.....







 

[apologies, but we have not yet included the footnotes]   

Answer: The International Date Line (IDL) is an imaginary line running from the North Pole to the South Pole that is, in theory, 180° away from the Greenwich Meridian. We say "in theory" because it is actually not a straight line. It changes course around various land areas to minimize confusion from having countries divided by it. The IDL separates two consecutive calendar days. That is, the date in the eastern hemisphere, to the left of the line on a map, is always one day ahead of the date in the western hemisphere. The IDL is recognized by the nations of the world as a matter of convenience. It has no force in international law. If we look at a map of the Pacific Ocean in a standard atlas of the world we should be able to find the IDL marked out approximately in the middle.

Why do we need an IDL? Time around the planet is divided into zones so that, in theory, noon in each country coincides approximately with when the sun is overhead (or at its highest point in the sky). The only other systematic method would be to have the whole world on the same time, which would be much more problematic. Since the globe is divided into time zones, a traveler journeying eastward would have to advance his or her watch by one hour every time a new zone was entered. Thus, on entering the first time zone they would reset their watch to, for example, Ten AM instead of Nine AM, which is the "real" time back home. Then, at the next time zone they would advance their watch another hour, and be two hours out of synchrony with home time. Without an IDL, they would find, on their arrival back home that they were 24 hours, or one calendar day, ahead of everyone else. It would not really be one day ahead because it is just an artificial phenomenon caused by the resetting of their watch in each time zone. If they traveled in a westerly direction they would be one day behind every one else when they got back to their home country.

The IDL has an interesting history that reflects mankind’s gradual adjustment to living in a world where international travel and communication have become progressively more widespread and rapid. It was in 1884, at an international convention held in Washington, D.C., that the prime meridian of Greenwich was established. This action indirectly affirmed the concept of a date line 180° from Greenwich. Although it was in 1884 that the 180th meridian was internationally affirmed as the date line, the general custom of navigators in the years before this time had been to adjust their time counts at this meridian. Also the out-of-step dating methods of Pitcairn Island, the Philippines, the Society islands and Alaska had been adjusted relative to this meridian prior to the conference of 1884.

Following are details of some of the changes in dating methods that have occurred at different localities as the present IDL has evolved. In each case a local government changed their time reckoning in order to harmonize conditions with the broader global picture and to reduce confusion and inconvenience.

1. In 1790 the mutineers of the Bounty settled in the remote island of Pitcairn in the southeastern Pacific. The Bounty had entered the Pacific from the west by way of the Cape of Good Hope and the mutineers brought with them to Pitcairn the time reckoning of the lands west of the 180° meridian. It was not until about 1814 that the date reckoning was changed to that of the nations east of the 180° meridian.

2. The Philippines were on the time count of America and the other lands east of the 180° meridian until a decree was issued by the local governor-general that the day following Monday, December 30, 1844 should be Wednesday, January 1, 1845. This moved the Philippines to the calendar reckoning of the lands west of the 180° meridian and brought them into harmony with other local nations such as China and Indonesia. Why were the Philippine Islands on the time count of the lands east of the 180° meridian to begin with? It was because the Spanish colonized the Islands from the American (eastern) side of the Pacific. The American calendar reckoning was brought with the colonizers who did not want to change their day as they went across the Pacific.

3. The Society Islands, of which Tahiti is the best known, lie in the Pacific Ocean at about 150° longitude west of Greenwich. They were evangelized by European missionaries who entered the Pacific Ocean from the west via the Cape of Good Hope in the 1790’s. Unfortunately these missionaries failed to make an adjustment in their time reckoning as they crossed the Pacific and thus brought the day count of the lands west of the 180° meridian over into the area east of this line. This mistake led to a confusing state of affairs since the Tahitian natives were originally taught by the missionaries to keep Sunday on what was actually Saturday. The French government, however, moved the Islands to the time count of the lands east of the 180° meridian sometime between 1844 and 1846. The Christians who had been observing Saturday as Sunday were then forced to change their weekly reckoning, and what had previously been Monday was now hallowed as Sunday.

4. In 1867 the United States of America accepted Russia’s proposal for them to buy the area of land known as Alaska. When the sale was finalized an adjustment in the calendar was necessary to bring Alaska into harmony with the rest of America. First the Russian’s were, at this time, still using the old Julian calendar which by now had accumulated 12 days of error in it. Hence it was necessary to add 12 days to the Russian calendar to bring it into line with the new Gregorian calendar (see the answer to Question 3 for more information on this change from the Julian to the Gregorian method). This change did not involve an alteration in the day of the week as, for example, Monday, May 15, 1867 according to the Julian calendar would be Monday, May 27, 1867 by the Gregorian method. But the Americans had to also drop a day of the week to bring Alaska into line with the U.S.A. and other nations east of the IDL. This would have meant that what was previously Saturday would now be Friday. The Alaskan change in the day of the week was done in the years shortly after the formal transfer of Alaska to the USA in October 1867.

5. The Samoan Islands, situated between about 168 and 172° longitude west of Greenwich were, like the Society Islands, evangelized by missionaries who brought the time reckoning of the nations west of the 180° meridian into the area east of this demarcation. In 1892 the time was corrected by the Samoan population keeping Monday, July 4, twice in succession.

6. The Cook Islands, lying at longitude 156 to 160° west of Greenwich, also counted their days as if they were west of the 180° meridian until they rectified the error by keeping Christmas day, Monday, December 25, 1899, twice (for two days in a row).

7. In 1995 the island group called Kiribati made an interesting change in its time reckoning. This nation is spread over a huge area of the Pacific Ocean and is divided by the 180° meridian. Its eastern most islands lie as far east as the 150° meridian, which is farther east than Honolulu. In 1995 the Kiribati government unilaterally moved the islands east of the 180° meridian to the day count of those islands west of this line. Probably Kiribati’s action has moved a large segment of the IDL east, and many modern maps now show the IDL as bulging around Kiribati’s eastern islands. However, we say "probably" because it seems that the international decision and consensus on Kiribati’s 1995 time adjustments has not yet been finalized. The idea that the vast stretches of international ocean lying between the tiny islands of eastern Kiribati should be also on the day count of lands west of the180° meridian has been considered unsatisfactory by at least one leading map producer. MapQuest.com uses the pre-1995 IDL and makes the following note on its maps: "All islands east of 180° within the Republic of Kiribati observe the same date as the islands west of 180° even though they are positioned on opposite sides of the International Date Line." Thus it seems that Kiribati has changed its local time zone reckoning but may not have altered the IDL. In time this will be clarified. Nevertheless, for the inhabitants of Kiribati the change in day count for the easterly islands is a big issue for Sabbath-keepers. It is equivalent to the IDL being moved as far as they are concerned. We sincerely sympathize with the Sabbath-keepers in the islands that used to be in the eastern day count until 1995 when they were transferred to the day count of the lands west of the IDL. They have been faced with the difficult decision of whether to keep worshipping on the same day as previously, or to change to the new calendar reckoning advised by their government. The day they used to call Saturday has now become Sunday. We also sympathize with Sunday-keepers and Friday-keepers (Moslems) who, of course, face the same sort of conscientious dilemma. We will mention more about Kiribati’s rather unique situation later.

8. The kingdom of Tonga is the only island group that, to our knowledge, has not yet readjusted its time count following the introduction of the incorrect calendar reckoning by early missionaries. Tonga lies at about 175° longitude west of Greenwich and is thus east of the 180° meridian and should really be keeping the calendar reckoning of America and the other nations east of 180°. However it still keeps the time count of the lands west of the 180° meridian. On maps showing the IDL it will be noticed that the line veers eastward just north of the Tongan group. This is because Tonga has chosen to stay on the calendar reckoning of the lands west of the 180° meridian. This is really an artificial situation since the whole Tongan nation lies east of the 180° meridian in the same way as the Samoan and the Cook Island groups do. Due to this artificial situation, in Tonga they keep Sunday for Saturday. In other words those who go to church on Sunday, Tongan time, are really worshipping on Saturday. Interestingly, Seventh-day Adventists on this Island who worship on the Biblical seventh-day Sabbath go to church on Sunday local time. They keep Sabbath from sundown Saturday to sundown Sunday, Tongan time. These Seventh-day Adventists have chosen to keep the correct day even though locally it looks like they are Sunday-keepers. It is a strange situation to have "Sunday"-keepers and Sabbath-keepers going to church on the same day. It is hoped that one day the authorities will make the change and correct the calendar reckoning of this island group, thus resolving the confusing situation.

As will be obvious from the above, the issue of the IDL brings to mind many questions in relation to the observance of the seventh-day Sabbath. Such questions include:

1. Our original question, is it true that Sabbath observance is irrelevant for modern living because of the IDL?

2. Does God recognize the current IDL?

3. Should Jerusalem or some other place be considered as God’s IDL?

4. How does God view the way that days of the week have been changed by local governments who have made alterations in relation to the IDL?
5. How can the Sabbath be kept when travelling across the IDL?

 

Let us consider these questions one at a time:

1. Is it true that the IDL makes Sabbath observance meaningless for those living in modern times?

The seventh-day Sabbath will always be relevant and meaningful for mankind because it is intrinsically linked to the great truths of creation and redemption (please see the answer to Question 13) [11]. The IDL results in the need for some extra thought and consideration from modern Sabbath-keepers and creates issues that people of bygone days were not concerned with. But these matters, which are discussed below, are quite straightforward when considered with commonsense and should not cause any doubts or worries for those who think about them carefully while recognizing the relevant Biblical principles.

2. Does God recognize the current IDL?

God has not given in the Bible any direct instruction regarding the position of an IDL. This can only mean that He has left it up to mankind to arrive at a solution while recognizing the principles that He has laid down in His Word.

First, it should be recognized that God has made the Sabbath to be kept on a round world and that He does not ask us to do things that are impossible. To command us to do something, while knowing it was not completely possible, would amount to being unjust or unfair. The Bible clearly teaches that God is perfectly just and thus we can rest assured that the problem of the IDL does not produce any impossible situations regarding Sabbath observance.

Secondly, we need to realize that the need for an IDL is a natural phenomenon resulting from the fact that we live on a rotating globe. It is not just something that is needed because of clocks and time zones. It is a necessity for all people who operate their lives using the division of time that we call a "day", whether they begin their days at sunset, midnight or some other time. For example, a Sabbath-keeper living in Israel who decides to travel around the world in a westerly direction would begin their Sabbath each week a little later than their brethren and sisters at home. This is because they are travelling in the direction that the sun sets. When they got to half way around the world they would be starting their Sabbath half a day later then those at home. If they did not use an IDL, when they got back to Israel, they would be observing the Sabbath a whole day later than their fellow believers. So we can see that the need for an IDL is a natural one and not just some artificial creation of fallen man. Inasmuch as God has ordained the division of time called a "day" based on His creation of our world as a rotating globe, and inasmuch as an IDL is a natural necessity resulting from this situation, we can safely say that it is God’s will for us to have an IDL. The next obvious question is where would God like us to put the IDL? In seeking an answer to this let us first consider the claim of some that "God’s International Date Line" is Jerusalem or the eastern border of Israel.

3. Should Jerusalem or some other place be considered as God’s IDL?

Those who read the Bible must admit that God has not decreed anywhere that an IDL should be at Jerusalem or anywhere else. There is no evidence at all that Jews in the Old Testament recognized any change in the day at Jerusalem, or that God commanded them of such. As we read the Old Testament scriptures it appears clear that Jews as far east as Babylon, Persia and even India (Esther 1:1; 8:9), and as far west as Egypt, simply kept the seventh-day Sabbath as the sun went down in the same cycle as they were used to keeping it. They kept the Sabbath in this regular cycle as they migrated to these lands. There was no reason for them to do otherwise, as this was the commonsense thing to do. They were certainly not concerned with the problems associated with travelling right around the globe. Thus those in the east would keep the day earlier than back in Israel and those in the west would keep it later.

In addition, Jesus our Lord, who knows everything and who no doubt was aware of the issues that a round world gives, mentions nothing in relation to an IDL during His ministry as recorded by the New Testament. Moreover, He traveled freely east and west of Jerusalem without any reference to an IDL.

Arguments for an IDL at Jerusalem based on the account of Christ’s death and resurrection are nothing more than speculation based on analogy. There is no evidence whatsoever that the New Testament church, which spread rapidly outside the boundaries of Israel both east and west, recognized any date line. It would have been such a big issue that Jesus would not have failed to mention it before His death, and the disciples would not have failed to draw attention to it in their ministry after Pentecost.

Making the IDL at Jerusalem, or somewhere else in Israel, would cause far more problems than the current location. There would certainly be far less commonsense in positioning it there rather than in the Pacific Ocean. It would cause great confusion for Sabbath-keepers all along the line from Russia in the North to the lands of Africa in the South. Huge numbers of believers near the line, and still in the same countries or even towns, would be worshipping on different days. It would make regional gatherings and large church meetings a nightmare. It would significantly hinder the proclamation of the gospel. All this would be contrary to the great principle of scripture outlined in 1 Corinthians 14:40, "Let all things be done decently and in order". It is an old saying that order is the first law of Heaven. But having the IDL in Israel is a recipe for disorder and chaos. If we read through the account in the Old Testament of the sanctuary service we can see that order, neatness and correct timing were regarded by God as essential. They were part of the sacredness of the service. So, in looking for a position for the IDL we need to take into consideration this important Bible principle of "order" and focus on having it where confusion and disorder will be minimized. Certainly to move the position of the IDL in our times would be a colossal source of confusion and would definitely detract from focussing on the essentials of Christianity. Moreover, if just believers in the seventh-day Sabbath considered the IDL as being at Jerusalem, then all Sabbath-keepers east of Jerusalem and west of the IDL would be, in the eyes of unbelievers, keeping sacred the same day as Sunday-keepers. This would remove the witness of the Sabbath from half the world because it would seem, in the eyes of the people, that Sabbath-keepers honored the same day as Sunday-keepers. Doing this would be going against the counsel of Christ in Matthew 5:13-16 where He exhorts us to let our "light" shine.

Matthew 22:37 says "love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind". This is another important Bible principle that applies to the IDL issue. We are to use our minds and consider the situation logically and reasonably. The most sensible approach, and the most Biblical, is to consider the issue as it would develop for Sabbath-keepers migrating further and further east and west from the Mountains of Ararat (after the flood) or from Palestine. Those going east would keep the day earlier and earlier as they traveled in the direction of the sunrise. In contrast, those moving in a westerly direction would keep the day later and later as they journeyed toward the sunset. When the two groups got to half way around the globe they would meet and note the discrepancy between each other’s day reckoning. What should they now do? The commonsense approach would be to admit that they needed a line about halfway around from home where there was a changeover in day. This would allow all those migrating eastward to keep the day in the usual cycle until they got to the halfway line. Likewise, those migrating in the westerly direction would keep the daily cycle that they were familiar with until the agreed line of demarcation was reached. This is basically what we have ended up having with the current IDL, and therefore we can use this line in good conscience.

4. How does God view the way that days of the week have been changed by local governments who have made alterations in relation to the IDL?

God has not told us in the Bible what He thinks of these changes. So, again we must go by the principles of His Word. Having a nation divided by the IDL would be a recipe for discord. So we can apply the principle of "order" (1 Corinthians 14:40) here and say that surely God would not want unnecessary confusion to be created by a nation being "cut in two" by the IDL. Also, having a nation divided by the IDL is not logical. It does not make sense because it creates unnecessary division and disunion. So we can also apply the principle of "commonsense" (Matthew 22:37) to the situation. Thirdly, we can apply the principle of "witness" (Matthew 5:13-16) because having a nation divided by the IDL would confuse the witness of the Sabbath. People would make a joke of the situation saying, "Well, are you going to have your Sabbath today on this half of the nation, or are you going to work today at finishing your project and dash across to the other side of the line for tomorrow’s Sabbath?" So it becomes evident that having a nation divided by the IDL is not in harmony with important Bible principles. Thus, if a nation is divided by the 180° meridian then, on principle, it needs to move to the day reckoning of whichever side will make for the most sensible, orderly situation. For similar reasons, if a nation, like Tonga, is completely on one side of the 180° meridian it should be on the time count of that side.

The changes in the IDL that have occurred over the years in the Philippines, Alaska, the Cook Islands and so forth, can be viewed as the challenging but necessary adjustments that were needed as knowledge increased and the best solution for the affected nations evolved. These alterations have been in harmony with the Bible principles discussed above. Tonga needs to move to the east of the IDL to be in agreement with the above principles. What about Kiribati? This nation is divided by the 180° meridian, so the changes made in 1995 are compatible with the three Bible principles elucidated above. Thus, we believe that Sabbath-keepers in the eastern islands of Kiribati can have a clear conscience in changing to the new calendar reckoning that puts them on the same day count as the western half of the nation.

Let us now consider how we might answer for our faith if challenged about the IDL and its adjustment by various nations. Consider the following question: "You worship on the day you do because of the International Date Line, a line decided on for the convenience of the nations and their prosperity. If the line were different, your day would be different. If the nations moved it west of Australia, where you currently live, you would be keeping what we now call Friday. How then can you say that your day is God's true day, unbroken since time began?" Well, we can say that any move of the IDL west of Australia ought to be rejected because it makes no sense and God wants us to use commonsense and worship Him with our mind as well as with our spirit. We can then state our belief that the current IDL may be viewed, with good conscience, as a result of providential guidance because it is in the best place to allow "all things [to] be done decently and in order". Furthermore, we can say that the Bible makes it clear that the seventh day is unbroken in terms of Palestinian time and, if we can be sure about Palestinian time, then we can confidently gauge the rest of the world in relation to it.

5. How can the Sabbath be kept when travelling across the IDL?

We believe there are two sensible alternatives that can be chosen, with a clear conscience, by Sabbath-keepers when journeying across the IDL into, or out of, the sacred hours of the seventh day. Briefly they are as follows:

a). Make the change from one day to the next immediately on crossing the IDL.

b). Alternatively, make the adjustment at the first sunset after crossing the IDL. However, if this option is chosen then the Sabbath-keeper needs to change to the new day before sundown if they happen to end their journey prior to sunset. That is, they would make the change in day when they arrived at their destination. Why would they do this? Because if they did not make the change on arrival then they would be out of synchrony with all the people living in that place. The confusion and unnecessary negative influence upon non-believers would be against the Bible principles of 1 Corinthians 14:40 and Matthew 5:13-16. It would also be against another principle of commonsense, namely that the Sabbath should be observed at the time it comes to the country or location on the globe where you are.

To further clarify these options let us consider a couple of scenarios. A Sabbath-keeper called Michael is travelling in a boat across the Pacific from Los Angeles to Japan. He arrives at the IDL at 10:00 AM Saturday morning having already observed as sacred the hours from Friday sunset up until that time. What should he do? Michael could immediately change his clock to 10:00 AM Sunday and close his Sabbath observance at that time. Or he could continue to observe the Sabbath until sunset, which for him could be, for example, 6:00 PM. Then he would change his watch to 6:00 PM Sunday and close the Sabbath. If, however, Michael’s ship docked at an island for passengers to disembark before sunset, and Michael had chosen this second option, he would need to finish his Sabbath on arrival at the island and set his watch to the local time which might be, for example, 3:00 PM Sunday.

Another Sabbath-keeper called Kate is flying from New Zealand eastwards across the Pacific to see her sister in Hawaii who has suddenly been taken seriously ill. She is unable to get an urgent flight out except for one leaving at 5 AM Saturday morning. Kate does all the preparations she can before Sabbath begins and then rests and observes the seventh day from Friday sunset as best she can. In the plane she reads, prays and talks to the person next to her. Kate’s plane reaches the IDL at 10:30 AM Saturday morning. She decides to immediately change her time to 10:30 AM Friday morning and close her Sabbath. After landing she aims to start the Sabbath again at sunset when it begins for the local people. An alternative for Kate could have been to continue her Sabbath observance in the plane and terminate it at the time of her Friday afternoon landing in Hawaii. Then she would begin the Sabbath again as it came to the Hawaiian people at sunset.

Having said all the above about Sabbath-keepers coping with travel across the IDL on the seventh day, it should be stressed that it would be better to avoid such situations if possible and to observe the Sabbath in some stationary place. This would enable the Sabbath blessings of peace and joy to be more fully appreciated. For the same reason travelers anywhere should try and avoid unnecessary journeying on the Sabbath and especially seek to avoid finishing there train, boat, car, plane etc. trip on the seventh day. However, in Kate’s case the principle of caring for the sick and distressed made it very appropriate for her to go over to her sister as soon as possible even though it complicated Kate’s Sabbath observance.