis, that therefore it must be longer than a
literal day. But this is useless reasoning, because the evening and
morning mark the beginning and end of the day, respectively. The
absense of both of these qualifiers would, following such logic,
therefore indicate that the seventh day had not begun either (Maniguet
2002; Sarfati 2004)!
Systematic Theologian Dr. Douglas Kelly states in response to such
claims:
“To say the least, this places
a great deal of theological weight on a very narrow and thin exegetical
bridge! Is it not more concordant with the patent sense of the context
of Genesis 2 (and Exodus 20) to infer that because the Sabbath differed
in quality (though not—from anything we can learn out of the text
itself—in quantity), a slightly different concluding formulawas
appended to indicate a qualitative difference (six days involved work;
one day involved rest)? The formula employed to show the termination of
that first Sabbath: “And on the seventh day God ended His work which He
had made; and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He
had made” (Gen. 2:2) seems just as definite as that of “and the evening
and the morning were the first day” (Kelly, 1997).
Additionally, the reason the “evening and morning” was left out of the
listing for the seventh day was to emphasize that God’s creation work
was finished, as Genesis 2:1-3 clearly states (Sarfati 2004).
Certianly, John 5:17 says as much:
“But Jesus answered them, ‘My
father is working and I am working.’ ”
Sarfati states:
“But in context, Jesus is
refering to God’s providential
and redemptive work, not
creative work. The Father still works, but He is not creating, in the
Genesis 1 sense of the word. He is resting from all that He has made”
(Sarfati 2004; emphasis his).
There is no more creation of space, time, or matter (including stars,
plants, or organisms), as occured in Genesis 1 and 2, but the Father
still works.
Evidence
of Hebrews 4:1-11 Misinterpreted
Hebrews 4:1-11, as evidence of a continuing seventh day, is
misinterpreted.
As Sarfati points out:
“Hebrews 4 never says that the seventh
day of creation is continuing to the
present; it merely says that God’s rest is continuing. If someone says
on Monday that he rested on Saturday and is still resting, it in no way
implies that Saturday lasted until Monday” [see Anon, 1999]
(Sarfati, 2004, emphasis his).
A.S. Kulikovsky analyzed the grammar of Hebrews 4 and concluded:
“The ‘rest’ of Hebrews 4
clearly refers to the Kingdom of God. This type of rest was aluded to
right back at the time of creation, as well as at the time of the
Exodus. Nowhere in the text is it equated with the seventh day of
creation, nor is there any grammatical or contextual data suggesting
any such equation. Thus, the progressive creationists’ claim that the
seventh day of creation is still continuing is without any exegetical
foundation whatsoever, making it a worthless argument for non-literal
creation days” (Kulikovsky 1999).
Charles Laymon states:
“Underlying the thought of this
section is the idea that the sabbath is prophetic in character. Its
meaning is not exhaused in the backward reference to creation and the
covenant; it has also a forward reference to a yet unfinished work of
God. Jesus Christ is the realization of this forward thrust; the
prophetic work of God comes to completion in him. Those who are in him,
those who have faith, therefore already take part through this faith in
God’s sabbath rest. And faith is decisive. Its presense means a real
participation in the fulfillment of God’s plan. Its absence makes the
message of no benefit to those who hear because they do not receive it
with faith. And here is the throbbing concern of the book. Good news
came to Israel but because faith was lacking there was no entry into God’s rest. The abiding peril of the
Christian church is the same: the good news is proclaimed, but unless
it is received by faith the promise remains ineffectual. Israel’s
history is one of God’s goodness and man’s disobedience. But God speaks
of another day and in Christ offers once more the gift of rest to those
who believe. There remains a sabbath
rest for the people of God and those who have faith in Christ
enter into that rest” (Laymon, 1971, emphasis his).
Conclusion
It is clear from straightforward Biblical exegesis that the claim that
the seventh day continues beyond a simple, literal 24-hour period is
patently false and should no longer be propogated in any circle, let
alone Christian circles.
References:
Anonymous (based on the research of Mike Kruger), “Is the Seventh Day
an Eternal Day?” Creation, 21(3), 1999
F. Brown, The New
Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew and English Lexicon,
Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody, MA, 1979
A.S. Kulikovsky, “God’s Rest in Hebrews 4:1-11,” TJ (peer-reviewed), 13(2), 1999
C.M. Laymon, The Interpreter’s
One-Volume Commentary on the Bible, Abingdon Press, 1971,
Nashville, TN
M. Maniguet, The Theological Method
of Hugh Ross: An Analysis and Critique, M.Th. Thesis, Systematic
Theology, Baptist Bible Seminary, Clarks Summit, PA, 2002
H. Ross, Creation and Time,
Nabpress, Colorado Springs, CO, 1994
J. Sarfati, Refuting Compromise,
Master Books, Green Forest, AR, 2004
M. Van Bebber and P. Taylor, Creation
and Time, Eden Productions, 1994, Gilbert, AZ
|
